i started writing this last night before i fell asleep.
=========
so, the msm is really going full gotcha on this hydroxycholoroquine thing, even going so far as to delete a tweet by madonna, who does not like being censored.
it's my job to weigh in on this bullshit and correct the shoddy journalism. so, let's survey the results on this drug here in a way that people can properly understand. and, i won't hold my breath that the idiots will get it through their numbskulls.
so, let's take a quick look through this:
https://www.henryford.com/news/2020/07/hydro-treatment-study
that is not a small scale trial in a sketchy field hospital in nigeria, it's a major study at a major medical institution that was published in a leading medical journal. and, this is what they say, rather clearly:
In a large-scale retrospective analysis of 2,541 patients hospitalized between March 10 and May 2, 2020 across the system’s six hospitals, the study found 13% of those treated with hydroxychloroquine alone died compared to 26.4% not treated with hydroxychloroquine. None of the patients had documented serious heart abnormalities; however, patients were monitored for a heart condition routinely pointed to as a reason to avoid the drug as a treatment for COVID-19.
they conclude there is some reason to think that the treatment was effective.
“The findings have been highly analyzed and peer-reviewed,” said Dr. Marcus Zervos, division head of Infectious Disease for Henry Ford Health System, who co-authored the study with Henry Ford epidemiologist Samia Arshad. “We attribute our findings that differ from other studies to early treatment, and part of a combination of interventions that were done in supportive care of patients, including careful cardiac monitoring. Our dosing also differed from other studies not showing a benefit of the drug. And other studies are either not peer reviewed, have limited numbers of patients, different patient populations or other differences from our patients.”
.
.
.
“Our analysis shows that using hydroxychloroquine helped saves lives,” said neurosurgeon Dr. Steven Kalkanis, CEO, Henry Ford Medical Group and Senior Vice President and Chief Academic Officer of Henry Ford Health System. “As doctors and scientists, we look to the data for insight. And the data here is clear that there was benefit to using the drug as a treatment for sick, hospitalized patients.”
they make an important caveat, though:
Dr. Zervos also pointed out, as does the paper, that the study results should be interpreted with some caution, should not be applied to patients treated outside of hospital settings and require further confirmation in prospective, randomized controlled trials that rigorously evaluate the safety and efficacy of hydroxychloroquine therapy for COVID-19.
“Currently, the drug should be used only in hospitalized patients with appropriate monitoring, and as part of study protocols, in accordance with all relevant federal regulations,” Dr. Zervos said.
so, why is this peer-reviewed study by a major institution in a leading academic journal being ignored in favour of some now-ancient preliminary studies at medrxiv?
well, it's at least 40% politics, surely. i can't correct your mistake if you're just being dishonest and know better anyways, and this seems to be something that is driving ratings at the news networks. so, they don't want to destroy a good story, i guess.
but, i can point out what the confusion no doubt is if the bad articles are being produced in good faith, and it's the question of what the drug does.
while the ford results actually don't surprise me, the same center is currently doing a prophylactic trial, and i don't expect this trial to produce positive results, in the end. that is, that while the science underlying the efficacy of the drug as a treatment in very specific scenarios may be compelling, the idea that it's going to ward the disease off certainly isn't. this is the study you probably imagine is underlying the science and yet hasn't even been done yet:
https://www.henryford.com/whip-covid-19
why are they experimenting with this drug? the answer is that it's an immunosuppressor. something that seems to happen with very sick covid patients is that their immune system starts attacking itself. the clinical purpose of this drug - as it is used for autoimmune disorders like lupus, rather than parasites like malaria, a confusion i ran into as well due to bad msm coverage - is to weaken the immune system, to stop it from attacking itself. when successful, this allows the patient to recover enough to seek other treatments.
then, does this drug cure the disease? no. but, it was never suggested by anybody (except trump, apparently) that it should be used for the purpose of curing the disease. what it does is eliminate a symptom, and that makes it a lot easier for doctors to help you beat it yourself. remember: at this stage, the only defense you have remains your own body. the best the doctors can do is help your body work, right now, and this drug does that by stopping it from attacking itself, just like it does with lupus patients.
so, let's be clear: no credible person ever argued that the hydroxy is an antiviral drug, or that it would help clear the disease from the system. what credible people suggested, and tested, and have found to be true, is that the drug has an effect on calming the immune system down, and preventing your immune response from killing you.
so, what is probably going to happen if you give random people the drug out in the wild? the answer is that they're going to be more likely to get sick, due to their immune system weakening, which is what the drug does. not only will the drug fail in warding off the disease, but it will likely increase the likelihood of serious infection.
that's what happens when you use medication wrong, but we don't usually blame it on the medicine. generally, we blame it on the person who consumed the dose at the wrong time, or on the doctor for malpractice.
well what about the study that showed it kills people?
that actually got retracted:
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31180-6/fulltext
i don't expect this to end any time soon; the ignorance of the general public, combined with the dishonesty of the mainstream press (and their own ignorance, feigned or real) has created a perfect storm of gotcha politics. but, nobody knows what the fuck they're even talking about.
there have been some other drugs brought in in the same class that are being utilized for the same reason, and there may be good reasons to use those drugs on some patients, instead. side effects would be one reason. that's fine, and i'm not going to second guess the doctors, or question why they pick one representative of a class of drugs over others, and there are lots, including price, availability and corporate interconnectedness.
and, again: the drug will neither cure you if you have it nor protect you from getting it. i don't need to wait for that study.
but, the actual science underlying this drug as a treatment option in specific scenarios has actually been established for many, many years, and the people you need to "get" are actually the mainstream media, for disseminating truly disastrous levels of disinformation around it.
everybody is a liar.
trust noone.