Hydroxychloroquine Still Doesn’t Do Anything, New Data Shows

a reply to: Southern Guardian

In its death throes, ad hominem attacks are now acceptable on ATS. Even from moderators.

a reply to: Phage

Sad state of affairs when a moderator needs to be sat down on the naughty chair.

originally posted by: puzzled2
a reply to: Southern Guardian

nice find

That must be another language for, you were wrong with that source. Carry on.

Did you read the site with all the recommendation

You're referring to the ICMR study and subsequent recommendation of HCQ against COVID19, in certain circumstances back in May. That study remains under question and scrutiny:

The ICMR bulletin on targeted hydroxychloroquine prophylaxis for Covid-19: Need to interpret with caution

The National Task Force for Covid-19 of the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) in a bulletin dated March 21, 2020 recommended the use of hydroxychloroquine for prophylaxis in asymptomatic health care workers caring for suspected or confirmed patients and household contacts of confirmed patients. This is cause for concern with regard to bioethics and good clinical practice. The evidence for the efficacy of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine is currently derived from open label trials and cell culture studies with no conclusive evidence available from randomised clinical trials.

National Library of Medicine

AIIMS Delhi and Raipur doctors question ICMR study that showed HCQ can curb Covid risk

The authors include only symptomatic healthcare workers (HCWs) who were tested positive or negative in cases and controls. As a good number of individuals with SARS-CoV-2 infection are asymptomatic, the inclusion of only symptomatic HCWs is unlikely to represent the entire HCWs taking and/or not taking HCQ as prophylaxis,” they wrote.

Remember, the ICMR recommended use and wide distribution of HCQ against COVID as far back as May, in direct conflict with the WHOs recommendation. At the same time, India's COVID19 caseload compounded from just under 200k recorded cases, to well over 2.5 million today.

You might be more helpful if you stowed your bias

My bias you say?

Do not use hydroxychloroquine for COVID: National Taskforce (Australia)

Why hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine don’t block coronavirus infection of human lung cells

2005 chloroquine study had nothing to do with COVID-19 and the drug wasn’t given to humans

The World Health Organisation: Studies show hydroxychloroquine does not have clinical benefits in treating COVID-19

PolitiFact - Yes, at least five randomized controlled studies say hydroxychloroquine doesn’t help

Chloroquine does not help against the coronavirus

WHO says trials show malaria and HIV drugs don't cut Covid-19 hospital deaths

NIH halts clinical trial of hydroxychloroquine

Birx: FDA 'has been very clear' on its concerns about using hydroxychloroquine as COVID-19 treatment

NIH halts clinical trial of hydroxychloroquine

Trump Coronavirus Taskforce member, Fauci: Science shows hydroxychloroquine is not effective

The WHO, the NIH, Trump's very own task force, other national government COVID19 task forces... but you sit here, on a conspiracy forum, with obscure and quacky sources behind you, and tell me that I'm the biased one?

Ok then.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Southern Guardian

In its death throes, ad hominem attacks are now acceptable on ATS. Even from moderators.

Showing their true colors. Obviously it's all about preservation of ones tribal politics, and they'll devolve to childish insults if they have to.

Sad state of affairs indeed. The owners are right to close this site.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

You want substance when you have spent the whole thread trying to tell people who work in science what science is?


See? New material pays off. You got another laugh.

TheRedneck

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Ah, I see backup has arrived.

The more the merrier when debunking science, amirite?

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

See? New material pays off. You got another laugh.

Actually I'm sad. This is a terrible look at where ATS has ended up. You need to take the time to actually go back and see your posts. You're completely off it bud. I mean disagree with me all you want. Resorting to 4chan level quality? It's disgraceful.

Do you think this guy is lying ? interview starts at 3.50 , i,d like to hear everyone's take on it, simple yes or no answer is good, www.youtube.com... a reply to: TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Ah, I see backup has arrived.

The more the merrier when debunking science, amirite?

TheRedneck

You must remain silent when in the naughty chair or I will have to restart the timer.

If I carried on the way you are in this thread I would have been post banned by now.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

I mean disagree with me all you want.

Why? So you can call me a liar again?

Go back and read your posts. You have called everyone who disagreed with you a liar and poked fun at them, even going so far as to insinuate mental deficiency in some. Most recently, you called an actual practicing nurse who has worked with the triple treatment a liar and insinuated they are inept! That is an actual nurse! You have scoffed and dismissed out of hand every opposing article presented to you, including many from the NIH, like a child sticking their fingers in their ears and singing off-key at the top of their lungs.

And now you want debate? No. You are a child, and I am not going to treat a child as an adult.

