- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Small trial finds Hydroxychloroquine not effective for treating COVID-19
Posted on 4/3/20 at 2:38 pm to TulaneFan
Posted on 4/3/20 at 2:38 pm to TulaneFan
From the study:
I haven't seen the others, anyone know how this aspect compares to them?
quote:
There were 7 men and 4 women with a mean age of 58.7 years (range: 20-77), 8 had significant comorbidities associated with poor outcomes (obesity: 2; solid cancer: 3; hematological cancer: 2; HIV-infection: 1).
I haven't seen the others, anyone know how this aspect compares to them?
1
Posted on 4/3/20 at 2:51 pm to ldts
Can someone explain this to me:
Are we not thinking that less than 5% of people who contract the virus develop serious enough symptoms to be hospitalized?
And, the ones that are hospitalized usually have other health concerns (older, overweight, diabetes etc).
If that is the case, isn't any real difference maker in reducing overcrowded hospitals etc going to be one that specifically has success with the cases that are actually needing hospitalization?
Since 95%+ people who get this don't develop symptoms serious enough to be hospitalized, is a drug that keeps 95%+ of people testing positive from entering the hospital doing all that much?
What am I missing about this?
Posted on 4/3/20 at 3:04 pm to wm72
quote:
What am I missing about this?
It's a potential preventative for the pneumonia that accompanies the virus, not a cure for the Corona virus. If it's effective, it will lower the percentage of people who need hospitalization.
quote:
The results showed that the 31 patients who received the drug showed a lessening of their symptoms 24 hours earlier than patients in the control group. In addition, pneumonia symptoms improved in 25 of the 31 patients versus 17 of 31 in the control group
Remember when everyone screamed about hospitals being overwhelmed with patients needing care? This could help with that aspect.
This post was edited on 4/3/20 at 3:10 pm
Posted on 4/3/20 at 3:21 pm to ellishughtiger
quote:
But our resident furloughed plant workers told me differently
Is it any surprise the board libs are cheering this study?
Posted on 4/3/20 at 3:27 pm to RB10
quote:
The results showed that the 31 patients who received the drug showed a lessening of their symptoms 24 hours earlier than patients in the control group. In addition, pneumonia symptoms improved in 25 of the 31 patients versus 17 of 31 in the control group
So all of 62 of the patients in the study were in bad enough shape that they would been hospitalized when the test began?
If so, that would certainly seem to reduce hospital numbers if those test results hold true in larger numbers.
However, since a vast majority of people in the US are already being told to stay at home unless the symptoms become very serious, I am curious what percentage of those 62 would have never been admitted to a hospital here in the first place.
Anyway, anything that may have some moderate success is very good news.
Posted on 4/3/20 at 3:30 pm to TulaneFan
The answer is: we don't know. And people should stop hyping the frick out of the drug based on sparse scientific evidence.
Posted on 4/3/20 at 3:34 pm to TulaneFan
Chemo doesn't save most patients with late stage cancer. That doesn't mean its not effective early. The point is administering early to inhibit the virus' multiplication.
Posted on 4/3/20 at 3:39 pm to wm72
quote:
Anyway, anything that may have some moderate success is very good news.
This is the long and short of it. Would you want them to not administer something because it may not work, only to find out later that it does? Or to administer it now only to find out that it doesn't have much impact later?
Seems like the former is the approach being taken here.
Posted on 4/3/20 at 3:46 pm to Barstools
quote:
Sounds like we need more studies.
... precisely
Posted on 4/3/20 at 3:48 pm to RB10
quote:
This is the long and short of it. Would you want them to not administer something because it may not work, only to find out later that it does? Or to administer it now only to find out that it doesn't have much impact later?
Seems like the former is the approach being taken here.
I think there are doctors everywhere administering this. I know there's a large study in NY right now but also think any doctor is free to use it.
My huge fear is of any treatment or vaccine for this becoming too hyped and politicized.
The worst thing we could possibly do is devolve into a Republican pet "cure" VS a Democratic pet "cure" debate over any and all possible cure/vaccines.
Posted on 4/3/20 at 3:49 pm to RB10
quote:
This is the long and short of it. Would you want them to not administer something because it may not work, only to find out later that it does? Or to administer it now only to find out that it doesn't have much impact later?
Seems like the former is the approach being taken here
They are administering it now. And the fact we're not hearing much about the wonder drug makes its efficacy questionable. Unless you're one of those who thinks it is a liberal media plot to make Trump look bad. Occam's Razor would suggest Trump jumped the gun in yet another rambling off-the-cuff remark that is commonplace for him to make.
Posted on 4/3/20 at 3:50 pm to Unknown_Poster
quote:
They are administering it now. And the fact we're not hearing much about the wonder drug makes its efficacy questionable.
You're hearing plenty about it.
quote:
Unless you're one of those who thinks it is a liberal media plot to make Trump look bad. Occam's Razor would suggest Trump jumped the gun in yet another rambling off-the-cuff remark that is commonplace for him to make.
Why does everything end up being about Trump with you? It's pretty clear that the only reason you're against this drug is because Trump said it works.
This post was edited on 4/3/20 at 3:54 pm
Posted on 4/3/20 at 3:57 pm to Unknown_Poster
quote:
They are administering it now. And the fact we're not hearing much about the wonder drug makes its efficacy questionable. Unless you're one of those who thinks it is a liberal media plot to make Trump look bad. Occam's Razor would suggest Trump jumped the gun in yet another rambling off-the-cuff remark that is commonplace for him to make.
I don’t think its a bad thing if our non scientist President tried to give America a little bit of hope in what is a bleak time. It’s not like he mandated all citizens to take hydroxychloroquine. He just made sure to expedite the access to it by speeding up the FDA process and tried to tout a little positive news when all you see is deaths and unemployment piling up. Nothing wrong with that.
Posted on 4/3/20 at 4:12 pm to TulaneFan
So every other study across the world sees a benefit and the folks who made the virus don't? hmmmm...
Posted on 4/3/20 at 4:18 pm to Adam Banks
quote:
I don’t think its a bad thing if our non scientist President tried to give America a little bit of hope in what is a bleak time. It’s not like he mandated all citizens to take hydroxychloroquine. He just made sure to expedite the access to it by speeding up the FDA process and tried to tout a little positive news when all you see is deaths and unemployment piling up. Nothing wrong with that.
Yeah I don't get why people have to make everything so political. I fricking hate Trump and I had no problem with him mentioning the drug(s) as possible treatments. Any sliver of hope is fine with me right now.
Posted on 4/3/20 at 4:20 pm to TulaneFan
quote:
The drugs were touted by President Trump as a “game changer” for COVID-19.
Pretty sure he said it potentially could be.
Posted on 4/3/20 at 4:50 pm to Unknown_Poster
quote:
They are administering it now. And the fact we're not hearing much about the wonder drug makes its efficacy questionable. Unless you're one of those who thinks it is a liberal media plot to make Trump look bad. Occam's Razor would suggest Trump jumped the gun in yet another rambling off-the-cuff remark that is commonplace for him to make.
The sad truth is that, at least on this board, people's opinions on both sides seem to be based on either their political opinions or on some other reason that they originally decided to be either all in for it or all in skeptical of it.
I've said before and I still feel the same way - I hope it does work and if I was in a situation where I was sick and could try it I would. That said, I haven't seen anything to convince me it works. But I'd try it on the chance that it does.
Posted on 4/3/20 at 5:23 pm to TulaneFan
It isn’t a cure to kill the virus. It’s a treatment that keeps symptoms manageable so you don’t die or need a hospital until your body fights it off
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News