re: DR FAUCI AND THE NIH KNEW IN 2005 CHLOROQUINE STOPS SARS

quote:

---

“This is not a major threat to the people of the United States and this is not something that the citizens of the United States should be worried about right now,” Dr. Fauci told Newsmax’s Greg Kelly on January 21.

---

Dr Fauci is a fraud

quote:

---

What do suggest we offer people who are dying? Nothing as we wait on clinical trials?

---

Reading is helpful, try it.

quote:

---

I want the Trump drugs if I get the China flu

---

I'd totally expect the guy who decided to challenge a physician on this board after not reading what the physician posted to bust out the "China flu" just cause.

quote:

---

I don't see how Trump gets up every morning an works with these back-stabbers who would love to see him fail...and be run out of office. So Hillary could take power.

---

You do know that Mike Pence is next in line, not Hilary, right?

Here is the thing I have to question. If it works in vitro, where are the clinical trials? This was 15 years ago. Surely there has been sufficient time to put together clinical trials to test yet there are none. Maybe having a cheap alternative too expensive anti vitals isn’t what big pharmaceutical wants and so the trials never get sponsored and paid for?

quote:

---

Here is the thing I have to question. If it works in vitro, where are the clinical trials? This was 15 years ago. Surely there has been sufficient time to put together clinical trials to test yet there are none. Maybe having a cheap alternative too expensive anti vitals isn’t what big pharmaceutical wants and so the trials never get sponsored and paid for?

---

SARS and MERS are extremely deadly and were stopped fairly quickly. No time for any clinical trials.

quote:

---

"what is the relevance of his opinion on models (and you seem to disagree with his states opinion vs his actions) to a threat regarding his opinion on drugs?"

---

Not saying I disagree with him concerning the drug and its benefits but for him to dismiss trials offhand without much to back him up BUT then base his response off of models with suspect data from the start makes him more questionable in my opinion.

I have said it before. He is a 35+ year bureaucrat and is looking at this thing through his lense and his lense only. He is dismissing economic impacts or not considering them, and he is dismissing potential treatments. In other words, he has tunnel vision.

quote:

---

If it works in vitro, where are the clinical trials?

---

So, clinical trials go in multiple phases. And they are very expensive. They are designed to bring a drug to market, as they are required by the FDA for approval.

Phase 1- healthy people unaffected by the drug take the drug to see if they die or have side effects not shown in the animal models or predicted based on in-vitro studies
-this occurred decades ago for plaquenil, as we are not talking about disease-ridden people in these studies

Phase 2- a small (~100s) get the drug for the specified condition. You see how they do vs untreated or "standard care" patients.
This is basically what is going on now, kind of. But it isn't in phases because the drug is not seeking FDA approval to treat viruses. We know the drug's toxicity profile, and we know that it has in-vitro activity against viruses. These trials are underway presently despite knowing about this activity during the SARS outbreak.

Why? Because a drug that already exists to treat a condition that doesn't (widespread viral pandemic from an unknown agent (and 6m ago, this was an unknown agent, so any data from prior to its existence would only be so useful) is wasteful of money, time, and resources.

There has not been a novel viral outbreak like this in recent human memory. SARS had fewer than 10,000 cases. MERS also was rare. H1N1 wasn't quite as different as this and had widespread infectivity but mild, generally, symptoms. And there's already a different set of drugs that treated H1N1 influenza, making the study of plaquenil for it essentially unneeded.


Again, no one is saying not to write it for the disease.
What they are saying is:
1) A large number of people who get this disease get better on their own
2) There are a multitude of trials available to compare getting the drug vs not getting the drug. In effort to help decide if this is effective and extrapolate data to future outbreaks of this or other illnesses, please enroll there if at all possible

quote:

---

MD doc

---

And a particularly nerdy one at that.


I found this link from the IDSA's summary of therapeutics for COVID19. I didn't actually seek out the ASHP individually but wound up there.
I'll use just about anything reputable to get to an endpoint that is needed. In this case, I wanted the current CHEST and ID recommendations. The former had surprisingly little, the latter had this summary that is updated frequently. I'll probably continue to use them as a reference - I really like this summary- in the future but on a day-to-day basis am not generally looking into source data for recommendations.

quote:

---

But why does Fauci leave the audience with no hope and Birx just the opposite? See the difference in communication delivery style and the effect it has on people? Fauci doesn't have to be so negative.

---

Fauci wants the country shutdown for many many months. If it was up to him nothing would be open until a "cure" for the virus was in hand and approved.