Hydroxychloroquine Still Doesn’t Do Anything, New Data Shows

Interview starts at 3 minutes 50 seconds. And once again i,ll ask the question, Is Dr Risch telling the truth, or is he lying, A simple yes or no answer will suffice ?? www.youtube.com...

a reply to: puzzled2

And FYI the thread is
Hydroxychloroquine Still Doesn’t Do Anything, New Data Shows

So the onus is on you to provide the NEW DATA

Evidence of absence

Evidence of absence is evidence of any kind that suggests something is missing or that it does not exist.

HCQ is an effective treatment against COVID-19, correct? You're still yet to demonstrat this.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

so your absences of quantifiable studies that hcq doesn't work is proof of what it works?

EXPERT VIEW
Hydroxychloroquine Lowers COVID-19 Death Rate, US Study Finds

Hydroxychloroquine is an excellent drug with significant benefits in autoimmune and other diseases due to its immunomodulatory, anti-inflammatory, anti-thrombotic and anti-proliferative effects so no good for covid-19 as it has none of those characteristics does it.
or maybe
COVID-19 and its implications for thrombosis and anticoagulation

....
and in other good news

New Protocol Ivermectin to replace HCQ in treatment of Covid patients

originally posted by: puzzled2
a reply to: Southern Guardian

EXPERT VIEW
Hydroxychloroquine Lowers COVID-19 Death Rate, US Study Finds

You've gone back and referred, once again, to the discredited Henry Ford Study which had been address a number of times on here.

A flawed Covid-19 study gets the White House’s attention

The study that sparked the latest controversy was anything but randomized. Not only was it not randomized, outside experts noted, but patients who received hydroxychloroquine were also more likely to get steroids, which appear to help very sick patients with Covid-19. That is likely to have influenced the central finding of the Henry Ford study: that death rates were 50% lower among patients in hospitals treated with hydroxychloroquine.

But hey, whatever the Whitehouse gives the tick approval to right?

By the way, that link sits behind a subscription wall. It was fortunate it referenced to the Henry Ford study back in early May in the first paragraph, but still. If you're going to reference, get a clean accessable source.

Hydroxychloroquine is an excellent drug with significant benefits in autoimmune and other diseases due to its immunomodulatory, anti-inflammatory, anti-thrombotic and anti-proliferative effects so no good for covid-19 as it has none of those characteristics does it.

This study doesn't measure the direct effects of HCQ on COVID-19 itself. It's purely speculative. Again, you have a habit of digging up these studies that have no direct testing on the virus itself, meanwhile ignoring the other studies with direct testings to the virus itself. This is a consistent pattern from you and I'm not accepting it.

or maybe
COVID-19 and its implications for thrombosis and anticoagulation

This study isn't about direct effects of HCQ against COVID-19.

New Protocol Ivermectin to replace HCQ in treatment of Covid patients

The article:

The Uttar Pradesh government has decided to replace Hydroxychloroquine with Ivermectin for prevention and treatment of Covid-19.

An order specifying the dosage and use of Ivermectin for both prevention as well as treatment has been issued by Additional Chief Secretary (Health & Medicine) Amit Mohan Prasad to all the chief medical officers in the state.

Sources in the government said that the decision to replace Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) with Ivermectin was taken after encouraging results in Agra, where it was used on an experimental basis.

“There were a lot of issues with HCQ. Therefore, we have now been instructed to instead use Ivermectin as per the prescribed doses. We will start distribution of the medicine among frontline health workers and also during contact tracing from Saturday onwards,” said Lucknow Chief Medical Officer Dr RP Singh.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

just posting the same sort of links you do - but hey you can at least identify the source study in mine. What studies is Birx and Fauchi referring to in your links? Who knows as they don't clarify so its probably already redacted or of low quality bias.

Err, don't your Experts also work at the Whitehouse and therefore should be treated with the same contempt. Your TDS really shows today.


FYI -- I know the last link was not about HCQ working - It was about the replacement, thought you would be happy.

