Jump to content

Hydroxychloroquine is effective.


Thaidup
 Share

Recommended Posts

 

Hydroxychloroquine is effective, and consistently so when provided early, for COVID-19: a systematic review

 

My opinion is to read more and make up your own mind, One may think that cheap and easily produced pharmaceuticals will not be profitable for drug companies, But hey just a thought.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33042552/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Thaidup said:

Hydroxychloroquine is effective, and consistently so when provided early, for COVID-19: a systematic review

My opinion is to read more and make up your own mind, One may think that cheap and easily produced pharmaceuticals will not be profitable for drug companies, But hey just a thought.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33042552/

Doesn't look very convincing to me, it's really a review of studies done.

This is a quote from the above paper:

"We searched PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, Google Scholar and Google for all reports on HCQ as a treatment for COVID-19 patients. This included preprints and preliminary reports on larger COVID-19 studies. We included reports with HCQ alone as well as in combination with AZ and/or zinc."

However, it's only 05:06 & I'm not fully awake.🧐

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Another Ivermectin study has recently come out, peer reviewed again,anyone want to see it? It was funded by Pfizer, it may have the results some want to see.🙂

Edited by Thaidup
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 4/1/2022 at 12:09 AM, Faraday said:

Doesn't look very convincing to me, it's really a review of studies done.

This is a quote from the above paper:

"We searched PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, Google Scholar and Google for all reports on HCQ as a treatment for COVID-19 patients. This included preprints and preliminary reports on larger COVID-19 studies. We included reports with HCQ alone as well as in combination with AZ and/or zinc."

However, it's only 05:06 & I'm not fully awake.🧐

With all respect. A Cochrane study is the often considered the highest level of evidence and is a compilation of many meta-analaysis done.

   A reivew of studies can be a very effective tool to concentrate the current scientific information. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/4/2022 at 2:22 AM, Thaidup said:

Another Ivermectin study has recently come out, peer reviewed again,anyone want to see it? It was funded by Pfizer, it may have the results some want to see.🙂

Now, Pfizer funding a study.. Here we got the "unbiased", "altruistic", "objective" and totally "free of secondary gain" the covidistas want. 

   555

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
Posted (edited)

I love how no matter how much evidence one provides, some people are just too brain-damaged from Trump Derangement Syndrome and religious belief that HCQ/Ivermectin simply CANNOT be effective that no amount of evidence will ever make them budge one inch on the matter. Even a high-quality meta-analysis like this one.

You give them evidence, they say it's "unconvincing".  They ask for more evidence, you give them a meta-analysis, they say, "hmph".

You stick a peer-reviewed journal article (or a whole bunch of them) in their face, they look the other way.

Not only will they reject any evidence that challenges their beliefs, but they won't even consider looking into it.

NOTHING. NOTHING. will change their minds.

It's part of their identity now.

Edited by analog
  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/10/2022 at 12:27 AM, analog said:

I love how no matter how much evidence one provides, some people are just too brain-damaged from Trump Derangement Syndrome and religious belief that HCQ/Ivermectin simply CANNOT be effective that no amount of evidence will ever make them budge one inch on the matter. Even a high-quality meta-analysis like this one.

You give them evidence, they say it's "unconvincing".  They ask for more evidence, you give them a meta-analysis, they say, "hmph".

You stick a peer-reviewed journal article (or a whole bunch of them) in their face, they look the other way.

Not only will they reject any evidence that challenges their beliefs, but they won't even consider looking into it.

NOTHING. NOTHING. will change their minds.

It's part of their identity now.

For many, we don't waste our time narrowing into one segment of the scientific community only using meta-analysis to try and prove a point. We only ask for properly conducted mass double blind testing as the standard for vaccines, other medications and treatments etc. 

After all, it may not have been successful, perhaps even considered dangerous by some, against earlier variants. As variants change, so does testing have to be redone against the new. 

But unlike the early stages, we are now living in a world with far more medical treatments and medication for the virus.

https://theconversation.com/does-a-new-study-really-show-that-hydroxychloroquine-might-be-effective-against-omicron-174300

I leave it to the advice from the trusted expert medical professionals I feel comfortable with, often who have given me many years of service delivering sound advice that has worked for my medical conditions and health status. I am sure others do as well.

What anyone else chooses to take in such circumstances, and in what ever means they feel is good for them, then that is up to them. But lets not label any part of the community just because you disagree with the position they have taken, especially ones highlighted well in the past.

In my opinion, and as an external observer, it does seem too often Americans are locked into a Trump vs anti-Trump reality and wrongly believe the rest of the world can only follow their lead in what they do.

