What's new
By:

Rational CoViD-19 Discussion Thread: Science vs. Politics

babe said:
none of them are common occurrences. Some are associated with other conditions, mostly not very common. A doctor can sort out these risks. Not a reason to just not consider using it at all.
Click to expand...

When you give a drug to millions of people, rare occurrences happen, particularly to people who don't know they have certain conditions or don't share that information.

babe said:
Let's put it this way: A train is coming down the track at 90mph, and you are stuck on the crossing. You are arguing that we are all safer staying in our car rather than undoing our seat belt and trying to get away. So many people get strangled in those seat belts when they try to release them and get out quickly. I know. It's tragic when that happens, and we sue the seat belt company.
Click to expand...

In this metaphor, we also happen to be in a tunnel with no room on the sides to avoid the train, so getting out adds nothing to our changes of survival.
 
babe said:
The anecdotal stories massively report elimination of the virus in about six days, supported by many experienced doctors doing their business of trying to save patients somehow.
Click to expand...

Apparently, its also about 6 days without HCQ. I agree we don't have a quality study yet.

babe said:
Not enough science to back your stand, bro.
Click to expand...

Exactly. That's my point. You don't give drugs to randomly.

babe said:
widespread experience with HCQ reports general antiviral side effects
Click to expand...

Anecdotally, but never in formal studies.

babe said:
Chemically, the molecule would be classed as an oxidizing agent toxic to corona viruses in general.
Click to expand...

It would be if it actually did something.
 
(needs editing---referring to post above comparing two early Chinese studies available now)

I think I got confused on the evaluation given for these studies. Too clarify, here is the comparison data presented, and the author's remarks following:

Here’s a comparison between the two:

HCQ-comparisons-1024x134.png


So you can see that these two came out rather differently, with the Zhejiang study showing no detectable difference on treatment and the Wuhan one showing what looks like a real effect, especially on radiological progression of pneumonia (which I have to say is a very strong endpoint to measure). Here, then, is a good exercise in interpreting clinical trial statistics: we are now one-and-one after two small hydroxychloroquine trials: which one (if either) reflects the real-world situation?

I think I said the studies showed 90% clearance of the virus after six days. No. That is anecdotal stuff from other sources.

The author here gave the HCQ a cautious positive or hopeful signal in the end, but noted several deficiencies and missing data in the report. And noted that it is disturbing that a study envisioning two 100 patient cohorts only came up with 31. Pretty hard to convince people to take a placebo (in any theoretical scenario) when on death's door. I suspect both studies were using less serious patients. Another problem is the reliability of even PCR tests when false positives coming from other corona types are being wailed about, at least in the labs if not by management. again, a rapidly mutating virus.....
 
One Brow said:
Trump won't be President for the next decade, will he?
Click to expand...

I think what I said was that socialists are not going to go away for at least ten years, whoever the hell is Pres. And they won't quit working the ropes of any crisis that can win a vote.
 
One Brow said:
When you give a drug to millions of people, rare occurrences happen, particularly to people who don't know they have certain conditions or don't share that information.



In this metaphor, we also happen to be in a tunnel with no room on the sides to avoid the train, so getting out adds nothing to our changes of survival.
Click to expand...

Saying this is consistent with your despair that we have anything on our medical regimen repertoire that can make a difference. But that's the difference between you and me.

Looking around..... and in fact going around.... the Utah/Nevada/California loop, I can say people are doing a fair job social distancing, and that we are seeing fair results just from that. Public health measures are being practiced quite well, even in the stores that are open. Lots of places have shields in place separating customers from clerks or employees, almost every place is using masks, most stores have sanitizing wipes at the entrance/exit. We have good temp sensors too, in conspicuous use.... you have to have your temp taken to cross the blue line..... stuff like that everywhere.

The antibiotics, useful to fight the secondary infection/cytokine storm of serious cases, are being evaluated for their usefulness here in practical comparative experience, if not in scientific studies. And a number of antivirals are being tried as well. Our doctors are learning daily from their experience, and their success stats will be showing it. Hard to see what HCQ is doing with so many variables going on.,maybe….. but still..... doctors can see what there is to see day by day.
 
Scat said:
LOL Because having a D or R in front of your name makes you inherently better or worse at handling situations.
Click to expand...

Some situations, yes. People who think government is the enemy or that government can't do anything right tend to run the government badly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top