Trump trial proves to be political after all

[SkepticThinker]

I have deleted the article I posted that referenced Hydroxychloroquine.

Conclusions.......(NIH___National Center for Biotechnology Information)​

HCQ has been shown to have consistent clinical efficacy for COVID-19 when it is provided early in the outpatient setting; in general, it appears to work better the earlier it is provided. Overall, HCQ is effective against COVID-19. There is no credible evidence that HCQ results in worsening of COVID-19. HCQ has also been shown to be safe for the treatment of COVID-19 when responsibly used.
Go to:

February 2024:​

Highlights​

•Hydroxychloroquine was prescribed in hospitalised patients with Covid-19 despite of the low-level evidence.

• Subsequently, HCQ use was associated with an 11% increase in the mortality rate in a meta-analysis of randomized trials.
• The number of hydroxychloroquine related deaths in hospitalised patients is estimated at 16,990 in six countries.
• These findings illustrate the hazard of drug repurposing with low-level evidence for the management of future pandemics.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S075333222301853X

 

[Laniakea]

Address the point and your error.
TIA.

Your point.....

The mainstream media doesn't regulate medicine and this is bogus.

......was addressed.
And your error was corrected.

To repeat: Nobody said it regulated medicine.

 

[Stonetree]

February 2024:​

Highlights​

•Hydroxychloroquine was prescribed in hospitalised patients with Covid-19 despite of the low-level evidence.

• Subsequently, HCQ use was associated with an 11% increase in the mortality rate in a meta-analysis of randomized trials.
• The number of hydroxychloroquine related deaths in hospitalised patients is estimated at 16,990 in six countries.
• These findings illustrate the hazard of drug repurposing with low-level evidence for the management of future pandemics.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S075333222301853X

The two sources of information seem to completely contradict each other. The source that @Laniakea supplied referenced specific tests that would indicate the "efficacy" of use or the "non-efficacy" of Hydroxychloroquine use for Covid-19 ( I am assuming,US based). The source you supplied used statistical information from international records of patients treated for multiple diseases that were given Hydroxychloroquine and died. Personally, I have no way of knowing how to choose which is definitive between contradicting sources that were different types of studies.

 

[McBell]

The two sources of information seem to completely contradict each other. The source that @Laniakea supplied referenced specific tests that would indicate the "efficacy" of use or the "non-efficacy" of Hydroxychloroquine use for Covid-19 ( I am assuming,US based). The source you supplied used statistical information from international records of patients treated for multiple diseases that were given Hydroxychloroquine and died. Personally, I have no way of knowing how to choose which is definitive between contradicting sources that were different types of studies.

Personally, I will go with the one that reveals the results of actually giving it to people and recording their actual reactions over the one that was done with out actually giving it to people.

many a thing look good on paper, but are epic fails in practice.

 

[blü 2]

Ashli Babbit.
So, looks like you guessed wrong.

But I got it right when I said you don't give a toss ─ Trump can direct murderous riots, and that's all fine with you.

Just as his raping, his lying, his commercial fraud, his incompetence to run his own presidential office, let alone a country, his brainless distribution of state secrets, his narcissism, his self-entitlement, his whining and constant posed victimhood, are all fine with you.

 

[Stonetree]

Personally, I will go with the one that reveals the results of actually giving it to people and recording their actual reactions over the one that was done with out actually giving it to people.
witch
many a thing look good on paper, but are epic fails in practice.

They told me Pepsi was bad for me. Now, I drink Green Tea. Should I switch to Hydroxy?

 

[SkepticThinker]

Your point.....



......was addressed.
And your error was corrected.

To repeat: Nobody said it regulated medicine.

The point was to correct the inaccurate claims you posted about hydroxychloroquine as a COVID treatment. You were claiming that the mainstream media didn't tell us that Trump was "right" about hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for COVID. Not only was he wrong, but what he was telling people was downright dangerous, as per the article I cited.

You ignored it for obvious reasons and instead focused on some inanity, as per your M.O.

