Jump to content

Menu

Recommended Posts

Just now, square_25 said:

Yeah, it's still higher than I would like it, but it's actually kind of encouraging. Not that I want to test those percentages in my family... 

Totally agree. I don't ever want to make light of covid, but I have had some pretty bad worst case scenarios in my head over the last 6 mos. I do find this encouraging.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 18.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Ausmumof3

    3022

  • Pen

    2298

  • square_25

    1706

  • Arcadia

    1337

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

DS got home 3 hours ago!  ❤️❤️

Update-  my youngest is not only short of breath, coughing, dizzy, nausaues, and with headache-  she is also confused.  I called our doctor and talked with him and she is going to be going to the ER.

That's not a blanket right.  If my religion required human sacrifice, I can't practice it.  If my religion required sexual assault, I can't practice it. Freedom of religion isn't a blanket right

Posted Images

3 minutes ago, square_25 said:

My personal guess is that there are fewer deaths only because the hospitalized population is very different from the early days of the pandemic -- more spread out, so they take less sick cases. 

Possibly, but I've actually heard the opposite. I heard a NYC doc saying that at the beginning they hospitalized many people who didn't need hospitalization. Basically they didn't know what to do, so if someone had tested positive and felt sick enough to be seen, they were automatically hospitalized. He said they are much better now at targeting the sickest patients. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TracyP said:

Possibly, but I've actually heard the opposite. I heard a NYC doc saying that at the beginning they hospitalized many people who didn't need hospitalization. Basically they didn't know what to do, so if someone had tested positive and felt sick enough to be seen, they were automatically hospitalized. He said they are much better now at targeting the sickest patients. 

I mean, maybe at the very beginning? There were SO MANY cases in NY, I doubt they managed to hospitalize a significant fraction. I know that mid-pandemic, people were reporting being told not to come in unless they were sure they weren't OK. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, TracyP said:

Possibly, but I've actually heard the opposite. I heard a NYC doc saying that at the beginning they hospitalized many people who didn't need hospitalization. Basically they didn't know what to do, so if someone had tested positive and felt sick enough to be seen, they were automatically hospitalized. He said they are much better now at targeting the sickest patients. 

I'm sure NY is now much better at it, because there isn't the same crunch. 

I'm going to keep assuming that not a ton has changed as long as the positivity seems like the right statistic to predict deaths, I think. Like... that's a very simple model, and it's working very well so far, so as long as it seems to work, I'll assume that a lot of the variation is just sampling issues (kinds of patients in hospitals, who's bothering to get tested and who isn't, etc.) 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, square_25 said:

I mean, maybe at the very beginning? There were SO MANY cases in NY, I doubt they managed to hospitalize a significant fraction. I know that mid-pandemic, people were reporting being told not to come in unless they were sure they weren't OK. 

Yeah, I don't know how that all balances out. I assumed that was part of his point tho. That if they thought they were sick enough to come in, that was enough to get them hospitalized. They now would be better able to determine who actually needs to be hospitalized.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, TracyP said:

Yeah, I don't know how that all balances out. I assumed that was part of his point tho. That if they thought they were sick enough to come in, that was enough to get them hospitalized. They now would be better able to determine who actually needs to be hospitalized.

I would guess this is all really hard to disentangle. That's why I'm sticking to my simple model and watching it, lol. It's so surprisingly predictive that if it keeps working, it really cuts through the noise. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, square_25 said:

I would guess this is all really hard to disentangle. That's why I'm sticking to my simple model and watching it, lol. It's so surprisingly predictive that if it keeps working, it really cuts through the noise. 

Heading out for now, but can you explain why the possibility of better outcomes would make a difference to your model? I hope it's not a totally dense question, but I don't see how they're connected.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Zoe asked us about treatment only after a hospital visit. I entered what the hospital prescribed which we haven’t used either the Tylenol or the cough medicine and that’s it. It didn’t ask about supplements. 
 

Day 8 and dh’s only symptom is anosmia. The hospital won’t clear him to go back to work until his senses return. 
 

“Our findings indicate that the novel coronavirus changes the sense of smell in patients not by directly infecting neurons but by affecting the function of supporting cells,” said senior study author Sandeep Robert Datta, associate professor of neurobiology in the Blavatnik Institute at HMS.

