REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Hydroxychloriquine, The Cure For Wuhan Coronavirus (Fauci Flu)

POSTED BY: JEWELSTAITEFAN
UPDATED: Monday, August 10, 2020 16:27
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 868
PAGE 1 of 2

Monday, June 29, 2020 4:45 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


THREAD ALERT: In this thread, on August 5th SIGNYM posted an article which effectively summarizes the reasons that I started this thread. And 4 posts later it was quoted in a more readable format. Please jump down to that to read it for understanding, and then continue reading wherever you choose.



This is a thread about HCQ, plus other potential or promising cures for the Wuhan Coronavirus.
I think a brand name for it is Plaquenil.

Some mention of chloriquine as a variant of HCQ (or vice versa).

As I understand it, HCQ helps the body, or the cells, accept or absorb Zinc, which is apparently what really does the work. But without the HCQ, the Zinc is not able to absorb enough to to enough good.

It will take me a while to assemble this.



Constructive contributions will be appreciated.


First, a timeline:

HCQ has been used for more than 80 years. It is often used to treat Malaria, Lupus, Rheumatoid Arthritus.
One experienced practitioner is Dr. Daniel Wallce

November 2019: Covid-19 started by this time. We knew this by 17 March.
December 2019: Wuhan spread, lab tested and reserached, until by the end of the month all lab samples and test results were destroyed, and not released to any other authority.

20/21 January: a thread started here about the virus, by kiki.

19 March: Trump mentions HCQ in a White House press conference.
23 March: widespread knowledge of HCQ.
23 March: now with HCQ known, Pelosi holds hostage the so-called Corona Bill for Democrap's Dream List of Pork.
25 March: Dr. Oz discussing treatments with HCQ.
27 March: Israeli company Teva is DONATING 6 million doses of HCQ to America, plus another 5 million donation to follow. The Mediterranien includes Italy and Spain - did they refuse donations of the cure?
27 March: Delaying Dems rush to pass their $2T Pork Aid Bill before it is not needed. Held it hostage a week to add $1.623T of Pork.
29 March: reports that UV light kills Covid-19.
30 March: HCQ donation of 6 million doses arrives in US from Israel.
30 March: TV had to rush a Coronavirus Panic Special before the pandemic evaporated with the arrival of HCQ.
31 March: NY is not allowing victims to get HCQ without going to a hosptal, where you get Covid.
1 April: Dr. Oz reports not one single person has been found who has been taking HCQ and has Covid19, nor gotten virus and has Lupus, Rheumatoid Arthritis.
3 April: Fauci lies about and downplays HCQ. If folks took HCQ then Liar-in-Chief Fauci would lose his spotlight.
3 April: NYT reverses narrative, HCQ might be OK.
3 April: MI Governor had threatened Doctors who treat patients with HCQ, now reverses - leaving NY as only state outlawing HCQ prescriptions.
3 April: Searches for HCQ on Fake News search engines gives fake results of Chloroquine Phosphate for aquariums.
3 April: NY Gov Fredo Gump bans HCQ prescriptions from pharmacies, must go to a hospital to get Death Panelled (or get sent to a Nursing Home to infect everybody)
3 April: Novartis producing HCQ for free, 37 million units.
3 April: RWED still devoid of HCQ discussion.
6 April: Turkey confiscated nation's supply of HCQ. In Spain 73% of Covid patients getting HCQ.





NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, June 29, 2020 4:46 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Other options.

Chloroquine.

Remdisavir.

Experimental antibody.

Zinc

Interferon.

azithromiacin

Nitric Oxide GaS



Detection:
Pulse Oximeter
Temperature Checks.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, June 29, 2020 5:21 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Other options.

Remdisavir.

Experimental antibody.

Zinc

Interferon.



Prone positioning

Use of nasal cannula O2, mask O2, CPAP or BiPAP, in that order, as opposed to ventilators

Dexamethasone

Famotidine(?)

Quote:

Detection:
Pulse Oximeter

Temperature Checks.



RNA test

Antigen test

IgM antibody test (early-infection indicator)



I hope this is what you had in mind!

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, June 29, 2020 5:52 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by 1KIKI:
Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Other options.

Remdisavir.

Experimental antibody.

Zinc

Interferon.



Prone positioning

Use of nasal cannula O2, mask O2, CPAP or BiPAP, in that order, as opposed to ventilators

Dexamethasone

Famotidine(?)

Quote:

Detection:
Pulse Oximeter

Temperature Checks.



RNA test

Antigen test

IgM antibody test (early-infection indicator)

----------------------------
I hope this is what you had in mind!

I think those will be useful. Can you elaborate on whether they are for early detection, confirmation detection (like in hoospital), general population (unsuspecting) detection, after-infection or recovery detection/confirmation, or pathological for autopsy stage?


I am really hot on identifying fairly commonly available detections, like the pulse-Ox. But good to know how relevant or reliable the other methods are. Perhaps specify which items require do tor visit, clinic visist, nurse, emergency room, pharmacy, or just store shelf.



I know after that story about the pulse-Ox, every unit in my city was gone, all of the shelves empty. But I recently saw on tV ads that they have a pair for $40, instead of $80 apiece.

getoxiup.com
$40 for 1, and 2nd free.

I plan to list all options which are reasonably effective or promising, but will include disclaimers when appropriate.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, June 29, 2020 6:48 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


RNA test - this is the infamous original nasal swab. It requires a physician's order and participating laboratory. Originally it required collection by medical personnel, then it went to self-swab at mass-testing sites, now there are you-do home kits. But, again, it's not OTC. You just can't go to the store and buy it.
There seems to be limitations in terms of timing and collection site. At this point it looks like it's best done within the 2 weeks after symptoms start, or you're more likely to get a false negative. Also, if your infection mostly resides deep in your lungs and you do a nasal swab (for example) you're more likely to get a negative test result simply b/c you tested a place where the virus wasn't.

Antigen test - is the new blood-test kid on the block, just being afaik beta-tested/ rolled-out at some testing sites.

IgM antibody test (early-infection indicator) - is a blood test, afaik requiring a blood draw and a doctor's order along with a participating laboratory. Shortcomings are that there's a narrow window for many people to detect a current or recent infection. Roughly half of asymptomatic people with proven COVID-19 will lose detectable antibodies in 1-3 months, as will about 15% of symptomatic people.

'Antibody' tests - are also blood tests and they look for past infection, and for the most part require a doctor's order. They're usually mixed IgM(early)/ IgG(late) antibody tests. For the most part they require a blood draw. How long these may stay detectable is information I haven't seen, though one study indicated detectable antibodies fade fairly quickly over time (within a year).
Quest Diagnostics makes an OTC kit where iirc you prick yourself (like a glucose test) and send it in. While it hasn't been specifically ordered to not be used by the FDA as have the VAST majority of antibody test kits for use by medical facilities, it also hasn't received EUA (emergency use authorization) from the FDA, so I'm not sure about its regulatory status OR its quality.

X-ray - is a means of detecting current COVID-19 pneumonia, which looks for 'ground glass' or uniformly hazy lung opacities. It requires a medical-doctor's order (or equivalent, PA, NP or other), X-ray machine, and radiologist-doctor to interpret.



The only at-home OTC detection I believe is the pulse-ox (aka O-SAT for oxygen saturation) monitor ... thermometer, and a checklist of symptoms.

ETA: correction

Quest has test centers that do a blood draw for its 'direct to consumer' COVID-19 antibody test. Here's one experience: https://www.zdnet.com/article/i-got-quests-new-covid-19-antibody-test-
and-it-was-strange
/




NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, June 29, 2020 8:45 PM

WISHIMAY

THIS machine kills fascists- Woody Guthrie


Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
This is a thread about HCQ, plus other potential or promising cures




NOT a cure, treatment, or prevention drug for Covid.

It may have residual effects for people that naturally use a lot of sulfur, but since most people are overloaded to begin with, all it's going to do it ramp up seriously negative side effects.

Like I said, I've taken it and I know.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, June 29, 2020 8:55 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


CQ and HCQ both have well-known side effects, since they're medications that've been used for a long time for a number of conditions. Heart arrhythmias is just one of the known side effects. BTW, if you're Black, a study conducted by the US army found you have a 10% chance of having genetics that will make your red blood cells explode when you take these drugs (it's called a G6PD deficiency).

Even quinine - that slightly bitter natural version of the drugs found in tonic water as flavoring - is limited because it can have side effects. But if you want to, you can always get around the low concentration by drinking more tonic water.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, July 1, 2020 4:15 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, July 1, 2020 4:22 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


I have not gotten far, but I ask this:

If you had a business, what would you find most critical to help your workers or customers detect if they have a problem?

Many grocery stores and pharmacies have BP stations, where you can yourself check your blood pressure, heart rate, etc.

I would have hoped to have seen those infrared temperature scanners in similar stations, for checking foreheads.

But for me, I think the Pulse-Oximeter is the big slam-dunk. Detects before victim senses hard breathing, and the results are amazingly clear. I really don't understand why this is not universally accessible by now. As a public service.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, July 1, 2020 10:04 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


From the information I've gathered, temperature scans catch less than half to a maximum of half of all infectious cases, because, apparently, most spread is driven by people who are either asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic. Still, as far as I know, it's the earliest measurable indicator available, and it's better than nothing.

Of course there's always the person's own sense of their health - do they have a headache, aches and pains, lack of energy, general malaise, non-productive cough, etc. Many of these symptoms can appear on their own, without or before a fever.

O-Sats are better at detecting just how ill a person is. Usually they know they're ill, but they think they're only mildly ill. The happy-hypoxics as they've been called don't realize that they're seriously and maybe even ICU-worthy ill, because they don't feel at all short of air.




NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 2, 2020 3:21 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by 1KIKI:
CQ and HCQ both have well-known side effects, since they're medications that've been used for a long time for a number of conditions. Heart arrhythmias is just one of the known side effects. BTW, if you're Black, a study conducted by the US army found you have a 10% chance of having genetics that will make your red blood cells explode when you take these drugs (it's called a G6PD deficiency).

Even quinine - that slightly bitter natural version of the drugs found in tonic water as flavoring - is limited because it can have side effects. But if you want to, you can always get around the low concentration by drinking more tonic water.

There seems to be some discrepancy among claims regarding racism of the Coronavirus.
I don't think I have seen specifics as to which races, or how they are targeted.
But this info about blacks seems specific. Do you agree this is racist, or would you argue this is not racist?

Shall we assume exploding red blood cells is fatal? Or is there a mitigation available for blacks who have this G6PD deficiency? Is this deficiency only in Blacks? Meaning it relates to their pigmentation? Or due to geneological factors, such as ancestry in Africa, or India, or Australia, or Central America?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 2, 2020 4:26 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Quote:

I don't think I have seen specifics as to which races, or how they are targeted.
But this info about blacks seems specific. Do you agree this is racist, or would you argue this is not racist?

It's a medical genetic condition. Anyone can have that gene variation, its next most common population are people of white Mediterranean descent. So, it's not restricted to one 'race', it's just a gene variant that can occur in anyone.
Quote:

Shall we assume exploding red blood cells is fatal?
It can be. Free hemoglobin floating around in the bloodstream can gum up many organs, including the kidneys.
Quote:

Or is there a mitigation available for blacks who have this G6PD deficiency?
Once the red cells have exploded the only treatment is to take out the blood and replace the free-hemoglobin clogged plasma with saline. Otherwise, the treatment is to avoid substances that will trigger the problem.
Quote:

Is this deficiency only in Blacks? Meaning it relates to their pigmentation?
No, and no.
Quote:

Or due to genealogical factors, such as ancestry in Africa, or India, or Australia, or Central America?
... due to genetic characteristics of various populations. The gene variant exist in all peoples, but its percentage is higher in some and lower in others.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, July 6, 2020 6:43 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Copied from another thread, I hope nobody minds.

Quote:

Originally posted by 1KIKI:
https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S1201-9712(20)30534-8/fulltext
Quote:


Treatment with Hydroxychloroquine, Azithromycin, and Combination in Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19

Highlights

• As of May27, 2020 there are over 1,678,843 confirmed cases of COVID-19 claiming more than 100,000 lives in the Unites States. Currently there is no known effective therapy or vaccine.
• According to a protocol-based treatment algorithm, among hospitalized patients, use of hydroxychloroquine alone and in combination with azithromycin was associated with a significant reduction in-hospital mortality compared to not receiving hydroxychloroquine.
• Findings of this observational study provide crucial data on experience with hydroxychloroquine therapy, providing necessary interim guidance for COVID-19 therapeutic practice.

Conclusions and Relevance
In this multi-hospital assessment, when controlling for COVID-19 risk factors, treatment with hydroxychloroquine alone and in combination with azithromycin was associated with reduction in COVID-19 associated mortality. Prospective trials are needed to examine this impact.

However:
Quote:

The combination of hydroxychloroquine?+?azithromycin was reserved for selected patients with severe COVID-19 and with minimal cardiac risk factors. An electrocardiogram (ECK) based algorithm was utilized for hydroxychloroquine use. QTc>500?ms was considered an elevated cardiac risk and consequently hydroxychloroquine was reserved for patients with severe disease with telemetry monitoring and serial QTc checks.
Unscrambling the medical jargon what it means is this: One of the known side effects of HCQ (CQ, and quinine) is serious heart arrhythmias (there are several types). A cardiac arrhythmia is like having the pistons of your car each firing at all different times, or firing far too early, or far too late. Obviously your car won't run that way, and neither will your heart, and neither will you. And the main risk factor for death using HCQ in previous studies was cardiac arrhythmias. The SIGNIFICANT doubling of mortality using HCQ (double the death rate, or more) is what caused previous trials to be halted. All those extra deaths couldn't be ignored.