If you cared one iota about the state of ATS, you would not be here just trying to deceive and ad hominem your own way to some sort of "win" that only exists in your own mind. Everyone who enters this thread can see your actions. You have fooled no one, except maybe yourself (and that is nothing to be proud of).

I plan on staying in this thread whether you like it or not. I have plenty of time while the computer is busy running simulations and numerical analyses. And I will be calling you out on your bias and your childish behavior. I can act just as immature as you can be. Don't like it? Go somewhere else.

TheRedneck

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Show me the T&C violation.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

Why? So you can call me a liar again?

I didn't think it would hurt you in that way. I'm so sorry Redneck. You are who you think you are. If that helps you live, that's important.

Go back and read your posts. You have called everyone who disagreed with you a liar and poked fun at them,

Who's this? I've poked fun yes. I figured it was fair game since I seem to be targeted often on here.

Let me know. I'll go back myself.

even going so far as to insinuate mental deficiency in some.

Whoa, I do not remember that. Again, refer back to that post.

You have scoffed and dismissed out of hand every opposing article presented to you,

Yep, and I've addressed the reasons why those articles and sources are unreliable. I've made that effort as a matter of respect for debate. Much like when you decided to use the very partisan AAPS as a source. I pointed out why they weren't a reliable one.

I plan on staying in this thread whether you like it or not. I have plenty of time while the computer is busy

Don't ever recall I took issue with your eagerness to stay put here. Fantastic. Let's talk this out. I'll await your response.

I'm sorry I got you so angry Redneck. We're both passionate about these topics. I'm willing to sit down and talk it out.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

I'm sorry I got you so angry Redneck. We're both passionate about these topics. I'm willing to sit down and talk it out.

I'm not angry; I am disgusted and frustrated. I have spent far too much time in my life dealing with people like you have presented yourself. Wasted time and wasted energy, that usually wound up costing me. Had one damn good idea that literally went up in smoke because one idiot refused to listen to me and cut a voltage rating behind my back. Could have caught my shop on fire. As it was, I just spent the next few days cleaning dielectric residue off everything and airing out the smoke smell.

Like you, he knew everything and was infallible.

I am passionate about this topic. I know people, good friends, who are high risk for this damn virus. I myself am unable to wear a face mask due to medical issues. Thankfully, my immunity is strong enough I doubt I have anything to worry about, but I would still like for science to find an effective treatment. That cannot happen as long as people like you lobby the public against any potential treatments, and trying to twist scientific research to fit your opinion does not endear you to me.

I have not seen one single person in this thread state that hydroxychloroquine by itself is effective; I have seen no study that claims such. But you keep arguing the point. It has gotten to the point that some places are restricting clinical trials over the damn hysteria. That's not science... that's the opposite of science. We need more studies, not less.

You want respect? Show others some.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Show me the T&C violation.

TheRedneck

DTOM.

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Can't do it, eh? Got it.

You'll fit right in here.

TheRedneck

Can't do what, oh you mean have a tantrum and throw around ad homs without being post banned, yep you're catching on.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

Your first link
Do not use hydroxychloroquine for COVID: National Taskforce (Australia)
appears to referencing the studies here
Australian guidelines for the clinical care of people with COVID-19

All studies have Certainty of the Evidence (Quality of evidence)
Very Low Due to serious risk of bias and very serious imprecision
Moderate Due to serious risk of bias
Very Low Due to serious risk of bias, very serious imprecision and indirectness
...

Which appears acceptable to you because it supports your point of view.

So unless you can find a real study that hasn't got BIAS and does a proper evaluation of all patients before treatment the random assigned, unknown state of health comparisons are pretty useless.
But if you trying to force upon EVERYONE a shot it seems pretty important.

You have a nice day.

a reply to: TheRedneck

In my opinion they don’t want it to work. It doesn’t fit their agenda.

Usually when a potential cure is identified for an illness the hype is optimistic. I am seeing that here in Canada right now with a possible cure coming down the pipe for diabetes.

Not the case here though. Scientific objectivism has been tossed out the window in favour of political ideology and profit.

I am hoping that the Russian vaccine first of all works and secondly has given the Gates vaccination plans a swift kick to the nads but time will tell. The way that it is being received in the western media is pointing that way.

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
originally posted by: puzzled2
a reply to: Southern Guardian

nice find

That must be another language for, you were wrong with that source. Carry on.

