New York has been using HQC since their trial started March 24th. For a treatment that is supposed to work In a week, I’m really surprised we haven’t seen anything yet.

NIH started theirs a week ago.

FOX news had two Folks crediting HQC to their recovery on the news, that said, they were never sick enough to go to the hospital.

And that is what is going to make determining HQC effectiveness hard. Most folks just get better anyway. By the time people present with symptoms enough to go to the Dr, they are already a week into a two week path. So they get a week of HQC for the last week of the natural course and who knows if it helped or if you were recovering anyways.

If anyone has seen any links on using HQC on those really sick, please post a link. If HQC was going to help, immune suppression, like HQC does for lupus should be a no brainer for those about to pass.

Why do you post CCP propaganda ?

The Chinese have more experience with treating Covid than anyone. Their govt actually approved HCQ and a few other drugs for Covid treatment over a month ago. They can produce more HCQ than any other country and would presumably be happy to sell it.

So “propaganda” would be to present data showing that the drug is effective - because that would show that they were “right” and support their commercial interest. When Chinese researchers publish data suggesting that HCQ has limited or little effect, that is actually contrary to their govt’s actions. That is worth looking at.

Actually, all data is worth looking at. People have jumped on the HCQ train based on early French “data” that, is on its face, pretty meaningless. I mean even if you trust the data is accurate, it shows nothing. So we should at least look at Chinese data that, if accurate, could mean something.

Refusing to even look at data implies lack of confidence in one’s ability to evaluate data. Censoring yourself is a bad idea.

Sounds about right.

I consider everything published from CCP controlled sources as suspect. When the data is wrong, nothing follows.

None of these data points can be verified independently so it's a matter of trust and the CCP definitely can't be.

The hemoglobin binding theory is more than a rumor, and it is suggested that chloroquine could help against that.

https://chemrxiv.org/articles/COVID-19_Disease_ORF8_and_Surface_Glycoprotein_Inhibit_H eme_Metabolism_by_Binding_to_Porphyrin/11938173

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/coronavirus-wuhan-lab-china-compete-us-sources

https://www.stripes.com/news/veterans/va-spent-200-000-on-controversial-anti-malaria-drug-touted-as-coronavirus-game-changer-1.625501

https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/coronavirus/more-deaths-no-benefit-from-malaria-drug-hydroxychloroquine-in-va-virus-study/2276671/

I know of three people who received Remdesivir and recovered in record time. The drug likely is not a cure but an effective aid in fighting off the virus. It should be made available widely but they are waiting for phase 3 study data to come in. It possibly will be approved this month.

<iframe width="777" height="437" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/9iKJ98ZpatA" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

You'll notice tables 3 and 4 show different patient counts in each column. So.... apparently the authors took the 19 sickest, moved them over to the other arms and counted the deaths in Table 3 towards them. Also, those needing ventilation of 6.9% vs 14% between the last two arms seem to confirm the French results but the author's conclusion downplays that.

Really unfortunate that the scientific community has been corrupted by politics.

Really unfortunate that politicians started making scientific claims without data.

I certainly hope to hold the scientific community at a higher standard than politicians !

The authors credentials of that restrospective study are an alphabet soup of MDs and PhDs of some sort ...

Joseph Magagnoli, M.S.1,2,*, Siddharth Narendran, M.D.4,5,*, Felipe Pereira M.D.4,5,*, Tammy Cummings, Ph.D.1, James W. Hardin, Ph.D.3,S. Scott Sutton, Pharm.D.1,2, Jayakrishna Ambati, M.D.4,5,

I guess you missed the $$$$$ at the end of their credentials? Just like the politicians pushing it.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/04/21/anti-malarial-drug-trump-touted-is-linked-higher-rates-death-va-coronavirus-patients-study-says/

Fox News Stars Touted a Malaria Drug, Until They Didn’t

Laura Ingraham called hydroxychloroquine “a game changer.” But after a month of coverage, she stopped discussing the drug on the air.


Michael M. Grynbaum
April 22, 2020, 6:41 p.m. ET

For a month’s stretch, the Fox News star Laura Ingraham relentlessly promoted the malaria drug hydroxychloroquine to her nearly four million nightly viewers.

The drug was “a game changer” in the fight against the coronavirus, the conservative anchor declared. She booked recovered patients to describe their “miracle turnaround” — “like Lazarus, up from the grave,” as Ms. Ingraham put it. Anyone who questioned the drug’s efficacy was, she said, “in total denial.”

“I love everybody, love the medical profession,” the host said on April 3, after listing off public health experts who questioned the cure. “But they want a double-blind controlled study on whether the sky is blue.”

But as of Wednesday last week, Ms. Ingraham was no longer talking about hydroxychloroquine, and she hasn’t brought it up on her show since.

Her fellow Fox News prime-time stars, Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity, have also cut back on referring to the drug. In fact, since April 13, hydroxychloroquine has been mentioned about a dozen times on Fox News, compared with more than 100 times in the four previous weeks, according to a review of network transcripts.