So THIS retrospective study addressed the very real issue of death-dealing arrhythmias, and selected data for patients that were both screened-for and monitored-for adverse cardiac effects.

By preventing all those deaths due to cardiac arrhythmias, the benefits were allowed to prevail.

I'm still left wondering why they don't run a trial with zinc added.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, July 7, 2020 3:16 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by 1KIKI:
Quote:

I don't think I have seen specifics as to which races, or how they are targeted.
But this info about blacks seems specific. Do you agree this is racist, or would you argue this is not racist?

It's a medical genetic condition. Anyone can have that gene variation, its next most common population are people of white Mediterranean descent. So, it's not restricted to one 'race', it's just a gene variant that can occur in anyone.
Quote:

Shall we assume exploding red blood cells is fatal?
It can be. Free hemoglobin floating around in the bloodstream can gum up many organs, including the kidneys.
Quote:

Or is there a mitigation available for blacks who have this G6PD deficiency?
Once the red cells have exploded the only treatment is to take out the blood and replace the free-hemoglobin clogged plasma with saline. Otherwise, the treatment is to avoid substances that will trigger the problem.
Quote:

Is this deficiency only in Blacks? Meaning it relates to their pigmentation?
No, and no.
Quote:

Or due to genealogical factors, such as ancestry in Africa, or India, or Australia, or Central America?

... due to genetic characteristics of various populations. The gene variant exist in all peoples, but its percentage is higher in some and lower in others.

Thanks for all this info, I'm not familiar with it all.

Do many folk who have this G6PD deficiency know they do? Does this mean they cannot drink tonic water, gin and tonic?

Is the test for this simple, can be completed quickly? Is this test normally conducted prior to prescribing these medications?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, July 7, 2020 3:39 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Thanks for all this info, I'm not familiar with it all.

Do many folk who have this G6PD deficiency know they do?

There's no US routine neonatal screening for G6PD deficiency as part of a panel of tests the various states do run. Though a Children's Hospital where I once worked did screen neonates as part of its panel of routine neonatal testing, so there may be institutions that do this testing on their own.
Quote:

Does this mean they cannot drink tonic water, gin and tonic?
The amount of quinine in tonic water is deliberately kept to low ppm levels specifically to avoid any medical misadventures. Fava beans are a more concerning trigger.
Quote:

Is the test for this simple, can be completed quickly? Is this test normally conducted prior to prescribing these medications?
There are a number of different kinds of tests that use different techniques, are differently sensitive, and cost different amounts. For example, there are screening tests that are quick and cheap but not at all sensitive (they'll only detect a sample that has 10% of less of normal G6PD activity). I've read some indication the military does check before administering drugs that might cause a problem.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 10, 2020 2:06 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by 1KIKI:
Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Thanks for all this info, I'm not familiar with it all.

Do many folk who have this G6PD deficiency know they do?

There's no US routine neonatal screening for G6PD deficiency as part of a panel of tests the various states do run. Though a Children's Hospital where I once worked did screen neonates as part of its panel of routine neonatal testing, so there may be institutions that do this testing on their own.
Quote:

Does this mean they cannot drink tonic water, gin and tonic?
The amount of quinine in tonic water is deliberately kept to low ppm levels specifically to avoid any medical misadventures. Fava beans are a more concerning trigger.
Quote:

Is the test for this simple, can be completed quickly? Is this test normally conducted prior to prescribing these medications?

There are a number of different kinds of tests that use different techniques, are differently sensitive, and cost different amounts. For example, there are screening tests that are quick and cheap but not at all sensitive (they'll only detect a sample that has 10% of less of normal G6PD activity). I've read some indication the military does check before administering drugs that might cause a problem.

So it is not completely missing, just a percentage deficiency. Much better scenario.

Have you been cooking fava beans?


And getting poisoning from excessive tonic water (quinine) - that is completely separate and unrelated, right?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 10, 2020 4:08 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


I think this will more completely answer your questions.

In sum though - G6PD is an enzyme. Various DNA mutations cause G6PD variations with reduced function. This reduced function is tolerable until ingestion of challenge substances overwhelms the red cells' limited variant-G6PD ability to process those harmful substances into useful substances instead, and the red cells become damaged.
FWIW the ORIGINAL tonic water was actually self-medication with quinine as a 'tonic' to combat malaria. Since then quinine's been adopted as a flavoring in tonic water, where levels are kept in the low ppm range to try and avoid any untoward medical effects. Medically, malaria treatment has moved on from natural quinine through the creation of variations of quinine, such as CQ and HCQ (and there are many others). Quinine has the same effect on red cells as QC and HCQ.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glucose-6-phosphate_dehydrogenase_defici
ency


But to your understanding, G6PD is an enzyme. G6PD deficiency is reduced activity of the enzyme, caused by a few different genetic mutations in the instructions for making the enzyme. Even faulty G6PD has SOME enzymatic activity, but it's reduced below normal.

The genetic instructions for making the G6PD enzyme are found on the X chromosome. Because males have only one X chromosome (males have the XY chromosome pair), if they inherit a faulty X chromosome they display unmitigated G6PD deficiency. Females otoh have the XX pair, so unless both of their X chromosomes have a G6PD mutation, they have at least some amount of well-functioning G6PD enzyme.

So G6PD deficiency ranges from no amount of normal enzyme and reduced G6PD functioning in males, to some amount of normal enzyme in females and up to nearly normal functioning in females.

Having lower-functioning G6PD enzyme is tolerable until something happens that overwhelms the limited G6PD function. Because red blood cells specifically depend on G6PD (and only G6PD) to maintain their membranes, when the faulty G6PD is overwhelmed due to higher levels of challenging chemicals, the red cell membranes become damaged leading to anything from high levels of red cell removal and lowered red cell counts (anemia), to actual breakup of red cells in the bloodstream and the released hemoglobin causing kidney damage.

There are MANY substances that can overwhelm faulty G6PD enzymes, including those found in fava beans; and also many anti-malarials, including nature's original anti-malarial quinine.
Quote:

Triggers

Carriers of the underlying mutation do not show any symptoms unless their red blood cells are exposed to certain triggers, which can be of four main types:

Foods (fava beans is the hallmark trigger for G6PD mutation carriers),
Certain medicines including aspirin, quinine and other antimalarials derived from quinine.
Moth balls (naphthalene)[6]
Stress from a bacterial or viral infection.[7]

To avoid the hemolytic anemia, G6PD carriers have to avoid some drugs and foods.[7]




NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 11, 2020 2:19 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


I wonder if a lay person can know if they have G6PD. Do they get blood in their urine if their cells explode? Of just a lousy feeling all over, lethargy? Or abdomen just feels sore.

Thanks so much for all the info.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 11, 2020 5:50 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


As I've read, many people will never have symptoms of G6PD deficiency because they'll never be exposed to substances that trigger the problem.

From what I've read, newborns may have jaundice. Jaundice will trigger a search to find the cause, which is how a fair number of cases are detected. Adults may have chronic anemia along with its symptoms, because their red cells are being destroyed faster than the bone marrow can create them. There are a number of clues that this anemia is being caused by red-cell destruction, such as the presence of broken bits of red cells seen under a microscope; the presence of immature red cells in the blood as the bone marrow is releasing them early to try and compensate for the anemia; and a raised bilirubin which is the product of the body metabolizing hemoglobin from destroyed red cells. Once anemia is detected, with or without indication it's being caused by red cell destruction, a search for the cause will happen. (BTW it's a truism that I read many decades ago that anemia in males is extremely rare - though of course it's common in females. And that anemia in males is ALWAYS considered pathological, since there's no 'normal' cause for it.)

And of course if you have a family history of G6PD deficiency it would be something to look for in yourself.

There are some other symptoms here: https://healthjade.net/g6pd-deficiency/

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, July 20, 2020 4:12 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Here is a post from April 6 in the virus thread, a pertinent, informative post by, of all folk, second:

Quote:

Originally posted by second:
The first Covid 19 case diagnosed in New Jersey
www.nytimes.com/2020/04/05/magazine/first-coronavirus-patient-new-jers
ey.html


Commentary on the above article: Remdesivir III

Robert Waldmann | April 5, 2020 8:20 pm

https://angrybearblog.com/2020/04/remdesivir-iii.html

The first Covid 19 case diagnosed in New Jersey

Around 3 a.m. on March 10, Balani arrived at the hospital. The medicine had come in, and she did not want to wait until the morning to administer it. With Balani in the room, a nurse woke Cai up so that he could sign the legal papers. Soon after, he was hooked up, intravenously, to the drug.

The next day Cai’s fever, which he’d had for at least nine days, finally broke. Even before he received the remdesivir, his oxygen levels started to stabilize. Now they indicated he was on the mend. He was still so weak in the following days that he could barely speak without exhaustion; every time he tried, he was racked by coughs. But the progress was steady

Chloroquine also ran, It was used for a day while the Remdesivir was in the mail,

Cai’s boss, Dr. George Hall, also made a call, not long after Huang spoke to the infectious-disease doctor on call. He spoke with another doctor on Cai’s caregiving team, a hospitalist named Danit Arad.

[skip]

Hall explained …that the Chinese National Health Commission had just published the seventh edition of guidelines on how to treat coronavirus. It was true that they were based more on clinical experience than on published studies, but he urged Arad to follow some of its protocols, which included prescribing two drugs that were commonly given to patients in China soon after they showed symptoms like shortness of breath: chloroquine, an antiviral drug once used to treat malaria, and Kaletra, another antiviral that had once been used to treat H.I.V.

[skip]

at the time that neither drug had been through extensive clinical trials or had F.D.A. approval. She listened patiently to Hall and expressed her concern that his suggestions did not conform to standard medical procedure or C.D.C. guidelines.

Hall understood the need for evidence-based medicine as well as she did, he told her. But this was life and death.

[skip]

That day, Cai was given chloroquine and Kaletra

Comment: I do not understand the need for “evidence-based medicine” or rather I do not understand how the phrase is used by doctors. There is no evidence that Covid 19 patients (without heart disease) do better without Chloroquine. I learn that “evidence based medicine” does not imply choosing the therapy that a fair balance of evidence suggests is best for the patient. Pharmaceuticals are presumed guilty until proven safe and effective. The evidence is treated as evidence in a criminal trial with the burden of proof on the pharmaceutical.

I have no idea what “standard medical procedure” might mean in the context of Covid 19. it appears that as soon as a new disease is discovered, there is a standard procedure for treating it, which can’t be based on data or evidence.

The story has a happy ending, but it is not reassuring. It also doesn’t surprise me.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, July 20, 2020 5:10 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence-based_medicine

Evidence-based guidelines and policies
Main article: Medical guideline

David M. Eddy first began to use the term "evidence-based" in 1987 in workshops and a manual commissioned by the Council of Medical Specialty Societies to teach formal methods for designing clinical practice guidelines. The manual was eventually published by the American College of Physicians.[22][23] Eddy first published the term "evidence-based" in March, 1990 in an article in the Journal of the American Medical Association that laid out the principles of evidence-based guidelines and population-level policies, which Eddy described as "explicitly describing the available evidence that pertains to a policy and tying the policy to evidence instead of standard-of-care practices or the beliefs of experts. The pertinent evidence must be identified, described, and analyzed. The policymakers must determine whether the policy is justified by the evidence. A rationale must be written."[24] He discussed "evidence-based" policies in several other papers published in JAMA in the spring of 1990.[24][25] Those papers were part of a series of 28 published in JAMA between 1990 and 1997 on formal methods for designing population-level guidelines and policies.[26]

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, July 21, 2020 3:51 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Here is the pulse-ox post from 21 April:

Quote:

Originally posted by second:
Here’s a Lifesaving COVID-19 Test That Costs Almost Nothing

Well, almost nothing after you buy the $40 pulse/oxygen meter from Walgreens. It is next to blood pressure monitors and blood glucose monitors.

www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2020/04/heres-a-lifesaving-covid-19-tes
t-that-costs-almost-nothing
/

The New York Times ran a fascinating op-ed on Monday, and I’m surprised that it hasn’t gotten more attention. Here’s the nickel summary: a hotshot ER doctor volunteered to spend time at Bellevue Hospital in Manhattan and discovered something odd. Practically everyone he saw had pneumonia caused by COVID-19:

Even patients without respiratory complaints had Covid pneumonia. The patient stabbed in the shoulder, whom we X-rayed because we worried he had a collapsed lung, actually had Covid pneumonia. In patients on whom we did CT scans because they were injured in falls, we coincidentally found Covid pneumonia. Elderly patients who had passed out for unknown reasons and a number of diabetic patients were found to have it.

And here is what really surprised us: These patients did not report any sensation of breathing problems, even though their chest X-rays showed diffuse pneumonia and their oxygen was below normal. How could this be?

www.nytimes.com/2020/04/20/opinion/coronavirus-testing-pneumonia.html

You can—and should!—click the link to read the details, but the short answer turns out to be that COVID-19 attacks the lungs in an unusual way: it causes the air sacs to collapse and oxygen levels to fall, but the lungs still expel carbon dioxide normally. Since it’s carbon dioxide buildup that causes you to feel short of breath, patients had never even noticed anything was wrong:

A vast majority of Covid pneumonia patients I met had remarkably low oxygen saturations at triage — seemingly incompatible with life — but they were using their cellphones as we put them on monitors….Patients compensate for the low oxygen in their blood by breathing faster and deeper — and this happens without their realizing it….By the time patients have noticeable trouble breathing and present to the hospital with dangerously low oxygen levels, many will ultimately require a ventilator.

