Study retracted involving Hydroxyqloroquine.

In before the O-T Covid defenders ask us to “just move on.”

Nah, it was bleach.

quote:

---

In before the O-T Covid defenders ask us to “just move on.”

---

Like a living Babylonian Bee headline



"those who acted like little retarded tyrant assholes ask others to forgive and forget"

quote:

---

Nah, it was bleach.

---

Republicans are so lazy they use chemicals to clean fish instead of a filet knife

quote:

---

Are they deporting bad comedians now?

---

We can hope.

quote:

---

Are they deporting bad comedians now?

---

George Lopez got deported but I’m still here

quote:

---

Just my anecdotal experience: Got covid on September or October, 2020, worst sore throat of my life. My doctor prescribed hydroxychloroquine and my symptoms stopped immediately. Doctor made me come back and retest since I got better so quickly. Still tested positive for about a week later but had no symptoms at all.

---

I've taken HCQ numerous times and never had any issues with it. My doc prescribed IVM (horse dewormer for the mouth breathers in the back) and my case eased up within 24 hours.

At the end of the day, 2 of these pills cost approx .06c a dose to produce while the Fauci pill, Remsdivir, was close to $1k. This was highlighted several times, but the OT dumbasses called us conspiracy theorist and shunned us from society because we wouldnt comply

It's one of the safest medicines I write. Have not had an issue with a patient on it in over 20 years. Effective for COVID as well when given with zinc. It's a shame they have people scared to take it over politics.

Wait wtf?


This happened in june 2020 as well with an article in the Lancet: LINK


Is this a second paper being retracted?


Yep, apparently its an entirely different article: LINK

Editors Note:

quote:

---

This article has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (LINK
Following publication, the Journal was made aware of readers' debate about this article. The Journal received a number of Letters to the Editor and correspondence from readers. The plan, as published in an early version of an Editor's Note, was initially to publish these Letters to the Editor, after the Authors of the above article had been given the right to reply and submit a response (which would also be published, after review).
After assessing all the information at this stage, and the extent and depth of the criticism, the Editor-in-Chief made the decision to change approach and handle this matter through the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) process for corrections to the scientific record: LINK
Upon completion of this process, and following careful consideration of all available information, this article has been retracted at the request of the Editor-in-Chief.
The decision to retract was made due to two major issues.
1.
Reliability of the data and choice of the data. The Belgian dataset in particular was found to be unreliable, based on estimates.
2.
The assumption that all patients that entered the clinic were being treated the same pharmacologically was incorrect.
The above two issues meant that the Editor-in-Chief found the conclusions of the article to be unreliable and therefore the article needed to be retracted.
Update September 2024
The Journal wishes to clarify that at no point did the investigation find evidence of fraud in the article, and instead believe it was honest error on the part of the authors.
The authors were responsive to the Journal’s correspondence and engaged with the process throughout. The authors do not agree with the retraction and dispute the grounds for it.

---