This implies that in most cases, SARS-CoV-2 infection is unlikely to permanently damage olfactory neural circuits and lead to persistent anosmia, Datta added, a condition that is associated with a variety of mental and social health issues, particularly depression and anxiety.

“I think it’s good news, because once the infection clears, olfactory neurons don’t appear to need to be replaced or rebuilt from scratch,” he said. “But we need more data and a better understanding of the underlying mechanisms to confirm this conclusion.”

A majority of COVID-19 patients experience some level of anosmia, most often temporary. Analyses of electronic health records indicate that COVID-19 patients are 27 times more likely to have smell loss but are only around 2.2 to 2.6 times more likely to have fever, cough or respiratory difficulty, compared to patients without COVID-19.

Some studies have hinted that anosmia in COVID-19 differs from anosmia caused by other viral infections, including by other coronaviruses.

https://www.technologynetworks.com/neuroscience/news/how-covid-19-might-be-causing-smell-loss-337872

Edited by Plum
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, square_25 said:

I would guess this is all really hard to disentangle. That's why I'm sticking to my simple model and watching it, lol. It's so surprisingly predictive that if it keeps working, it really cuts through the noise. 

 

Did you run calculations for earlier (a few months ago) in NY ? 

 

As I have been following since February or whenever (but not specifically NY) case fatality rate has seemed to be decreasing. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Plum said:

Zoe only asked us about treatment only after a hospital visit. I entered what the hospital prescribed which we haven’t used either the Tylenol or the cough medicine and that’s it. It didn’t ask about supplements. 
 

 

Having prescribed medication versus actually taken seems like a problem for meaningful statistics if that’s common. 

 

1 minute ago, Plum said:

Day 8 and dh’s only symptom is anosmia. The hospital won’t clear him to go back to work until his senses return. 
 

“Our findings indicate that the novel coronavirus changes the sense of smell in patients not by directly infecting neurons but by affecting the function of supporting cells,” said senior study author Sandeep Robert Datta, associate professor of neurobiology in the Blavatnik Institute at HMS.

This implies that in most cases, SARS-CoV-2 infection is unlikely to permanently damage olfactory neural circuits and lead to persistent anosmia, Datta added, a condition that is associated with a variety of mental and social health issues, particularly depression and anxiety.

“I think it’s good news, because once the infection clears, olfactory neurons don’t appear to need to be replaced or rebuilt from scratch,” he said. “But we need more data and a better understanding of the underlying mechanisms to confirm this conclusion.”

A majority of COVID-19 patients experience some level of anosmia, most often temporary. Analyses of electronic health records indicate that COVID-19 patients are 27 times more likely to have smell loss but are only around 2.2 to 2.6 times more likely to have fever, cough or respiratory difficulty, compared to patients without COVID-19.

Some studies have hinted that anosmia in COVID-19 differs from anosmia caused by other viral infections, including by other coronaviruses.

https://www.technologynetworks.com/neuroscience/news/how-covid-19-might-be-causing-smell-loss-337872

 

Perhaps also some role for 

Zinc?

too much, or nasal spray, can cause anosmia, but so can zinc deficiency 

if zinc gets depleted fighting the virus I wonder if that could be an added factor

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Pen said:

Did you run calculations for earlier (a few months ago) in NY ? 

As I have been following since February or whenever (but not specifically NY) case fatality rate has seemed to be decreasing. 

Err, let me check, one sec. 

So, I'd estimate that at the peak, we had 

50*1/10000*20,000,000  = 100,000 

daily cases or so, and at the peak 2 weeks later we had about 1000 deaths a day

 Right now, we have about 

1.1*1/10000*20,000,000  = 2200 

cases per day or so, and about 20 deaths a day. 

I'm seeing about the same IFR around a percent, frankly, if I assume my calculations are right. 

Also, note how GOOD these estimates are. There's a linear relationship. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Pen said:

 

Having prescribed medication versus actually taken seems like a problem for meaningful statistics if that’s common. 

 

 

Perhaps also some role for 

Zinc?

too much, or nasal spray, can cause anosmia, but so can zinc deficiency 

if zinc gets depleted fighting the virus I wonder if that could be an added factor

I went in and looked at the options. They ask about actual treatment done at the hospital such as oxygen and ventilation. There is an other option at the end where you fill in the blanks of treatment given. That’s where I entered it. 
 