As you know, about 80 percent of people with COVID-19 have either mild symptoms or no symptoms. But the other 20 percent develop pneumonia and many end up on ventilators and eventually die. The problem is that they don’t feel anything for the first week, and by the time they do it’s too late. So how can we catch these cases earlier? With this:

This is a pulse oximeter, and it measures the level of oxygenation in your blood. You probably get a quick oxygenation test every time you see a doctor. So the answer is: test your blood oxygenation every day. If it falls below normal levels, get to an ER and get tested for COVID-19. Your chances of survival are way higher if you can get to it early.

Yes, I Bought a Pulse Oximeter Today
by Kevin Drum

Just to follow up on this morning’s post, I did indeed go out to Walgreens and buy a pulse oximeter today.
www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2020/04/yes-i-bought-a-pulse-oximeter-t
oday
/


Quote:


The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 24, 2020 3:07 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Copied from the main thread, from 8 April:

Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
And FINALLY!!!

Blue shop towels filter small particles better than cotton!

Quote:

Using blue shop towels in homemade face masks can filter particles 2x to 3x better than cotton, 3 clothing designers discover after testing dozens of fabrics

..."We spent a few days researching and brainstorming any material that could filter: coffee filters, batting, window shades, Swiffer, interfacing, etc., all the way to more technical materials that are available to specialized industrial sectors like aviation, oil refinery, medical fields," Schempf said.

They bought a $1,400 particulate-counter device from Grainger that measures filtration ability down to 0.3 microns and spent another 10 sleepless days testing all the fabrics they could find.

They wanted a material they could buy as easily as cotton but that balanced filtration with breathability — they discovered that HEPA vacuum-cleaner bags, for instance, had great filtration but were too suffocating to wear.

The ideal material turned out to be stretchy blue shop towels made from a polyester hydro knit.

Inserting two of these towels into an ordinary cotton mask brought filtration up to 93% of particles as small as 0.3 microns, the smallest their machine could test. Meanwhile, the cotton masks filtered 60% of particles at best in their tests, Schempf said.

Polyester hydro knit towels are readily available at hardware and automotive stores. The two brands they tested were ToolBox's shop towel and ZEP's industrial blue towel. Interestingly, Scott's pro shop towels, which are also made with a hydro knit fabric, didn't work as well, Schempf said.


https://www.businessinsider.com/homemade-mask-using-hydro-knit-shop-to
wel-filters-better-2020-4?op=1


Thanks to hubby for finding this!

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

#STAYTHEFUCKHOME


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 30, 2020 3:12 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


From the other thread:
From 23 April:

Quote:

Originally posted by 1KIKI:
Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
... having heard very similar things about hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) ...

One of the problems with chloroquine (related to HCQ) is that it causes significant - and sometimes fatal - heart arrhythmias. Both these drugs have been used for a long time to treat other conditions besides malaria, such as lupus, As such, their side effects are well known. After a debate about the relative safety of both drugs, a small study in Brazil was launched to test chloroquine, as it was deemed the safer drug. The study was halted after only 10 days due to a large number of deaths (~17% of patients) on the higher dose. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.07.20056424v2

kiki does not really endorse the fake Trial in Brazil, but posts of it here. The purpose of the Fake Trial was to discredit HCQ/CQ since it had already proven reliable for about 80 years. It has already been known that at higher doses it causes problems with hearts, so the Fake Trial intentionally gave higher doses in order to have pretext to halt the Fake Trial.

This is a similar tactic used in prior Fake Trials which were manipulated to fail.
One was the Hydrazine Sulfate cancer cure which the NIH pretended to run in the 1990s. The one thing that everybody knew could not be done is consume peanuts or peanut butter while taking Hydrazine Sulfate. After almost all of the Trial subjects were showing regression and absence of their cancers, in order to Fail the Trial, the NIH directed that all of the recovering patients switch their diets from "no peanuts" to requiring them to all consume peanuts every meal. Therefore, obviously, these patients died, giving pretext for the excuse to cancel the Fake Trials and declare the treatment ineffective.

Seems like the same thing now with the Fake Trials for HCQ. Anything for Doctors to kill off some more patients and Big Pharma to make more $$$.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 30, 2020 7:14 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


There have been, still are, and will be, many, MANY trials of CQ/ HCQ in many countries and also conducted by international bodies.


This link to a database - using COVID-19 as the broadest possible search terms across the globe - came up with 2,834 listed studies of all kinds on COVID-19. These are the ones that have reached some kind of end that involve various forms of chloroquine.

Of the ones that were concluded, and that have published results, all cite either lack of benefit, or high-mortality side effects.

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/study/NCT04343768?cond=COVID-19&am
p;draw=4&rank=126

Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences
Completed
no results published

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/study/NCT04491994?cond=COVID-19&am
p;draw=13&rank=1076

UNICEF
Completed
no results published

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04261517?cond=COVID-19&draw
=13&rank=1042

Shanghai Public Health Clinical Center
Completed / A pilot study of hydroxychloroquine in treatment of patients with moderate COVID-19
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32391667/
http://www.zjujournals.com/med/CN/10.3785/j.issn.1008-9292.2020.03.03
no difference from control

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04341870?cond=COVID-19&draw
=13&rank=1028

Study of Immune Modulatory Drugs and Other Treatments in COVID-19 Patients: Sarilumab, Azithromycin, Hydroxychloroquine Trial - CORIMUNO-19 - VIRO (CORIMUNO-VIRO)
Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris
Suspended (DSMB recommendation (futility))

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04348474?cond=COVID-19&draw
=12&rank=918

Efficacy and Safety of Hydroxychloroquine and Azithromycin for the Treatment of Ambulatory Patients With Mild COVID-19
Azidus Brasil
Suspended (Azidus, the CRO hired for this study by Prevent Senior has lost the interest to conduct this study.)

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04329572?cond=COVID-19&draw
=7&rank=418

Efficacy and Safety of Hydroxychloroquine and Azithromycin for the Treatment of Hospitalized Patients With Moderate to Severe COVID-19
Azidus Brasil
Suspended (Azidus, the CRO hired for this study by Prevent Senior has lost the interest to conduct this study.)

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04347512?cond=COVID-19&draw
=10&rank=762

EVALUATION OF THE EFFICACY OF THE HYDROXYCHLOROQUINE-AZITHROMYCIN COMBINATION IN THE IN THE PREVENTION OF COVID-19 RELATED SDRA (TEACHCOVID)
Withdrawn (In view of the notices concerning hydroxychloroquine issued by the regulatory authorities, we withdraw the protocol)

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04358068?cond=COVID-19&draw
=9&rank=650

Evaluating the Efficacy of Hydroxychloroquine and Azithromycin to Prevent Hospitalization or Death in Persons With COVID-19
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) / Teva Pharmaceuticals Industries LTD
completed
No results published

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04363203?cond=COVID-19&draw
=9&rank=623

VA Remote and Equitable Access to COVID-19 Healthcare Delivery (VA-REACH TRIAL) (VA-REACH)
Salomeh Keyhani MD / San Francisco VA Health Care System
Suspended (concerns related to study drug)

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04371926?cond=COVID-19&draw
=6&rank=391

Prophylactic Benefit of Hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19 Cases With Mild to Moderate Symptoms and in Healthcare Workers With High Exposure Risk (PREVENT)
Texas Cardiac Arrhythmia Research Foundation
Withdrawn (Concerned about the adverse effects of HCQ)

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04331834?cond=COVID-19&draw
=6&rank=390

Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis With Hydroxychloroquine for High-Risk Healthcare Workers During the COVID-19 Pandemic (PrEP_COVID)
Barcelona Institute for Global Health
Suspended (The study has been suspended until a new epidemic curve occurs.)

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04323631?cond=COVID-19&draw
=6&rank=388

Hydroxychloroquine for the Treatment of Patients With Mild to Moderate COVID-19 to Prevent Progression to Severe Infection or Death
Rambam Health Care Campus (Israel)
Withdrawn (Trial not started due to accumulating evidence against HCQ for COVID)

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04362332?cond=COVID-19&draw
=6&rank=386

Chloroquine, Hydroxychloroquine or Only Supportive Care in Patients Admitted With Moderate to Severe COVID-19 (ARCHAIC)
UMC Utrecht / ZonMw: The Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development
Terminated (Currently, almost no patients admitted to Dutch hospitals. If any effect of HCQ is to be expected we need more than 1000 inclusions)

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04307693?cond=COVID-19&draw
=6&rank=374

Comparison of Lopinavir/Ritonavir or Hydroxychloroquine in Patients With Mild Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19)
Sung-Han Kim, Asan Medical Center (Korea)
Terminated (Terminated early because no patients were further enrolled since mid-Apr 2020.)

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04369742?cond=COVID-19&draw
=5&rank=207

Treating COVID-19 With Hydroxychloroquine (TEACH)
NYU Langone Health
Suspended (Investigator decision)

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04329611?cond=COVID-19&draw
=32&rank=74

ALBERTA HOPE COVID-19 for the Prevention of Severe COVID19 Disease
Dr. Michael Hill / Alberta Health Services ' et al
Suspended (Enrolment was suspended on 22may2020, after Mehra et al (Lancet 2020) suggested excess toxicity of HCQ.)

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04308668?cond=COVID-19&draw
=31&rank=2812

Post-exposure Prophylaxis / Preemptive Therapy for SARS-Coronavirus-2 (COVID-19 PEP)
University of Minnesota
Completed / A Randomized Trial of Hydroxychloroquine as Postexposure Prophylaxis for Covid-19 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32492293/
After high-risk or moderate-risk exposure to Covid-19, hydroxychloroquine did not prevent illness compatible with Covid-19 or confirmed infection when used as postexposure prophylaxis within 4 days after exposure.
also https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32383125/

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04341727?cond=COVID-19&draw
=30&rank=2720

Hydroxychloroquine,Hydroxychloroquine,Azithromycin in the Treatment of SARS CoV-2 Infection (WU352)
Washington University School of Medicine
Suspended (DSMB recommended study suspension slow accrual)

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04323527?cond=COVID-19&draw
=29&rank=2686

Chloroquine Diphosphate for the Treatment of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Secondary to SARS-CoV2 (CloroCOVID19)
Fundação de Medicina Tropical Dr. Heitor Vieira Dourado (Brazil) / Marcus Vinícius Guimarães de Lacerda / et al
Completed / Effect of High vs Low Doses of Chloroquine Diphosphate as Adjunctive Therapy for Patients Hospitalized With Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Infection: A Randomized Clinical Trial https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32339248/
The preliminary findings of this study suggest that the higher CQ dosage should not be recommended for critically ill patients with COVID-19 because of its potential safety hazards, especially when taken concurrently with azithromycin and oseltamivir.
Effect of High vs Low Doses of Chloroquine Diphosphate as Adjunctive Therapy for Patients Hospitalized With Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Infection: A Randomized Clinical Trial https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32330277/
Conclusions and relevance: The preliminary findings of this study suggest that the higher CQ dosage should not be recommended for critically ill patients with COVID-19 because of its potential safety hazards, especially when taken concurrently with azithromycin and oseltamivir.

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04389320?cond=COVID-19&draw
=28&rank=2566

Antimalarial and Covid 19 in Rheumatoid Arthritis
Assiut University (Egypt)
Completed
no Results Posted

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04321278?cond=COVID-19&draw
=27&rank=2476

Safety and Efficacy of Hydroxychloroquine Associated With Azithromycin in SARS-CoV2 Virus (Coalition Covid-19 Brasil II)
Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein (Brazil)
Completed / Uso de antipalúdicos en el tratamiento del COVID-19: ¿una ventana de oportunidad? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7174146/
... only 12.5% ??of patients in the control group had negative side effects compared to 57.1% of the patients who received 200 mg daily of hydroxychloroquine sulfate for 10 days, and 100% of those who received the combination of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin, the latter at a dose of 500 mg on day 1, followed by 250 mg / day the following 4 days.

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04441424?cond=COVID-19&draw
=27&rank=2434

Convalescent Plasma Therapy on Critically-ill Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) Patients
Alkarkh Health Directorate-Baghdad
Completed / Title: The therapeuticpotential of Convalescent plasma therapy on treating critically-ill COVID-19 patients residing in respiratory care units in hospitals inBaghdad, Iraq https://clinicaltrials.gov/ProvidedDocs/24/NCT04441424/Prot_SAP_000.pd
f

no mention of any type of chloroquine was made in the text

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04333654?cond=COVID-19&draw
=26&rank=2324

Hydroxychloroquine in Outpatient Adults With COVID-19
Sanofi
Terminated (Rate of enrollment too slow to allow completion in a reasonable timeframe)

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04345861?cond=COVID-19&draw
=24&rank=2181

Hydroxychloroquine Plus Azithromycin Versus Hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19 Pneumonia (COVIDOC Trial) (COVIDOC)
University Hospital, Montpellier (France)
Terminated (halted prematurely.)

