Jump to content

triplehorn

Full Members
  • Posts

    4441
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by triplehorn

  1. This HCQ deal in the US is really something. It's been politicized all around and potential applications as a part of a larger coordinated approach appear misunderstood, (assuming apparent successful incorporation by multiple other countries is the standard). It's just one facet of our national incoherence to manage the pandemic at home.
  2. Resignation would be more consequential in the short term. The cat’s out of the bag with this seizure warrant.
  3. Feds serving a warrant on the phone of a US Senator? If it’s anything like the warrant served on POTUS’ personal attorney, they’ve already got serious shit on him.
  4. Here's a different look at CV risk with use of HCQ : Hydroxychloroquine Use and Cardiovascular Events Among Patients with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus and Rheumatoid Arthritis "Conclusion: In this nested case-control study within an incident SLE/RA cohort, we found a 17% reduced risk of incident CV events overall associated with current HCQ use. We also identified trends towards reduced risks of MI, Stroke/TIA, and VTE associated with current HCQ use. By leveraging remote users as the comparison group, we reduced the potential for confounding by indication. These findings suggest a preventative benefit of HCQ use in reducing CV disease among patients with SLE and RA."
  5. Re the graphs, correct, they reflect daily new cases of COVID-19 vs time with a 10-day average. The outstanding question, which has been broached in some initial attempts to study the effects of HCQ on covid, is if early administration of HCQ results in smaller viral loads and a more rapid rate of the body's clearance of the virus. It follows that this would reduce probability of transmission and reduce the number of daily new cases. Individually it could mean a shorter milder course of illness less likely to progress to the crash/ICU phase. Globally it could help reduce R0 to less than 1.0 leading to containment of the virus.
  6. Now we get to watch and see if a similar trend is replicated in India, who is adopting a comparable approach to Italy with early outpatient/in-home HCQ intervention: Published 10th May, 2020 : Revised guidelines for Home Isolation of very mild/pre-symptomatic COVID-19 cases Right now, this is India's curve at the start of their national initiative for pre-test, pre-symptomatic application of HCQ. So we'll get to watch in real time what happens. It's important to realize that this approach necessarily involves a national coordinated effort with meaningful contact tracing and outpatient/in-home visits by health care providers to identify and administer HCQ safely and effectively.
  7. Italy peak was about 3/22. News of Italy's HCQ national policy came out 3/29. I'm guessing they had good reason based on their observations/findings to go public with the news, hence the curve plunging before advertising it. Crushing it is multifactorial. We all know that. But Italy's national curve didn't plateau before dropping, it just plunged. Italy was less than 2 weeks ahead of us when their country blew up with the virus. I'd love to look like Italy does two weeks from now. They seem to think early intervention with HCQ for pre-symptomatic and uncomplicated cases is an important component, and today, it looks like they're not wrong.
  8. Here's a correlation: March 29th: Italy Finally Starts Mass Treatment with Hydroxychloroquine Taken from the endcoronavirus.org website: look at what has happened to Italy's graph after March 29th when Italy launched a national outpatient/in-home early intervention program incorporating HCQ
  9. CV risk associated with HCQ? I saw this published less than two weeks ago: The Effect of Chloroquine, Hydroxychloroquine and Azithromycin on the Corrected QT Interval in Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Infection I guess , don't know (words), you're thinking of the study of people with HCQ being more likely to die ? If so, I don't recall if there was a cause/effect determined. Was it due to arrhythmogenic causes? Was Zinc provided to those HCQ subjects? Things have progressed from the last month, and a lot of it was not touched on over the course of the last page.
  10. It's known. When your words fail, you deploy .gifs. soooo Anyway, @RayDog, you raised a highly relevant question about whether specifically raising zinc levels could augment results when combined with HCQ/AZ. This new study supports that zinc warrants serious consideration as a key element in this cocktail.