Did you read the site with all the recommendation

You're referring to the ICMR study and subsequent recommendation of HCQ against COVID19, in certain circumstances back in May. That study remains under question and scrutiny:

The ICMR bulletin on targeted hydroxychloroquine prophylaxis for Covid-19: Need to interpret with caution

The National Task Force for Covid-19 of the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) in a bulletin dated March 21, 2020 recommended the use of hydroxychloroquine for prophylaxis in asymptomatic health care workers caring for suspected or confirmed patients and household contacts of confirmed patients. This is cause for concern with regard to bioethics and good clinical practice. The evidence for the efficacy of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine is currently derived from open label trials and cell culture studies with no conclusive evidence available from randomised clinical trials.

National Library of Medicine

AIIMS Delhi and Raipur doctors question ICMR study that showed HCQ can curb Covid risk

The authors include only symptomatic healthcare workers (HCWs) who were tested positive or negative in cases and controls. As a good number of individuals with SARS-CoV-2 infection are asymptomatic, the inclusion of only symptomatic HCWs is unlikely to represent the entire HCWs taking and/or not taking HCQ as prophylaxis,” they wrote.

Remember, the ICMR recommended use and wide distribution of HCQ against COVID as far back as May, in direct conflict with the WHOs recommendation. At the same time, India's COVID19 caseload compounded from just under 200k recorded cases, to well over 2.5 million today.

You might be more helpful if you stowed your bias

My bias you say?

Do not use hydroxychloroquine for COVID: National Taskforce (Australia)

Why hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine don’t block coronavirus infection of human lung cells

2005 chloroquine study had nothing to do with COVID-19 and the drug wasn’t given to humans

The World Health Organisation: Studies show hydroxychloroquine does not have clinical benefits in treating COVID-19

PolitiFact - Yes, at least five randomized controlled studies say hydroxychloroquine doesn’t help

Chloroquine does not help against the coronavirus

WHO says trials show malaria and HIV drugs don't cut Covid-19 hospital deaths

NIH halts clinical trial of hydroxychloroquine

Birx: FDA 'has been very clear' on its concerns about using hydroxychloroquine as COVID-19 treatment

NIH halts clinical trial of hydroxychloroquine

Trump Coronavirus Taskforce member, Fauci: Science shows hydroxychloroquine is not effective

The WHO, the NIH, Trump's very own task force, other national government COVID19 task forces... but you sit here, on a conspiracy forum, with obscure and quacky sources behind you, and tell me that I'm the biased one?

Ok then.



Listen to yourself man , I mean just stop for a second and take a look from the outside in objectively . What are you fighting for , Why are you fighting so hard to disprove something that you yourself do not even understand ? Who are you trying to convince ? Us or yourself I think you trying to convince yourself desperately .

Hydroxychloroquine has been around for 50+years people take it every day therapeutically for years , your acting like its some sort of radioactive isotope poison.

Look at all the studies you listed . The WHO says , The WHO says , The WHO says , Dr.Fauci says , Dr Fauci says. Guy there lying ? how can you not see that ? They do not want us to treat this virus with something they cant control and make money off of . Any studies results can be slanted to show either positive or negative results depending on whether or not the people in charge want it to succeed .

It's like there is an epidemic of headaches and people are trying to use Tylenol to treat there headaches but all of the sudden Tylenol is poison because the media says so .

The demonizing of Hydroxychloroquine is Political pure and simple the people in charge need this virus to last a certain ammount of time and kill a certain ammount of people , Hydroxychloroquine would dampen the numbers and the cant have that. I'm not sure what your so afraid of , are you so sure that your precious MSM , Left wing party or who ever just would never lie to you ?

a reply to: puzzled2

Your first link
Do not use hydroxychloroquine for COVID: National Taskforce (Australia)
appears to referencing the studies here
Australian guidelines for the clinical care of people with COVID-19

All studies have Certainty of the Evidence (Quality of evidence)
Very Low Due to serious risk of bias and very serious imprecision
Moderate Due to serious risk of bias
Very Low Due to serious risk of bias, very serious imprecision and indirectness

No need to mess about with your wording. Let me translate what you're actually saying here in more straightforward terms.

Associate Professor Julian Elliott, executive director of the National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce, and the rest of the National COVID19 task force, are wrong in their assessment, because you know more than them about these studies.

Ok then.

So unless you can find a real study that hasn't got BIAS

Well you label pretty much all the intepretations from major national medical bodies, professors, national COVID19 task forces, leading medical experts such as Fauci and Birx, all these sources and views against HCQ, as biased. Beyond that it's your delusional view of what's 'fact'. I can't help you there. I will continue to reference those with the appropriate backgrounds, medical expertise, and I will continue to call you out on the errors and issues behind your sources. I'll also continue to remind you that you're a know nothing behind a computer screen name on a conspiracy website. You assessments are worth nothing, so I'm not interested in them.