Flu & Covid19

n7axw wrote:A change in subject... in a news clip today, Trump is portrayed as taking his own recommended cure for covid19, an antimalarial drug hydro...(if you really want this sucker properly spelled, look it up).

Presumably Trump doesn't have covid19, but thinks it could be preventative...

Goodness. I don't like Trump for reasons already elaborately gone over. But the FDA has already warned that it can have deadly effects, such as increasing the risk of fatal heart attacks... Like him or not, I really don't want the man hurting himself. And even worse, some of his more enthusiastic followers could start following his example.

Bad deal all the way around... only the latest clash between the anecdotal and the scientific....

Don

-

You might have noticed the news last November about President Trump getting a not routine physical last November:

https://www.newsweek.com/dick-cheneys-c ... ms-1472525

This visit to Walter Reed occurred soon after Trump had met personally with a Chinese official to sign the Phase One trade agreement. This was contemporanously with the initial phase of the Coronavirus outbreak. IIRC, that Chinese official was among the first people diagnosed.

Your comments about the Hydro... being ineffective and extremely dangerous are misinformed. This drug has been around for a long time. If I recall correctly, it is now a generic so no pharmecutical company can make windfall profits on it. While Hydro... can have side effects, including cardiac, those risks are deemed acceptable when the drug might be needed. Hydro... as either an early treatment or a propholactic, is not at all controversial anywhere outside of the United States. Germany had been buying it in bulk and using it. Hydro.. is controversial only in America only because President Trump has been citing it as a potential treatment or preventative. One of Trump's staff who is in frequent, close contact with him has recently tested positive for the Coronavirus. It is extremely appropriate for President Trump to be prescribed Hydro...

TFLYTSNBN wrote:

n7axw wrote:A change in subject... in a news clip today, Trump is portrayed as taking his own recommended cure for covid19, an antimalarial drug hydro...(if you really want this sucker properly spelled, look it up).

Presumably Trump doesn't have covid19, but thinks it could be preventative...

Goodness. I don't like Trump for reasons already elaborately gone over. But the FDA has already warned that it can have deadly effects, such as increasing the risk of fatal heart attacks... Like him or not, I really don't want the man hurting himself. And even worse, some of his more enthusiastic followers could start following his example.

Bad deal all the way around... only the latest clash between the anecdotal and the scientific....

Don

-

You might have noticed the news last November about President Trump getting a not routine physical last November:

https://www.newsweek.com/dick-cheneys-c ... ms-1472525

This visit to Walter Reed occurred soon after Trump had met personally with a Chinese official to sign the Phase One trade agreement. This was contemporanously with the initial phase of the Coronavirus outbreak. IIRC, that Chinese official was among the first people diagnosed.

Your comments about the Hydro... being ineffective and extremely dangerous are misinformed. This drug has been around for a long time. If I recall correctly, it is now a generic so no pharmecutical company can make windfall profits on it. While Hydro... can have side effects, including cardiac, those risks are deemed acceptable when the drug might be needed. Hydro... as either an early treatment or a propholactic, is not at all controversial anywhere outside of the United States. Germany had been buying it in bulk and using it. Hydro.. is controversial only in America only because President Trump has been citing it as a potential treatment or preventative. One of Trump's staff who is in frequent, close contact with him has recently tested positive for the Coronavirus. It is extremely appropriate for President Trump to be prescribed Hydro...

I notice that you gave up on the idea of spelling that awful word too...

No the drug is not controversial when used in a clinical setting for its designed purpose. But what Trump is doing is relying on anecdotal evidence and risking himyself on a very dangerous drug for which there is no scientific evidence that it can be used for covid at all, let alone that it might have any preventative effect. The FDA recommends that it not be used at all except in a clinical setting where its effects can be closely monitored.

TFLY, this stuff is serious business and should be treated as such. We are not talking about picking up a bottle of aspirin at the local pharmacy. I think you are misinformed this time.

But if you have info, feel free. I admit I'm a bit worried about the subject.

Don

-

Highly controversial here as well. There is a clinical trial being run out of the University of Melbourne, with the distinct message of don't try this at home folks.
Reading that Trump is on it simply reinforced the general opinion of him.

I thought that I would just share the statement by President Trump's physician.

MAY 18, 2020

MEMORANDUM FOR: KAYLEIGH MCENANY
ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT
WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY

FROM: SEAN P. CONLEY, DO, FACEP
PHYSICIAN TO THE PRESIDENT
COMMANDER, U.S. NAVY.

SUBJECT: HYDROXYCHLOROQUINE

As has been previously reported, two weeks ago one of the President's support staff tested positive for COVID-19.
The President is in very good health and has remained symptom-free. He receives regular COVID-19 testing, all negative to date.