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04342650?cond=COVID-19&draw
=24&rank=2156

Chloroquine Diphosphate in the Prevention of SARS in Covid-19 Infection (CloroCOVID19II)
Fundação de Medicina Tropical Dr. Heitor Vieira Dourado (Brazil)
Completed
No Results Posted

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04361461?cond=COVID-19&draw
=22&rank=1969

Use of Hydroxychloroquine Alone or Associated for Inpatients With SARS-CoV2 Virus (COVID-19)
Apsen Farmaceutica S.A. / Federal University of São Paulo
Withdrawn (This study was canceled before enrollment due to a decision by the Sponsor)

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04376814?cond=COVID-19&draw
=21&rank=1893

Favipiravir Plus Hydroxychloroquine and Lopinavir/Ritonavir Plus Hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19
Baqiyatallah Medical Sciences University (Iran)
Completed
No Results Posted

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04344379?cond=COVID-19&draw
=21&rank=1867

Prevention of SARS-CoV-2 in Hospital Workers s Exposed to the Virus (PREP-COVID)
Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris (France)
Suspended (suspension of clinical trials with hydroxychloroquine by health authorities)

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04350281?cond=COVID-19&draw
=21&rank=1850

Double Therapy With IFN-beta 1b and Hydroxychloroquine
The University of Hong Kong (China)
Completed
No Results Posted

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04434144?cond=COVID-19&draw
=21&rank=1804

A Comparative Study on Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine on the COVID19 Patients in Bangladesh
Upazila Health & Family Planning Officer's (UHFPO) Office, Chakoria, Cox's Bazar (Bangladesh)
No Results Published

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04334967?cond=COVID-19&draw
=20&rank=1761

Hydroxychloroquine in Patients With Newly Diagnosed COVID-19 Compared to Standard of Care
Providence Health & Services
Suspended (suspected unfavorable risk/benefit assessment)

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04475588?cond=COVID-19&draw
=19&rank=1606

Efficacy and Safety of Itolizumab in COVID-19 Complications
Biocon Limited (India)
Completed
No Results Posted

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04354441?cond=COVID-19&draw
=18&rank=1583

Effect of Hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19 Positive Pregnant Women (HyPreC)
Sir Mortimer B. Davis - Jewish General Hospital (Canada)
Withdrawn (Not started)

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04350450?cond=COVID-19&draw
=18&rank=1524

Hydroxychloroquine Treatment of Healthcare Workers With COVID19 Illness at Montefiore
Montefiore Medical Center
Withdrawn (PI withdrew the submission to the IRB)

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04333914?cond=COVID-19&draw
=17&rank=1440

Prospective Study in Patients With Advanced or Metastatic Cancer and SARS-CoV-2 Infection (IMMUNONCOVID)
Centre Leon Berard (France)
Suspended (Potential recrutment related to the epidemic context.)

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04423991?cond=COVID-19&draw
=16&rank=1367

Identification of a Responsive Subpopulation to Hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19 Patients Using Machine Learning (IDENTIFY)
Dascena
Completed
No Results Posted

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 31, 2020 11:06 AM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Another case taking HCQ. I think he had mentioned months ago that he would do this treatment if he got it.

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/republican-says-trump-promoted-covid-1917195
91.html

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 31, 2020 11:42 AM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


I've noticed a lack of clarity among internet sources about dosage. Many of the Fake Trials are intentionally failing the Trial by forcing HIGH DOSES which has already been known, for many decades, to cause problems, like with the heart.

I see that the approved dosage is only for a max or 6.5mg per kg of body weight per day. For 100lbs person, this is about 290mg, or less than 150mg if taking twice per day. For 150lbs, this is about 440mg per day, or max dosage of 220mg twice per day. For 200lbs, this is about 580mg per day maximum, or 290mg twice per day.
The tablets seem to only come in 200mg size.

Successful treatment practices have indicated starting with 400mg twice on the first day, 12 hours apart, and then 200mg twice per day for 4 days. This all exceeds the approved maximum dosages as specified in the approval for use guidelines. This would certainly seem to fit the description of HIGH DOSES.

However, WHO has been trying to force Doctors to use 800mg x2 6 hours apart on the first day, followed by 400mg x2 per day for 10 days.
That certainly seems to be exceeding the maximum allowed dosage by a factor up to 11.

Many of these Fake Trials keep using the excuse of High Dose results to prematurely end their Trials and declare this inexpensive drug as dangerous.

The interwebs continue to be burying whatever information is useful bout the dosage. Perhaps more or better info is forthcoming.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 31, 2020 2:40 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
I've noticed a lack of clarity among internet sources about dosage.

The 4 clinical trials with published results were clear about their dosing.
Quote:

Many of the Fake Trials are intentionally failing the Trial by forcing HIGH DOSES which has already been known, for many decades, to cause problems, like with the heart.
Only 1 of 4 exclusively had high dosing, but they were following the recommendations of a Chinese study. 1 had a low-dose regimen along with a high dose regimen, the other 2 (which noted there was no difference from the control) had dosing within allowable parameters.
Quote:

I see that the approved dosage is only for a max or 6.5mg per kg of body weight per day. For 100lbs person, this is about 290mg, or less than 150mg if taking twice per day. For 150lbs, this is about 440mg per day, or max dosage of 220mg twice per day. For 200lbs, this is about 580mg per day maximum, or 290mg twice per day.
There are in fact a number of very different maximum dosages DEPENDING ON USE.
There's the maximum dosage
Usual Adult Dose for Malaria Prophylaxis
-Maximum dose: 400 mg salt (310 mg base)/dose
Usual Adult Dose for Malaria
Maximum Dose:
-First dose: 800 mg salt (620 mg base)/dose
-Second, third, and fourth dose: 400 mg salt (310 mg base)/dose
Usual Adult Dose for Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
-Doses above 400 mg/day are not recommended.
Usual Adult Dose for Rheumatoid Arthritis
Maximum dose: 600 mg salt (465 mg base)/day or 6.5 mg/kg salt (5 mg/kg base)/day, whichever is lower
https://www.drugs.com/dosage/hydroxychloroquine.html
Quote:


The tablets seem to only come in 200mg size.

Quote:

Successful treatment practices
There WERE no successful treatments in any of the 4 clinical trials.
Quote:

have indicated starting with 400mg twice on the first day, 12 hours apart, and then 200mg twice per day for 4 days. This all exceeds the approved maximum dosages as specified in the approval for use guidelines. This would certainly seem to fit the description of HIGH DOSES.
3 of 5 dosing regimens did NOT exceed the maximum doses - if you read all the dosing information!
Quote:

However, WHO has been trying to force Doctors to use 800mg x2 6 hours apart on the first day, followed by 400mg x2 per day for 10 days.
That certainly seems to be exceeding the maximum allowed dosage by a factor up to 11.

That is a completely false statement. https://www.who.int/publications/m/item/informal-consultation-on-the-d
ose-of-chloroquine-and-hydroxychloroquine-for-the-solidarity-clinical-trial---8-april-2020
The WHO trial recommends "The Chloroquine or Hydroxychloroquine schedule selected for the trial includes two oral loading doses (250 mg per tablet CQ or 200mg per tablet HCQ), then oral twice-daily maintenance doses for ten days." For HCQ that's 400mg/day.
Quote:

Many of these Fake Trials keep using the excuse of High Dose results to prematurely end their Trials and declare this inexpensive drug as dangerous.

The interwebs continue to be burying whatever information is useful bout the dosage. Perhaps more or better info is forthcoming.

I know you have an agenda to make Trump right.
But posting lies (and trying to get away with it by failing to post links) isn't the way to do it.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 31, 2020 3:00 PM

THG


If this video concerning why Hydroxychloroquine is not good to treat coronavirus doesn't answer your questions, then there's no hope for you.

T


Stupid people don't know they're stupid, and they certainly don't realize how obvious it is to others.


Widely cited hydroxychloroquine study is ‘flawed’, Fauci tells hearing


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, August 1, 2020 12:27 PM

REAVERFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/05/02/pseudo-science-behind-the-assau
lt-on-hydroxychloroquine/
Anthony Watts (Anthony Watts) is a blogger, weathercaster and non-scientist, paid AGW denier who runs the website wattsupwiththat.com. He does not have a university qualification and has no climate credentials other than being a radio weather announcer. His website is parodied and debunked at the website wattsupwiththat.com Watts is on the payroll of the Heartland Institute, which itself is funded by polluting industries.[1]

Quote:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331898127_Hydroxychloroquine_
usage_in_US_patients_their_experiences_of_tolerability_and_adherence_and_implications_for_treatment_Survey_results_from_3127_patients_with_SLE_conducted_by_the_Lupus_Foundation_of_A
is about Lupus.

Quote:

https://vivelifecenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/White-Paper-on-H
CQ-07-22-2020.pdf
by a guy from "America's Frontline Doctors," a sham funded by reichwing dark money. No credibility.
https://www.snopes.com/news/2020/07/30/americas-frontline-doctors/


I think you probably know how to use credible sources. You just don't.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, August 1, 2020 3:49 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.




https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/05/02/pseudo-science-behind-the- assault-on-hydroxychloroquine/
I suggest you vet the rest of the references in your first link. I didn't have time to do them all, but so far they're a bust for CQ/ HCQ/ CQPO4.

Did you actually verify them yourself? It doesn't look like it.
(links broken up for formatting)


Bansal, M., 2020. Cardiovascular disease and COVID-19. Diabetes & Metabolic Syndrome: Clinical Research & Reviews, 25 March.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7102662/


Brouqui, P., Million, M. & Raoult, D., 2020. Scientific fraud to demonstrate the lack of efficacy of hydroxychloroquine compared to placebo in a non-randomized retrospective cohort of patients with Covid: Response to MAHEVAS et al. , MedRxiv, 2020. Mediterranee Infection, 24 04.

Chorin, E. e. a., 2020. The QT Interval in Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Infection Treated with Hydroxychloroquine/Azithromycin. medRxiv, 3 April.

COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel, 2020. COVID-19 Treatement Guildelines, s.l.: s.n.

CredibleMeds.org, 2020. COMBINED LIST OF DRUGS THAT PROLONG QT AND/OR CAUSE TORSADES DE POINTES (TDP). [Online]
Available at: https://crediblemeds.org/pdftemp/pdf/CombinedList.pdf

Drugs.com, 2019. Hydroxychloroquine Dosage. [Online]
Available at: https://www.drugs.com/dosage/hydroxychloroquine.html

FDA WARNING, 2020. FDA cautions against use of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine for COVID-19 outside of the hospital …. [Online]
Available at: https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-safety-and-availability/fda-cautions-ag
ainst-use-hydroxychloroquine-or-chloroquine-covid-19-outside-hospital-setting-or


Gautret, P. & Raoult, D. e. a., 2020. Clinical and microbiological effect of a combination of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin in 80 COVID-19 patients with at least a six-day follow up: A pilot observational study. Travel Medicine and Infectious Disease, 4 April.

Hache, G. & Raoult, D. e. a., 2020. Combination of hydroxychloroquine plus azithromycin as potential treatment for COVID 19 patients: pharmacology, safety profile, drug interactions and management of toxicity.. Mediterranee Infection, 22 April.

Hawryluk, M., 2020. Mysterious Heart Damage Hitting COVID-19 Patients. WebMD, 06 April.

Jorge, A. e. a., 2019. Hydroxychloroquine Use and Cardiovascular Events Among Patients with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus and Rheumatoid Arthritis. American College of Rheumatology.
https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/hydroxychloroquine-use-and-cardiovas
cular-events-among-patients-with-systemic-lupus-erythematosus-and-rheumatoid-arthritis
/

Kochi, A. e. a., 2020. Cardiac and arrhythmic complications in patients with COVID-19.. Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology, 08 April.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/jce.14479
cardiac complications from COVID-19 require vigilance for cardiotoxic effects from chloroquines

Magagnoli, J. e. a., 2020. Outcomes of hydroxychloroquine usage in United States veterans hospitalized with Covid-19. medRxiv, 23 April.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.16.20065920v2
no benefit

Mahevas, M. e. a., 2020. No evidence of clinical efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 infection with oxygen requirement: results of a study using routinely collected data to emulate a target trial. medRxiv, 14 April.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.10.20060699v1
no benefit

Molina, J. M. e. a., 2020. No evidence of rapid antiviral clearance or clinical benefit with the combination of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin in patients with severe COVID-19 infection. Médecine et Maladies Infectieuses, 28 March.
https: // www.researchgate.net/profile / Breno_ Melo-Lima/ publication/ 340293105_ No_ Evidence_of_ Rapid_Antiviral_ Clearance_or_ Clinical_ Benefit_ with_the_ Combination_ of_ Hydroxychloroquine_and _Azithromycin_ in_ Patients_with_ Severe_ COVID-19_ Infection/ links/5e97751692851c2f52a62c2d/ No-Evidence-of- Rapid-Antiviral-Clearance-or- Clinical-Benefit-with- the-Combination -of-Hydroxychloroquine -and- Azithromycin-in- Patients- with- Severe-COVID-19-Infection.pdf
no benefit

Nikiforov, B. B., 2020. Modern Approaches to COVID-19 Therapy. [Online]
Available at: http://fmbaros.ru/upload/medialibrary/53f/Nikiforov-_-Sovremennye-podk
hody-etiotr.-i-patogeneticheskoy-terapii-_2_.pptx

no translated literature found

Prutkin, J. M., 2020. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): Arrhythmias and conduction system disease. UpToDate, 24 April.
no literature found

Simpson, T. e. a., 2020. Ventricular Arrhythmia Risk Due to Hydroxychloroquine-Azithromycin Treatment For COVID-19. [Online]
Available at: https://www.acc.org/latest-in-cardiology/articles/2020/03/27/14/00/ven
tricular-arrhythmia-risk-due-to-hydroxychloroquine-azithromycin-treatment-for-covid-19

literature review article - no data; cautions for cardiac risk; recommends no chloroquine use for outpatients, for people with risk factors, and when continuous cardiac monitoring is not available

Tang, W. e. a., 2020. Hydroxychloroquine in patients with COVID-19: an open-label, randomized, controlled trial. medRxiv, 14 April.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2020/05/07/2020.04.10.20
060558.full.pdf

reports no clinical difference from untreated except for an increase of adverse events

Wang, D., Hu, B. & Hu, C., 2020. Clinical Characteristics of 138 Hospitalized Patients With 2019 Novel Coronavirus–Infected Pneumonia in Wuhan, China. JAMA Network, 7 February.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2761044
no mention of any kind of chloroquine



JSF link 2 and 3
https:// www.researchgate.net/publication /331898127_Hydroxychloroquine _ usage_in_US_patients_ their_experiences_ of_ tolerability_ and_adherence_and_implications_ for_treatment_Survey_ results_from_3127_patients_with_SLE_ conducted_by_the_Lupus_ Foundation_of_A

https://vivelifecenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/White-Paper-on-H
CQ-07-22-2020.pdf


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, August 4, 2020 4:41 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by 1KIKI:
Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
I've noticed a lack of clarity among internet sources about dosage.


The interwebs continue to be burying whatever information is useful bout the dosage. Perhaps more or better info is forthcoming.

I know you have an agenda to make Trump right.
But posting lies (and trying to get away with it by failing to post links) isn't the way to do it.

I have no agenda to make Trump right. If I have an agenda, it would be to help folk get whatever cure they desire, and therefore to help provide and display the information, for folk to view and consume.
However, after Trump made mantion of HCQ at a presser, the TDSers and the Orange Man Bad club all went batshit and opposed HCQ for no logical reason. So, those who are wrong are the ones I want to prove wrong. In a roundabout way, proving Trump might be right could help towards that end.
If there is logical and proven ways that HCQ is NOT a cure, then we could hope that such info could be shared in reasonable form, absent TDS and Orange Man Bad lunacy.

I would hope that, since HCQ has had many decades track record, we could focus on Trials NOT dated 2020, but from one of the other dozens of years that HCQ has been prescribed. It seems all of the Fake Trials are dated 2020, and are corrupted by the forces of TDS and Orange Man Bad.


I don't always post linkies, because that takes extra time, which I am short of. Also, web searches get different results between using mobile device and using desktop, so it is more difficult to track down some things which I've read.
If I feel that it is not well known that Terra might be orbiting Sol, I would try to track down a linky to point out that implication. Otherwise I conjure it can be easily found. I also generally assume you have greater capability to find medical or biological references than most can.

Sorry you thought I was evading your points.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, August 5, 2020 3:53 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


I apologize if I'm covering old ground, but I saw an interesting article to repost here

Quote:

An Effective COVID Treatment the Media Continues to Besmirch
ANALYSIS

By Steven Hatfill
August 04, 2020

On Friday, July 31, in a column ostensibly dealing with health care “misinformation,” Washington Post media critic Margaret Sullivan opened by lambasting “fringe doctors spouting dangerous falsehoods about hydroxychloroquine as a COVID-19 wonder cure.”

Actually, it was Sullivan who was spouting dangerous falsehoods about this drug, something the Washington Post and much of the rest of the media have been doing for months. On May 15, the Post offered a stark warning to any Americans who may have taken hope in a possible therapy for COVID-19. In the newspaper’s telling, there was nothing unambiguous about the science -- or the politics -- of hydroxychloroquine: “Drug promoted by Trump as coronavirus game-changer increasingly linked to deaths,” blared the headline. Written by three Post staff writers, the story asserted that the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine in treating COVID-19 is scant and that the drug is inherently unsafe. This claim is nonsense.

Biased against the use of hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19 -- and the Washington Post is hardly alone -- the paper described an April 21, 2020, drug study on U.S. Veterans Affairs patients hospitalized with the illness. It found a high death rate in patients taking the drug hydroxychloroquine. But this was a flawed study with a small sample, the main flaw being that the drug was given to the sickest patients who were already dying because of their age and severe pre-existing conditions. This study was quickly debunked. It had been posted on a non-peer-reviewed medical archive that specifically warns that studies posted on its website should not be reported in the media as established information.

Yet, the Post and countless other news outlets did just the opposite, making repeated claims that hydroxychloroquine was ineffective and caused serious cardiac problems. Nowhere was there any mention of the fact that COVID-19 damages the heart during infection, sometimes causing irregular and sometimes fatal heart rhythms in patients not taking the drug.

To a media unrelentingly hostile to Donald Trump, this meant that the president could be portrayed as recklessly promoting the use of a “dangerous” drug. Ignoring the refutation of the VA study in its May 15 article, the Washington Post cited a Brazil study published on April 24 in which a COVID trial using chloroquine (a related but different drug than hydroxychloroquine) was stopped because 11 patients treated with it died. The reporters never mentioned another problem with that study: The Brazilian doctors were giving their patients lethal cumulative doses of the drug.

On and on it has gone since then, in a circle of self-reinforcing commentary. Following the news that Trump was taking the drug himself, opinion hosts on cable news channels launched continual attacks on both hydroxychloroquine and the president. “This will kill you!” Fox News Channel’s Neil Cavuto exclaimed. “The president of the United States just acknowledge that he is taking hydroxychloroquine, a drug that [was] meant really to treat malaria and lupus.”

Washington Post reporters Ariana Cha and Laurie McGinley were back again on May 22, with a new article shouting out the new supposed news: “Antimalarial drug touted by President Trump is linked to increased risk of death in coronavirus patients, study says.” The media uproar this time was based on a large study just published in the Lancet. There was just one problem. The Lancet paper was fraudulent and it was quickly retracted.

However, the damage from the biased media storm was done and it was long-lasting. Continuing patient enrollment needed for early-use clinical trials of hydroxychloroquine dried up within a week. Patients were afraid to take the drug, doctors became afraid to prescribe it, pharmacies refused to fill prescriptions, and in a rush of incompetent analysis and non-existent senior leadership, the FDA revoked its Emergency Use Authorization for the drug.

So what is the real story on hydroxychloroquine? Here, briefly, is what we know:

When the COVID-19 pandemic began, a search was made for suitable antiviral therapies to use as treatment until a vaccine could be produced. One drug, hydroxychloroquine, was found to be the most effective and safe for use against the virus. Federal funds were used for clinical trials of it, but there was no guidance from Dr. Anthony Fauci or the NIH Treatment Guidelines Panel on what role the drug would play in the national pandemic response. Fauci seemed to be unaware that there actually was a national pandemic plan for respiratory viruses.

Following a careful regimen developed by doctors in France, some knowledgeable practicing U.S. physicians began prescribing hydroxychloroquine to patients still in the early phase of COVID infection. Its effects seemed dramatic. Patients still became sick, but for the most part they avoided hospitalization. In contrast --- and in error -- the NIH-funded studies somehow became focused on giving hydroxychloroquine to late-presenting hospitalized patients. This was in spite of the fact that unlike the drug’s early use in ambulatory patients, there was no real data to support the drug’s use in more severe hospitalized patients.

By April, it was clear that roughly seven days from the time of the first onset of symptoms, a COVID-19 infection could sometimes progress into a more radical late phase of severe disease with inflammation of the blood vessels in the body and immune system over-reactions. Many patients developed blood clots in their lungs and needed mechanical ventilation. Some needed kidney dialysis. In light of this pathological carnage, no antiviral drug could be expected to show much of an effect during this severe second stage of COVID.

On April 6, 2020, an international team of medical experts published an extensive study of hydroxychloroquine in more than 130,000 patients with connective tissue disorders. They reaffirmed that hydroxychloroquine was a safe drug with no serious side effects. The drug could safely be given to pregnant women and breast-feeding mothers. Consequently, countries such as China, Turkey, South Korea, India, Morocco, Algeria, and others began to use hydroxychloroquine widely and early in their national pandemic response. Doctors overseas were safely prescribing the drug based on clinical signs and symptoms because widespread testing was not available.

However, the NIH promoted a much different strategy for the United States. The “Fauci Strategy” was to keep early infected patients quarantined at home without treatment until they developed a shortness of breath and had to be admitted to a hospital. Then they would they be given hydroxychloroquine. The Food and Drug Administration cluelessly agreed to this doctrine and it stated in its hydroxychloroquine Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) that “hospitalized patients were likely to have a greater prospect of benefit (compared to ambulatory patients with mild illness).”

In reality just the opposite was true. This was a tragic mistake by Fauci and FDA Commissioner Dr. Stephen Hahn and it was a mistake that would cost the lives of thousands of Americans in the days to come.

At the same time, accumulating data showed remarkable results if hydroxychloroquine were given to patients early, during a seven-day window from the time of first symptom onset. If given during this window, most infections did not progress into the severe, lethal second stage of the disease. Patients still got sick, but they avoided hospitalization or the later transfer to an intensive care unit. In mid-April a high-level memo was sent to the FDA alerting them to the fact that the best use for hydroxychloroquine was for its early use in still ambulatory COVID patients. These patients were quarantined at home but were not short of breath and did not yet require supplemental oxygen and hospitalization.

Failing to understand that COVID-19 could be a two-stage disease process, the FDA ignored the memo and, as previously mentioned, it withdrew its EUA for hydroxychloroquine based on flawed studies and clinical trials that were applicable only to late-stage COVID patients.

By now, however, some countries had already implemented early, aggressive, outpatient community treatment with hydroxychloroquine and within weeks were able to minimize their COVID deaths and bring their national pandemic under some degree of control.

In countries such as Great Britain and the United States, where the “Fauci-Hahn Strategy” was followed, there was a much higher death rate and an ever-increasing number of cases. COVID patients in the U.S. would continue to be quarantined at home and left untreated until they developed shortness of breath. Then they would be admitted to the hospital and given hydroxychloroquine outside the narrow window for the drug’s maximum effectiveness.

In further contrast, countries that started out with the “Fauci-Hahn Doctrine” and then later shifted their policy towards aggressive outpatient hydroxychloroquine use, after a brief lag period also saw a stunning rapid reduction in COVID mortality and hospital admissions.

Finally, several nations that had started using an aggressive early-use outpatient policy for hydroxychloroquine, including France and Switzerland, stopped this practice when the WHO temporarily withdrew its support for the drug. Five days after the publication of the fake Lancet study and the resulting media onslaught, Swiss politicians banned hydroxychloroquine use in the country from May 27 until June 11, when it was quickly reinstated.



The consequences of suddenly stopping hydroxychloroquine can be seen by examining a graph of the Case Fatality Ratio Index (nrCFR) for Switzerland. This is derived by dividing the number of daily new COVID fatalities by the new cases resolved over a period with a seven-day moving average. Looking at the evolution curve of the CFR it can be seen that during the weeks preceding the ban on hydroxychloroquine, the nrCFR index fluctuated between 3% and 5%.

Following a lag of 13 days after stopping outpatient hydroxychloroquine use, the country’s COVID-19 deaths increased four-fold and the nrCFR index stayed elevated at the highest level it had been since early in the COVID pandemic, oscillating at over 10%-15%. Early outpatient hydroxychloroquine was restarted June 11 but the four-fold “wave of excess lethality” lasted until June 22, after which the nrCFR rapidly returned to its background value.

Here in our country, Fauci continued to ignore the ever accumulating and remarkable early-use data on hydroxychloroquine and he became focused on a new antiviral compound named remdesivir. This was an experimental drug that had to be given intravenously every day for five days. It was never suitable for major widespread outpatient or at-home use as part of a national pandemic plan. We now know now that remdesivir has no effect on overall COVID patient mortality and it costs thousands of dollars per patient.

Hydroxychloroquine, by contrast, costs 60 cents a tablet, it can be taken at home, it fits in with the national pandemic plan for respiratory viruses, and a course of therapy simply requires swallowing three tablets in the first 24 hours followed by one tablet every 12 hours for five days.

There are now 53 studies that show positive results of hydroxychloroquine in COVID infections. There are 14 global studies that show neutral or negative results -- and 10 of them were of patients in very late stages of COVID-19, where no antiviral drug can be expected to have much effect. Of the remaining four studies, two come from the same University of Minnesota author. The other two are from the faulty Brazil paper, which should be retracted, and the fake Lancet paper, which was.

Millions of people are taking or have taken hydroxychloroquine in nations that have managed to get their national pandemic under some degree of control. Two recent, large, early-use clinical trials have been conducted by the Henry Ford Health System and at Mount Sinai showing a 51% and 47% lower mortality, respectively, in hospitalized patients given hydroxychloroquine. A recent study from Spain published on July 29, two days before Margaret Sullivan’s strafing of “fringe doctors,” shows a 66% reduction in COVID mortality in patients taking hydroxychloroquine. No serious side effects were reported in these studies and no epidemic of heartbeat abnormalities.

This is ground-shaking news. Why is it not being widely reported? Why is the American media trying to run the U.S. pandemic response with its own misinformation?

