Drug that Trump called a ‘miracle Covid cure’ is linked to 17,000 deaths

[Foxx]

"A drug infamously touted by Donald Trump has been linked to nearly 17,000 Covid deaths in a new scientific study.

 

Researchers say that the anti-malaria drug hydroxychloroquine was prescribed to patients during the first wave of Covid-19 “despite the absence of evidence documenting its clinical benefits.”

 

The French study estimated that 16,990 patients in the US, France, Belgium, Italy, Spain and Turkey may have died as a result of the drug."

 

(more)

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/trump-drug-covid-deaths-hydroxychloroquine-b2474022.html

 

Edited January 7 by stats
original post edited to correct errors

[BE88]

5 hours ago, Foxx said:

 

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/trump-drug-covid-deaths-hydroxychloroquine-b2474022.html

This is fake news.

[EVENKEEL]

I've been given this drug several times when visiting malaria prone countries as was the crew. This sounds suspiciously like fake news.

[lopburi3]

Not fake at all.  Off label use did nothing to prevent Covid and seems to have caused some users to have more severe issues than they would have had without - many lives were lost to this and it has been known for years but numbers had not previously been estimated.

 

https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/4389800-hydroxychloroquine-deaths-study/#:~:text=Hydroxychloroquine is an anti-malaria,proposed as a preventative measure.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

The source study:

 

Deaths induced by compassionate use of hydroxychloroquine during the first COVID-19 wave: an estimate

Biomedicine & Pharmacotherapy

Volume 171, February 2024

 

"... HCQ use was associated with an 11% increase in the mortality rate in a meta-analysis of randomized trials.

•

The number of hydroxychloroquine related deaths in hospitalised patients is estimated at 16,990 in six countries.

•

These findings illustrate the hazard of drug repurposing with low-level evidence for the management of future pandemics."

 

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S075333222301853X

 

[jaywalker2]

Deliberately linking that to Trump seems more than a little malicious. A lot of people recommended hydroxycholorquine.

[lopburi3]

4 minutes ago, jaywalker2 said:

Deliberately linking that to Trump seems more than a little malicious. A lot of people recommended hydroxycholorquine.

Actually it is Trump that trumpeted this:

 

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

10 minutes ago, jaywalker2 said:

Deliberately linking that to Trump seems more than a little malicious. A lot of people recommended hydroxycholorquine.

 

The source study contains a brief allusion to Trump's role in promoting the drug as a COVID treatment:

 

"it is critical that representatives of public authorities should not, on the basis of their personal conviction, promote the prescription of medicines that have not been formally evaluated, thereby falsely raising hopes as to the existence of a solution to a complex health crisis [88]"

...

[88] Karni A., Thomas K. Trump Says He’s Taking Hydroxychloroquine, Prompting Warning From Health Experts [Internet]. The New York Times. 2020 [cited 2023 Nov 29];Available from: 〈https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/18/us/politics/trump-hydroxychloroquine-covid-coronavirus.html〉

 

Which links to the following:

Trump Says He’s Taking Hydroxychloroquine, Prompting Warning From Health Experts

His announcement drew immediate criticism from a range of medical experts, who warned not just of the dangers it posed for the president’s health but also of the example it set.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/18/us/politics/trump-hydroxychloroquine-covid-coronavirus.html

 

Edited January 7 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

FWIW, according to the study, the U.S., in part because of its large population, accounted for the vast majority of the study's estimated COVID treatment hydroxychloroquine deaths -- nearly 13,000 of the almost 17,000 they estimated among the six studied countries during the first COVID wave in 2020.

 

 

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S075333222301853X

 

[impulse]

I notice that they're careful not to claim a cause, just an association. And their analysis is of people who were treated in hospital, not people who took HCQ as a preventative, or a self-prescribed treatment when they felt sick.

