The commercial labs were not and they are pushing out the vast majority of the testsOriginally Posted by techman05
|
|
|
|
|
The commercial labs were not and they are pushing out the vast majority of the tests
''Don't be a bad dagh..."
Because that's what makes them safe!
Thank you
Thank you. Exactly
You have this part exactly backwards. Really ask yourself if you would be arguing so vehemently that a prescription drug taken as directed by a doctor is not safe if Trump hadn't suggested it could help with this pandemic. Your TDS has you so twisted up that you are arguing semantics to desperately prove that Trump was "wrong again". You want to argue he did a bad job responding to this pandemic- fine there is miles of room for debate about that and it will be debated about for years to come. Making
We will certainly find out whether it is effective in treating COVID. I can promise you if Trump ignored it you and Guiss would be complaining about Trump sitting on his hands while France, and China and others are using an existing, established drug and showing promising results.
I am totally okay with the FDA allowing doctors to prescribe this to treat COVID. This is an emergency with no known treatment.
Pimping the treatment from the bully pulpit of the presidency is out of line.
Telling people that it is “safe” is just not true. Nor is saying that no one has died from it - like Pawdawg did.
The jury is out whether it is effective or not, which is to be expected at a time like this. Designing clinical trials is not the highest priority.
The reason why Trump promotes this treatment - it was first pimped by Tucker Carlson.
Which is really just a microcosm with what is wrong with this presidency. So much of his policy and commentary is driven by right wing media rather than the experts.
This drug that has everyone so up in arms, is given to EVERY member of the US Military when they are deployed overseas... along with a list of others.. not discretionary, but mandatory.. but I'm sure that the experts on here already knew that..
Arguing vehemently? Looks like you and I define SAFE and VEHEMENCE differently. After all, you and I entered into this discussion because of your semantics around the word SAFE.
I have no interest in showing that Trump was wrong. He's been so wrong on so much, that one more thing doesn't move the needle. It's fun to point out here because he's so, nearly universally, worshipped on this board.
I agree with Guiss about the use of the drug. I probably disagree with him about the severity of the issue with Trump talking out of school about it. Anyone who would trust his medical opinion on something is so detached from reality that arguing with them does no good. Sort of like people arguing that Trump has "total authority"...it's just laughable. Not worth an argument...unless I happen to be bored.
Ultimately, I feel like you're projecting. I'll never know for sure, but you called me an idiot for saying that prescription drugs are not "safe"...which is not debatable unless you're playing semantic games in an effort to paint your opponent as deranged.
Time is your friend. Impulse is your enemy. -John Bogle
And to think, I actually entertained investing some of my money....Gawd! and Whew!
Is it still give to the military? I thought they changed the anti-malaria drug to something with less side effects?
Can't speak of lately, but the side effects we had we claimed were due to the fact that they (Military) shot you full of so many different things at one time, that if you did suffer any side effects, you had no idea which one it came from.
You contradict yourself in your own statements. You are partially correct that it is not debatable. Prescription drugs when taken as directed by a doctor are safe otherwise they would never be approved for use. It's literally the whole point of the FDA. I will bow out of this discussion so you and Guiss can untie yourselves and go back to your regularly scheduled nonsense.
Four people might have died from it over a 60 year period. Extremely safe
4 people died from it in France, alone, being treated for Coronavirus.
But there is a new paper coming out now.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1...551v1.full.pdf
Worryingly, significant risks are identified for combination users of HCQ+AZM even in the short-term as proposed for COVID19 management, with a 15-20% increased risk of angina/chest pain and heart failure, and a two-fold risk of cardiovascular mortality in the first month of treatment.
Actress Rita Wilson can confirm that chloroquine doesn't help but does have potential side effects. https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/14/enter...rus/index.html
"I can only tell you that I don't know if the drug worked or if it was just time for the fever to break," she said. "The fever did break, but the chloroquine had such extreme side effects. I was completely nauseous and I had vertigo and my muscles felt very weak. I think people have to be very considerate about that drug. We don't really know if it is helpful in this case."
Nah it couldn't have been the chloroquine that brought down the fever but it definitely caused the nauseous, vertigo and muscle weakness no chance that had anything to do with coronavirus
No, they didn't die from the drug. They died from SARS II. They had it and as we know if you die, and you have it, you died from the new virus.
Some fellow was crossing a street after dark and got hit and killed by a car. He had tested positive for the new virus, SARS II, and therefore he died from the virus. Oh, and it was all Trump's fault.
That paper is merely a compilation of a literature review of other studies and reports. It states:
Our results suggest that long-term use of HCQ leads to an increased risk of cardiovascular mortality, with no observable excess risk of major cardiovascular events or diagnosed bradycardia. Considering the current evidence, this may relate to cumulative effects of HCQ leading to an increased risk of QT lengthening or relate to the moderately increased risk of angina and heart failure seen. However, as the strong association observed with cardiovascular death is not observed with diagnosed arrhythmia or bradycardia in this study, sudden cardiovascular death here is more likely due to QT lengthening and undetected and/or sudden torsade-de-pointes. Although long-term treatment with HCQ is not expected for the management of COVID-19, some research suggests that higher doses as prescribed for COVID-19 can, even in the short-term, lead to equivalent side effects given the long half-life of HCQ.49
The article they cite as saying potential short-term is
49. Chatre C, Roubille F, Vernhet H, Jorgensen C, Pers YM. Cardiac Complications Attributed to Chloroquineand Hydroxychloroquine: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Drug Saf 2018;41:919-31.
It states: "Most patients had been treated for a long time (median 7 years, minimum 3 days; maximum 35 years) and with a high cumulative dose (median 1235 g for hydroxychloroquine and 803 g for chloroquine). "
With conclusions:
CONCLUSIONS:
Clinicians should be warned that chloroquine- or hydroxychloroquine-related cardiac manifestations, even conduction disorders without repercussion, may be initial manifestations of toxicity, and are potentially irreversible. Therefore, treatment withdrawal is required when cardiac manifestations are present.
I don't know if what's presented in the link I found (https://link.springer.com/article/10...264-018-0689-4) is the complete report but if not its only available by subscription.
It is an international compilation. It is the comments on the combined therapy of HCQ + ZPac, which is the widely used therapy that is being tried, is more problematic because they BOTH contribute to QT lengthening, making the promoted therapy more risky than either drug alone.
And as pointed out in your quote -
Thus higher doses of HCQ, even without Zpac, can cause heart issues. Patients should be monitored on EKG and should be taken off the HCQ if QT lengthening is seen.Although long-term treatment with HCQ is not expected for the management of COVID-19, some research suggests that higher doses as prescribed for COVID-19 can, even in the short-term, lead to equivalent side effects given the long half-life of HCQ.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
