The P&R Plague Thread (Covid-19)

[ZRod]

@commando the fact that Scarlet referred to it as horse medicine is mostly thanks to the media sensationalizing it. They smeared Rogan for taking a medicine "used as a horse dewormer" when he most likely took the tablets made for human consumption only, but you didn't hear that from the talking Lemon's on CNN. It's lazy and completely dishonest (it might even lead idiots to try to find and take literal horse dewormer at the horse size dose).

 

Yes, there is no clinical evidence supporting ivermectin as a treatment for COVID. Same as there was none for hydroxychloroquine. Just report on the bozos who take the literal horse paste or fish tank cleaner and how wrong dangerous that is, and how there is no evidence that the human form is effective. It's dishonest to say that doctors are prescribing a drug that's used as a horse dewormer, when they literally are not doing that. They are prescribing a drug meant for human consumption only.

[Archy1221]

8 minutes ago, ZRod said:

@commando the fact that Scarlet referred to it as horse medicine is mostly thanks to the media sensationalizing it. They smeared Rogan for taking a medicine "used as a horse dewormer" when he most likely took the tablets made for human consumption only, but you didn't hear that from the talking Lemon's on CNN. It's lazy and completely dishonest (it might even lead idiots to try to find and take literal horse dewormer at the horse size dose).

 

Yes, there is no clinical evidence supporting ivermectin as a treatment for COVID. Same as there was none for hydroxychloroquine. Just report on the bozos who take the literal horse paste or fish tank cleaner and how wrong dangerous that is, and how there is no evidence that the human form is effective. It's dishonest to say that doctors are prescribing a drug that's used as a horse dewormer, when they literally are not doing that. They are prescribing a drug meant for human consumption only.

I agree with most of what you said, but there is some clinical evidence to support HCQ +therapies in COVID patients. 
 

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

[Scarlet]

 

 

https://www.who.int/news-room/questions-and-answers/item/coronavirus-disease-(covid-19)-hydroxychloroquine

 

Quote

WHO does not recommend hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for COVID-19. This recommendation is based on 30 trials with more than 10 000 COVID-19 patients.

 

Hydroxychloroquine did not reduce mortality, the need for or duration of mechanical ventilation.

 

Taking hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19 may increase the risk of heart rhythm problems, blood and lymph disorders, kidney injury, liver problems and failure. 

 

[commando]

20 minutes ago, ZRod said:

@commando the fact that Scarlet referred to it as horse medicine is mostly thanks to the media sensationalizing it. They smeared Rogan for taking a medicine "used as a horse dewormer" when he most likely took the tablets made for human consumption only, but you didn't hear that from the talking Lemon's on CNN. It's lazy and completely dishonest (it might even lead idiots to try to find and take literal horse dewormer at the horse size dose).

 

Yes, there is no clinical evidence supporting ivermectin as a treatment for COVID. Same as there was none for hydroxychloroquine. Just report on the bozos who take the literal horse paste or fish tank cleaner and how wrong dangerous that is, and how there is no evidence that the human form is effective. It's dishonest to say that doctors are prescribing a drug that's used as a horse dewormer, when they literally are not doing that. They are prescribing a drug meant for human consumption only.

https://cdispatch.com/news/2021-08-21/ivermectin-sales-surge-at-pharmacies-feed-stores-despite-inconclusive-studies-on-effectiveness-against-covid-19/

 

it certainly looks like people were buying it from feed stores

 

The human form of ivermectin is available by prescription only, but no prescription is needed to purchase the ivermectin used for animals.

“I started seeing people buying it for COVID back in January,” said one farm supply manager who agreed to speak on the condition of anonymity because he realizes the drug may be controversial. “It’s really picked up in the last four or five weeks, about the time we started hearing about the Delta variant. Compared to last August, my sales of ivermectin have increased probably 50-fold.”

Bonner notes that purchasing animal medicines for human use is illegal.

“There’s no punishment for it, but if you do get sick after taking an animal medicine, you don’t have any liability claim,” he said. “You’re on your own. It was your decision.”

[Archy1221]

2 minutes ago, Scarlet said:

 

 

https://www.who.int/news-room/questions-and-answers/item/coronavirus-disease-(covid-19)-hydroxychloroquine

 

 

Henry Ford, a very reputable hospital system, found it helped their patients 

[ZRod]

@commando that's not what I've been talking about...