 

Given that HCQ is a treatment for parasites, it's not hard to imagine that those chosen for HCQ treatment in hospital may have had more serious issues than those who weren't.  My understanding (from way early) is that some of the treatments for Covid had serious side effects, some of them having to do with parasites running amuck.  Given that the entire medical establishment seemed to be wary of HCQ from all the bad press, there must have been a reason(s) for them to use it on some and not others.

 

Let's see all the other correlations, like which patients were given HCQ.  For example, was it generally used as a Hail Mary?  Or more on older people?  Or on people who had specific symptoms that already predicted a higher mortality rate?  Which hospitals used HCQ on their patients, and what are their mortality statistics on a good day?

 

So many unanswered questions.

 

Or, it may have been a deadly poison imposed on millions of people who took it willingly.

 

Edit:  For example, people with cancer who undergo radiation generally die at a much higher rate than cancer patients that don't need radiation.  Because they're sicker to start with...  Radiation probably saved a lot of people, in the big scheme of things.  But any study would show that it's associated with a higher mortality rate.

 

Edited January 7 by impulse

[ozimoron]

1 hour ago, jaywalker2 said:

Deliberately linking that to Trump seems more than a little malicious. A lot of people recommended hydroxycholorquine.

 

A lot of people weren't the president

[stevenl]

21 minutes ago, impulse said:

I notice that they're careful not to claim a cause, just an association. And their analysis is of people who were treated in hospital, not people who took HCQ as a preventative, or a self-prescribed treatment when they felt sick.

 

Given that HCQ is a treatment for parasites, it's not hard to imagine that those chosen for HCQ treatment in hospital may have had more serious issues than those who weren't.  My understanding (from way early) is that some of the treatments for Covid had serious side effects, some of them having to do with parasites running amuck.  Given that the entire medical establishment seemed to be wary of HCQ from all the bad press, there must have been a reason(s) for them to use it on some and not others.

 

Let's see all the other correlations, like which patients were given HCQ.  For example, was it generally used as a Hail Mary?  Or more on older people?  Or on people who had specific symptoms that already predicted a higher mortality rate?  Which hospitals used HCQ on their patients, and what are their mortality statistics on a good day?

 

So many unanswered questions.

 

Or, it may have been a deadly poison imposed on millions of people who took it willingly.

 

Edit:  For example, people with cancer who undergo radiation generally die at a much higher rate than cancer patients that don't need radiation.  Because they're sicker to start with...  Radiation probably saved a lot of people, in the big scheme of things.  But any study would show that it's associated with a higher mortality rate.

 

Better read the study before coming with objections to the results.

[impulse]

8 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Better read the study before coming with objections to the results.

 

I did.  I don't see a causal correlation.  And while the title claims "induced by", the highlights only claim "associated" and "related".  And as best as I can see, the data (meta data) they pulled from just correlated association, not causation. 

 

Of course, I'm not going to spend weeks perusing the hundreds of studies.  I'll wait for the interweb wingnuts.  They'll be along in a week or so.  And they have PhD's in this stuff.

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

A lot of the early studies done on hydroxychloroquine and COVID were found to be flawed or otherwise suspect. The subsequent,  more competent research done has typically shown no meaningful benefit.

 

Some of the history on that from a 2020 USAToday report:

Fact check: Hydroxychloroquine has not worked in treating COVID-19, studies show

...

"COVID-19 was popularized by a French study on March 20, which found the antimalarial drug, in combination with antibiotic azithromycin, was "significantly associated with viral load reduction/disappearance in COVID-19 patients."

...

"Medical experts and policymakers, desperate to turn the pandemic's tide and propelled by hype, jumped on the bandwagon. The FDA approved emergency use of the drug in late March, and many states and countries kickstarted their own clinical trials."

...

"In April, the organization behind the journal that published the French study announced it did not meet the group's "expected standard." An analysis in May found the French study to be "quick and dirty ... as methodologists would legitimately say, with poor quality reporting and several biases."