Steven Hatfill is a veteran virologist who helped establish the Rapid Hemorrhagic Fever Response Teams for the National Medical Disaster Unit in Kenya, Africa. He is an adjunct assistant professor in two departments at the George Washington University Medical Center where he teaches mass casualty medicine. He is principle author of the prophetic book “Three Seconds Until Midnight -- Preparing for the Next Pandemic,” published by Amazon in 2019.


https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2020/08/04/an_effective_cov
id_treatment_the_media_continues_to_besmirch_143875.html


-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

#WEARAMASK

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, August 5, 2020 5:50 AM

THG


Please, just take the fucking drug for Christ's sake. You fucking morons.

T


Stupid people don't know they're stupid, and they certainly don't realize how obvious it is to others.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, August 5, 2020 7:35 AM

THG


T

Stupid people don't know they're stupid, and they certainly don't realize how obvious it is to others.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, August 5, 2020 8:10 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
I apologize if I'm covering old ground, but I saw an interesting article to repost here

Quote:

An Effective COVID Treatment the Media Continues to Besmirch
ANALYSIS


https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2020/08/04/an_effective_cov
id_treatment_the_media_continues_to_besmirch_143875.html


Signym, you and Trump are promoting hydroxychloroquine for the same political reasons as Brazilian President Bolsonaro:

A former Brazilian health minister, Luiz Mandetta, fired by Bolsonaro in April partly over the President's support of hydroxychloroquine, described public demand for hydroxychloroquine as "false hope". He said the President knew from the start that science didn't back his choice of drug, although Bolsonaro has recently insisted it medically aided him.

"It's just false hope," he told CNN. "Poor people have a hard time getting the health system to work and they say 'at least I have this'. It's more like a placebo, something they can take and be grateful to (Bolsonaro)," he said. "It's a political choice, nothing about health. He uses the drug to say to people they can go back to work." Bolsonaro has recently said the use of the drug is a matter between patient and doctor, but has insisted it has helped cure him from a two week infection.

The country's surplus of hydroxychloroquine comes amid an urgent need for other drugs to help Covid-19 patients. Pedro Archer, director of the Rio de Janeiro doctor's union, and an ICU doctor himself for months in the pandemic, said that he feared the focus on hydroxychloroquine has diverted government attention away from obtaining medications that coronavirus patients actually need.

"Midazolam, fentanyl, noradrenaline," he said, referring to vital drugs used to keep patients alive and comfortable in an ICU. "Public health is always running out of these." He added: "If the US wants to help Brazil, send these, not hydroxychloroquine."

More at www.cnn.com/2020/08/04/americas/brazil-us-hydroxychloroquine-doses-int
l/index.html


The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, August 5, 2020 8:43 AM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
However, after Trump made mention of HCQ at a presser, the TDSers and the Orange Man Bad club all went batshit and opposed HCQ for no logical reason.

ONE logical reason might be if it doesn't work AND carries risks for COVID-19 damaged hearts.
Quote:

I would hope that, since HCQ has had many decades track record, we could focus on Trials NOT dated 2020, but from one of the other dozens of years that HCQ has been prescribed.
We're supposed to look at HCQ trials BEFORE 2020 even though they DIDN'T look at SAR-CoV-2?

Then how in god's name is anybody supposed to figure out if it works against the SAR-CoV-2 or not?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, August 5, 2020 8:48 AM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


reposted for readability
Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
I apologize if I'm covering old ground, but I saw an interesting article to repost here



Quote:

An Effective COVID Treatment the Media Continues to Besmirch
ANALYSIS

By Steven Hatfill
August 04, 2020

On Friday, July 31, in a column ostensibly dealing with health care “misinformation,” Washington Post media critic Margaret Sullivan opened by lambasting “fringe doctors spouting dangerous falsehoods about hydroxychloroquine as a COVID-19 wonder cure.”

Actually, it was Sullivan who was spouting dangerous falsehoods about this drug, something the Washington Post and much of the rest of the media have been doing for months. On May 15, the Post offered a stark warning to any Americans who may have taken hope in a possible therapy for COVID-19. In the newspaper’s telling, there was nothing unambiguous about the science -- or the politics -- of hydroxychloroquine: “Drug promoted by Trump as coronavirus game-changer increasingly linked to deaths,” blared the headline. Written by three Post staff writers, the story asserted that the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine in treating COVID-19 is scant and that the drug is inherently unsafe. This claim is nonsense.

Biased against the use of hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19 -- and the Washington Post is hardly alone -- the paper described an April 21, 2020, drug study on U.S. Veterans Affairs patients hospitalized with the illness. It found a high death rate in patients taking the drug hydroxychloroquine. But this was a flawed study with a small sample, the main flaw being that the drug was given to the sickest patients who were already dying because of their age and severe pre-existing conditions. This study was quickly debunked. It had been posted on a non-peer-reviewed medical archive that specifically warns that studies posted on its website should not be reported in the media as established information.

Yet, the Post and countless other news outlets did just the opposite, making repeated claims that hydroxychloroquine was ineffective and caused serious cardiac problems. Nowhere was there any mention of the fact that COVID-19 damages the heart during infection, sometimes causing irregular and sometimes fatal heart rhythms in patients not taking the drug.

To a media unrelentingly hostile to Donald Trump, this meant that the president could be portrayed as recklessly promoting the use of a “dangerous” drug. Ignoring the refutation of the VA study in its May 15 article, the Washington Post cited a Brazil study published on April 24 in which a COVID trial using chloroquine (a related but different drug than hydroxychloroquine) was stopped because 11 patients treated with it died. The reporters never mentioned another problem with that study: The Brazilian doctors were giving their patients lethal cumulative doses of the drug.

On and on it has gone since then, in a circle of self-reinforcing commentary. Following the news that Trump was taking the drug himself, opinion hosts on cable news channels launched continual attacks on both hydroxychloroquine and the president. “This will kill you!” Fox News Channel’s Neil Cavuto exclaimed. “The president of the United States just acknowledge that he is taking hydroxychloroquine, a drug that [was] meant really to treat malaria and lupus.”

Washington Post reporters Ariana Cha and Laurie McGinley were back again on May 22, with a new article shouting out the new supposed news: “Antimalarial drug touted by President Trump is linked to increased risk of death in coronavirus patients, study says.” The media uproar this time was based on a large study just published in the Lancet. There was just one problem. The Lancet paper was fraudulent and it was quickly retracted.

However, the damage from the biased media storm was done and it was long-lasting. Continuing patient enrollment needed for early-use clinical trials of hydroxychloroquine dried up within a week. Patients were afraid to take the drug, doctors became afraid to prescribe it, pharmacies refused to fill prescriptions, and in a rush of incompetent analysis and non-existent senior leadership, the FDA revoked its Emergency Use Authorization for the drug.

So what is the real story on hydroxychloroquine? Here, briefly, is what we know:

When the COVID-19 pandemic began, a search was made for suitable antiviral therapies to use as treatment until a vaccine could be produced. One drug, hydroxychloroquine, was found to be the most effective and safe for use against the virus. Federal funds were used for clinical trials of it, but there was no guidance from Dr. Anthony Fauci or the NIH Treatment Guidelines Panel on what role the drug would play in the national pandemic response. Fauci seemed to be unaware that there actually was a national pandemic plan for respiratory viruses.

Following a careful regimen developed by doctors in France, some knowledgeable practicing U.S. physicians began prescribing hydroxychloroquine to patients still in the early phase of COVID infection. Its effects seemed dramatic. Patients still became sick, but for the most part they avoided hospitalization. In contrast --- and in error -- the NIH-funded studies somehow became focused on giving hydroxychloroquine to late-presenting hospitalized patients. This was in spite of the fact that unlike the drug’s early use in ambulatory patients, there was no real data to support the drug’s use in more severe hospitalized patients.

By April, it was clear that roughly seven days from the time of the first onset of symptoms, a COVID-19 infection could sometimes progress into a more radical late phase of severe disease with inflammation of the blood vessels in the body and immune system over-reactions. Many patients developed blood clots in their lungs and needed mechanical ventilation. Some needed kidney dialysis. In light of this pathological carnage, no antiviral drug could be expected to show much of an effect during this severe second stage of COVID.

On April 6, 2020, an international team of medical experts published an extensive study of hydroxychloroquine in more than 130,000 patients with connective tissue disorders. They reaffirmed that hydroxychloroquine was a safe drug with no serious side effects. The drug could safely be given to pregnant women and breast-feeding mothers. Consequently, countries such as China, Turkey, South Korea, India, Morocco, Algeria, and others began to use hydroxychloroquine widely and early in their national pandemic response. Doctors overseas were safely prescribing the drug based on clinical signs and symptoms because widespread testing was not available.

However, the NIH promoted a much different strategy for the United States. The “Fauci Strategy” was to keep early infected patients quarantined at home without treatment until they developed a shortness of breath and had to be admitted to a hospital. Then they would they be given hydroxychloroquine. The Food and Drug Administration cluelessly agreed to this doctrine and it stated in its hydroxychloroquine Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) that “hospitalized patients were likely to have a greater prospect of benefit (compared to ambulatory patients with mild illness).”

In reality just the opposite was true. This was a tragic mistake by Fauci and FDA Commissioner Dr. Stephen Hahn and it was a mistake that would cost the lives of thousands of Americans in the days to come.

At the same time, accumulating data showed remarkable results if hydroxychloroquine were given to patients early, during a seven-day window from the time of first symptom onset. If given during this window, most infections did not progress into the severe, lethal second stage of the disease. Patients still got sick, but they avoided hospitalization or the later transfer to an intensive care unit. In mid-April a high-level memo was sent to the FDA alerting them to the fact that the best use for hydroxychloroquine was for its early use in still ambulatory COVID patients. These patients were quarantined at home but were not short of breath and did not yet require supplemental oxygen and hospitalization.

Failing to understand that COVID-19 could be a two-stage disease process, the FDA ignored the memo and, as previously mentioned, it withdrew its EUA for hydroxychloroquine based on flawed studies and clinical trials that were applicable only to late-stage COVID patients.

By now, however, some countries had already implemented early, aggressive, outpatient community treatment with hydroxychloroquine and within weeks were able to minimize their COVID deaths and bring their national pandemic under some degree of control.

In countries such as Great Britain and the United States, where the “Fauci-Hahn Strategy” was followed, there was a much higher death rate and an ever-increasing number of cases. COVID patients in the U.S. would continue to be quarantined at home and left untreated until they developed shortness of breath. Then they would be admitted to the hospital and given hydroxychloroquine outside the narrow window for the drug’s maximum effectiveness.

In further contrast, countries that started out with the “Fauci-Hahn Doctrine” and then later shifted their policy towards aggressive outpatient hydroxychloroquine use, after a brief lag period also saw a stunning rapid reduction in COVID mortality and hospital admissions.

Finally, several nations that had started using an aggressive early-use outpatient policy for hydroxychloroquine, including France and Switzerland, stopped this practice when the WHO temporarily withdrew its support for the drug. Five days after the publication of the fake Lancet study and the resulting media onslaught, Swiss politicians banned hydroxychloroquine use in the country from May 27 until June 11, when it was quickly reinstated.


Quote:



The consequences of suddenly stopping hydroxychloroquine can be seen by examining a graph of the Case Fatality Ratio Index (nrCFR) for Switzerland. This is derived by dividing the number of daily new COVID fatalities by the new cases resolved over a period with a seven-day moving average. Looking at the evolution curve of the CFR it can be seen that during the weeks preceding the ban on hydroxychloroquine, the nrCFR index fluctuated between 3% and 5%.

Following a lag of 13 days after stopping outpatient hydroxychloroquine use, the country’s COVID-19 deaths increased four-fold and the nrCFR index stayed elevated at the highest level it had been since early in the COVID pandemic, oscillating at over 10%-15%. Early outpatient hydroxychloroquine was restarted June 11 but the four-fold “wave of excess lethality” lasted until June 22, after which the nrCFR rapidly returned to its background value.

Here in our country, Fauci continued to ignore the ever accumulating and remarkable early-use data on hydroxychloroquine and he became focused on a new antiviral compound named remdesivir. This was an experimental drug that had to be given intravenously every day for five days. It was never suitable for major widespread outpatient or at-home use as part of a national pandemic plan. We now know now that remdesivir has no effect on overall COVID patient mortality and it costs thousands of dollars per patient.

Hydroxychloroquine, by contrast, costs 60 cents a tablet, it can be taken at home, it fits in with the national pandemic plan for respiratory viruses, and a course of therapy simply requires swallowing three tablets in the first 24 hours followed by one tablet every 12 hours for five days.

There are now 53 studies that show positive results of hydroxychloroquine in COVID infections. There are 14 global studies that show neutral or negative results -- and 10 of them were of patients in very late stages of COVID-19, where no antiviral drug can be expected to have much effect. Of the remaining four studies, two come from the same University of Minnesota author. The other two are from the faulty Brazil paper, which should be retracted, and the fake Lancet paper, which was.

Millions of people are taking or have taken hydroxychloroquine in nations that have managed to get their national pandemic under some degree of control. Two recent, large, early-use clinical trials have been conducted by the Henry Ford Health System and at Mount Sinai showing a 51% and 47% lower mortality, respectively, in hospitalized patients given hydroxychloroquine. A recent study from Spain published on July 29, two days before Margaret Sullivan’s strafing of “fringe doctors,” shows a 66% reduction in COVID mortality in patients taking hydroxychloroquine. No serious side effects were reported in these studies and no epidemic of heartbeat abnormalities.

