All things Chinese CoronaVirus

[njbill]

wgdsr, I’m not sure what you are reading. The bottom line is that the study says hydroxychloroquine doesn’t work. There is more detail, of course, but that’s what the study concluded.

It is not an editorialization or a political statement to say Trump was wrong. He said it would work. This study says it doesn’t.

[RedFromMI]

wgdsr, I’m not sure what you are reading. The bottom line is that the study says hydroxychloroquine doesn’t work. There is more detail, of course, but that’s what the study concluded.

It is not an editorialization or a political statement to say Trump was wrong. He said it would work. This study says it doesn’t.

The paper does say that any observed effect is not statistically significant. It did have a caveat that the study design (retrospective look at cases in NYC) may have influenced the results.

So any effect that is positive is not significant unless hidden by the design of the experiment. Given its size, and given the more positive results of other treatments, it still is not a good result for these drugs.

[seacoaster]

Back to our ongoing course on leadership in times of crisis:

President Trump, asked about the more than 80,000 Americans who've died of coronavirus:

"Don’t ask me, ask China."

[MDlaxfan76]

mdlax, this would seem to be a strange hill to die on. cuomo and ny missed this one. hopefully can right the ship.
jersey, cali and ny in march were mandating this, jersey and cali reversed course and cuomo defended this and was adamant throughout april.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/co ... s-n1191811

Thanks, that article certainly makes it clear that it's a heck of a lot more complicated than the blanket statement either with or against Cuomo's decisions.

As I said, (and agree with you strongly) mistakes have undoubtedly been made.

I don't call him King Andy for no reason.

fair 'nuff.

What do you call the fellow in the White House?

I call him Der Leader.

I don't know what to call Trump anymore. He is the same person he presented himself to be on that stupid TV show. He is an arrogant, self centered and egotistical jackass. He is not a Republican. He is certainly not a conservative. IMO he is liked by his base supporters because he leaves Democrats and the media foaming at the mouth with rage and blind hatred. I still find it unusual that way before Trump became POTUS, the NYS Democrats loved the guy and loved cashing all of his checks.

He is the head of the Republican Party and enjoys a 90+% approval rating amongst republicans. You may be thinking of another Trump.

# a false equivalency is a choice

To the Washington DC establishment Republicans Trump is a horses rear end. Those establishment Rs resent having an interloper such as Trump moving in on their territory. If anyone is going to screw up the country, that is their job, not Trumps. When speaking of middle America type Republicans, IMO they love Trump because Democrats despise him. That may be a simplistic explanation, but i believe it is true.

It is hard to change a belief with facts.

I believe that DC establishment Republicans despise Trump. Kindly enlighten me as to your facts that prove otherwise. If all you have are statistics, I probably thought you were a more enlightened individual. Please, please, please don't tell me you are just suffering from a TDS hangover. If that is the case, take 2 Bidens and post again in the morning.

So Trump is or isn’t a Republican? He has a 90+% approval rating amongst republicans and he is the head of the Republican Party.

Defining what a Republican is sure ain't in my wheelhouse. I am willing to guess since establishment Republicans hate him with much passion that Trump has to reside as a fringe option for some Republicans. If you are trying to convince me that 90% of all Republicans love him... well then you have not been reading MDs opinion of the guy. MD is a lifelong member of the Republican party. Are there more than 1 Republican parties? I'm getting confused here.

Your words:
“I don't know what to call Trump anymore. He is the same person he presented himself to be on that stupid TV show. He is an arrogant, self centered and egotistical jackass. He is not a Republican. He is certainly not a conservative. IMO he is liked by his base supporters because he leaves Democrats and the media foaming at the mouth with rage and blind hatred.”

He is a Republican. He is he head of the Republican Party and he has a 90%+ approval rating. It should not be difficult to understand for most people.

MD is a lifelong Republican and if I remember correctly he is not a Trump supporter. I don't know where this 90% figure you keep touting even comes from. If you want to tell me that the ESTABLISHMENT REPUBLICANS consider him the leader of the party I would politely tell you your crazy. I don't know how Trump could be considered the leader of anything politically. If you are convinced that Trump is the actual leader of the Republican party i would suggest to you the fact Trump could not get any legislation passed when his party controlled both houses tells me his fellow Republicans were sending him a message. IMO that message was he was not running anything in the Republican party except for his mouth.

I'm in that dwindling 10%. Lots have left the GOP altogether, so the shrinking GOP is more concentrated with those who actually support Trump or at least support the vitriol against libs and Dems, or are chewed by the Trumpist wing.

Trump had trouble getting something passed, after John McCain died?

You are of course correct that Trump in no way reflects traditional GOP values.

