WarriorGM wrote:You're right it is the most asinine thing in the world when people turn medicine into politics. But who politicized hydroxychloroquine? Was it Trump or was it his detractors? From what I can see it was his detractors who made a big deal out of it. Where did Trump get the idea that HCQ might be effective? Did he come up with it out of thin air? Of course not. He got it from Fauci most likely or maybe one of his other expert medical advisors. But because Trump relayed that information and became associated with HCQ his critics couldn't wait to see HCQ fail and Trump by extension. It's obscene.
So hang on. Trump says something very stupid, its proven to be stupid, and then Trump's supporters still pimp it, even though it not only showed to not be effective, it had potential long-term damage tacked onto it. It was not, nor ever was, pushed by Fauci or anyone besides the medical fringe, because competent doctors will wait for studies. Clout chasers who want to be ahead of the game pushed it. Then Trump pushed it. Then people who took the word of Trump over numerous studies pushed it. And you think that the pushback on something that doesnt work was political? I'm sorry but that's the dumbest take on this thread so far and that is quite the mountain to summit.
Remdesivir doesn't hurt people? Maybe, maybe not. The negative side effects of HCQ are well-known because it has been used for a long time. With remdesivir who really knows what the long term side effects are.
It's existed 10 years, and here's a shock for you - we can actually tell when things are going to be bad long term. Its not magic. Things just don't pop up. We can see potential long-term damage in COVID, and that's been around 2 years. We knew about the long-term damage of HCQ well before this. Playing the "I dont know, thus nobody must know" card is.. crazy. I mean, frankly your whole analysis is. But this specifically is just baffling.
Call me a Trump supporter all you want but I arrived at my conclusions without him and without watching a minute of Fox News. Your fixation with him shows your biases as much as anyone else's. Unsurprisingly you're using the same kind of cherry picking used in political discussion.
Your links are about the ACTT-1 trial but you ignore the larger Solidarity trial.https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4057
And you wonder why people remain skeptical?
Havent gone anywhere near the Trump route, but hit dogs do holler, dont they
Hoorah that you come by your willful ignorance honestly. And no - not cherry picking. Because that study - at its core levels - said the EXACT same thing as the ACTT trials in data. The presentation was different. Don't understand? Not surprised and no worries - I've got you. The ACTT trials indicated absolutely zero evidence that HCQ was helpful. None. Bupkis. It in fact lined up with every study previous. Remdesevir, however, shortened the spread time of COVID in test subjects anywhere from 0 to 4 days, in a consistent average. It also posited that due to shortened time, that survival percentages would improve. The Solidarity trial REAFFIRMED
that Remdesevir increased the timeline and helped speed along recovery, but did not find that it improved survival percentages. If it did in fact cure COVID.. yeah, we'd be in a much better position. It doesn't. It accelerates healing in people who would likely heal anyways, which is significant in that it lowers incubation time and lowers spread percentages.
Or in short, Remdesevir is useful in the fight against COVID, HCQ is not and never was, and the data you presented confirms that. You think its some accident that the term "impact on survival" being used over and over again?
There are many potential cocktail treatments that suggest themselves? Sounds great. But we've seen promising combined treatments suggested before. We need to see results. Good thing for Gilead that with the $3000+ per course it charges for remdesivir it will be able to fund such trials. I wonder though if maybe using that money to buy oxygen machines might be more cost effective for more people in the world.
That's why they are testing them right now. Of course, people will read headlines as you did, come to inaccurate conclusions, and then try and spread doubt in something that you have absolutely no clue about. So maybe there's some logic behind the idea of just treating symptoms instead of looking for effective treatment plans, because people are just too willfully ignorant, human representations of the Dunning-Kreuger effect come to life, to the point that even when we do finally make ourselves capable to control COVID, it won't matter because people will be too ignorant to believe it.
And if you don't believe me on that, I submit this thread. This whole country. Because we literally got to the point where we could control it last month, and were people actually interested in the truth instead of confirmation bias, we'd actually be on the verge of stamping out COVID right now and getting ready for normal life to resume towards the end of 2021.
Sorry to all who read this and hate the tone, but pseudo-intellectual BS like what the poster submitted is literally why we aren't returning to normal any time soon. And at a certain point, they need to be held to some sort of accountability. There's a reason they search for twitter, facebook, sports forums to spout this nonsense.. if there was any legitimate concern, any non-narcissistic reasoning behind, any reason beyond the need to feel intelligent for being counter-authority.. they'd be in medical forums talking with nurses, interns, residents, attendings - people on the ground floor who have the actual data. But they won't. Because the curbstomping they'd receive there would make my rant here look like Mr. Rogers on Ativan.