This is ground-shaking news. Why is it not being widely reported? Why is the American media trying to run the U.S. pandemic response with its own misinformation?

Steven Hatfill is a veteran virologist who helped establish the Rapid Hemorrhagic Fever Response Teams for the National Medical Disaster Unit in Kenya, Africa. He is an adjunct assistant professor in two departments at the George Washington University Medical Center where he teaches mass casualty medicine. He is principle author of the prophetic book “Three Seconds Until Midnight -- Preparing for the Next Pandemic,” published by Amazon in 2019.


https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2020/08/04/an_effective_cov
id_treatment_the_media_continues_to_besmirch_143875.html
Quote:



-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

#WEARAMASK


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, August 5, 2020 8:50 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly


Quote:

Originally posted by 1KIKI:
Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
However, after Trump made mention of HCQ at a presser, the TDSers and the Orange Man Bad club all went batshit and opposed HCQ for no logical reason.

ONE logical reason might be that it doesn't work AND carries risks for COVID-19 damaged hearts.
Quote:

I would hope that, since HCQ has had many decades track record, we could focus on Trials NOT dated 2020, but from one of the other dozens of years that HCQ has been prescribed.
We're supposed to look at HCQ trials BEFORE 2020 even though they DIDN'T look at SAR-CoV-2?

Then how in god's name is anybody supposed to figure out if it works against the SAR-CoV-2 or not?

Hydroxychloroquine -- given either alone or in combination with the antibiotic azithromycin -- did not improve the conditions of hospitalized patients with mild-to-moderate Covid-19.

The study, led by researchers in Brazil, included 504 patients with confirmed Covid-19 who either needed no supplemental oxygen, or were receiving up to 4 liters per minute of oxygen. The study was conducted across 55 hospitals in Brazil.

The patients were randomly assigned to receive either standard of care; hydroxychloroquine at a dose of 400mg twice daily; or hydroxychloroquine at a dose of 400mg twice daily, plus azithromycin at a dose of 500mg once daily for seven days. The researchers then assessed how the patients were doing 15 days later.

Neither hydroxychloroquine alone nor hydroxychloroquine plus azithromycin appeared to affect the condition of the patients at the 15-day mark, the study showed.

Additionally, unusual heart rhythms and elevated liver-enzyme levels were more frequent in patients receiving hydroxychloroquine alone or with azithromycin, according to the study.

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/07/23/health/hydroxychloroquine-covid-bra
zil-study/index.html


Hydroxychloroquine has been shown effective at reelecting Donald J Trump. That is what this is all about, 1kiki.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, August 5, 2020 9:14 AM

THG


How can I make it as plain as possible? If anyone here believed the drug was safe they would take it. They aren't, so it isn't.

This whole thread is about trolling. Confusing the message and giving Trump cover.

T


Stupid people don't know they're stupid, and they certainly don't realize how obvious it is to others.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, August 5, 2020 9:30 AM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Signy -

I realize Hatfill's article wasn't a research paper. And maybe he was the victim of editorial space-saving and they got rid of his references as too long and too pedantic.

But I found many of his statements troubling because they lacked evidence.

Quote:

When the COVID-19 pandemic began, a search was made
By whom?
Quote:

for suitable antiviral therapies to use as treatment until a vaccine could be produced. One drug, hydroxychloroquine, was found to be the most effective and safe for use against the virus.
Isn't that the point in dispute? So how does an unsupported claim resolve it?
Quote:

Fauci seemed to be unaware that there actually was a national pandemic plan for respiratory viruses.
Did it involve HCQ as implied?
Quote:

... some knowledgeable practicing U.S. physicians began prescribing hydroxychloroquine to patients still in the early phase of COVID infection. Its effects seemed dramatic.
names? dates? numbers?
Quote:

They reaffirmed that hydroxychloroquine was a safe drug with no serious side effects.
That's simply not true as HCQ definitely carries risks, even listed in the prescribing information in the US.
Quote:

In mid-April a high-level memo was sent to the FDA alerting them to the fact that the best use for hydroxychloroquine was for its early use in still ambulatory COVID patients.
From whom? To whom? What date? Are quotes available?
Quote:

... some countries had already implemented early, aggressive, outpatient community treatment with hydroxychloroquine ...
Which ones? When did this happen?

And so on.

You know, I'd be happy if HCQ was a good answer to saving a lot of people. And as you may have noticed, I've spent considerable time and effort trying to track down the reality of the current situation instead of just relying on m$m claims.


But, just like with WMDs, and Russia hacked the DNC, I'd need to see evidence. Hatfill was certainly in a position to provide some, but he provided zip, not even durable, verifiable names and dates in his historical recounting.



NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, August 5, 2020 9:58 AM

THG


By
Margaret Sullivan
Media columnist
July 30, 2020 at 10:47 a.m. CDT

You may have heard about the viral video featuring a group of fringe doctors spouting dangerous falsehoods about hydroxychloroquine as a covid-19 wonder cure.

In fact, it’s very possible you saw the video since it was shared on social media tens of millions of times — partly thanks to President Trump who retweeted it more than once, and who described the group’s Stella Immanuel, also known for promoting wacky notions about demon sperm and alien DNA, as “very impressive” and even “spectacular.”

Given this and a few other hideous developments, it’s time to acknowledge the painfully obvious: America has waved the white flag and surrendered.

With nearly 150,000 dead from covid-19, we’ve not only lost the public-health war, we’ve lost the war for truth. Misinformation and lies have captured the castle.

And the bad guys’ most powerful weapon? Social media — in particular, Facebook.

Some new research, out just this morning from Pew, tells us in painstaking numerical form exactly what’s going on, and it’s not pretty: Americans who rely on social media as their pathway to news are more ignorant and more misinformed than those who come to news through print, a news app on their phones or network TV.

And that group is growing.

The report’s language may be formal and restrained, but the meaning is utterly clear — and while not surprising, it’s downright scary in its implications.

“Even as Americans who primarily turn to social media for political news are less aware and knowledgeable about a wide range of events and issues in the news, they are more likely than other Americans to have heard about a number of false or unproven claims.”

Media coverage of the 2016 campaign was disastrous. Now’s the last chance to get 2020 right.

Specifically, they’ve been far more exposed to the conspiracy theory that powerful people intentionally planned the pandemic. Yet this group, says Pew, is also less concerned about the impact of made-up news like this than the rest of the U.S. population.

They’re absorbing fake news, but they don’t see it as a problem. In a society that depends on an informed citizenry to make reasonably intelligent decisions about self-governance, this is the worst kind of trouble.

And the president — who knows exactly what he is doing — is making it far, far worse. His war on the nation’s traditional press is a part of the same scheme: information warfare, meant to mess with reality and sow as much confusion as possible.

Will Sommer of the Daily Beast took a deeper look this week into the beliefs of Stella Immanuel — the Houston doctor whom Trump has termed “very impressive” and “spectacular.”

“She has often claimed that gynecological problems like cysts and endometriosis are in fact caused by people having sex in their dreams with demons and witches,” Sommer wrote. “She alleges alien DNA is currently used in medical treatments, and that scientists are cooking up a vaccine to prevent people from being religious. And, despite appearing in Washington, D.C., to lobby Congress on Monday, she has said that the government is run in part not by humans but by ‘reptilians’ and other aliens.”

Immanuel said in a recent speech in Washington that the power of hydroxychloroquine as a treatment means that protective face masks aren’t necessary. None of this has a basis in fact — but try telling that to the tens of millions who have not only seen it but been urged to believe it.

The video featuring Immanuel and others eventually was taken down by Facebook. But as usual, it was far too late.

And Donald Trump Jr., who tweeted it out calling it a “must watch,” got his hand slapped by Twitter — briefly losing his right to sully the truth and jam the gears of reality.

Sure, Chris Wallace did a tough Trump interview. But it’s a fig leaf for Fox’s usual sycophancy.

A low point, certainly, in a long series of them over the past few years — all happening even as congressional Republicans tried to turn Wednesday’s appearance by four titans of tech at a landmark antitrust hearing into a politicized rant about how social media doesn’t give conservatives a fair shot.

This is patently untrue, also.

Week after week, Fox News, Breitbart News, and others of their right-wing ilk reign at the top of Facebook’s list of the most engaged-with content. And Facebook doesn’t do nearly enough to keep harmful lies — often promoted by the far right — off its platform.

In a sweeping piece on disinformation and the 2020 campaign in February — in the pre-pandemic era — the Atlantic’s McKay Coppins concluded with a telling quote from the political theorist Hannah Arendt that bears repetition now. Through an onslaught of lies, which may be debunked before the cycle is repeated, totalitarian leaders are able to instill in their followers “a mixture of gullibility and cynicism,” she warned.

Over time, people are conditioned to “believe everything and nothing, think that everything was possible and that nothing was true.” And then such leaders can do pretty much whatever they wish.

With the lies in a viral video, a president’s stamp of approval, and the confirmation that social media is how more and more Americans get their supposed “news,” we’ve moved a big step closer to that reality.

And we should be afraid.


T

Stupid people don't know they're stupid, and they certainly don't realize how obvious it is to others.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, August 5, 2020 12:05 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK

[/i]


Maybe if the Legacy Media didn't spend all of its time lying to everyone, people would trust the Legacy Media.


The time for fear has come and gone long ago. It is what it is now. There's nothing they can do to get that trust back.





Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, August 5, 2020 12:57 PM

THG


The mainstream media is held accountable. Reporting incorrect stories, while rare, does happen. What other reputable sources of news are there?

Twitter, I think not. Facebook, I think not. YouTube, I think not. All these others have allowed people to post the most outlandish Bizarre and weird garbage. Which, until very recently went completing unchallenged. Then there are those sites that angulate stories and change the context, distort the facts. Sites like zerohedge.

My point is that this leaves Jack with only his warped perspectives. Perspectives gathered into his essence while consuming vast amounts of alcohol. He claims he is sober now. Yet we remember his sick and twisted thinking from those days. We recognize it in his essence, in his soul to this day. I would suggest he begin his recovery by ending his constant trolling.

T


Stupid people don't know they're stupid, and they certainly don't realize how obvious it is to others.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, August 5, 2020 1:26 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK

[/i]


They constantly print misinformation.

The most reasonable and least conspiracy theory like reason is because they don't want to miss out on being the first to "print" so they just say a bunch of shit without having any facts first. This happens literally every single day.

Yes. Retractions are made a lot. But the retraction is hardly ever read by anybody because the story is out of the news cycle and people have moved on to the next thing. 3/4 of the shit you've got floating around in your brain is misinformation from reading headlines for articles that were later debunked.



And fuck your suggestions. I don't take advice from people I wouldn't piss on if they were burning alive.


Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, August 5, 2020 2:11 PM

THG


Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

They constantly print misinformation.


Do Right, Be Right. :)




T

Stupid people don't know they're stupid, and they certainly don't realize how obvious it is to others.


If not the media. What other reputable sources of news are there?


10 Journalism Brands Where You Find Real Facts Rather Than Alternative Facts

https://www.forbes.com/sites/berlinschoolofcreativeleadership/2017/02/
01/10-journalism-brands-where-you-will-find-real-facts-rather-than-alternative-facts/#1994f207e9b5


1. The New York Times
2. The Wall Street Journal
3. The Washington Post
4. BBC
5. The Economist
6. The New Yorker
7. The Associated Press, Reuters, Bloomberg News
8. Foreign Affairs
9. The Atlantic
10. Politico



Runners Up:

- National Public Radio

- TIME magazine

-The Christian Science Monitor

- The Los Angeles Times (and many other regional, metropolitan daily newspapers)

- USA Today

- CNN

- NBC News

- CBS News

- ABC News

Business News Sources:

- FORBES magazine

- Bloomberg BusinessWeek magazine

- Fortune magazine

- The Financial Times newspaper

Sources of reporting and opinion from the right of the political spectrum:

- National Review

- The Weekly Standard

Sources of reporting and opinion from the left of the political spectrum:

- The New Republic

- The Nation

Paul Glader is an associate professor of journalism at The King's College in New York City, a media scholar at The Berlin School of Creative Leadership

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, August 5, 2020 3:10 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN



Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
I apologize if I'm covering old ground, but I saw an interesting article to repost here



Quote:

An Effective COVID Treatment the Media Continues to Besmirch
ANALYSIS

By Steven Hatfill
August 04, 2020

On Friday, July 31, in a column ostensibly dealing with health care “misinformation,” Washington Post media critic Margaret Sullivan opened by lambasting “fringe doctors spouting dangerous falsehoods about hydroxychloroquine as a COVID-19 wonder cure.”

Actually, it was Sullivan who was spouting dangerous falsehoods about this drug, something the Washington Post and much of the rest of the media have been doing for months. On May 15, the Post offered a stark warning to any Americans who may have taken hope in a possible therapy for COVID-19. In the newspaper’s telling, there was nothing unambiguous about the science -- or the politics -- of hydroxychloroquine: “Drug promoted by Trump as coronavirus game-changer increasingly linked to deaths,” blared the headline. Written by three Post staff writers, the story asserted that the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine in treating COVID-19 is scant and that the drug is inherently unsafe. This claim is nonsense.