 

@Archy1221 that's a pretty early study, which they even admitted needed further clinical trials. It's kind of odd that HQ with azithromycin ended up having a worse outcome than HQ alone. I have no idea how the drugs interact, but it would lead me to wonder if there are some statistical anomalies going on.

[Scarlet]

44 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

Henry Ford, a very reputable hospital system, found it helped their patients 

https://www.bridgemi.com/michigan-health-watch/henry-ford-study-hydroxychloroquine-covid-quietly-shut-down

 

Quote

Hydroxychloroquine — an antimalarial drug that has also proven useful in treating rheumatoid arthritis, lupus and other inflammatory diseases — briefly produced some excitement last spring when it was promoted as a potential game-changer by President Trump. But early optimism gave way to broader medical studies, with the nation’s top health agencies eventually determining it was not effective in treating or preventing the spread of the novel coronavirus.

 

But that optimism proved misplaced, with just 624 people signing up. Henry Ford quietly ended the study just before Christmas.

 

But doubts about the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine had already begun to emerge among frontline clinicians, and were confirmed over time by larger studies that failed to show significant evidence of improvement among coronavirus patients. 

 

In addition to low participation, Henry Ford researchers said they realized the “extremely low rate of infection” among its trial’s participants would make it “extremely unlikely” to discern whether the drug had an effect.

 

Quote

 

That study was never completed and was questionable from the get go.  Other more rigorous studies have since found that hydroxychloroquine is not effective in the prevention or treatment of COVID.

 

Not sure why you feel the need to keep pushing this but whatever.   Even Henry Ford's own researchers said it's was unlikely from their trials whether or not they could discern if hydroxychloroquine was effective.

 

 

 

 

[BigRedBuster]

5 hours ago, B.B. Hemingway said:

But they didn’t, because the Ivermectin they used in the study is a drug intended for human use. Despite all the moronic jokes about it being horse medicine.

Didn’t say they did. But, what they did take is just as stupid if they are fighting Covid.  Anyone with a brain knows it’s not going to work on a virus. 

[Archy1221]

4 hours ago, Scarlet said:

https://www.bridgemi.com/michigan-health-watch/henry-ford-study-hydroxychloroquine-covid-quietly-shut-down

 

 

That study was never completed and was questionable from the get go.  Other more rigorous studies have since found that hydroxychloroquine is not effective in the prevention or treatment of COVID.

 

Not sure why you feel the need to keep pushing this but whatever.   Even Henry Ford's own researchers said it's was unlikely from their trials whether or not they could discern if hydroxychloroquine was effective.

 

 

 

 

In August, Henry Ford posted a letterdefending its work, and insisting its study remained “promising.” Due to a “political climate that...has made any objective discussion about this drug impossible,” the letter said, Henry Ford would no longer comment on hydroxychloroquine “outside the medical community.” 
 

The study I shared with you had nothing to do with the study you referenced as I read it.  It sounds to me like it was enrollment for a different study 

[The Dude]

12 hours ago, ZRod said:

@commando the fact that Scarlet referred to it as horse medicine is mostly thanks to the media sensationalizing it. They smeared Rogan for taking a medicine "used as a horse dewormer" when he most likely took the tablets made for human consumption only, but you didn't hear that from the talking Lemon's on CNN. It's lazy and completely dishonest (it might even lead idiots to try to find and take literal horse dewormer at the horse size dose).

 

Yes, there is no clinical evidence supporting ivermectin as a treatment for COVID. Same as there was none for hydroxychloroquine. Just report on the bozos who take the literal horse paste or fish tank cleaner and how wrong dangerous that is, and how there is no evidence that the human form is effective. It's dishonest to say that doctors are prescribing a drug that's used as a horse dewormer, when they literally are not doing that. They are prescribing a drug meant for human consumption only.

 

That's what I didn't understand about the Joe Rogan witchhunt in the first place.  The actual news media can blatantly lie and spread misinformation, no big deal, they've been doing it for decades.  But a  podcaster suddenly needs to be held to a much higher standard of journalistic integrity?  Makes absolutely zero sense.

[Scarlet]

8 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

In August, Henry Ford posted a letterdefending its work, and insisting its study remained “promising.” Due to a “political climate that...has made any objective discussion about this drug impossible,” the letter said, Henry Ford would no longer comment on hydroxychloroquine “outside the medical community.” 
 

