Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in patients with Covid-19: a randomized trial

medrxiv.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 123 posts

Re: Efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in patients with Covid-19: a randomized trial

#111

Post by bart_spoon »

DubiousPusher wrote: post #107
bart_spoon wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I said, the only people prescribing this stuff are actual physicians. You are assuming that a trained MD is going to start prescribing this stuff willy-nilly based on two sentences by the president? If that actually occurs, it's because they agree with him and are prescribing them as they see fit. There isn't "panic" in the equation. Its physicians trying to help their patients.

No but doctors do respond to pressure from patients who will respond to two sentences from the president. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4151257/

So to be clear, you believe there is a massive run on hydroxychloroquine because Trump mentioned it in a sentence or two as having promise in a press conference, and now thousands and thousands of patients are strong-arming their physicians into giving them prescriptions for it?

Even if that wasn't a ridiculous stretch and was actually happening, that's on the shitty doctors, not the president.

Re: Efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in patients with Covid-19: a randomized trial

#112

Post by DubiousPusher »

bart_spoon wrote: post #111
DubiousPusher wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No but doctors do respond to pressure from patients who will respond to two sentences from the president. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4151257/

So to be clear, you believe there is a massive run on hydroxychloroquine because Trump mentioned it in a sentence or two as having promise in a press conference, and now thousands and thousands of patients are strong-arming their physicians into giving them prescriptions for it? Even if that wasn't a ridiculous stretch and was actually happening, that's on the shitty doctors, not the president.

It is not a ridiculous stretch. Drug companies advertise directly to individuals on popular TV for exactly this reason.

Re: Efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in patients with Covid-19: a randomized trial

#113

Post by orwin »

karl11 wrote: post #19

Based on this and all the other anecdotal studies plus all the people treated with it for other ailments, it seems fairly certain that at a minimum this treatment is not causing more harm. Given that plus all the indications that it seems to help to some degree, we should be pursuing production scale of these drugs aggressively. It is very unfortunate that the media politicized this treatment in such a way that now e…

I'm not american and i really, really don't care about trump now (i did in 2017 when i wanted an internship in Ohio that was denied cause new policies and all that stuff but i eventually found something better, so i'm not angry about it).

Antiviral drugs will always be given to late in this disease case, maybe it can reduce infectuosity but we don't know enough yet.

Maybe giving it to everyone to prevent the disease before its even there could be helpfull, but if i had to take HCQ, i will have to stop taking my antihistamine drugs, and going into april/may, this is a big no for me.

The fact that it can also reduce the autoimmune reaction is really interesting though, so maybe giving it to mild cases will prevent them to destroy their own cells, but this is also dangerous as the disease can cause myocard lesions (probably the autoimmune reaction, but we don't know yet).

In any case, talking about it is useless before more data arrive: even if we could give HCQ to everybody, the lockdown is still necessary until the first wave decrease (at least in France). Don't forge an opinion on something this early, it will be hard to let it go if you're wrong, and being right early don't give you anything.

Re: Efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in patients with Covid-19: a randomized trial

#114

Post by James_Henry »

arcticbull wrote: post #110
James_Henry wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you show me the statistics/theory that show that this is too small a sample size to make meaningful decisions from?

Statistical significance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_significance

So, are you trying to say that the results that the researchers say are statistically significant aren't actually statistically significant? They give their numbers in the paper and the p-values are less than everyone's favorite threshold (.05).

If you are trying to say that their sample size was too small to find an effect using null hypothesis testing, then that makes no sense.

Re: Efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in patients with Covid-19: a randomized trial

#115

Post by phkahler »

frank2 wrote: post #101
dlp211 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't believe I have to say this, but the POTUS is not some hacker news comment. What they say has large and far reaching consequences and they shouldn't be spouting off about anecdotal evidence. Their comments had already caused a shortage of HCQ, and led to at least one death.

>If the doctor now publicly claiming 699 treatments with 0 deaths using HCQ turns out to be a blatant fraud I think he may well lose his license given the situation. I don't think the boards of medical quality assurance of the 50 states care enough about public statements to yank the license of (or even to discipline) a doctor for making a public statement the doctor knew to be false. In general the US medical profes…

No, but in a case like this our current POTUS might. Not right, but he might.

Re: Efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in patients with Covid-19: a randomized trial

#116

Post by [deleted] »

tomcam wrote: post #109
aabeshou wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

dont move the goalposts. (1) OP said big pharma wants to downplay HCQ because it doesnt make them as much money. (2) reply says that the fact that pharma donated millions of doses contradicts that (3) OP counters that pharma is donating millions of doses because it gives them an epic tax write-off it has nothing to do with donations being bad. it has to do with the fact that pharma is always doing whats best for them…

> dont move the goalposts. Thought I was asking for clarification. What goalposts did I move?

[deleted]

Re: Efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in patients with Covid-19: a randomized trial

#117

Post by dogma1138 »

aabeshou wrote: post #91
dogma1138 wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s fine however it doesn’t bode with the original assertion that it’s downplayed HCQ if anything it somewhat sensationalized it. I have no problems believing that BigPharma does what is good for BigPharma in this case getting good PR, a tax write off and having their most valuable customers as in those with chronic conditions which means pretty much most people once they hit 50-60 to stay alive so they can sell t…

- I think Trump is the one who sensationalized it, not pharma surrogates, but I may be wrong - I'm not committed to this particular conspiracy theory but I jumped in here because I don't like when people try to dismiss conspiracies out of hand as if it's crazy to think that pharma does things like this constantly. There's this free market ideology that exonerates companies and argues that self-interested behavior lea…

It’s perfectly acceptable to dismiss conspiracy theories that not only go against the actual narrative but against common sense.

Re: Efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in patients with Covid-19: a randomized trial

#118

Post by corybrown »

tangue wrote: post #24

I live in an island where during a viral outbreak some were advocating for chloroquine against the Chikungunya virus. The initial in-vitro tests were promising but it turns out during human trials it has a reverse effect and delayed adaptive immune responses (1). It's sad to see scientific method destroyed by politics and social networks. [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5977261/

You live on Reunion? What is that like?

Re: Efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in patients with Covid-19: a randomized trial

#119

Post by zimpenfish »

Recurecur wrote: post #13
D13Fd wrote: post #11

I wish the current U.S. administration hadn't tried to turn this into a partisan issue.

It absolutely did not. The press did. The mainstream US media has become a one-sided partisan cheerleading squad for the Democrats, and most Americans are sick of it. We'll see how that works out in November.

> The mainstream US media has become a one-sided partisan cheerleading squad for the Democrats

They broadcast almost every word Trump says, largely uncritically[1], with frequent "Today is the day he became President" epiphanies whilst minor Democrat issues are blown up into huge talking points and controversies that last for months.

How the chuff are they a "one-sided partisan cheerleading squad" for the Democrats?

[1] There'll occasionally be a "these things aren't true" afterwards but it doesn't stop them broadcasting them first.

Re: Efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in patients with Covid-19: a randomized trial

#120

Post by zimpenfish »

phkahler wrote: post #94
dlp211 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't believe I have to say this, but the POTUS is not some hacker news comment. What they say has large and far reaching consequences and they shouldn't be spouting off about anecdotal evidence. Their comments had already caused a shortage of HCQ, and led to at least one death.

>> I can't believe I have to say this, but the POTUS is not some hacker news comment. No, hes a guy charged with making high level decisions in a crisis. He also has some very competent advisors at places like the NIH, FDA, CDC etc... I dont think he was just some redneck responding to a tabloid article. If the doctor now publicly claiming 699 treatments with 0 deaths using HCQ turns out to be a blatant fraud I think…

> If the doctor now publicly claiming 699 treatments with 0 deaths using HCQ turns out to be a blatant fraud

The odds seem good on that one.

"Zelenko’s claims, however, rest solely on taking him at his word: He has published no data, described no study design, and reported no analysis."

Post reply on HN