All Purpose Coronavirus Discussion VIII: mmvvpp Memorial Thread (No Election Talk)

[Starat327]

The only meatI beat is my own, sir.

Oh no, that was meant for Beef.

 

[Beef Invictus]

It's a way to get the poll juices flowing.

 

[BiggE]

NHL rumored to be playing a 48 game season starting in February.

Robert Hagg will play all 48 games while Therrien runs the powerplay.

God hates us

 

[deadhead]

No, HCQ wasn’t “killing people.”

No, the usage in the October study wasn’t “completely different.” A) It was a retrospective study. B) HCQ combined with Azythromycin & zinc was standard, not novel. From April 10, for example:
“We’ve been employing a combination of anti-viral drugs hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin since the first patient admitted with COVID-19,” said Frank Dienst, MD, Parrish Medical Center Intensivist and Critical Care Medical Director. “We prescribe it for all patients who don’t have contraindications, such as a condition or underlying health issues that would make the treatment inadvisable.”
“Most critical care specialists recognize the combination of the two drugs as probably being useful, but it’s not a certainty. It’s generally prescribed only for significant disease, such as pneumonia,” added Dr. Dienst.
Hydroxychloroquine Drug Combo Treatment for COVID-19 Patients

You’re just flat-out incorrect. It’s a shame some governors were trying to stop medical doctors from making a professional medical decision that ultimately proved to help save lives in some circumstances. And it’s a shame you’re clinging to your misinformation even when presented with evidence that it helped people.

That's not a "source," that's just an opinion of a practice that's using HCQ.

Where is the peer review study, or at least pre-review working paper submitted to a peer review journal or reputable open source journal (b/c time matters, it's become accepted practice to issue drafts of papers that will be peer reviewed to accelerate the discussion).

The fact that some doctors are using a treatment doesn't mean it's effective, without the gold standard "blind" study (like the vaccine trials, where the researcher doesn't know which patient gets the treatment so she can't influence the results either deliberately or through subconscious bias) or at least a statistically valid sample, the testimony of doctors is worthless. It's similar to the cancer hot spot problem, just because it seems to work may simply be a coincidence, or worse, wishful thinking (doctors tend to be control freaks).

 

[Ghosts Beer]

Actually. I'm relying on the other studies and barebones statistics that weren't retracted. As well as the interpretation of my father, who has 40+ years of experience as a doctor and is up to speed on all of this.

Do you think a full dose is the exact same thing as a low dose?

Then what non-retracted study are you referring to that said HCQ killed Covid patients?

I gave you a retrospective study that said it saved lives & reduced hospitalizations.

And my point all along was that governors should leave the medical decision b/w doctor & patient.

Your father may think it doesn’t work. There are also plenty of front-line experienced doctors who swear it helped many.

 

[Beef Invictus]

Then what non-retracted study are you referring to that said HCQ killed Covid patients?

I gave you a retrospective study that said it saved lives & reduced hospitalizations.

And my point all along was that governors should leave the medical decision b/w doctor & patient.

Your father may think it doesn’t work. There are also plenty of front-line experienced doctors who swear it helped many.

Holy shit. This isn't this hard. HCQ on its own did not save lives. A treatment that happened to use a low dose of it did. Earlier treatments relying solely on HCQ were harmful because they provided no benefit and caused dangerous side effects.

Medicine doesn't work like it does on "House." Ethics are really important. It's ethically wrong to dose patients with a drug that doesn't help them but does have dangerous side effects.

Are you really unable to tell the difference between HCQ being used on its own, and as a small part of a larger treatment? Vitamin C on its own doesn't cure sepsis. But a treatment plan involving Vitamin C often does. Are you unable to realize that Vitamin C on its own is not the same as Vitamin C as an aspect of a treatment method? Because it's the exact same thing as HCQ being part of a treatment vs being used on its own, so presumably you'd also be incapable of making that distinction.

 

[Lord Defect]

Speaking of hypocrisy

An anti-gay Hungarian politician has resigned after being caught by the police fleeing a 25-man orgy through a window

You could say he was caught with his pants down

 

[Lord Defect]

Beef, I glance over a lot of his posts, but I don’t think he said it was to be used on it own as a primary treatment.

 

[BiggE]

You could say he was caught with his pants down

A hypocrite politician, who’d a thunk it?

 

[Beef Invictus]

Beef, I glance over a lot of his posts, but I don’t think he said it was to be used on it own as a primary treatment.

That was how it was originally used when he first evangelized it.


Now it's being used in a completely different manner and he's acting like it validates his initial incorrect embrace of a failed treatment.

 

[Appleyard]

UK regulators approved the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine this morning.

800,000 people from high risk groups will have vaccine available to them next week.

Being made in Belgium... which I did not know before.

 

[Lord Defect]

'I'm high as a Georgia pine': Dock Ellis's no-hitter on LSD, 50 years on

 

[Lord Defect]

Marine Corps to grunts: Please stop taking LSD

 

[Lord Defect]

 

[Embiid]

The hypocrites in Washington better do something and stop saving big banks instead.

COVID-19 damage to Social Security to extend beyond pandemic

 

[Young Sandwich]

Because he's Beef, and it's what he do.

 

[mja]

The hypocrites in Washington better do something and stop saving big banks instead.

COVID-19 damage to Social Security to extend beyond pandemic

Problem: For half the hypocrites in Washington, that's a feature, not a bug.

 

[BernieParent]

That was how it was originally used when he first evangelized it.


Now it's being used in a completely different manner and he's acting like it validates his initial incorrect embrace of a failed treatment.