He’s been taking Immune + with his multivitamins and that has zinc. He doesn’t use nasal spray. 
 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m interested to see what comes of all the studies into loss of taste and smell. I lost mine years ago with the flu and ENT’s were all basically saying it’s more common than people realize and there’s nothing I can do. Maybe something will come from it that will help.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Joker said:

I’m interested to see what comes of all the studies into loss of taste and smell. I lost mine years ago with the flu and ENT’s were all basically saying it’s more common than people realize and there’s nothing I can do. Maybe something will come from it that will help.

Ooh, I did NOT know that can happen :-/. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, square_25 said:

Err, let me check, one sec. 

So, I'd estimate that at the peak, we had 

50*1/10000*20,000,000  = 100,000 

daily cases or so, and at the peak 2 weeks later we had about 1000 deaths a day

 Right now, we have about 

1.1*1/10000*20,000,000  = 2200 

cases per day or so, and about 20 deaths a day. 

I'm seeing about the same IFR around a percent, frankly, if I assume my calculations are right. 

Also, note how GOOD these estimates are. There's a linear relationship. 

 

Shouldn’t it (IFR) change if any treatment at all is any better now than earlier? 

So...   if that’s actually true ...  could we conclude  then  from your statistics that nothing , not dexamethasone or anything else done in NY actually is helping survival? 

 

That does not seem to fit with what people I know in medicine are saying.

 

Word albeit anecdotal is that at certain points for some patients giving HCQ cocktail or at other points steroid cocktail (anticoagulants etc) is making s difference.  (Difference in terms of someone seeming deathly ill feeling and doing much better).

 

I know you tend to go with statistics as most significant and important.

I tend to rate observations in field from people I trust more highly than you do.  

 

 

Edited by Pen
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Pen said:

Shouldn’t it change if any treatment at all is any better now than earlier? 

So...   if that’s actually true ...  could we conclude  then  from your statistics that nothing , not dexamethasone or anything else done in NY actually is helping survival? 

I mean, my estimates are obviously not perfect, and the data is noisy. I would guess the IFR is changing from 1 percent to, like, 0.8 percent. But no, I don't think there's been something revolutionary that decreases deaths by a big factor. And to be fair, none of these studies are showing this large an effect. 

The data is all very noisy, but as long as I'm getting a linear relationship with some minor variation, I'm assuming that a lot of the anecdotal reports are confirmation bias. 

Edited by square_25
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, square_25 said:

I mean, my estimates are obviously not perfect, and the data is noisy. I would guess the IFR is changing from 1 percent to, like, 0.8 percent. But no, I don't think there's been something revolutionary that decreases deaths by a big factor. And to be fair, none of these studies are showing this large an effect. 

The data is all very noisy, but as long as I'm getting a linear relationship with some minor variation, I'm assuming that a lot of the anecdotal reports are confirmation bias. 

 

I will think about that. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Joker said:

I’m interested to see what comes of all the studies into loss of taste and smell. I lost mine years ago with the flu and ENT’s were all basically saying it’s more common than people realize and there’s nothing I can do. Maybe something will come from it that will help.

 

12 minutes ago, square_25 said:

Ooh, I did NOT know that can happen :-/. 

Yes. My mom has had no sense of smell for 30 years after a bad flu. 
 

Side note: People with repeated head trauma or CTE lost their sense of smell before any other symptoms showed up. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a country, I'm not sure which, I can look around for the graph if people are interested, that started and stopped HCQ and had a lag of 13 days to more deaths after stopping and then less deaths after starting.

Panama stopped HCQ and death rate went up.  They started HCQ again a few days ago. I think it's worth watching and could tell us something if their deaths go down in about 10 days.

One country could be a coincidence. Two countries and a future prediction is another story, IMO, we'll see what happens.

1770606859_ScreenShot2020-07-25at9_56_05AM.thumb.png.ac26a1265cf9a202b8539a796fee8d81.png

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, ElizabethB said:

There was a country, I'm not sure which, I can look around for the graph if people are interested, that started and stopped HCQ and had a lag of 13 days to more deaths after stopping and then less deaths after starting.

Panama stopped HCQ and death rate went up.  They started HCQ again a few days ago. I think it's worth watching and could tell us something if their deaths go down in about 10 days.

One country could be a coincidence. Two countries and a future prediction is another story, IMO, we'll see what happens.

