Another study, a French study, on Hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin shows a 98% recovery rate using their protocol.
These were also very ill patients.
Here's the full English text of the study:
https://www.mediterranee-infection.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/MS.pdf
The first version of our article on the 1061 patients who were treated entirely with hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin is finished. You will see in the results that mortality is around 0.75% and that the cure rate is extremely high. This treatment has already been used by other AP-HM departments, with comparable results, independently of our team. We are pre-publishing the summary of this article in English and a table that summarizes all of our data so that this can eventually be used for political decisions.
Large pool of patients with severe COVID-19 illness, an actual controlled study (not a retrospective study), and all protocols fully outlined? It's still not peer reviewed but results duplication is mentioned with "sister-studies" currently running in France.
They excluded 350 patients from their study and stated all the reasons, why (transparency like this is good).
9 Patients died. Median age was 79. All of them had comorbidities.
France also does a better job of tracking diseases than the US. The US has a "throw it all under COVID-19" problem and it shows in our numbers.
Where are the studies from NYC? They, supposedly, had 4000 people undergoing trials on Hydroxychloroquine at one point.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Another study, a French study, on Hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin shows a 98% recovery rate using their protocol.These were also very ill patients.
Here's the full English text of the study:
https://www.mediterranee-infection.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/MS.pdf
Large pool of patients with severe COVID-19 illness, an actual controlled study (not a retrospective study), and all protocols fully outlined? It's still not peer reviewed but results duplication is mentioned with "sister-studies" currently running in France.
They excluded 350 patients from their study and stated all the reasons, why (transparency like this is good).
9 Patients died. Median age was 79. All of them had comorbidities.
France also does a better job of tracking diseases than the US. The US has a "throw it all under COVID-19" problem and it shows in our numbers.
Where are the studies from NYC? They, supposedly, had 4000 people undergoing trials on Hydroxychloroquine at one point.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.16.20065920v1.full.pdf
his study, we found no evidence that use of hydroxychloroquine, either with or without
azithromycin, reduced the risk of mechanical ventilation in patients hospitalized with Covid-19.
An association of increased overall mortality was identified in patients treated with
hydroxychloroquine alone. These findings highlight the importance of awaiting the results of
ongoing prospective, randomized, controlled studies before widespread adoption of these drugs.
The balls store the virus...... YouTube video
Originally posted by jaden_2.0
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.16.20065920v1.full.pdf
Yes, saw this one already. Threw it out as a bad study. The group that was tested had little control in the target group and they were twice as ill as the "control group" - which is odd. They were administered the drug after already having been intubated...which is really close to death if you look at the progression of COVID-19. The study was also a retrospective study, not an active study (where they went back through files and compiled a study from it rather than purposefully and actively executing a study which is part of why it looks like it was done so sloppy).
Also, one of the researchers has a conflict of interest (developing a competing drug) that was undisclosed, with Gilead.
Why would this French study show much different results and why does it make reference of similar results in multiple sister studies that are wrapping up?
Considering there are multiple studies going on and done (but not yet pre-published like this one) and this one keeps coming up in the news, you have to wonder why? I didn't see the media plastering the French study (the one I linked) all over the news but I saw them plastering the one you linked (and it feels creepy as hell when you see it):
And FoxNews has text from the French researchers where they break down the problems with that VA study and I'd like to get the English version text. They clearly have a paper from them as you can see it in the background when she reads he convenient text-clippings:
Originally posted by dadudemon
Yes, saw this one already. Threw it out as a bad study. The group that was tested had little control in the target group and they were twice as ill as the "control group" - which is odd. They were administered the drug after already having been intubated...which is really close to death if you look at the progression of COVID-19. The study was also a retrospective study, not an active study (where they went back through files and compiled a study from it rather than purposefully and actively executing a study which is part of why it looks like it was done so sloppy).Also, one of the researchers has a conflict of interest (developing a competing drug) that was undisclosed, with Gilead.
Why would this French study show much different results and why does it make reference of similar results in multiple sister studies that are wrapping up?
Considering there are multiple studies going on and done (but not yet pre-published like this one) and this one keeps coming up in the news, you have to wonder why? I didn't see the media plastering the French study (the one I linked) all over the news but I saw them plastering the one you linked (and it feels creepy as hell when you see it):
And FoxNews has text from the French researchers where they break down the problems with that VA study and I'd like to get the English version text. They clearly have a paper from them as you can see it in the background when she reads he convenient text-clippings:
Think it will be a while before we see quality studies. My favourite doing the rounds at the minute is the one that says smokers are less likely to get Covid--19.