 

[Laniakea]

But I got it right when I said you don't give a toss ─ Trump can direct murderous riots, and that's all fine with you.

Just as his raping, his lying, his commercial fraud, his incompetence to run his own presidential office, let alone a country, his brainless distribution of state secrets, his narcissism, his self-entitlement, his whining and constant posed victimhood, are all fine with you.

Hey, where's that tolerant liberal attitude you guys are supposed to have?
Don't be so hateful. Think sunshine, roses, and rainbows. You guys just LOVE rainbows, right?

 

[Laniakea]

The point was to correct the inaccurate claims you posted about hydroxychloroquine as a COVID treatment. You were claiming that the mainstream media didn't tell us that Trump was "right" about hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for COVID. Not only was he wrong, but what he was telling people was downright dangerous, as per the article I cited.

You ignored it for obvious reasons and instead focused on some inanity, as per your M.O.

And you still haven't proven Hydroxychloroquine to be dangerous.
My body, my choice. Giving people the right to access information to choose what they want to put into their own body is a liberal idea, at least when it's the information approved by the Truth Department of the USA.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Hey, where's that tolerant liberal attitude you guys are supposed to have?
Don't be so hateful. Think sunshine, roses, and rainbows. You guys just LOVE rainbows, right?

Where's the response to anything that was pointed out to you?

Oh, no where. As usual.

Just another cop out hand-wave non-response.

 

[SkepticThinker]

And you still haven't proven Hydroxychloroquine to be dangerous.

I didn't, scientists and researchers did. I just provided their meta-study.

My body, my choice. Giving people the right to access information to choose what they want to put into their own body is a liberal idea, at least when it's the information approved by the Truth Department of the USA.

This doesn't address anything that was said to you.

The point was to correct the inaccurate claims you posted about hydroxychloroquine as a COVID treatment. You were claiming that the mainstream media didn't tell us that Trump was "right" about hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for COVID. Not only was he wrong, but what he was telling people was downright dangerous, as per the article I cited.

 

[Laniakea]

Where's the response to anything that was pointed out to you?

Oh, no where. As usual.

Just another cop out hand-wave non-response.

The post you replied to was my response.
Jeez, man!

 

[We Never Know]

I didn't, scientists and researchers did. I just provided their meta-study.


This doesn't address anything that was said to you.

The point was to correct the inaccurate claims you posted about hydroxychloroquine as a COVID treatment. You were claiming that the mainstream media didn't tell us that Trump was "right" about hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for COVID. Not only was he wrong, but what he was telling people was downright dangerous, as per the article I cited.

Here is where the problem and confusion come from...same source, ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

If someone only reads the one from Oct 2020, hydroxychloroquine use is supported.
Then when updated in Aug 2021 its discouraged.

First is from October 2020..

"This review found four important results. The first is that HCQ appears to be consistently effective for the treatment of COVID-19 when provided early in the course of disease in the outpatient setting, and it is generally more effective the earlier it is provided. The second is that overall, in most studies, HCQ exhibits efficacy against COVID-19. The third is that there are no unbiased studies showing a negative effect of HCQ treatment of COVID-19. The fourth is that HCQ appears to be safe for the treatment of COVID-19 when used responsibly"

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

Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) has shown efficacy against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in some but not all studies. We hypothesized that a systematic review would show HCQ to be effective against COVID-19, more effective when provided earlier, not associated ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Second from Aug 2021...

"Previously, we recommended a moratorium to health care providers concerning prescriptions of hydroxychloroquine.3 13 Since that time, no significant benefits have been found in the recent randomized evidence for post-exposure prophylaxis and among hospitalized patients. Regarding risk, hydroxychloroquine derived a reassuring safety profile from decades of prescriptions for autoimmune diseases of greater prevalence in younger and middle-aged women, whose risks of fatal outcomes due to QTc prolongations are very low. In contrast, the risks associated with COVID-19 are much higher because mortality rates for COVID-19 and the side effects of hydroxychloroquine are both highest in older patients and those with comorbidities, both of whom are predominantly men. The current totality of evidence more strongly supports our previous recommendations concerning the lack of efficacy and possible harm of hydroxychloroquine in the treatment and prevention of COVID-19"

Updates on Hydroxychloroquine in Prevention and Treatment of COVID-19

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[Laniakea]

Here is where the problem and confusion come from...same source, ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

If someone only reads the one from Oct 2020, hydroxychloroquine use is supported.
Then when updated in Aug 2021 its discouraged.