 

The other country was Switzerland. Here is the graph, and an article about it in Francesoir.

http://www.francesoir.fr/societe-sante/covid-19-hydroxychloroquine-works-irrefutable-proof77275352_ScreenShot2020-07-25at10_27_20AM.thumb.png.5f8cbdd25856f1290e1b2fa140da890a.png

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

plot.svg
 
 
PrEP
100%
 
PEP
100%
 
Early
100%
 
Late
60%
 
All
74%
 
  62 studies
Global HCQ studies. PrEP, PEP, and early treatment studies show high effectiveness, while late treatment shows mixed results.
 
 
 
 

 

 

 

https://www.palmerfoundation.com.au/61-studies-37-peer-reviewed-early-treatment-studies-are-very-positive-covid-deaths-621-206/

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The real reason why not HCQ is  dry likely that needed ingredients apparently come from places like India that have banned exports . 

Though if these types of pandemics are here to stay we should probably start growing chinchona trees - or whatever is needed now — maybe it will help in a few decades. 

Edited by Pen
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

A preprint saying that asymptomatic people might not be able to feel the symptoms caused by Covid because the virus is capable of blocking pain signals.

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.07.17.209288v1.abstract

Quote

One Sentence Summary SARS-CoV-2’s Spike protein promotes analgesia by interfering with VEGF-A/NRP1 pathway, which may affect disease transmission dynamics.

 

Asymptomatic carriers can still end up with health problems but they're usually mild.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, BeachGal said:

A preprint saying that asymptomatic people might not be able to feel the symptoms caused by Covid because the virus is capable of blocking pain signals.

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.07.17.209288v1.abstract

 

Asymptomatic carriers can still end up with health problems but they're usually mild.

 

Wow. Fascinating! 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.newsweek.com/key-defeating-covid-19-already-exists-we-need-start-using-it-opinion-1519535?amp=1&__twitter_impression=true
 

Dropping in quickly - came across this today from Newsweek, not exactly a bastion of conservatism but it references several of the studies I know I’ve seen recently, if anyone is interested in the HQC case.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Bagels McGruffikin said:

https://www.newsweek.com/key-defeating-covid-19-already-exists-we-need-start-using-it-opinion-1519535?amp=1&__twitter_impression=true
 

Dropping in quickly - came across this today from Newsweek, not exactly a bastion of conservatism but it references several of the studies I know I’ve seen recently, if anyone is interested in the HQC case.

I looked at his own article that he mentions, and it's unreadably dense. I need charts that show comorbidities in the groups, at the very least. He also mentions "natural experiments" that seem pretty odd to me -- again, I'd just need to know more about this. 

It's entirely possible that HQC works! I would just like to judge the evidence myself. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, square_25 said:

I looked at his own article that he mentions, and it's unreadably dense. I need charts that show comorbidities in the groups, at the very least. He also mentions "natural experiments" that seem pretty odd to me -- again, I'd just need to know more about this. 

It's entirely possible that HQC works! I would just like to judge the evidence myself. 

 

 

 

 

 

https://www.palmerfoundation.com.au/61-studies-37-peer-reviewed-early-treatment-studies-are-very-positive-covid-deaths-621-206/

 

Maybe if you read these you will find what you are looking for.  Or not. 

 

As I read things neither masks nor HCQ are perfect, but both help—help very significantly.  It is a  crying shame that both became political. 

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Pen said:

 

 

 

 

https://www.palmerfoundation.com.au/61-studies-37-peer-reviewed-early-treatment-studies-are-very-positive-covid-deaths-621-206/

 

Maybe if you read these you will find what you are looking for.  Or not. 

 

As I read things neither masks nor HCQ are perfect, but both help—help very significantly.  It is a  crying shame that both became political. 

 

No, that doesn't help much, because it's just a list of studies. I'd have to dig into the specifics. Here's a randomly controlled study: 

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2019014

No positive effect. It's probably been posted already, it's just what I found using Google. 

Edited by square_25
Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, square_25 said:

No, that doesn't help much, because it's just a list of studies. I'd have to dig into the specifics. Here's a randomly controlled study: 

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2019014

No positive effect. It's probably been posted already, it's just what I found using Google. 

 

I meant to read all or many of the actual studies- not just the list.  That is what I did!

Link to post
Share on other sites

@square_25 many if not all of the studies in the 

https://c19study.com/  

Are clickable.  