The study I shared with you had nothing to do with the study you referenced as I read it.  It sounds to me like it was enrollment for a different study 

You mean the study Trump and Peter Navarro were out in front of their skis on?  That study also proved to be flawed and has been roundly dismissed by the scientific community.  

 

https://www.statnews.com/2020/07/08/a-flawed-covid-19-study-gets-the-white-houses-attention-and-the-fda-may-pay-the-price/

 

Quote

The study that sparked the latest controversy was anything but randomized. Not only was it not randomized, outside experts noted, but patients who received hydroxychloroquine were also more likely to get steroids, which appear to help very sick patients with Covid-19. That is likely to have influenced the central finding of the Henry Ford study: that death rates were 50% lower among patients in hospitals treated with hydroxychloroquine.

 

The president’s trade adviser, Peter Navarro, told reporters that Henry Ford had asked the FDA to issue a new emergency use authorization for the drug. The agency had previously revoked hydroxychloroquine’s authorization on June 15, based on evidence it was not effective. 

 

Experts were taken aback by the developments.

 

“The medical community has come to the inescapable conclusion that hydroxychloroquine is not effective at treating Covid-19 infections,” said Steven Nissen, a cardiologist at the Cleveland Clinic and a longtime clinical trialist. “Peter Navarro is not a scientist, he is the president’s trade representative. He should not be advising the public on matters of health.”

 

Nissen and Borio say observational studies simply cannot be used to determine whether a medicine is effective. Again and again they have been wrong

 

[nic]

On 2/18/2022 at 2:25 PM, NM11046 said:

I can sorta explain that - allergies are all driven by exposure ... when I (and I assume many of you here at HB) were young, as soon as we could say "I'm hungry" mom was giving us pb, on a spoon, on celery, on an apple - I remember zero kids with nut allergies.  Then folks started waiting to expose their kids (I blame the move to breast feeding kids and being more aware of what they were exposed to starting with what mom eats)

 

Like the first year in pre school every kid gets sick all the time, they get more immune to more things as they are around school (and people and germs) more.  As some of my parents aged folks would say "kids need to eat dirt - makes em' healthier".

My kid with the egg allergy was barely on solid food when he had his first reaction. He broke out in hives on his stomach and threw up in the pediatricians office. He had a hard time breathing too. He reacted to a small piece of angel food cake.

[Archy1221]

https://www.henryford.com/news/2020/08/hydroxychloroquine-an-open-letter
 

As an early hotspot for the COVID-19 pandemic, we have seen and lived its devastating effects alongside our patients and families. Perhaps that’s what makes us even more determined to rally our researchers, frontline care team members and leaders together in boldness, participating in scientific research, including clinical trials, to find the safest care and most effective treatments. While feeling the same sense of urgency everyone else does to recognize a simple, single remedy for COVID-19, we need to be realistic in the time it takes to fully understand the optimal therapy or combination of therapies required of a new virus we are all trying to contain.

The most well-accepted and definitive method to determine the efficacy of a treatment is a double-blind, randomized clinical trial. However, this type of study takes a long time to design, execute and analyze. Therefore, a whole scientific field exists in which scientists examine how a drug is working in the real world to get as best an answer as they can as soon as possible. These types of studies can be done much more rapidly with data that is already available, usually from medical records.

Like all observational research, these studies are very difficult to analyze and can never completely account for the biases inherent in how doctors make different decisions to treat different patients. Furthermore, it is not unusual that results from such studies vary in different populations and at different times, and no one study can ever be considered all by itself.

[Scarlet]

To believe hydroxychloroquine is at all effective in treating Covid you'd have to believe that research scientists and front line physicians both are either completely incompetent or in some sort of conspiracy to disregard the data, which there is none that hasn't been dismissed by the vast majority of scientists.  The tendency to hold one or both of these beliefs seem to be inherent only in Trumpists for what appears to be political reasons.

 

In other words if hydroxychloroquine worked who the f#&% wouldn't be singing it's praises?

[Archy1221]

https://www.mediaite.com/news/cdc-under-new-scrutiny-for-collecting-wide-variety-of-covid-related-data-but-publishing-only-a-tiny-fraction/
 

more transparency should always be the answer, not less