Why is this flagged? It seems like an interesting article from a reputable source.
Hydroxychloroquine Probably Isn’t the Answer
31–40 of 115 posts
Re: Hydroxychloroquine Probably Isn’t the Answer
#32Not to diminish the possible successes, but without a randomized control trial, there is no way the success can reliably be attributed to the medications. That's not to say they should stop prescribing it, simply due to lack of formal trials. But the perceived benefits should not be taken at face value, yet.
> but without a randomized control trial, there is no way the success can reliably be attributed to the medications That's non-sense, if everyone that had cancer got cured by a miracle drug, would you still demand a randomized control trial?
It's simply a problem of what is considered to be evidence in the scientific community. If everyone "got cured by a miracle drug", that implies you already have the compelling evidence in hand that the drug, in fact, is a cure. This is an example of begging the question.
Re: Hydroxychloroquine Probably Isn’t the Answer
#33Why is this flagged? It seems like an interesting article from a reputable source.
[deleted]
Re: Hydroxychloroquine Probably Isn’t the Answer
#34This site also has an article wistfully praising Remdesivir, a proprietary drug with far less evidence than HCQ. I think money might be talking here.
Re: Hydroxychloroquine Probably Isn’t the Answer
#35Not to diminish the possible successes, but without a randomized control trial, there is no way the success can reliably be attributed to the medications. That's not to say they should stop prescribing it, simply due to lack of formal trials. But the perceived benefits should not be taken at face value, yet.
> but without a randomized control trial, there is no way the success can reliably be attributed to the medications That's non-sense, if everyone that had cancer got cured by a miracle drug, would you still demand a randomized control trial?
Yes! I want to be sure that this miracle drug is 100% to eliminate all the other drugs that has nasty side effects and have a lower effectivity.
Let's pick some terminal ill patients. I think cancer metastasis in the brain has a very bad prognosis, like less than a year of life expectancy [1]. Let's make a one year trial: 100 patients in the control group that receive the usual treatment and a placebo. 100 patients in the treatment group that receive the miracle drug instead of the placebo. Obviously a double blind study.
If the terminal patients selection was good enough, after a year you will get 90 death in the control group (there are some lucky guys) and only 5 death in the treatment group (someone died in a car accident). That would be very convincing and in a few years (with a few additional studies) it will remove all the current drugs from the market.
Without a serious study, some doctors will believe in the miracle drug and some will have the gut feeling that another drug or drug combination is better and continue using the old treatment. The lack of a convincing study kill people.
And also, there is the risk of snake oil. Some doctors are convinced that a drug cures 100% of the patients and push it to be applied to everyone. Sometimes they are wrong, without a study it is impossible to separate the good and the bad ideas. The lack of a convincing study kill people.
[1] Unless it a metastasis of breast cancer and is affected by hormones? I think there a few exceptions, but it is usually very bad.
Re: Hydroxychloroquine Probably Isn’t the Answer
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The idea is that any treatment that slows the progress of the infection will also buy the patient's immune system more time to fight the infection. Is there any serious trial that shows that Hydroxychloroquine has any effect at all?
Double blind peer reviewed trials are a good goal but in the middle of a crisis you can't let a desire for perfection get in the way of the good. There is enough imperfect evidence that this treatment stack (that is, several drugs used in combination with hydroxychloroquine) has benefits that it should be considered a potential part of a solution. Waiting a couple of years for perfect studies to be carefully conducte…
> There is enough imperfect evidence that this treatment stack [...] has benefits that it should be considered a potential part of a solution.
Is there any evidence? Do you have a link to the best evidence so far? Did someone tried a similar treatment and get the same result?
It is not necessary to have a perfect study, because there too little time. But how hard is to make a study with a randomized control group? You are not sure if this drug is better or worse, so giving only the standard treatment perhaps is better. I guess a double blind experiment is more difficult for logistic reasons, but if the patients have respirators and are sedated, it is almost a single blind experiment. And if the results are the number of death or an analysis in a lab by a machine (instead of self reports), they can be less influenceable.
Re: Hydroxychloroquine Probably Isn’t the Answer
#37Prevent Senior in Brazil, an health operator with mosts of its patients on risk groups (60+ yo) are using hydroxychloroquine on all its COVID-19 patients with tremendous success. Right now I choose to believe on MD in front line rather then in Health Societies, FDA, WHO and those bureaucrats who let the virus spread all around due to its incompetence
Do you have a reference for this?
This local news article (in Portuguese) has quotes from Prevent Senior executives: https://www.diariodaregiao.com.br/_conteudo/2020/04/cidades/...
“Every patient showing symptoms and with CTs indicating the presence of Covid-19 are invited to join the protocol. We’ve discharged more than 200 patients”.
Re: Hydroxychloroquine Probably Isn’t the Answer
#38Prevent Senior in Brazil, an health operator with mosts of its patients on risk groups (60+ yo) are using hydroxychloroquine on all its COVID-19 patients with tremendous success. Right now I choose to believe on MD in front line rather then in Health Societies, FDA, WHO and those bureaucrats who let the virus spread all around due to its incompetence
Do you have a reference for this?
You can use Google Translate
https://www.google.com.br/amp/s/noticias.uol.com.br/saude/ul...
Hospitals like Albert Einstein and Sirio Libanês are also using it but patients must sign a term and take full responsibility over any complications.
Re: Hydroxychloroquine Probably Isn’t the Answer
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
Double blind peer reviewed trials are a good goal but in the middle of a crisis you can't let a desire for perfection get in the way of the good. There is enough imperfect evidence that this treatment stack (that is, several drugs used in combination with hydroxychloroquine) has benefits that it should be considered a potential part of a solution. Waiting a couple of years for perfect studies to be carefully conducte…
> There is enough imperfect evidence that this treatment stack [...] has benefits that it should be considered a potential part of a solution. Is there any evidence? Do you have a link to the best evidence so far? Did someone tried a similar treatment and get the same result? It is not necessary to have a perfect study, because there too little time. But how hard is to make a study with a randomized control group? Yo…
Re: Hydroxychloroquine Probably Isn’t the Answer
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
> but without a randomized control trial, there is no way the success can reliably be attributed to the medications That's non-sense, if everyone that had cancer got cured by a miracle drug, would you still demand a randomized control trial?
Yes! I want to be sure that this miracle drug is 100% to eliminate all the other drugs that has nasty side effects and have a lower effectivity. Let's pick some terminal ill patients. I think cancer metastasis in the brain has a very bad prognosis, like less than a year of life expectancy [1]. Let's make a one year trial: 100 patients in the control group that receive the usual treatment and a placebo. 100 patients i…
Unfortunately, you cannot correct nasty side effects for patients who die from lack of treatment.