When I click They first bring up an abstract, and often in the abstract I can then link to the original publication to read the full study!!!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, square_25 said:

No, that doesn't help much, because it's just a list of studies. I'd have to dig into the specifics. Here's a randomly controlled study: 

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2019014

No positive effect. It's probably been posted already, it's just what I found using Google. 

Thank you for linking that, I hadn't seen that one. I find it really curious that not a single randomized, controlled study has been able to show any benefit in either HCQ alone or HCQ+AZ (and the U of MN study also included zinc). If it's so clearly beneficial, why do the benefits disappear as soon as the subjects are randomized? Why have four large, randomized, controlled studies, from three different countries, all returned identical results showing no benefit?

Edited by Corraleno
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Corraleno said:

Thank you for linking that, I hadn't seen that one. I find it really curious that not a single randomized, controlled study has been able to show any benefit in either HCQ alone or HCQ+AZ (and the U of MN study also included zinc). If it's so clearly beneficial, why do the benefits disappear as soon as the subjects are randomized? Why have three large, randomized, controlled studies, from three different countries, all returned identical results showing no benefit?

Probably cause it's not beneficial? 😉 Or is that your point? 

Observational studies have a tendency to overstate the efficacy of things, because it's impossible to control for all confounders. 

However, it's not like I've looked through all possible studies, so I can't be sure!! 

Edited by square_25
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, square_25 said:

Oh, great!! I'll take a look. 

 

I suggest starting with older ones and working to newer

Link to post
Share on other sites

459 new cases 10 deaths, ranging from 40s to 80s

Because there are quite a few medical workers either with coronavirus or in quarantine the defence force are going to pair up with paramadics

Also student paramadics are going to be deployed

Also 14000 retired or non active medical workers mostly nurses have put up their hand to take some shifts  particularly in nursing homes as it turns out that many casual workers worked in multiple nursing homes, and that is how it spread between the nursing homes so quickly. 

 

 

Edited by Melissa in Australia
  • Like 2
  • Sad 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Pen said:

 

 

 

 

https://www.palmerfoundation.com.au/61-studies-37-peer-reviewed-early-treatment-studies-are-very-positive-covid-deaths-621-206/

 

Maybe if you read these you will find what you are looking for.  Or not. 

 

As I read things neither masks nor HCQ are perfect, but both help—help very significantly.  It is a  crying shame that both became political. 

 

ok, looking at the studies, this doesn't seem that impressive, given that I can't see where they controlled for how sick thy were to start with, etc. 

Results: Out of 26,815 SARS-CoV-2 positive patients, 77 (0.29%) were chronically treated with HCQ, while 1,215 (0.36%) out of 333,489 negative patients were receiving it chronically (P=0.04). After adjustment for age, sex, and chronic treatment with corticosteroids and/or immunosuppressants, the odds ratio of SARS-CoV-2 infection for chronic treatment with HCQ has been 0.51 (0.37-0.70).https://www.palmerfoundation.com.au/chronic-treatment-with-hydroxychloroquine-and-sars-cov-2-infection/

And

The majority of hospitalized patients received hydroxychloroquine (74.6% of survivors and 71.3% of non-survivors) and azithromycin (67.4% of survivors and 71.3% of non-survivors). Fewer hospitalized patients received other medications such as remdesivir, anakinra, tocilizumab, or sarilumab (Table 2). 

https://www.palmerfoundation.com.au/risk-factors-for-mortality-in-patients-with-covid-19-in-new-york-city/

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/12/2020 at 3:02 AM, Ausmumof3 said:

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.07.02.20145003v1
 

Pre print study claiming that the patterns of tissues infected with Covid versus the tissues suffering most damage in cases where people have died indicates that the biggest killer is immune system overreaction rather than the virus itself.  I’m probably paraphrasing that horribly but that’s what I think it’s saying.  This also explains why steroids that help moderate immune response are helping survival rates.

I think this is why when seeing my rheumatologist this week and she gave me instructions about which medications this week to stop if I have presumed Covid or actually Covid for 2 weeks, she did mention that patients on immunosuppressants like me seem to be doing much better with Covid.  Interestingly, the only medicine I stop for the two weeks are Arava and Cimzia, which is the biologic.  I continue with Hydroxychloriquine and my steroid as usual

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/24/2020 at 10:32 AM, vonfirmath said:

Ugh. I need to have this handy in the store so I don't buy it in the first place

(Another reason to prefer soap over sanitizer!)