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/07/21/fact-check-hydroxychloroquine-hasnt-helped-covid-19-studies-show/5407547002/

 

Some of the early reports of hydroxychloroquine as a COVID treatment also came from doctors and others who had businesses selling that and other unproven treatments.

Network of Right-Wing Health Care Providers Is Making Millions Off Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin, Hacked Data Reveals

The data also reveals that 72,000 people paid at least $6.7 million for Covid-19 consultations promoted by America’s Frontline Doctors and vaccine conspiracist Simone Gold.

 

"America’s Frontline Doctors, a right-wing group founded last year to promote pro-Trump doctors during the coronavirus pandemic, is working in tandem with a small network of health care companies to sow distrust in the Covid-19 vaccine, dupe tens of thousands of people into seeking ineffective treatments for the disease, and then sell consultations and millions of dollars’ worth of those medications."

 

https://theintercept.com/2021/09/28/covid-telehealth-hydroxychloroquine-ivermectin-hacked/

 

[stevenl]

28 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

I did.  I don't see a causal correlation.  And while the title claims "induced by", the highlights only claim "associated" and "related".  And as best as I can see, the data (meta data) they pulled from just correlated association, not causation. 

 

Of course, I'm not going to spend weeks perusing the hundreds of studies.  I'll wait for the interweb wingnuts.  They'll be along in a week or so.  And they have PhD's in this stuff.

 

Yes, nothing about causation, but it does say this.

"HCQ use was associated with an 11% increase in the mortality rate in a meta-analysis of randomized trials." That makes your earlier reasoning incorrect.

"For example, people with cancer who undergo radiation generally die at a much higher rate than cancer patients that don't need radiation. Because they're sicker to start with... Radiation probably saved a lot of people, in the big scheme of things. But any study would show that it's associated with a higher mortality rate."

[Amethyst]

Two posts that were off-topic for this thread have been removed, along with several ensuing replies.

 

 

[billd766]

4 hours ago, BE88 said:

This is fake news.

Really? Where is your link to prove that it is false?

 

Most posters after yo both for and against came up with links and reasonable arguments, but not you.

 

Why is that?

[ukrules]

I wonder how many people who took lemsips also eventually died of it?

[novacova]

5 hours ago, Foxx said:

may have died

…and this is how the “may have” fictions become the truthful solid facts and flair up into rampant mythical hysterics. 

[ozimoron]

26 minutes ago, novacova said:

…and this is how the “may have” fictions become the truthful solid facts and flair up into rampant mythical hysterics. 

 

excess deaths during covid are...

 

Edited January 7 by stats
off topic comment removed

[jaywalker2]

3 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

The source study contains a brief allusion to Trump's role in promoting the drug as a COVID treatment:

 

"it is critical that representatives of public authorities should not, on the basis of their personal conviction, promote the prescription of medicines that have not been formally evaluated, thereby falsely raising hopes as to the existence of a solution to a complex health crisis [88]"

...

[88] Karni A., Thomas K. Trump Says He’s Taking Hydroxychloroquine, Prompting Warning From Health Experts [Internet]. The New York Times. 2020 [cited 2023 Nov 29];Available from: 〈https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/18/us/politics/trump-hydroxychloroquine-covid-coronavirus.html〉

 

Which links to the following:

Trump Says He’s Taking Hydroxychloroquine, Prompting Warning From Health Experts

His announcement drew immediate criticism from a range of medical experts, who warned not just of the dangers it posed for the president’s health but also of the example it set.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/18/us/politics/trump-hydroxychloroquine-covid-coronavirus.html

 

Not enough to justify his inclusion in the headline. If you were taking your medical advice from Trump, you have much bigger problems than whether hydroxycholoquine works against Covid.

 

The media's obsession with Trump only further fuels his popularity among his base.

[ozimoron]

23 minutes ago, jaywalker2 said:

Not enough to justify his inclusion in the headline. If you were taking your medical advice from Trump, you have much bigger problems than whether hydroxycholoquine works against Covid.

 

The media's obsession with Trump only further fuels his popularity among his base.