But do note they were instructed to stop using HCQ because of the encouraging results in Agra not failure of HCQ.

a reply to: puzzled2

just posting the same sort of links

And you'll get the same response and cut-downs from me.

Rinse, repeat.

Henry Ford Hospital is doing either a double or triple blind test and requested to be able to prescribe it and was turned down. I believe they are rolling them people into the test.

a reply to: mikell

Physicians could prescribe "off label" use of hyroxychloroquine and still can. Just ask the president. It can be also be used in clinical trials. There is nothing preventing Henry Ford Hospital from conducting proper studies.

Proper, as opposed to that retrospective, uncontrolled, and unblinded study they did previously.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

Exactly, rinses and repeat your useless hearsay statements, referencing unknown study or studies that supports your desire for Trump to be wrong.

The list of links you cut and paste don't reference one, so carry-on believing you're achieving some great service when in reality you have produced nothing of scientific fact.

So have you got anything other than hearsay, anecdotal and fake studies that proves what your team of experts are saying?

Come on, they say they have studies where are these studies?

a reply to: puzzled2

Exactly, rinses and repeat your useless hearsay statements

Dr. Birx: Randomized trials show benefit for remdesivir, but not hydroxychloroquine

Dr. Fauci says all the ‘valid’ scientific data shows hydroxychloroquine isn’t effective in treating coronavirus

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

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

NIH Halts Hydroxychloroquine Study; Says 'Unlikely' To Help COVID-19 Patients

British Heart Foundation: Why hydroxychloroquine isn't a "miracle cure" for coronavirus

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

Hearsay? Sure. The world's formost experts and medical bodies. Instead, I should rely on armed chair internet warriors who profess to some qualification.

Until your next references.

Yes, rince and repeat.

After Hydroxychloroquine, Trump Is Now Seeking To Get Another Unproven Drug Approved By The FDA: Report

President Donald Trump, who has previously touted antimalarial drugs as unproven treatments for Covid-19, is now reportedly seeking approval from the Food and Drug Administration for an extract from the oleander plant—another remedy with weak scientific backing—to be used to treat the coronavirus after being endorsed by a member of his cabinet and Trump-supporting MyPillow CEO, Mike Lindell, Axios reports.

Rest assured, his political drones will be out in force to cover up for him again.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

Oleandrin is not approved by the FDA for treatment of any disease. So, no. It cannot be prescribed until full clinical trials are conducted.

www.drugs.com...

a reply to: Phage

aaaah come on Phage! You can hit me a little deeper than that. Please I'm begging you. I'm not getting much of a bite from these other folk!

Also I mispelled rince. It's rinse.

I apologize. Possible a number of other spelling and grammatical errors out there.

Ms Shaw would be very dissappointed in me today.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

Yep all those

world's formost experts and medical bodies

that believed and acted on the Surgisphere fake data. So is that the study they are referencing in all your links?

They didn't even notice that the number of dead didn't match the actually dead in Australia or even double check 1 reference. Pretty shameful really.

Which is pretty much like you -- Just Repeat and rinse whatever yer told. Without a single verifiable study.
Go for it armchair parrot - squawk some more.

a reply to: puzzled2

that believed and acted on the Surgisphere fake data.

What fake data? Your source, thanks.

Liberals still care about Hydroxychloroquine ? Geebus H already. Just let people and their doctors do what they think is best for their own health.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

Google it because your cowardly failure to acknowledge that redacted study makes replying to you in this thread about as pointless as talking to the wall.

Enjoy your trolling.

a reply to: puzzled2

Google it because your cowardly

The only coward here is the person who made a claim, an accusation, and yet refuses to back it up with a source.

I take from that post this applies to you? Given you're running away?

Fine.

a reply to: Southern Guardian
You need to supply sources of studies not news articles referencing imaginary studies.

If you need the source to one of the most talked about redacted studies during covid-19 then your not worthy of talking to..
So this is the last response to the trolling failure of your weak sources of unverifiable claims.

Bye.