 

Just don't buy any hand sanitizer made in Mexico.  All of the ones on the eight page list were made there.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/24/2020 at 2:03 PM, Pawz4me said:

If it's OTC there would be people who would take way more than they were supposed to, believing that more is better. There is no way this drug should be available w/o oversight. And FWIW I do think there are lots of drugs that should be readily available. But this isn't one of them.

Yes,  this is a highly dangerous drug for children to take like 4 pills can be fatal with children.  But then I don't really think acetaminophen is a good drug over the counter-  very easy drug to overdose on and the overdose effects are very serious to deadly.  

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, TravelingChris said:

I think this is why when seeing my rheumatologist this week and she gave me instructions about which medications this week to stop if I have presumed Covid or actually Covid for 2 weeks, she did mention that patients on immunosuppressants like me seem to be doing much better with Covid.  Interestingly, the only medicine I stop for the two weeks are Arava and Cimzia, which is the biologic.  I continue with Hydroxychloriquine and my steroid as usual

Why does she want you to stop the biologic if people on immunosuppresants are doing better? (my husband is on a biologic for psoriasis, and he's been wondering if he should keep taking it if he returns to in person teaching soon).

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/24/2020 at 8:08 PM, TCB said:

Well I may have found one for you. It says peer reviewed but an article about it not the actual paper I think.

 

https://www.henryford.com/news/2020/07/hydro-treatment-study

 

ETA Ok it’s kind of old- July 2, also it looked like it said 18% reduction in mortality which I don’t think is as much reduction as Dexamethasone

 

ETA 2 - Just saw a comment that it may not have been well controlled, was observational and many were also given steroids

Dexamethasone is a steroid

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, TravelingChris said:

Yes,  this is a highly dangerous drug for children to take like 4 pills can be fatal with children.  But then I don't really think acetaminophen is a good drug over the counter-  very easy drug to overdose on and the overdose effects are very serious to deadly.  

I used to take Hydroxycloroquine for RA.  My doctor told me that with my small children, even one pill could be fatal.  And the pills are so tiny that even a small child could swallow them.  I stopped taking the medication because 1. I was noticing no benefit to my RA.  However, I also had no side effects.  So, 2. I didn't want my children to accidentally swallow one of my pills.

If I had noticed a benefit I might have continued to take it, but in my situation it wasn't worth the risk.

Also, while I didn't have any (known) side effects, some people do experience severe side effects, including vision problems.

I do not believe this should be available OTC.  And if so, they need to put it in a large pill that would not be as easy for children to swallow.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, kokotg said:

Why does she want you to stop the biologic if people on immunosuppresants are doing better? (my husband is on a biologic for psoriasis, and he's been wondering if he should keep taking it if he returns to in person teaching soon).

Just for one dose.  I take it every two weeks and I think that immediately after taking it, I am more likely to get sick or sicker but later I am not.  

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that there is a huge difference between taking vitamins or minerals that all bodies need to function properly :  like zinc, vitamin d, etc. and taking prescription medicines which have specific mechanisms within the body to block specific diseases or disease processes.  It's part of the "do no harm" of medicine.  I have no problem if someone is taking hcq (or anything else) as specifically prescribed by a qualified doctor for a patient who has been evaluated for a specific condition.  I think that that kind of prescribing should be accompanied by monitoring.  Like how people are monitored for liver damage with certain meds. (I personally would not go to any doctor that I thought was prescribing things based on their politics or some other non-medical agenda.  In fact, I think any doctor prescribing that way is guilty of malpractice.) 

Now vitamins and minerals can be misused.  And you can get toxic levels if done incorrectly so I think that caution is still necessary.  Quercetin is found in foods like apples and veggies like onions. 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, TravelingChris said:

Dexamethasone is a steroid

Exactly! Makes you wonder about the study results.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Ktgrok said:

ok, looking at the studies, this doesn't seem that impressive, given that I can't see where they controlled for how sick thy were to start with, etc. 