 

That doesn't make him right.

 

Edited January 7 by stats
off topic comment removed

[impulse]

57 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Yes, nothing about causation, but it does say this.

"HCQ use was associated with an 11% increase in the mortality rate in a meta-analysis of randomized trials." That makes your earlier reasoning incorrect.

"For example, people with cancer who undergo radiation generally die at a much higher rate than cancer patients that don't need radiation. Because they're sicker to start with... Radiation probably saved a lot of people, in the big scheme of things. But any study would show that it's associated with a higher mortality rate."

 

Key word there is "associated with". 

 

Coronary bypass surgery (CABG) is also associated with a higher mortality than those who have never had CABG.  But I'd be dead if I hadn't gotten a CABG.

 

Don't even get me started with their recommendations to more tightly control off label drug use during the next pandemic... 

 

This result argues in favour of tightly regulating access to off-label prescriptions during future pandemics

 

That's a huge stretch, just from a study of HCQ.  Tinfoil hat stuff.  Or, maybe just sponsored.

 

 

[stevenl]

1 minute ago, impulse said:

 

Key word there is "associated with". 

 

Coronary bypass surgery (CABG) is also associated with a higher mortality than those who have never had CABG.  But I'd be dead if I hadn't gotten a CABG.

 

Don't even get me started with their recommendations to more tightly control off label drug use during the next pandemic... 

 

This result argues in favour of tightly regulating access to off-label prescriptions during future pandemics

 

That's a huge stretch, just from a study of HCQ.  Tinfoil hat stuff.  Or, maybe just sponsored.

 

 

Unfortunately you're missing the point.

They randomly selected files of people who took and who didn't take hcq. Those wo took or were hcq administered died in higher numbers.

Causation hasn't been proven yes, but your dismissal with nonsense comparisons shows a lack of comprehension.

[novacova]

25 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

excess deaths during covid are...

Admit it, you’re being scammed by the media and your pet politicians. At this point in history, why anyone would believe anything coming out of the media and the mouths of politicians is baffling. It’s a complete joke and the joke is on the suckers that fall for it.

[Liverpool Lou]

"Drug that Trump called a ‘miracle Covid cure..."

 

I'm pretty sure that he never described it as "a miracle cure" but maybe someone will come up with a link that he did. 

[Liverpool Lou]

6 hours ago, Foxx said:

The French study estimated that 16,990 patients in the US, France, Belgium, Italy, Spain and Turkey may have died as a result of the drug."

It'd be interesting to know also how many people did not die after using it then the report may have some meaning instead of just being another lame Trump-bash!

[Liverpool Lou]

4 hours ago, lopburi3 said:

4 hours ago, jaywalker2 said:

Deliberately linking that to Trump seems more than a little malicious. A lot of people recommended hydroxycholorquine.

Actually it is Trump that trumpeted this:

Actually he was far from being the only one!

[stevenl]

3 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

It'd be interesting to know also how many people did not die after using it then the report may have some meaning instead of just being another lame Trump-bash!

Another one who comments on research without understanding.

[impulse]

18 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Unfortunately you're missing the point.

They randomly selected files of people who took and who didn't take hcq. Those wo took or were hcq administered died in higher numbers.

Causation hasn't been proven yes, but your dismissal with nonsense comparisons shows a lack of comprehension.

 

How, exactly, did they randomly select who got HCQ and who did not? 

 

If they gave everyone HCQ, they can't calculate the difference in mortality.  If they randomly chose who got HCQ, they were conducting a medical study without the consent of the patient.  That's unethical.  If one doctor gave out HCQ and another didn't, the doctors are also a variable.  If one hospital gave out HCQ and another didn't the quality of the hospital is a variable. 

 

If they selected patients for HCQ based on a symptom, that is a HUGE variable (and I suspect that's what happened)

 

Just like they choose heart patients for a CABG.  Only those with serious problems get a CABG.  So, we're already at risk for a higher mortality.