health

No benefit, higher death rate for malaria drug in coronavirus study

22 Comments
By GERARD JULIEN

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2020 AFP

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

22 Comments
Login to comment

But didn't Donnie say this was the cure?

No, he said it showed promise. Dr. Fauci didn't disagree with that.

Coronavirus stricken Michigan Rep. Karen WhitSett's condition dramatically improved hours after she took hydroxy.

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

Dr. Trump proven wrong again....

”What do they have to lose”?

Ummmm their lives!!!!

5 ( +8 / -3 )

The problem here is that this is not an experimental study, and, as such, proves absolutely nothing. It is a meta-analysis of carefully chosen patient records. All of these patients were hospitalized and the analysis was performed post hoc. Doctors caring for the patients made clinical and not experimental decisions. The "control" group was made up of patients whom doctors chose not to treat with ANY therapies upon entering the hospital. Why not? Common sense would lead us to conclude that doctors assessed the patients and thought they were better off than those who were given at least a single treatment. It's the job of the analysts to rule out that possibility. Furthermore, the sample size is concerning. Across the entire VA hospital system, these researchers were not able to find even 400 patients to analyze with fewer than 75 deaths? That does not make sense. Either the virus is far less serious than is being reported or there was cherrypicking, which should also be ruled out via instrumental variables. 

When this type of statistical malfeasance occurs, it sows confusion. We have to wait for definitive data that was responsibly collected and analyzed before making any real determinations. Otherwise, these guys are no better than Trump et al trying to manipulate data to score political points.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

but this has been disputed by other doctors and test" ...Many countries know it works and are in line to get it"

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

No, he said it showed promise. Dr. Fauci didn't disagree with that.

Dr. Fauci publicly disagreed and donny shut him up.

The deaths of all the people who took this treatment is on Donny.

But don't expect him to take any responsibility.

"The buck stops everywhere".

"I don't take any responsibility "!!

3 ( +4 / -1 )

It was both hilarious and pathetic to see donny trying to escape the Press questions during today's briefing.

Wouldn't be surprising if he gives up attending the briefing altogether.

His expressions showed he knew he is in deep trouble......

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Trump and his entire right-wing State TV media empire all touted this drug as the holy grail and cure...

Now we find out that was a scam and a con-job just like everything else Trump does.

"Get a Trump U degree, buy the Art of the Deal, get one of my Chinese-made Trump ties, Mexico will pay for the wall, stay at a Trump resort and have your bed made by an illegal immigrant...

One con-job after another - and his supporters all fall for it...

2 ( +3 / -1 )

But didn't Donnie say this was the cure?

Wonder how much money he got invested in this drug (firm).

This needs to be looked into.

Hope he doesn’t start flogging Alex Jones’ toothpaste.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

This needs to be looked into.

Donny has a small stake in Sanofi, one of the manufacturers of the drug.

Did all these people die because donny wanted to make a fast buck????

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Fake news with a definite political slant ("that counts President Donald Trump and right wing news channel Fox News among its biggest backers").

As has been pointed out by others here, the actual "study" does not show or prove anything.

This was an after-the-fact analysis of the medical charts of VA patients.

How did they select the patients to be included?

How did they select patients to be excluded?

According to the "Methods" section of the study:

"[H]ydroxychloroquine, with our without azithromycin, was more likely to be prescribed to patients with more severe disease. Thus, as expected, increased mortality was observed in patients treated with hydroxychloroquine, both with and without azithromycin. (Emphasis mine)

Relative to 2, above, anti-viral drugs like hydroxychloroquine are most effective when used early, and not after a patient is in a more severe state.

In the "study":

There is no indication how much patients were dosed with HCQ.

There is no indication how often patients were dosed with HCQ.

There is no idea when (3 days after symptom onset? 2 days after going on a ventilator?) patients were dosed with HCQ.

As admitted in the article above, the "study"under discussion has not been peer reviewed.

Randomized trials are currently underway. It will be the results of these trials that will render the final verdict on this treatment.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

More deaths Donnie and others are directly responsible for, as are his supporters who defended him on pushing it.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

The problem here is that this is not an experimental study, and, as such, proves absolutely nothing. It is a meta-analysis of carefully chosen patient records

No, that is a wrong concept, epidemiological studies routinely prove important and useful things without having to manipulate variables. A good statistical methodology can allow an retrospective study to prove things based on data taken previously. Also, you have the wrong idea about what a meta-analysis. this is not one.

This report has its value, but it is not a rock-solid proof about the effects of the drug, research is done like this in a changing situation and the researchers are doing here an effort to make sense of whatever data was collected without the intention of making a study from the very beginning. It has weaknesses and problems, which dilute the importance of the findings, but it is a huge step forward compared with the original French report that had even worse troubles, and obviously is much more important than just saying "This person felt better with chloroquine".

The study is not "fake" and do show the data and how their conclusions are being reached, that is the value of a scientific report. Independently of how it is being reported in the media it is a very useful glimpse to what is happening with the use of chloroquine right now, the only people that are confused by this are those that understandable are not prepared to interpret it, but that is true for every study.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

The study may not be fake, because it was in fact carried out. However, the news being milked from certainly is fake.

Randomized trials are currently underway. It will be the results of these trials that will render the final verdict on this treatment.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Here is some very detailed on HCQ and the VA report from an unbiased source.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLSYRqcg0wo&t=251s

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Trump and Fox News will issue an apology and a retraction in 3, 2, 1,.......never.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

The study is not "fake" and do show the data and how their conclusions are being reached, that is the value of a scientific report. 

Did I say it was fake? Much like the authors of this study, you should stop jumping to conclusions.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Donny has a small stake in Sanofi, one of the manufacturers of the drug.

Did you notice how the media stopped reporting on that? You know why? His ''small'' stake is about $1300. Furthermore, it is most likely a mutual fund, and if you know how mutual funds work, you will know how absurd your comment really is.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Did I say it was fake?

You are not the only one commenting in this.

It is understandable that people do not get a scientific publication, it is a messy overcomplicated thing on the first place, but making mistaken assumptions is not valid. This is what a manuscript looks like and the kind of data an analysis it will present in a situation like an ongoing pandemic. The authors clearly understand that and the people doing the review of it also do it. The only people that apparently end up making exaggerated assumptions are those that only read the extremely simplified digest written on the news.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

It's interesting to see liberals hold this study up as the holy grail while dismissing all the studies that showed positive outcomes. People more interested in gaining political advantage than being intellectually honest.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites