Hydroxchrloroquine is shown to be safe and effective says Science direct

[xylophone]

34 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

What Trump said:

"Then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in one minute. And is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside or almost a cleaning, because you see it gets in the lungs and it does a tremendous number on the lungs, so it’d be interesting to check that, so that you’re going to have to use medical doctors with, but it sounds interesting to me.”

No getting away from it, the man is plain dumb.

[Bkk Brian]

31 minutes ago, xylophone said:

No getting away from it, the man is plain dumb.

Probably not as dumb as the people who took his advice literally..........

 

Accidental Poisonings Increased After President Trump's Disinfectant Comments

In January, February and March of 2020, accidental poisonings with household disinfectants were up 5%, 17% and 93% respectively over the same months in 2019. In April, which includes an eight day period from the 23rd of the month to the 30th, following Trump’s comments, the increase was 121% compared to April of 2019. In the first ten days of May, things settled down some, with poisonings up 69% over the same 10-day period in 2019.

 

Still, it bears repeating that no household bleaches, disinfectants or other cleaning chemicals are meant for any kind of internal use.

https://time.com/5835244/accidental-poisonings-trump/

[Red Phoenix]

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2052297523000914

Title of the study > Efficacy and safety of in-hospital treatment of Covid-19 infection with low-dose hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin in hospitalized patients: A retrospective controlled cohort study

 

The study was conducted to compare the 28-day mortality rate in 352 patients treated with hydroxychloroquine with or without azithromycin (HCQ-group) in a hospital with a contemporary control group of 3533 patients receiving standard of care from the Belgian Collaborative Group on COVID-19 Hospital Surveillance

The conclusion of this recently published retrospective analysis reads: ‘It is very plausible that the observed survival benefit reflects a true treatment effect.’ In other words, the treatment was effective.

[Bkk Brian]

4 minutes ago, Red Phoenix said:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2052297523000914

Title of the study > Efficacy and safety of in-hospital treatment of Covid-19 infection with low-dose hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin in hospitalized patients: A retrospective controlled cohort study

 

The study was conducted to compare the 28-day mortality rate in 352 patients treated with hydroxychloroquine with or without azithromycin (HCQ-group) in a hospital with a contemporary control group of 3533 patients receiving standard of care from the Belgian Collaborative Group on COVID-19 Hospital Surveillance

The conclusion of this recently published retrospective analysis reads: ‘It is very plausible that the observed survival benefit reflects a true treatment effect.’ In other words, the treatment was effective.

The key here is that this study was in combination with azithromycin. It is also an outliner study:

 

Here's a meta analysis of 10 studies with hydroxychloroquine, with the result being that it increased adverse reactions.

 

Safety and efficacy of hydroxychloroquine as prophylactic against COVID-19 in healthcare workers: a meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials

Conclusions and relevance Our meta-analysis of 10 RCTs investigating the safety and efficacy of HCQ as pre-exposure prophylaxis in HCWs found that compared with placebo, HCQ does not significantly reduce the risk of confirmed or clinically suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection, while HCQ significantly increases adverse events.

https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/13/6/e065305

[eisfeld]

A retrospective cohort study... is all I need to read. Not a proper clinical trial. Not a double-blind randomized control trial. Nice try but no deal. There have been multiple much more sophisticated and higher quality studies that have shown the opposite.

[watthong]

8 hours ago, rattlesnake said:

Yes, and the issue here is how so many people just went with the claim that "Trump recommended injecting bleach" when he in fact didn't.

Any adult, no let me take that back, anyone that has more than 1 digit for their age, whether native English language speaker or not, watching that clip knows exactly what Trump meant. Only a 5 year old could be convinced that "he in fact didn't." However some folks still believe that if you keep saying things that are untrue, again and again enough, that it would become true. It never works though doesn't stop them from trying.

[watthong]

Here's a helpful illustration - as a community health service -

whether  "he in fact didn't" or not. 

 

 

 

 

 

[xylophone]

1 hour ago, rabas said:

Not sure about 2 digit 10 year olds, but anyone with a PhD in chemistry would know Trump (layman that he is) asked his medical staff, who oversee COVID research, if known chemical and/or electromagnetic disinfectants (biocides) could be made useful to fight SARS-2-Cov infections. 

 

Not only was this credible (likely unknown to Trump) it's been studied long before and after! 

 

Google patent 2015:

method for treating acute/chronic/severe sinusitis by exposing affected tissue of the sinus and contiguous tissue in the nasal cavity and greater oral cavity to effective amounts of chlorine dioxide as a bioactive agent.

