Corraleno Posted June 4, 2020 Share Posted June 4, 2020 10 minutes ago, PrincessMommy said: just about to post this. They've been dupped and it was a lie. The "company" putting out data was a front. Good grief. It wasn't just the WHO, etc... but also several prestigious peer-reviewed medical journals. "A Guardian investigation can reveal the US-based company Surgisphere, whose handful of employees appear to include a science fiction writer and an adult-content model, has provided data for multiple studies on Covid-19 co-authored by its chief executive, but has so far failed to adequately explain its data or methodology." https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/03/covid-19-surgisphere-who-world-health-organization-hydroxychloroquine Jeez, who is doing the peer review on these studies and why are they only being investigated after they're published??? The French study that started the whole thing was also rushed through "peer review" in less than 24 hours, and the journal later admitted that it "did not meet expected standards." These journals need to slow the hell down and start vetting these studies fully before publication. They are messing with people's LIVES. 🤬 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pen Posted June 4, 2020 Share Posted June 4, 2020 8 hours ago, Ktgrok said: Bummer. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/hydroxychloroquine-coronavirus-prevention-covid-19-study/ I won’t be so unhappy that I would probably not be able to get it. 😉 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halftime Hope Posted June 4, 2020 Share Posted June 4, 2020 (edited) Two new items on hydroxychloroquine today: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2016638 New England Journal of Medicine essentially saying HCQ was not effective prophylaxis. Note: it was not given with zinc, nor were zinc levels tested, so this study is not of much use. https://www.thelancet.com/lancet/article/s0140673620313246 Retraction of the Lancet article that showed such horrible results for use of hcq. Data unable to be peer-reviewed; the company that collected it would not release the data. General embarrasment and apologies from the co-authors. ETA: oh, #$%^&^%$ !!! I just found out that the NEJM study used the SAME data set, from the same company, Surgisphere, for their recently published study that is the basis for the FDA recommending no use of HCQ. Gaaaah! https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/29/health/coronavirus-hydroxychloroquine.html?action=click&module=RelatedLinks&pgtype=Article Edited June 4, 2020 by Halftime Hope 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halftime Hope Posted June 4, 2020 Share Posted June 4, 2020 @Pen There's more, see ETA above. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pen Posted June 4, 2020 Share Posted June 4, 2020 56 minutes ago, Corraleno said: Jeez, who is doing the peer review on these studies and why are they only being investigated after they're published??? The French study that started the whole thing was also rushed through "peer review" in less than 24 hours, and the journal later admitted that it "did not meet expected standards." These journals need to slow the hell down and start vetting these studies fully before publication. They are messing with people's LIVES. 🤬 Or keep on with “”pre-review” releases which tells people information is not reviewed, but gets it out sooner in case it can help. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pen Posted June 4, 2020 Share Posted June 4, 2020 26 minutes ago, Halftime Hope said: ETA: oh, #$%^&^%$ !!! I just found out that the NEJM study used the SAME data set, from the same company, Surgisphere, for their recently published study that is the basis for the FDA recommending no use of HCQ. Gaaaah! https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/29/health/coronavirus-hydroxychloroquine.html?action=click&module=RelatedLinks&pgtype=Article 🤯 gah! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halftime Hope Posted June 5, 2020 Share Posted June 5, 2020 4 hours ago, Pen said: 🤯 gah! It's worse than I thought. The NEJM that used the same data was a study on cardiac meds, not on HQC. I misread the NYT article and didn't click through the actual study. Stink! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pen Posted June 5, 2020 Share Posted June 5, 2020 4 minutes ago, Halftime Hope said: It's worse than I thought. The NEJM that used the same data was a study on cardiac meds, not on HQC. I misread the NYT article and didn't click through the actual study. Stink! Yeah, thanks. that group led by Mehra is seeming very fishy and publishing a bunch of high profile articles in high profile places which are changing research and patient care with what’s increasingly seeming to be bogus and self serving Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.