The shift came as President Trump has dialed back his public zeal for the treatment — and as studies and health experts have increasingly cast doubt on the efficacy of the drug in treating coronavirus. On Tuesday, a study of 368 Veterans Affairs patients showed that the use of hydroxychloroquine was associated with an increased risk of death.

Mr. Trump’s own medical team, including Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, has urged caution, noting the drug’s potential adverse effect on patients with heart troubles. But by mid-March, the drug was a staple of the right-wing media venues that Mr. Trump follows closely, including Rush Limbaugh’s radio show and Fox News prime time.

Ms. Ingraham, who declined to comment for this article, was an enthusiastic advocate for the treatment. On April 2, she told her viewers that “nearly all the experts that I’ve talked to, and the studies I’ve read, review this information, the evidence, and at this point it’s come across as pretty much of a game changer.” The next day, she met with Mr. Trump in the Oval Office to personally pitch him on the drug.

Doctors around the country have prescribed hydroxychloroquine to patients for weeks despite the lack of rigorous trials. Some physicians say, given the speed and severity of the coronavirus, they are turning to any medicinal tools they can to save lives, even as little evidence has emerged that hydroxychloroquine is a panacea. Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo of New York has allowed that, “anecdotally,” doctors have seen positive results from the treatment, while reminding people that reliable data could take months to collect.

On Fox News, though, Ms. Ingraham acknowledged those caveats in passing, leaving an impression that a skeptical bureaucracy was keeping Americans from benefiting from a miracle drug.

On April 9, she began her program by mocking the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Dr. Robert Redfield, for “essentially dismissing, trashing” hydroxychloroquine “despite all of its success stories.” She told viewers that the doctors booked on her program that night — “my medicine cabinet” — would “set the record straight.” (Fox News said on Wednesday that Ms. Ingraham’s segments about hydroxychloroquine always included a doctor or recovered patient.)

Later on the show, she interviewed a patient, Billy Saracino, who, by his account, recovered from the coronavirus because his wife was inspired by “The Ingraham Angle” to help arrange a prescription for hydroxychloroquine.

“It is amazing that the left and the medical establishment is still in total denial about the potential of these decades old drugs,” Ms. Ingraham declared.

Within a week, she had stopped talking about the drug on-air.

Mr. Hannity, while not as prominent a hydroxychloroquine cheerleader as Ms. Ingraham, also highlighted the use of the drug, at one point citing a study that, he told viewers, showed “hydroxychloroquine is rated now the most effective therapy by doctors, over 6,300 of them surveyed, for coronavirus.”

Mr. Hannity, who likes to remind viewers that he is “not a doctor,” routinely asked guests if they would take hydroxychloroquine for treatment if they were infected with the disease.

Fox News, the country’s top-rated cable network, carries outsize influence among viewers who flock to its popular opinion programs. Hydroxychloroquine was first cited on the network during a late-night news show on March 11. It jumped to prime time a few days later, when a guest named Gregory Rigano touted the drug to Mr. Carlson and Ms. Ingraham.

“Tucker Carlson Tonight” identified Mr. Rigano as an adviser to the Stanford University School of Medicine, but Stanford has since said he has no affiliation with the institution; Mr. Rigano has not been back on Fox News.

On Wednesday, Dr. Mehmet Oz, a frequent guest on Fox News, appeared on “Fox & Friends” and spoke about the Veterans Affairs study that showed no clear positive benefit of treating the coronavirus with hydroxychloroquine.

At first, Dr. Oz offered some caveats, noting the study was not a controlled trial and focused on “older and quite a bit sicker patients.” But pressed by the co-host Brian Kilmeade, Dr. Oz conceded that “the fact of the matter is, we don’t know.”

“There’s so much data coming from so many places,” he told viewers, “we are better off waiting for the randomized trials Dr. Fauci’s been asking for.”

Yet, a third of the country follows and believes them unquestionably.

I'd guess this has already been posted here since it's from March 31 but "Marcus Zervos, infectious disease doctor for Henry Ford Health System, said they had seen success with hydroxychloroquine therapy in a number of COVID-19 patients. He said those given the drug were able to get off a ventilator and out of the hospital faster."

https://wwmt.com/news/local/michigan-doctors-see-success-in-covid-19-treatment-but-say-more-clinical-trials-are-needed

I saw an article yesterday about the number of different strains of the virus. I figure this might explain why some are reporting success using HCQ and an antibiotic and others aren't. There's no 1 size fits all in medicine.

As for the hits on Fox and Ingraham calling it a game changer,
I don't watch her show but I'd bet she said the same thing the President did, that it is a "potential" game changer. A lot of the "news media" like to twist words. They claim "Trump called chloroquine a game changer" when in reality he said it might be a game changer... Anything to hurt Trump. And the usual suspects lap it up and say "yeah! he said....." without ever bothering to look into what was actually said.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EXgJJrBW...jpg&name=large

Ventilators kill.

I took this anti malaria drug when I was in Vietnam. Every person I knew took it, you had to.
I did not have malaria, the drug was a precaution. I did not get malaria!