 

Research paper: Comparison of Effectiveness of Chlorine Dioxide Mouthwash and Chlorhexidine Gluconate Mouthwash in Reduction of Oral Viral Load in Patients with COVID-19.

 

Chlorine dioxide nasal treatments:

 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/21548331.2020.1778908

 

[reference] "Can nasal irrigation with chlorine dioxide be considered as a potential alternative therapy for respiratory infectious diseases? The example of COVID-19."

 

And ultraviolet light! from famous Cedars-Sinai:

Reduced Viral Loads Seen in COVID-19 Patients Treated With UVA Light  [reference] 

This stuff is okay for surface cleaners, but under no circumstances must it be ingested, and that has been made clear throughout this thread and also of course in the article below where four people were sentenced to several years in jail for selling it as a Covid cure, to be ingested.

 

Furthermore, looking at the links you have provided involve such things as using a catheter inserted into the patient's trachea (nice procedure to have done!) And using terms such as "appeared to be associated" and "noting that they did not demonstrate a causal link between the improvement in patient conditions and the reduced viral loads".

 

Nothing in these links for your post suggests that chlorine dioxide is safe to be ingested.

 

A Florida man and his three sons were sentenced to several years in prison for selling more than $1 million worth of a fake COVID-19 "miracle" cure which they called "Miracle Mineral Solution" and claimed it cured a range of diseases, including COVID-19, HIV/AIDS, Alzheimer's disease, and leukaemia, among other diseases.

 

The solution that they were selling contained sodium chlorite and water, which becomes chlorine dioxide after being ingested, the Times reported.

 

All four men were found guilty by a jury in July after choosing to represent themselves in court. The sentencing came after a 3-year-long case that began in 2020 at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. The solution that they were selling contained sodium chlorite and water, which becomes chlorine dioxide after being ingested, the Times reported.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

On 10/12/2023 at 10:18 AM, mohlite said:

Hydroxychloroquine was known as a safe and effective drug for Covid-19

 

No, it wasn't. The issue arose during Trump's abortive time as president:

 

"Hydroxychloroquine had been granted emergency use authorization for COVID-19 in March 2020. The anti-malaria drug was authorized to be used for certain hospitalized COVID-19 patients, but the FDA revoked that authorization in June 2020, saying emerging data suggested it was “unlikely to be effective in treating COVID-19 for the authorized uses in the EUA.”

...

Brian Garibaldi, the director of the Johns Hopkins Special Pathogens Center and Biocontainment Unit, concurred that hydroxychloroquine should not be used as any treatment strategy for COVID, and no new research or guidance suggests otherwise."

 

AP Fact Check -- September 28, 2023

 

https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-false-hydroxychloroquine-covid-mayo-clinic-879901358147

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

Also, by way of background:

 

"In June 2020, the FDA ended the emergency use of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine for treatment of COVID-19.

Over time, clinical trials showed hydroxychloroquine:

• Led to serious heart problems in some people.
• Did not effectively treat COVID-19.
• Did not prevent infection with the virus that causes COVID-19."

Is hydroxychloroquine a treatment for COVID-19?

Sept. 26, 2023

 

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/coronavirus/in-depth/hydroxychloroquine-treatment-covid-19/art-20555331

 

 

 

 

[drewbkk]

On 10/12/2023 at 12:18 PM, Bkk Brian said:

Treatments and vaccines are two separate entities. 

 

Read it again, because it must have zipped over your noggin the first time:
 

Quote

Under an EUA, FDA may allow the use of unapproved medical products, or unapproved uses of approved medical products in an emergency to diagnose, treat, or prevent serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions when certain statutory criteria have been met, including that there are no adequate, approved, and available alternatives."

An EUA can only be granted when no adequate, approved, available alternatives exist, and when the known and potential benefits outweigh the potential risks. An EUA also only lasts as long as the public health emergency for which it was declared. 

 

Look closer:
 

Quote

diagnose, treat, or prevent

 

Can you see it yet, Brian?

 

Edited October 29, 2023 by stats
trolling, personal comment removed

[drewbkk]

On 10/12/2023 at 12:45 PM, xylophone said:

A Florida man and his three sons were sentenced to several years in prison for selling more than $1 million worth of a fake COVID-19 "miracle" cure which they called "Miracle Mineral Solution" and claimed it cured a range of diseases, including COVID-19, HIV/AIDS, Alzheimer's disease, and leukaemia, among other diseases.