After numerous discussions he and I had regarding the evidence for and against the use of hydroxychloroquine,
we concluded the potential benefit from treatment outweighed the relative risks.

In consultation with our inter-agency partners and subject matter experts around the country, I continue to monitor the myriad studies
investigating potential COVID-19 therapies, and I anticipate employing the same shared medical decision making
based on the evidence at hand in the future.

The "potential benefit" being that he might stop bugging his doctor about taking it?

TFLYTSNBN wrote:I thought that I would just share the statement by President Trump's physician.

MAY 18, 2020

MEMORANDUM FOR: KAYLEIGH MCENANY
ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT
WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY

FROM: SEAN P. CONLEY, DO, FACEP
PHYSICIAN TO THE PRESIDENT
COMMANDER, U.S. NAVY.

SUBJECT: HYDROXYCHLOROQUINE

As has been previously reported, two weeks ago one of the President's support staff tested positive for COVID-19.
The President is in very good health and has remained symptom-free. He receives regular COVID-19 testing, all negative to date.

After numerous discussions he and I had regarding the evidence for and against the use of hydroxychloroquine,
we concluded the potential benefit from treatment outweighed the relative risks.

In consultation with our inter-agency partners and subject matter experts around the country, I continue to monitor the myriad studies
investigating potential COVID-19 therapies, and I anticipate employing the same shared medical decision making
based on the evidence at hand in the future.

This has to be based on anecdotal evidence. There are no scientific studies affirming the value of that drug for covid. The dangers of the drug which include the risk of fatal heart attacks has been which has been warned of by the FDA.

So what is anecdotal evidence? Since we are discussing medicine right now, We'll frame it in those terms. It happens when one person comes to believe that he has been cured of an ailment by taking a certain drug, vitamin or chemical. There is no way to demonstrate that this is the case, but the person comes to believe it nonetheless. So when he hears that his neighbor is suffering from gout, he says, "you ought to try Fliver's Snake oil. It made my gout go away real good." That's anecdotal. Even a large number of reports attesting to the same thing remain anecdotal.

I remember when I was a teenager a friend of mine claimed that his grandpa lived to the ripe old age of 97 by chewing tobacco and drinking corn whiskey. My friend was utterly convinced that it was true because Grandpa said so. That's anecdotal. That is believed without systematic examination of what corn whiskey and chewing tobacco actually do to the body. It's far more likely that the old cuss survived because of sheer oneryness and a sturdy constitution to boot.

I don't understand why a doctor who has taken a Hippocratic oath to do no harm would go along with something like this. He is placing his patient at risk without any scientifically proven benefit.

Don

-!

n7axw wrote:I don't understand why a doctor who has taken a Hippocratic oath to do no harm would go along with something like this. He is placing his patient at risk without any scientifically proven benefit.

Who says that Trump actually takes hydroxychloroquine? Perhaps the doctor just supplied some placebo pills to shut him up?

Regarding the potential downsides to ingest hydroxychloroquine, if I remember correctly the dosage matters. If you just take a very small amounts the risks are negligible.

The problem I have with the whole thing is that Trump says it helps even though all studies so far show that there is no statistical significant numbers supporting that.

Joat42 wrote:

n7axw wrote:I don't understand why a doctor who has taken a Hippocratic oath to do no harm would go along with something like this. He is placing his patient at risk without any scientifically proven benefit.

Who says that Trump actually takes hydroxychloroquine? Perhaps the doctor just supplied some placebo pills to shut him up?

Regarding the potential downsides to ingest hydroxychloroquine, if I remember correctly the dosage matters. If you just take a very small amounts the risks are negligible.

The problem I have with the whole thing is that Trump says it helps even though all studies so far show that there is no statistical significant numbers supporting that.

probably just yet another dead cat!

Most of the studies that indicate that Hydroxy is not effective concentrated on patients in hospitals who had advanced stages of the disease. They also didn't include Zinc in the treatment. Those who advocate Hydroxy for Covidvirus agree that it is most effective during the early stages of an infection in combination with Zinc.

https://www.wnd.com/2020/05/4820255/

TFLYTSNBN wrote:Most of the studies that indicate that Hydroxy is not effective concentrated on patients in hospitals who had advanced stages of the disease. They also didn't include Zinc in the treatment. Those who advocate Hydroxy for Covidvirus agree that it is most effective during the early stages of an infection in combination with Zinc.

One randomized study found no difference using/not using hydroxychloroquine.

One non-randomized study found a slight benefit of using hydroxychloroquine - and that study gave rise to more questions than answers about the study itself.