HCQ is a pretty tangled web of evidence. The majority of the more recent studies have discounted its efficacy as a post-exposure prophylaxis, as therapy to prevent intubation or death in COVID-19-positive hospitalized patients, or as a treatment in patients hospitalized with mild-to-moderate COVID-19. Studies with these conclusions were all published in the New England Journal of Medicine between June and November. However, some studies did conclude benefit, though most had small patient sample size. An exception to this was a study by the Henry Ford COVID-19 Task Force that included 2,541 patients that found reduction in mortality associated with HCQ alone and in combination with azithromycin. Summary: the evidence tips against benefit with HCQ.

It is probably, though, the best illustration of how quickly politicized COVID-19 became. One side touted it far beyond what any evidence displayed; the other side vilified it. Another failing grade for the human race in addressing global crises.

 

[deadhead]

HCQ is a pretty tangled web of evidence. The majority of the more recent studies have discounted its efficacy as a post-exposure prophylaxis, as therapy to prevent intubation or death in COVID-19-positive hospitalized patients, or as a treatment in patients hospitalized with mild-to-moderate COVID-19. Studies with these conclusions were all published in the New England Journal of Medicine between June and November. However, some studies did conclude benefit, though most had small patient sample size. An exception to this was a study by the Henry Ford COVID-19 Task Force that included 2,541 patients that found reduction in mortality associated with HCQ alone and in combination with azithromycin. Summary: the evidence tips against benefit with HCQ.

It is probably, though, the best illustration of how quickly politicized COVID-19 became. One side touted it far beyond what any evidence displayed; the other side vilified it. Another failing grade for the human race in addressing global crises.

I don't think most observers "villified" HCQ, rather, they villified the hyping of HCQ, there are numerous treatments with mild positive impacts that have to be weighed against significant side effects - which is why you need multiple valid studies to determine the extent of the benefit to be weighted against its detriments. Even something as "harmless" as aspirin has side effects that can increase mortality for a certain portion of the population.

There are rarely "silver bullets" in medicine, and when they occur, the statistical and clinical evidence quickly becomes overwhelming. That hasn't been the case for any COVID treatment.

 

[swami24]

Google Image Result for https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/6wyCn24CH5MAqeWyEH7sB2Rkakg=/0x0:600x555/1200x800/filters:focal(252x229:348x325)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/63560327/oscar_gamble_2jpg_b9fc34a78c031a06.0.jpg

Google Image Result for https://a.espncdn.com/photo/2017/0330/r195171_747x420_16-9.jpg


Oscar Gamble, best 'fro ever

 

[Embiid]

It will all be pardoned..

'Very dark couple of weeks': Morgues and hospitals overflow

 

[Beef Invictus]

Every poll idea has been too fascist.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

That was how it was originally used when he first evangelized it.


Now it's being used in a completely different manner and he's acting like it validates his initial incorrect embrace of a failed treatment.

Utterly & patently false. Once again you are crafting a fairy tale.

1. The original HCQ study that led to optimism, which involved Didier Raoult & was published in March, included azithromycin on a case-by-case basis.

2. Expressing hope for a treatment that showed some promising early results against a novel virus with no known treatments, & believing that doctors & patients should have it available to them as an option without governors trying to ban it, isn’t “evangelizing,” especially when the person allegedly “evangelizing” says repeatedly that he has no idea if it works or not but that it shouldn’t be blocked as an option if medical doctors think it might help.

3. You ignore my request to cite a non-debunked study that supports your assertion that HCQ was “killing people” with Covid. Because there is none.

4. The latest study indicates that it was useful & reduced mortality. Thus, banning it, which you seem to have supported, could cost people lives that could’ve otherwise been saved.

 

[Beef Invictus]

Utterly & patently false. Once again you are crafting a fairy tale.

1. The original HCQ study that led to optimism, which involved Didier Raoult & was published in March, included azithromycin on a case-by-case basis.

2. Expressing hope for a treatment that showed some promising early results against a novel virus with no known treatments, & believing that doctors & patients should have it available to them as an option without governors trying to ban it, isn’t “evangelizing,” especially when the person allegedly “evangelizing” says repeatedly that he has no idea if it works or not but that it shouldn’t be blocked as an option if medical doctors think it might help.

3. You ignore my request to cite a non-debunked study that supports your assertion that HCQ was “killing people” with Covid. Because there is none.

4. The latest study indicates that it was useful & reduced mortality. Thus, banning it, which you seem to have supported, could cost people lives that could’ve otherwise been saved.

This is stunning revisionist history. Stop lying to us.

You did not present treatment combined with other drugs. You presented HCQ, on its own, as a silver bullet because that's what your God-Emperor and his media machine were thumping. There was never, and has never been, any benefit to such a treatment.

Now you're presenting a different treatment and pretending like that's what you meant the whole time? OK LOL.

 

[BernieParent]

I don't think most observers "villified" HCQ, rather, they villified the hyping of HCQ, there are numerous treatments with mild positive impacts that have to be weighed against significant side effects - which is why you need multiple valid studies to determine the extent of the benefit to be weighted against its detriments. Even something as "harmless" as aspirin has side effects that can increase mortality for a certain portion of the population.

There are rarely "silver bullets" in medicine, and when they occur, the statistical and clinical evidence quickly becomes overwhelming. That hasn't been the case for any COVID treatment.

I know, dead. This is what I do with my working hours. Re harmless, the "nocebo" -- i.e., adverse effects from placebo -- effect is real.

I will stand by my blanket verb, though. The more reasonable voices called for patience while study data accumulated but others just went for the kill shot on any use of HCQ. Additionally, there were justified words of caution that a run on this drug would seriously affect lupus patients and others who currently are taking it.