  11. An NYU retrospective study of 900 cases, zeroing in on HCQ/AZ, with and without zinc. The inclusion of zinc to HCQ and AZ apparently reduced the risk of death by 44%. Zinc-hydroxychloroquine found effective in some COVID-19 patients: https://news.yahoo.com/zinc-hydroxychloroquine-found-effective-covid-19-patients-study-215732283.html?bcmt=1 So adding zinc to HCQ/AZ could make a real difference relative HCQ/AZ alone. Add to that targeting use for early-as-possible intervention.
  12. Roberts points out that Trump is arguing for absolute immunity whereas DOJ is arguing for a heightened standard to get POTUS records. The DOJ then says they agree with Trump that he’s absolutely immune. Roberts points out that DOJ’s position now doesn't make sense - if POTUS is absolutely immune, then why would there be any standard ? DOJ gone tits up for Trump.
  13. All good here. I decided to unplug and get some fresh air for a bit. Thanks for asking though.
  14. Lots of things aren’t able to be tested with DBR controlled studies. Or be tested without insurmountable logistic obstacles or be completed in a remotely timely manner. That doesn’t make something not real or worth trying. Orthodoxy has its shortcomings.
  15. Sometimes the orthodoxy of the placebo controlled double blind randomized study reveals its shortcomings.
  16. No way Fauci is going to stand at that podium and say the American public should consider taking HCHQ at the height of the pandemic for any influenza like symptoms without out a positive test in hand. And we wont see that data. Hasn't stopped some from taking that approach, but the feds aren't going to promote it, understandably.
  17. That's a glowing endorsement compared to how he must feel about the testing situation.
  18. "people have to stay at home. But we did that. and now we have to open back up." only midday today: already over 23k new cases and over 1000 new deaths
  19. Trump won't mention Jay "the snake" Inslee by name for his early decisive leadership. face.
  20. It all starts with basic situational awareness. We could rapidly close gaps and be immeasurably better if we even had that. Instead, we're stuck having to overcome willful denial and systematic inaction from the very top. It's deadly, and it didn't have to be.
  21. Consensus data is lacking, but it looks like access to ventilators prolongs time to death more so than promoting survival and recovery. Lancet (3/5) : Respiratory support for patients with COVID-19 infection non-peer reviewed aggregate of available info: Mortality rate of COVID-19 patients on ventilators So any hoarding/biased allocation of ventilators is arguably fools gold. The real service to be offered is fact based leadership and effective national communication in order to contain this virus. Absent that, NO amount of medical or ventilator support will be sufficient be meet the overwhelming demand.
  22. We'd be faring better with anyone other than Trump. Who else would have fired our entire national (global) Pandemic Response Team? Who else would de-fund our program for routine maintenance of ventilators in the strategic stockpile ? Who else would marginalize or remove the voices from the podium of the most competent physicians and scientists promoting public understanding in an attempt to reduce his own stage envy? You couldn't invent a worse person for the position right now. And yes, even a single day delayed in taking definitive steps on social distancing has massive effects visible only weeks later. If we did at a national level what WA and CA did when they did it, we'd be in a massively improved situation as a nation. And really, we're still not there
  23. Compare looking at outcomes with early intervention vs intervention with complications present. Selecting subjects for early intervention is a situation where the difference between efficacy or not will manifest in maybe 5 or less out of every 100 subjects who would otherwise end up in the ICU with pneumonia. Showing that is more difficult than showing response between groups by selecting for subjects already having complications of infection. Since testing is a debacle, ideally we need a widely available med that anyone could take and that is safe enough to take even if you don't have confirmation of covid from a test (due to low availability and turnaround time). That could allow rapidly attacking a virus with the greatest chance of success without waiting for confirmation. It'd be ideal if a one-and-done single dose could work in people (as seen in vitro) as that would reduce med exposure to the vast majority of people who don't progress to complications. You could refine recs for early intervention based on older age and/or existence of co-morbid medical conditions, or anyone with URI symptoms with airway restriction/dyspnea. For now, the proven way to shut this bug down within weeks is extreme social distancing. and everyone covering their nose and mouth with basically anything while in public.
×
×
  • Create New...