Biased against the use of hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19 -- and the Washington Post is hardly alone -- the paper described an April 21, 2020, drug study on U.S. Veterans Affairs patients hospitalized with the illness. It found a high death rate in patients taking the drug hydroxychloroquine. But this was a flawed study with a small sample, the main flaw being that the drug was given to the sickest patients who were already dying because of their age and severe pre-existing conditions. This study was quickly debunked. It had been posted on a non-peer-reviewed medical archive that specifically warns that studies posted on its website should not be reported in the media as established information.

Yet, the Post and countless other news outlets did just the opposite, making repeated claims that hydroxychloroquine was ineffective and caused serious cardiac problems. Nowhere was there any mention of the fact that COVID-19 damages the heart during infection, sometimes causing irregular and sometimes fatal heart rhythms in patients not taking the drug.

To a media unrelentingly hostile to Donald Trump, this meant that the president could be portrayed as recklessly promoting the use of a “dangerous” drug. Ignoring the refutation of the VA study in its May 15 article, the Washington Post cited a Brazil study published on April 24 in which a COVID trial using chloroquine (a related but different drug than hydroxychloroquine) was stopped because 11 patients treated with it died. The reporters never mentioned another problem with that study: The Brazilian doctors were giving their patients lethal cumulative doses of the drug.

On and on it has gone since then, in a circle of self-reinforcing commentary. Following the news that Trump was taking the drug himself, opinion hosts on cable news channels launched continual attacks on both hydroxychloroquine and the president. “This will kill you!” Fox News Channel’s Neil Cavuto exclaimed. “The president of the United States just acknowledge that he is taking hydroxychloroquine, a drug that [was] meant really to treat malaria and lupus.”

Washington Post reporters Ariana Cha and Laurie McGinley were back again on May 22, with a new article shouting out the new supposed news: “Antimalarial drug touted by President Trump is linked to increased risk of death in coronavirus patients, study says.” The media uproar this time was based on a large study just published in the Lancet. There was just one problem. The Lancet paper was fraudulent and it was quickly retracted.

However, the damage from the biased media storm was done and it was long-lasting. Continuing patient enrollment needed for early-use clinical trials of hydroxychloroquine dried up within a week. Patients were afraid to take the drug, doctors became afraid to prescribe it, pharmacies refused to fill prescriptions, and in a rush of incompetent analysis and non-existent senior leadership, the FDA revoked its Emergency Use Authorization for the drug.

So what is the real story on hydroxychloroquine? Here, briefly, is what we know:

When the COVID-19 pandemic began, a search was made for suitable antiviral therapies to use as treatment until a vaccine could be produced. One drug, hydroxychloroquine, was found to be the most effective and safe for use against the virus. Federal funds were used for clinical trials of it, but there was no guidance from Dr. Anthony Fauci or the NIH Treatment Guidelines Panel on what role the drug would play in the national pandemic response. Fauci seemed to be unaware that there actually was a national pandemic plan for respiratory viruses.

Following a careful regimen developed by doctors in France, some knowledgeable practicing U.S. physicians began prescribing hydroxychloroquine to patients still in the early phase of COVID infection. Its effects seemed dramatic. Patients still became sick, but for the most part they avoided hospitalization. In contrast --- and in error -- the NIH-funded studies somehow became focused on giving hydroxychloroquine to late-presenting hospitalized patients. This was in spite of the fact that unlike the drug’s early use in ambulatory patients, there was no real data to support the drug’s use in more severe hospitalized patients.

By April, it was clear that roughly seven days from the time of the first onset of symptoms, a COVID-19 infection could sometimes progress into a more radical late phase of severe disease with inflammation of the blood vessels in the body and immune system over-reactions. Many patients developed blood clots in their lungs and needed mechanical ventilation. Some needed kidney dialysis. In light of this pathological carnage, no antiviral drug could be expected to show much of an effect during this severe second stage of COVID.

On April 6, 2020, an international team of medical experts published an extensive study of hydroxychloroquine in more than 130,000 patients with connective tissue disorders. They reaffirmed that hydroxychloroquine was a safe drug with no serious side effects. The drug could safely be given to pregnant women and breast-feeding mothers. Consequently, countries such as China, Turkey, South Korea, India, Morocco, Algeria, and others began to use hydroxychloroquine widely and early in their national pandemic response. Doctors overseas were safely prescribing the drug based on clinical signs and symptoms because widespread testing was not available.

However, the NIH promoted a much different strategy for the United States. The “Fauci Strategy” was to keep early infected patients quarantined at home without treatment until they developed a shortness of breath and had to be admitted to a hospital. Then they would they be given hydroxychloroquine. The Food and Drug Administration cluelessly agreed to this doctrine and it stated in its hydroxychloroquine Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) that “hospitalized patients were likely to have a greater prospect of benefit (compared to ambulatory patients with mild illness).”

In reality just the opposite was true. This was a tragic mistake by Fauci and FDA Commissioner Dr. Stephen Hahn and it was a mistake that would cost the lives of thousands of Americans in the days to come.

At the same time, accumulating data showed remarkable results if hydroxychloroquine were given to patients early, during a seven-day window from the time of first symptom onset. If given during this window, most infections did not progress into the severe, lethal second stage of the disease. Patients still got sick, but they avoided hospitalization or the later transfer to an intensive care unit. In mid-April a high-level memo was sent to the FDA alerting them to the fact that the best use for hydroxychloroquine was for its early use in still ambulatory COVID patients. These patients were quarantined at home but were not short of breath and did not yet require supplemental oxygen and hospitalization.

Failing to understand that COVID-19 could be a two-stage disease process, the FDA ignored the memo and, as previously mentioned, it withdrew its EUA for hydroxychloroquine based on flawed studies and clinical trials that were applicable only to late-stage COVID patients.

By now, however, some countries had already implemented early, aggressive, outpatient community treatment with hydroxychloroquine and within weeks were able to minimize their COVID deaths and bring their national pandemic under some degree of control.

In countries such as Great Britain and the United States, where the “Fauci-Hahn Strategy” was followed, there was a much higher death rate and an ever-increasing number of cases. COVID patients in the U.S. would continue to be quarantined at home and left untreated until they developed shortness of breath. Then they would be admitted to the hospital and given hydroxychloroquine outside the narrow window for the drug’s maximum effectiveness.

In further contrast, countries that started out with the “Fauci-Hahn Doctrine” and then later shifted their policy towards aggressive outpatient hydroxychloroquine use, after a brief lag period also saw a stunning rapid reduction in COVID mortality and hospital admissions.

Finally, several nations that had started using an aggressive early-use outpatient policy for hydroxychloroquine, including France and Switzerland, stopped this practice when the WHO temporarily withdrew its support for the drug. Five days after the publication of the fake Lancet study and the resulting media onslaught, Swiss politicians banned hydroxychloroquine use in the country from May 27 until June 11, when it was quickly reinstated.


Quote:



The consequences of suddenly stopping hydroxychloroquine can be seen by examining a graph of the Case Fatality Ratio Index (nrCFR) for Switzerland. This is derived by dividing the number of daily new COVID fatalities by the new cases resolved over a period with a seven-day moving average. Looking at the evolution curve of the CFR it can be seen that during the weeks preceding the ban on hydroxychloroquine, the nrCFR index fluctuated between 3% and 5%.

Following a lag of 13 days after stopping outpatient hydroxychloroquine use, the country’s COVID-19 deaths increased four-fold and the nrCFR index stayed elevated at the highest level it had been since early in the COVID pandemic, oscillating at over 10%-15%. Early outpatient hydroxychloroquine was restarted June 11 but the four-fold “wave of excess lethality” lasted until June 22, after which the nrCFR rapidly returned to its background value.

Here in our country, Fauci continued to ignore the ever accumulating and remarkable early-use data on hydroxychloroquine and he became focused on a new antiviral compound named remdesivir. This was an experimental drug that had to be given intravenously every day for five days. It was never suitable for major widespread outpatient or at-home use as part of a national pandemic plan. We now know now that remdesivir has no effect on overall COVID patient mortality and it costs thousands of dollars per patient.

Hydroxychloroquine, by contrast, costs 60 cents a tablet, it can be taken at home, it fits in with the national pandemic plan for respiratory viruses, and a course of therapy simply requires swallowing three tablets in the first 24 hours followed by one tablet every 12 hours for five days.

There are now 53 studies that show positive results of hydroxychloroquine in COVID infections. There are 14 global studies that show neutral or negative results -- and 10 of them were of patients in very late stages of COVID-19, where no antiviral drug can be expected to have much effect. Of the remaining four studies, two come from the same University of Minnesota author. The other two are from the faulty Brazil paper, which should be retracted, and the fake Lancet paper, which was.

Millions of people are taking or have taken hydroxychloroquine in nations that have managed to get their national pandemic under some degree of control. Two recent, large, early-use clinical trials have been conducted by the Henry Ford Health System and at Mount Sinai showing a 51% and 47% lower mortality, respectively, in hospitalized patients given hydroxychloroquine. A recent study from Spain published on July 29, two days before Margaret Sullivan’s strafing of “fringe doctors,” shows a 66% reduction in COVID mortality in patients taking hydroxychloroquine. No serious side effects were reported in these studies and no epidemic of heartbeat abnormalities.

This is ground-shaking news. Why is it not being widely reported? Why is the American media trying to run the U.S. pandemic response with its own misinformation?

Steven Hatfill is a veteran virologist who helped establish the Rapid Hemorrhagic Fever Response Teams for the National Medical Disaster Unit in Kenya, Africa. He is an adjunct assistant professor in two departments at the George Washington University Medical Center where he teaches mass casualty medicine. He is principle author of the prophetic book “Three Seconds Until Midnight -- Preparing for the Next Pandemic,” published by Amazon in 2019.


https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2020/08/04/an_effective_cov
id_treatment_the_media_continues_to_besmirch_143875.html
Quote:



-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

#WEARAMASK


Wow. Thank you very much SIGNYM for posting this fantastic article.
The scope and breadth of this summary as well as the incisive details encompass almost all of the reasons I started this thread, including the political hystrionics of the Libtard Lamestream Media. Surely the Liar-In-Chief Fauci sycophants would be all aghast at such revelations.

This jibes with the news and information I have heard from reliable and sensible sources from the start on this Coronavirus that Fauci funded.
Why has Trump not drained the swamp of this Fauci swampmonster? Why is this incompetent clown still employed?

I might try to copy this to the OP if that's OK with you.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, August 5, 2020 3:16 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


That graph shows that with HCQ the CFR settles to 1-3%, but without HCQ the CFR hangs around 10-16%.

So the realistic CFR expected is about 1/5 to 1/10 the Death Rate as the Fauci-Hahn Strategy.

New York and MI had banned use of HCQ, and they drove the Death Count for the whole nation, so our Deaths could be around 12,000 instead of around 120,000 (or whatever it is now).

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, August 5, 2020 4:30 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK

[/i]


Quote:

Originally posted by THG:
Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

They constantly print misinformation.


Do Right, Be Right. :)




T

Stupid people don't know they're stupid, and they certainly don't realize how obvious it is to others.


If not the media. What other reputable sources of news are there?


10 Journalism Brands Where You Find Real Facts Rather Than Alternative Facts

https://www.forbes.com/sites/berlinschoolofcreativeleadership/2017/02/
01/10-journalism-brands-where-you-will-find-real-facts-rather-than-alternative-facts/#1994f207e9b5


1. The New York Times
2. The Wall Street Journal
3. The Washington Post
4. BBC
5. The Economist
6. The New Yorker
7. The Associated Press, Reuters, Bloomberg News
8. Foreign Affairs
9. The Atlantic
10. Politico



Runners Up:

- National Public Radio

- TIME magazine

-The Christian Science Monitor

- The Los Angeles Times (and many other regional, metropolitan daily newspapers)

- USA Today

- CNN

- NBC News

- CBS News

- ABC News

Business News Sources:

- FORBES magazine

- Bloomberg BusinessWeek magazine

- Fortune magazine

- The Financial Times newspaper

Sources of reporting and opinion from the right of the political spectrum:

- National Review

- The Weekly Standard

Sources of reporting and opinion from the left of the political spectrum:

- The New Republic

- The Nation

Paul Glader is an associate professor of journalism at The King's College in New York City, a media scholar at The Berlin School of Creative Leadership





This is only a partial list of Liberal shill Legacy Media. I know you can do better than this.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Giant UFOs caught on videotape
Fri, August 14, 2020 13:23 - 2 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!!!
Fri, August 14, 2020 13:23 - 5275 posts
Mail Delays Fuel Concern Trump Is Undercutting Postal System Ahead of Voting
Fri, August 14, 2020 12:58 - 49 posts
Elections 2020
Fri, August 14, 2020 12:52 - 975 posts
Time for riots by white people: black man shoots 5 y/o white boy point blank, kills him
Fri, August 14, 2020 12:29 - 7 posts
The truth: It's too late. We will go extinct, very soon. Enjoy the time you have left.
Fri, August 14, 2020 12:28 - 622 posts
President Trump: good, bad, and ugly
Fri, August 14, 2020 12:16 - 250 posts
Antifa not a real thing, Right Wing Extremists still are!
Fri, August 14, 2020 12:13 - 44 posts
Mueller Investigation Is Over / Part two are the trials that begin in 2021 / tick tock
Fri, August 14, 2020 11:24 - 1120 posts
The predictions thread
Fri, August 14, 2020 09:43 - 824 posts
A thread for Democrats Only
Fri, August 14, 2020 09:37 - 3793 posts
Some Covid-19 thoughts
Fri, August 14, 2020 06:51 - 1126 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL