Live data from Hacker News

Effect of early treatment with fluvoxamine on risk of hospitalization for Covid

thelancet.com

31–40 of 127 posts

Re: Effect of early treatment with fluvoxamine on risk of hospitalization for Covid

#31
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's an entire suite of cheap drugs with proven positive effects when administered early: https://c19early.com/ Alphabet profits are up 68% because people are forced online. If there is cheap and effective COVID treatment, the world goes back to normal. Its a huge conflict of interest. Same goes for Facebook and the other tech companies. By contrast, look at Apple's muted COVID efforts. They want people out in the…

I'm with you, but the vaccine is like 32$ per dose, so 64$ total and completely blows out of the water all of those in their effectiveness. A lot of those drugs also have quite the side effects, I don't think it's clear to me they are more/less safe than vaccines. And then there's the issue that look how many choices there are? And it's still pretty unclear which of all of those is most efficient and how efficient ex…

>The other issue is they all mention requiring early treatment, but tests and other ways to detect Covid early aren't readily available or cheap, so do you now take this giant cocktail of mixed drugs every time you have a cold in case it turns out to be early onset Covid? Do you just take them all on a regular basis as a preventative?

This is mostly a self imposed US problem. In many parts of Europe, you can get a rapid covid test in corner stores for 1-2 euros

Re: Effect of early treatment with fluvoxamine on risk of hospitalization for Covid

#32
I wouldn’t touch flovoxamine or any other antidepressent (or antipsychotic for that matter) with a 10 foot stick.

If you want a good read about how the **y the US healthcare system is, this is a very worthwhile read. Ironically the author is the screenwriter of “Girl, Interrupted” and the story she writes is about how her son got screwed by the US healthcare system and is titled “Boy, Interrupted”. It also shows you how desperate people get for specialized care, and will shell out unfathomable amounts of money for “treatment” at sketchy places: https://www.madinamerica.com/2021/06/boy-interrupted-a-story... K Ironically, the last straw for me, when it came to living in America was my diagnosis of akathisia (just like the linked story), which is 1000x worse than it sounds. I have severe depression and I had been taking my medications as prescribed. Because of my taking these medications, I developed severe akathisia. Literally, before all hell broke loose from the severe akathisia (of which I likely had to varying degrees for years) my highly respected neurologist in movement disorders immediately wrote a scathing report of my situation with the diagnosis. He also gave a ton of recommendations. He also wrote letters to all of my doctors. He did this all within an hour and took the situation extremely seriously.

Unfortunately, even though he is technically a high powered doctor, the US healthcare system has taken a tremendous amount of power away from doctors in general. So a scathing write up in my medical record plus letters to all of my doctors (with recommendations) was all he could really do for me. I literally ended up in the ER 6 times in a week, with improper help. I kept on being discharged over and over again without any further help and even got in to trouble with the law multiple times. One time, after being drugged with Ativan (a benzodiazepine) and Ketamine (a general anesthetic) in the ER, from which I had been discharged. I had called my mother and she was going to pick me up from the hospital. She was well on her way for picking me up. Honestly, I thought I was just waiting outside on the sidewalk right next to the ER, for my mother, but something very wrong had happened. All of the sudden I see a cop car pull up about 30-40 feet away from me and they were headed my way to talk to me. Obviously the number one rule is to never talk to the police under any conditions. Traffic stops are a good time to practice Mm that, by the way. The best thing you can do is say “no comment, I need to talk to my lawyer first.” Anyways I was drugged up to the extreme so it was not like I was not talking and running my mouth to both of the cops observing the situation. Obviously I had caused some sort of public disturbance and somebody had called the cops on me and clearly I should have never been discharged from the hospital. Honestly, I have no idea how, when, or even where the public disturbance occurred (obviously this is public record but it is not healthy for me to investigate the situation further). Anyways, after the cops talked to me, they said that an “emergency detention order” was being issued and that I was going to be forced to get treatment at the **hole hospital which had improperly discharged me after being hella ativaned and ketamined up. Long story short, I had 3 interactions with the cops in 1 week. Prior to that I had only had 2 interactions with the police in my adult life (+14 years). Both were traffic stops, but neither were for moving traffic violations (burnt out headlight and expired registration during COVID-19). I was tremendously lucky that I was never charged with anything over that week from hell, and the cops managed to see that something was “off”. Anyways, like in the above link (excellent storytelling by the way so it is a worthwhile read), there are common denominators that I share with the writer’s son. I am a dual US|European Union (Croatian) citizen and I fled the US after the final hospital trip (from hell actually...it was the worst hospital trip of all time and I am hardcore chronically ill just in general) for Croatia exactly 21 days later (I had to obtain legal documents). Because of my training in electrical engineering, which I am profoundly fortunate to have, I do LORETA (technically sLORETA) neurofeedback training completely on my own to help heal my brain, just like the person in that story. Anyways, there is much more to the story that is better not put in writing. Just know that there is nothing that will bring me back to the USA.

Re: Effect of early treatment with fluvoxamine on risk of hospitalization for Covid

#33
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the issue is how was it proven back then? There are a lot of people promoting ideas, some of which will eventually get clinical backing that they are correct. Prior to studies being done, how do we evaluate who is a quack and who is correct? There is a lot of harm promoting quack ideas during a pandemic. Based on reputation? Twitter followers? Their passion? I do not believe anyone censored research and scien…

Aren't there many (>60) published studies showing varying positive effects of early treatment with Ivermectin though? (Despite a couple having been retracted for obvious fraud). YouTube's policy specifically bans mention of Ivermectin as a possible treatment. Combined with the safety profile and cost of Ivermectin, I'd have thought that it'd at least be worth a try in an emergency - the worst possible case being that…

> Aren't there many (>60) published studies showing varying positive effects of early treatment with Ivermectin though? (Despite a couple having been retracted for obvious fraud).

There are a number of low-quality (low numbers, methodological issue) studies with varying results. The primary "evidence" that got people excited about Ivermectin was a meta-analysis of these studies, but the meta-analysis itself pointed out that the largest amount of data and strongest evidence in their dataset came from one very large study – the study that was later withdrawn for having faked its data.

Since then, there's been no real compelling evidence at all that Ivermectin has any real impact beyond placebo.

> Compared with the quality of data surrounding remdesivir, molnupiravir etc, there seems to be a significant bias towards novelty (and therefore $$$).

There's a bias towards using treatments for which: 1) there is a reasonable expectation, based on understood science, that the treatment should impact the course of the virus

(preferably) and

2) there is some non-fraudulent, non-obscure and tiny dataset, indicating an effect.

The lack of strong data in support of Ivermectin is coupled with the fact that there's no particular reason to expect Ivermectin should have any impact on any particular virus.

> Similarly, it's been known for decades that vitamin D deficiency increases susceptibility to respiratory diseases, and most people in Europe/North America are deficient in winter. Why not hand it out? Worst case, it doesn't work.

This is mistaking correlation with causation. We know that many people who suffer serious respiratory illnesses, and who die from COVID-19, have low vitamin D levels. This is not believed to imply that low vitamin D levels cause death from COVID-19; rather it's simply the natural outcome of many old people having low vitamin D levels and age being a significant factor in COVID-19 deaths. People who die of old age also have low vitamin D levels; would you argue we should hand out vitamin D in an attempt to cure aging?

The idea that because these things are relatively safe we might as well just do them seems, in whole, silly. Sugar pills and crystals have a great safety profile too, but we don't expect physicians to use those on the theory of "well there's no real downside" either.

Science, not superstition, is the goal here.

Re: Effect of early treatment with fluvoxamine on risk of hospitalization for Covid

#34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's an entire suite of cheap drugs with proven positive effects when administered early: https://c19early.com/ Alphabet profits are up 68% because people are forced online. If there is cheap and effective COVID treatment, the world goes back to normal. Its a huge conflict of interest. Same goes for Facebook and the other tech companies. By contrast, look at Apple's muted COVID efforts. They want people out in the…

This is conspiracy dribble. Do you seriously think that there's a room full of executives at Google sitting in the dark rubbing their hands together and cackling as they draw up policies to block beneficial information from spreading so that the pandemic lasts longer and they bring in more revenue? People don't think like this except in movies. Any effort to do so would be immediately obvious to the people tasked wit…

I think its naive to believe that they aren't. Obviously big tech has done very well during this pandemic...you think they don't know that. What do you think they talk about? And Google in particular is in a position to actually help maintain the status quo (lockdowns).

Why is a business using its economic and political power to further its own interests a conspiracy theory?

Re: Effect of early treatment with fluvoxamine on risk of hospitalization for Covid

#35
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It showed a 32% reduction in hospitalization and approx 31% reduction in deaths.

Why does it say: > We found a clinically important absolute risk reduction of 5·0%, and 32% RR reduction, on the primary outcome of hospitalisation Why is the absolute 5% and the RR 32%? What's the difference? Also why does it say: > There were no significant differences between fluvoxamine and placebo for viral clearance at day 7 (p=0·090) and hospitalisations due to COVID (p=0·10), all-cause hospitalisations (p=0·0…

> Why is the absolute 5% and the RR 32%? What's the difference?

Example:

(20/100) 20% of patients die without treatment

(10/100) 10% of patients die with treatment

absolute = 10 percentage points difference (20->10)

relative = percent decrease. 20 -> 10 50% difference

Re: Effect of early treatment with fluvoxamine on risk of hospitalization for Covid

#36
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the issue is how was it proven back then? There are a lot of people promoting ideas, some of which will eventually get clinical backing that they are correct. Prior to studies being done, how do we evaluate who is a quack and who is correct? There is a lot of harm promoting quack ideas during a pandemic. Based on reputation? Twitter followers? Their passion? I do not believe anyone censored research and scien…

>Prior to studies being done, how do we evaluate who is a quack and who is correct You allow the dialog to take place and make up your own mind. >I would argue that anyone who had a solution to Covid should rush to get it published in a reputable Any tool thats not a vaccine gets associated with Trump or the right wing and is dismissed. Its even stifled funding for anti-virals that give a 50% reduction in hospitaliza…

How many people actually have the expertise to evalaute medical data like that? They don't. There's a very very small number of Hners that if they are honest with themselves are qualified to do that. I'm not saying that from a high and mghty position, I'm doing that from a place that I see HN talk incredibly ignorantly about all the time. HN is supposed to be smart.

You give the average person the ability to do "research" and they are killing themselves because people fall for all kinds of bullshit. Cults exist. Scam artists are a dime a dozen.

This stuff gets associated with trump and the right because they associate themselves wth it. I don't vote Democratic, I just don't think you're being realistic about how people operate, regardless whether I beleive that "censorship" is the answer or not.

Re: Effect of early treatment with fluvoxamine on risk of hospitalization for Covid

#37
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the issue is how was it proven back then? There are a lot of people promoting ideas, some of which will eventually get clinical backing that they are correct. Prior to studies being done, how do we evaluate who is a quack and who is correct? There is a lot of harm promoting quack ideas during a pandemic. Based on reputation? Twitter followers? Their passion? I do not believe anyone censored research and scien…

>Prior to studies being done, how do we evaluate who is a quack and who is correct You allow the dialog to take place and make up your own mind. >I would argue that anyone who had a solution to Covid should rush to get it published in a reputable Any tool thats not a vaccine gets associated with Trump or the right wing and is dismissed. Its even stifled funding for anti-virals that give a 50% reduction in hospitaliza…

> The government could have spent the last 18 months encouraging people to lose weight, stop smoking, drinking, and eating fast food.

Instead, the "solution" did the opposite. But worse, kids stayed inside, didn't exercise, put on (likely more) weight, didn't share illness (read: weakened immune system) and then those kids were ordered back to school in that highly vulnerable state.

The solution? The jab. With absolutely not acknowledgement or recognition they were prepped to be put in harns way.

This isn't a conspiracy theory. This is what happened and continues to happen. Unfortunately, such observations and analysis get marginalized as being a Covid denier or anti-vax. That doesn't make sense.

Re: Effect of early treatment with fluvoxamine on risk of hospitalization for Covid

#38
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the issue is how was it proven back then? There are a lot of people promoting ideas, some of which will eventually get clinical backing that they are correct. Prior to studies being done, how do we evaluate who is a quack and who is correct? There is a lot of harm promoting quack ideas during a pandemic. Based on reputation? Twitter followers? Their passion? I do not believe anyone censored research and scien…

>Prior to studies being done, how do we evaluate who is a quack and who is correct You allow the dialog to take place and make up your own mind. >I would argue that anyone who had a solution to Covid should rush to get it published in a reputable Any tool thats not a vaccine gets associated with Trump or the right wing and is dismissed. Its even stifled funding for anti-virals that give a 50% reduction in hospitaliza…

> You allow the dialog to take place and make up your own mind.

I'm not sure this applies to medicine or vaccines. I don't think any of us are in the position of "making up our own mind" about what works in medicine and what doesn't, which is why we have double-blind clinical studies. We can't even explain why/how placebo works.

Re: Effect of early treatment with fluvoxamine on risk of hospitalization for Covid

#39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Prior to studies being done, how do we evaluate who is a quack and who is correct You allow the dialog to take place and make up your own mind. >I would argue that anyone who had a solution to Covid should rush to get it published in a reputable Any tool thats not a vaccine gets associated with Trump or the right wing and is dismissed. Its even stifled funding for anti-virals that give a 50% reduction in hospitaliza…

> The government could have spent the last 18 months encouraging people to lose weight, stop smoking, drinking, and eating fast food. Instead, the "solution" did the opposite. But worse, kids stayed inside, didn't exercise, put on (likely more) weight, didn't share illness (read: weakened immune system) and then those kids were ordered back to school in that highly vulnerable state. The solution? The jab. With absolu…

If you seriously think the government could have made us all lose weight in the last 18 months... they’ve been running anti obesity campaigns for decades and failing while obesity grows every year.

BTW covid is plenty dangerous to non obese as well.

The vaccine shot actually works well and is incredibly easy to use compared to a grueling year long weight loss and sustaining it for a lifetime, for most people.

Re: Effect of early treatment with fluvoxamine on risk of hospitalization for Covid

#40
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Aren't there many (>60) published studies showing varying positive effects of early treatment with Ivermectin though? (Despite a couple having been retracted for obvious fraud). No, this is false. Use of animal ivermectin for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19 in humans is dangerous [1]. [1] https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/why-you-shoul...

I don't think anyone is suggesting that humans should take the animal version.

There are plenty of Facebook and YouTube guides about taking animal ivermectin as a replacement for human-rated medicine.

That said hopefully here on HN we can agree that is a dumb idea.

Post reply on HN