 

The solution that they were selling contained sodium chlorite and water, which becomes chlorine dioxide after being ingested, the Times reported.

 

All four men were found guilty by a jury in July after choosing to represent themselves in court. The sentencing came after a 3-year-long case that began in 2020 at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. The solution that they were selling contained sodium chlorite and water, which becomes chlorine dioxide after being ingested, the Times reported.

 

You can't possibly be blaming the president of the US for the silly activities of three dubious Florida Men, who were probably listening to CNN's context-less misrepresentation of Trump's original words, and saw a money-making opportunity, can you?

 

Edited October 29, 2023 by stats
trolling, personal comments removed

[Liverpool Lou]

On 10/10/2023 at 10:15 PM, amexpat said:

EX president Trump also recommended taking bleach and household cleaners like Lysol.

No, he did not.   If you really think that he did, then post the quote of what he said here, it shouldn't be hard for you to find it.   In reality, it will be hard for you to find his quote as you phrased it because he didn't say that.

[deejai33]

21 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

No, he did not.   If you really think that he did, then post the quote of what he said here, it shouldn't be hard for you to find it.   In reality, it will be hard for you to find his quote as you phrased it because he didn't say that.

 

I think you are correct. Based solely on this thread, Mr. Trump implied that research should be carried out to see if disinfectant could be used to cure covid by some mechanism.

 

This is apparently what he said, see previous posts in thread:

 

"Then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in one minute. And is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside or almost a cleaning, because you see it gets in the lungs and it does a tremendous number on the lungs, so it’d be interesting to check that, so that you’re going to have to use medical doctors with, but it sounds interesting to me.”

 

He's definetly not saying inject Lysol as it will clean your lungs.

 

But he is suggesting researching this.  But probably medics were well aware that disinfectants killed germs.  Mr Trump was not saying anything novel, useful.  Medics probably dismissed his suggestion, maybe informed him of that.

 

My view.

 

A bit odd that science has not come up with a full consensus on what cures for covid.  3+ years, surely they have good data by now.

Edited October 29, 2023 by deejai33

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

 

 

"During a press conference on Thursday, President Donald Trump asked that the White House coronavirus task force investigate whether a disinfectant could be injected as a treatment for coronavirus victims. His remarks, which did not specify the type of disinfectant, came after a DHS presentation on early research suggesting that the coronavirus may be decontaminated in sunlight."

 

 

AND

Coronavirus: Outcry after Trump suggests injecting disinfectant as treatment

"US President Donald Trump has been lambasted by the medical community after suggesting research into whether coronavirus might be treated by injecting disinfectant into the body.

 

He also appeared to propose irradiating patients' bodies with UV light, an idea dismissed by a doctor at the briefing.

...

Pulmonologist Dr Vin Gupta told NBC News: "This notion of injecting or ingesting any type of cleansing product into the body is irresponsible and it's dangerous.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-52407177

 

Edited October 29, 2023 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[Liverpool Lou]

10 minutes ago, deejai33 said:

28 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

No, he did not.   If you really think that he did, then post the quote of what he said here, it shouldn't be hard for you to find it.   In reality, it will be hard for you to find his quote as you phrased it because he didn't say that.

 

I think you are correct.

Thanks.  I know that I am.  

[placeholder]

What you failed to note is that this is a retrospective study. So not so reliable. In addition it also found significant benefits in just taking hydrochloroquine. Oxford University launched a massive clinical study of the possible benefits of hydrochloroquine in treating covid-19. They called the study off halfway through because they couldn't ethically justify continuing it since no benefit in using it treat covid-19.

 

A total of 1542 patients were randomised to hydroxychloroquine and compared with 3132 patients randomised to usual care alone. There was no significant difference in the primary endpoint of 28-day mortality (25.7% hydroxychloroquine vs. 23.5% usual care; hazard ratio 1.11 [95% confidence interval 0.98-1.26]; p=0.10). There was also no evidence of beneficial effects on hospital stay duration or other outcomes.

‘These data convincingly rule out any meaningful mortality benefit of hydroxychloroquine in patients hospitalised with COVID-19. Full results will be made available as soon as possible.

https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2020-06-05-no-clinical-benefit-use-hydroxychloroquine-hospitalised-patients-covid-19

 

And as a preventative medication, it's a bust.

https://www.science.org/content/article/three-big-studies-dim-hopes-hydroxychloroquine-can-treat-or-prevent-covid-19