Results: Out of 26,815 SARS-CoV-2 positive patients, 77 (0.29%) were chronically treated with HCQ, while 1,215 (0.36%) out of 333,489 negative patients were receiving it chronically (P=0.04). After adjustment for age, sex, and chronic treatment with corticosteroids and/or immunosuppressants, the odds ratio of SARS-CoV-2 infection for chronic treatment with HCQ has been 0.51 (0.37-0.70).https://www.palmerfoundation.com.au/chronic-treatment-with-hydroxychloroquine-and-sars-cov-2-infection/

And

The majority of hospitalized patients received hydroxychloroquine (74.6% of survivors and 71.3% of non-survivors) and azithromycin (67.4% of survivors and 71.3% of non-survivors). Fewer hospitalized patients received other medications such as remdesivir, anakinra, tocilizumab, or sarilumab (Table 2). 

https://www.palmerfoundation.com.au/risk-factors-for-mortality-in-patients-with-covid-19-in-new-york-city/

 

Again, I want to

point out that HCQ has main benefits early.  Ideally **before** hospitalization stage, or if in hospital at least as immediately as possible—not several days later when Cv19 is confirmed. (The only way my state currently allows HCQ to be used is for in hospital and with CV19 confirmed—and only people needing respiratory support can be hospitalized.  It is sort of like washing out a wound and applying antiseptic and antibiotic only **after**  it has already gone into systemic sepsis... really really stupid. Or perhaps something worse than stupid.) 

I realize it is anecdotal, but I think part of what is missing is the sort of irl experience that comes when people are feeling horrible and then take x and feel much better. Not that all do by any means, but for those who do feel better, it becomes extremely important.    This can be from a patient POV or an observing medical worker POV. 

Aspirins don’t help all headaches, for example, but they do help some (or maybe they are just an excellent placebo). In any case for the people they help, even if by placebo, it is a major feeling of relief.  

Cuba btw which probably hasn’t got as much corporate profit motives is using HCQ as part of its CV19 cocktail and seems to be doing better than Florida currently . 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Jean in Newcastle said:

I think that there is a huge difference between taking vitamins or minerals that all bodies need to function properly :  like zinc, vitamin d, etc. and taking prescription medicines which have specific mechanisms within the body to block specific diseases or disease processes.  It's part of the "do no harm" of medicine.  I have no problem if someone is taking hcq (or anything else) as specifically prescribed by a qualified doctor for a patient who has been evaluated for a specific condition.  I think that that kind of prescribing should be accompanied by monitoring.  Like how people are monitored for liver damage with certain meds. (I personally would not go to any doctor that I thought was prescribing things based on their politics or some other non-medical agenda.  In fact, I think any doctor prescribing that way is guilty of malpractice.) 

Now vitamins and minerals can be misused.  And you can get toxic levels if done incorrectly so I think that caution is still necessary.  Quercetin is found in foods like apples and veggies like onions. 

 

I agree with you about nutraceuticals being in a different category than pharmaceuticals. 

 

I guess maybe having lived in malarial countries HCQ doesn’t seem like that much of a “big deal” medication to me.  

The prophylaxis amount would seem to be 200mg several times for loading dose, along with zinc etc, then once per week ( with a 40 day half life maybe it doesn’t even need to be once per week). That’s extremely low compared to what has caused heart etc issues for some people with RA taking it more often for years . 

 

Possibly a better approach than purely OTC would be similar to how Pseudoephedrine is currently done in some places where limited amounts can be bought without prescription, but not kept in bottles on shelves where people can grab lots or would stockpile it like TP.  Possibly one could do that (remotely for less exposure) and get the instructions on use, cautions, etc. from pharmacist. 

My guess is that a lot of people at particularly high risk like migrant food workers don’t have doctors available to prescribe for them, monitor etc.    And it doesn’t necessarily need that. There can be instructions along lines of: if you experience ____ stop taking it.  If you experience __ stop taking and call __. 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, kokotg said:

Why does she want you to stop the biologic if people on immunosuppresants are doing better? (my husband is on a biologic for psoriasis, and he's been wondering if he should keep taking it if he returns to in person teaching soon).

I know the math protocol guy (dr Marik) was recommending the anti inflammatories only after the change when oxygen levels start dropping during that interview with Dr Been.  I think it’s a while since I watched it but the timing is important.  In the first two weeks approx you want the immune system doing everything possible to clear the virus.  But once/if the changes hits you bring in the anti inflammatories to dampen it down.  I wonder if this is working on a similar theory.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...