281–290 of 382 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I posted links to one of the in vitro studies here, and in the comments I posted the press release for the FDA approval: https://www.reddit.com/r/covid19stack
Your information is wrong and misleading. It’s irresponsible for you to post stuff like this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
True thing. Also people who I like like Elon Musk spoke about it https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1239650597906898947?s=20 On one side his voice should be heard, it may give people hope and help to move stuff On the other side, some people who don't know what balance is, might use it in the wrong way.
I can't understand why he's tweeting this as if the CDC and doctors and so on aren't already considering those drugs as a treatment option. Many of the responses to the tweet have a tin-foil-hat kinda feel to them. Who exactly do they think is suppressing usage of these drugs? And why?
The negative reaction to the French study has been pretty intense.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is...both in vitro and in vivo. The pushback on chloroquine is completely insane. It's a 90 year old, well-understood drug used safely by millions with mild side effects.
Sorry, this is just not true. The in-vitro results for chloroquine as an antiviral have been positive for many viruses, but it has never worked out in RCTs. Claiming there is good evidence from in-vivo studies is scientifically illiterate. Please post links to well-done RCTs if you believe they exist. There is a reason the WHO is running a 5-arm clinical trial for COVID. Edit: Your response to me literally says “In-V…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It hasn’t been tested against Covid-19. Recommending (or even vaguely hinting) that people just try random drugs that the FDA has approved for other uses is not a strategy with no downside.
It's been confirmed effective against SARS CoV in vitro [1]. Before you say it, yes, I know treatments in vitro do not always work in vivo. Reports from China, South Korea and France have suggested efficacy in humans against COVID-19. 1: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15351731
Chloroquine is a particularly funny example because they have already tried it as an antiviral drug several times without any efficacy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A quick skim of the article does not show any quote stating you should self medicate. There are quotes misrepresenting which stage of approval it is in.
Verbatim quote from the President: "if things don’t go as planned, it’s not going to kill anybody." Edit: Yes, I realize what he probably meant . I know how meds work. I still think he should have chosen his wording more carefully.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is...both in vitro and in vivo. The pushback on chloroquine is completely insane. It's a 90 year old, well-understood drug used safely by millions with mild side effects.
Sorry, this is just not true. The in-vitro results for chloroquine as an antiviral have been positive for many viruses, but it has never worked out in RCTs. Claiming there is good evidence from in-vivo studies is scientifically illiterate. Please post links to well-done RCTs if you believe they exist. There is a reason the WHO is running a 5-arm clinical trial for COVID. Edit: Your response to me literally says “In-V…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Okay well you're going to have to tell the FDA, the CDC, the WHO and many other equivalent organizations all over the world that.
They are doing clinical trials for it in COVID, so those will reveal its efficacy. The FDA, CDC, and WHO’s position is the same as mine.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Acetaminophen doesn’t belong in this conversation with the other drugs. I don't see why not? It's a good example where the max therapeutic dose (4000mg/day) is within 2X of the toxic dose range (7500mg-10000mg/day). And even the max therapeutic dose can be toxic to the liver. And it's exceptionally easy to accidentally overdose if you don't read product labels, since you could be taking multiple products that contain…
Almost no one should be taking 4g of acetaminophen a day. That’s definitely going to be toxic given enough time. It doesn’t belong in convo with other drugs because it requires far less monitoring. It’s also not taken chronically like the other drugs. Or shouldn’t be, at least.
Acetaminophen overdose is the leading cause for calls to Poison Control Centers (>100,000/year) and accounts for more than 56,000 emergency room visits, 2,600 hospitalizations, and an estimated 458 deaths due to acute liver failure each year.Data from the U.S. Acute Liver Failure Study Group registry of more than 700 patients with acute liver failure across the United States implicates acetaminophen poisoning in nearly 50% of all acute liver failure in this country. Available in many single or combination products, acetaminophen produces more than 1 billion US dollars in annual sales for Tylenol products alone. It is heavily marketed for its safety compared to nonsteroidal analgesics. By enabling self-diagnosis and treatment of minor aches and pains, its benefits are said by the Food and Drug Administration to outweigh its risks. It still must be asked: Is this amount of injury and death really acceptable for an over-the-counter pain reliever?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
President shouldn't talk about things he clearly doesn't understand. Compare this to how Obama used to measure every single word he said.
All presidents talk about stuff they don't understand.
“I like this stuff. I really get it. [...] People are really surprised I understand this stuff. Every one of these doctors said, ‘How do you know so much about this?’ Maybe I have a natural ability.”
“Anybody who wants a test will get a test, that’s the bottom line. [...] The tests are all perfect, like the letter was perfect, the transcription was perfect, right? This was not as perfect as that, but pretty good.”