After all, we have enough of our own governmental mechanisms in place to cater for our internal stuff ups and passionate debate rather than rely on others for that particular need. We tend to cast the political sideshow of US politics into the comedy club it deserves to provide entertainment when we are bored.😁

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This corona hysteria seems to be gradually replaced by Russophobia and the endless love for Ukraine (while NATO allies shoot up one Yemenese school bus after another) and theiur endless desire to write articles about dead Ukrainean people and shipment of more weapons. 

 

   What a crazy time to be alive. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, NorskTiger said:

This corona hysteria seems to be gradually replaced by Russophobia and the endless love for Ukraine (while NATO allies shoot up one Yemenese school bus after another) and theiur endless desire to write articles about dead Ukrainean people and shipment of more weapons. 

   What a crazy time to be alive.

The Russian guy at the UN laying out the biolab stuff with those documents was interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/15/2022 at 7:12 AM, Smithydog said:

I leave it to the advice from the trusted expert medical professionals I feel comfortable with

This is my exact same opinion, I only may ask why do the government agencies that are funded by large pharmaceutical companies distribute directives to private trusted medical expert professionals not to use trusted medications in an "off lable" manor? especially considering that the "vaccine" is EUA drug?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Thaidup said:

This is my exact same opinion, I only may ask why do the government agencies that are funded by large pharmaceutical companies distribute directives to private trusted medical expert professionals not to use trusted medications in an "off lable" manor? especially considering that the "vaccine" is EUA drug?

Injecting radio active isotopes to treat cancer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Thaidup said:

This is my exact same opinion, I only may ask why do the government agencies that are funded by large pharmaceutical companies distribute directives to private trusted medical expert professionals not to use trusted medications in an "off lable" manor? especially considering that the "vaccine" is EUA drug?

To me the purpose of drug screening and testing is to ensure medications, vaccines or treatments are safe for proposed use. As such, off label use, would seem to fall under their scrutiny and as such would need to meet minimum safety levels for such use. Perhaps the ones you are looking at didn't meet the standards required.

It does seem that an EUA, in the case for the US FDA, seems can be applied for any such item when predetermined steps are fulfilled. For example, this article includes the following text:

"An EUA can be revised or revoked by the FDA at any point as the agency evaluates the most current needs and available data. For example, the FDA issued an EUA for hydroxychloroquine during the first phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. Later, when it became clear that the treatment posed a risk but did not offer significant benefit, the FDA retracted the EUA."

https://www.yalemedicine.org/news/what-does-eua-mean

As to why individual medications or treatments have not been approved? Well I am sure if you are interested then searches through the internet may provide better answers than I can for individual items.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/14/2022 at 5:12 PM, Smithydog said:

For many, we don't waste our time narrowing into one segment of the scientific community only using meta-analysis to try and prove a point. We only ask for properly conducted mass double blind testing as the standard for vaccines, other medications and treatments etc. 

After all, it may not have been successful, perhaps even considered dangerous by some, against earlier variants. As variants change, so does testing have to be redone against the new. 

But unlike the early stages, we are now living in a world with far more medical treatments and medication for the virus.

https://theconversation.com/does-a-new-study-really-show-that-hydroxychloroquine-might-be-effective-against-omicron-174300

I leave it to the advice from the trusted expert medical professionals I feel comfortable with, often who have given me many years of service delivering sound advice that has worked for my medical conditions and health status. I am sure others do as well.

What anyone else chooses to take in such circumstances, and in what ever means they feel is good for them, then that is up to them. But lets not label any part of the community just because you disagree with the position they have taken, especially ones highlighted well in the past.

In my opinion, and as an external observer, it does seem too often Americans are locked into a Trump vs anti-Trump reality and wrongly believe the rest of the world can only follow their lead in what they do.

After all, we have enough of our own governmental mechanisms in place to cater for our internal stuff ups and passionate debate rather than rely on others for that particular need. We tend to cast the political sideshow of US politics into the comedy club it deserves to provide entertainment when we are bored.😁

I am not sure what you are trying to say. :)

 

 

Edited by analog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, analog said:

I am not sure what you are trying to say. :)

Simply, all medications, treatments, and vaccines should be tested to the same level of testing. Too often do we hear of "meta-analysis" and not the ultimate large scale double blind testing. To me it is hypocritical to seek a superior level of testing for one product (e.g. vaccines) but then to rely on less effective means of testing for existing products, especially when those products were not originally designed or tested for the new purpose intended.

and

The sideshow of the Covid-19 pandemic has been the debate, the good, the bad and the downright criminal, with the greatest amount over all aspects of it going on in the USA, and clearly influenced by two factors. Money and Politics. In my opinion trust is better with your own proven medical professionals than some advice on the internet. Too many may just tout their own unproven/tested services, effectively to seek payment like a "Dr Snake Cures all" or "Miracle hair cure" salesman of the past.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By posting on Thaiger Talk you agree to the Terms of Use