First is from October 2020..

"This review found four important results. The first is that HCQ appears to be consistently effective for the treatment of COVID-19 when provided early in the course of disease in the outpatient setting, and it is generally more effective the earlier it is provided. The second is that overall, in most studies, HCQ exhibits efficacy against COVID-19. The third is that there are no unbiased studies showing a negative effect of HCQ treatment of COVID-19. The fourth is that HCQ appears to be safe for the treatment of COVID-19 when used responsibly"

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

Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) has shown efficacy against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in some but not all studies. We hypothesized that a systematic review would show HCQ to be effective against COVID-19, more effective when provided earlier, not associated ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Second from Aug 2021...

"Previously, we recommended a moratorium to health care providers concerning prescriptions of hydroxychloroquine.3 13 Since that time, no significant benefits have been found in the recent randomized evidence for post-exposure prophylaxis and among hospitalized patients. Regarding risk, hydroxychloroquine derived a reassuring safety profile from decades of prescriptions for autoimmune diseases of greater prevalence in younger and middle-aged women, whose risks of fatal outcomes due to QTc prolongations are very low. In contrast, the risks associated with COVID-19 are much higher because mortality rates for COVID-19 and the side effects of hydroxychloroquine are both highest in older patients and those with comorbidities, both of whom are predominantly men. The current totality of evidence more strongly supports our previous recommendations concerning the lack of efficacy and possible harm of hydroxychloroquine in the treatment and prevention of COVID-19"

Updates on Hydroxychloroquine in Prevention and Treatment of COVID-19

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

"The Science" (from a .gov perspective) depends upon the narrative of the political party in control at the time.
In October of 2020, Trump was president.
In August of 2021, Biden was president.

I miss Science we were taught before science became politicized.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Nanny nanny boo boo.

Don't tell me she is going to run for president!

 

[blü 2]

Hey, where's that tolerant liberal attitude you guys are supposed to have?
Don't be so hateful. Think sunshine, roses, and rainbows. You guys just LOVE rainbows, right?

You're the one kissing a backside here, Donald's.

 

[Stonetree]

"The Science" (from a .gov perspective) depends upon the narrative of the political party in control at the time.
In October of 2020, Trump was president.
In August of 2021, Biden was president.

I miss Science we were taught before science became politicized.

I offered criticism of then-President Trump for his making off-the-cuff remarks about medical matters (Hydroxychloroquine). Scientists are the only authorities who should be remarking on scientific subjects. Many contributing factors in 2020 handicapped even the scientists and limited a better response that could have mitigated losses of life. We see Republicans scapegoating Dr. Fauci. They are accusing a national hero of being a villain for no good reason.IMO

 

[F1fan]

And you still haven't proven Hydroxychloroquine to be dangerous.
My body, my choice. Giving people the right to access information to choose what they want to put into their own body is a liberal idea, at least when it's the information approved by the Truth Department of the USA.

Very Darwin Award thinking you have there.

The issue isn't whether takling the horse pill will cure Covid, it's that Trump made the claim without any evidence. I have no idea where Trump got the idea of taking horse pills to cure Covid but I do remember medical experts telling citizens not to do it. It's not surprising that more died due to Trump's advice, kostly conservatives not getting vaccinated and dying. Trump was killing his own voters.

 

[We Never Know]

I do remember medical experts telling citizens not to do it. It's not surprising that more died due to Trump's advice, kostly conservatives not getting vaccinated and dying. Trump was killing his own voters.

See post #453

 

[Laniakea]

You're the one kissing a backside here, Donald's.

So? Does it bother you if I choose to kiss someone's backside?