But he does represent guys like PB, who hate all "libs" and Dems for drill, and are happy to take those tax cuts.

And guys like David Duke.

Some of those types are well represented by lots of loudmouths, particularly in the House, some in the Senate. And in general, the traditional GOP types, especially the moderates, have died or been pushed out by the hard core Trumpist wing.

And the surviving political folks, both those who run for office and the hangers on, have made their deal with the devil. Heck, Trump's press secretary had some quite derogatory things to say about him just a few years ago...but now kisses his butt daily...

[MDlaxfan76]

Back to our ongoing course on leadership in times of crisis:

President Trump, asked about the more than 80,000 Americans who've died of coronavirus:

"Don’t ask me, ask China."

As he has many times said, "who knew?'...

[wgdsr]

“Main Outcomes and Measures Primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were cardiac arrest and abnormal electrocardiogram findings (arrhythmia or QT prolongation).”

??? What am I missing?

those are what they are looking for. what they are trying to measure. here is the conclusions and relevance from the abstract:

Among patients hospitalized in metropolitan New York with COVID-19, treatment with hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, or both, compared with neither treatment, was not significantly associated with differences in in-hospital mortality. However, the interpretation of these findings may be limited by the observational design.

the conclusion after description of the study is the same verbatim.

here is the relevant info under primary outcomes:
In the primary analysis, following adjustment for demographics, specific hospital, preexisting conditions, and illness severity, no significant differences in mortality were found between patients receiving hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin (adjusted HR, 1.35 [95% CI, 0.76-2.40]), hydroxychloroquine alone (adjusted HR, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.63-1.85]), or azithromycin alone (adjusted HR, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.26-1.21]), compared with neither drug (Table 3) (complete case analysis variable completeness was 86%).

and secondary outcomes:
Across all groups, the most commonly reported adverse event was abnormal ECG findings, particularly arrhythmia (Table 4). Abnormal ECG findings were more common among patients receiving hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin and hydroxychloroquine alone, both overall and among those with a record of ECG screening. However, in logistic regression models of abnormal ECG findings, there were no significant differences between the groups receiving neither drug and each of the hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin and hydroxychloroquine alone groups.


and for cardiac arrest:
A greater proportion of patients receiving hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin experienced cardiac arrest (15.5%) and abnormal ECG findings (27.1%), as did those in the hydroxychloroquine alone group (13.7% and 27.3, respectively), compared with azithromycin alone (6.2% and 16.1%, respectively) and neither drug (6.8% and 14.0%, respectively). In adjusted models with those receiving neither drug as comparison, cardiac arrest was more likely in patients receiving hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin (adjusted OR, 2.13 [95% CI, 1.12-4.05]; E-value = 1.31), but not hydroxychloroquine alone (adjusted OR, 1.91 [95% CI, 0.96-3.81]) and azithromycin alone (adjusted OR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.27-1.56]), and also in patients taking hydroxychloroquine alone vs azithromycin alone (adjusted OR, 2.97 [95% CI, 1.56-5.64]; E-value = 1.81).

under limitations:
Limitations
This study has several limitations. First, in sampling first hospitalizations, possible readmissions to other facilities may not be captured. Second, mortality was limited to in-hospital death, and patients discharged were assumed to still be alive during the study period. Third, some potential confounders such as inflammatory markers associated with severity of COVID-19 in prior studies were not frequently measured and thus not available for modeling.18 Fourth, the rapidity with which patients entered the ICU and underwent mechanical ventilation, often concurrently with initiating hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin, rendered these outcomes unsuitable for efficacy analyses. Fifth, adverse events were collected as having occurred at any point during hospitalization, potentially before drug initiation, although both medications were started on average within 1 day of admission; future studies should examine the onset of these events relative to drug timing. Sixth, it is likely that there is unmeasured residual confounding due to factors not included in the analysis. For the significant associations of hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin vs no drug with cardiac arrest and hydroxychloroquine alone vs azithromycin alone with cardiac arrest, the respective E-values for the lower bound of the OR’s CI of 1.31 and 1.81 suggest factors moderately associated with treatment and cardiac arrest could render these associations nonsignificant.22 Seventh, for the subsample of 211 patients receiving azithromycin alone, the HR point estimate for mortality was 0.56, but the confidence interval crossed 1.0. This suggests the possibility of a true protective association, but it may also represent unmeasured confounding; it may warrant additional study. Eighth, the confidence intervals for some of the findings are wide, reflecting limits in study power for some analyses.

Clinical trials remain needed to provide definitive causal evidence of the effect of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin on mortality, while also providing an opportunity to more finely control baseline patient severity and the dose and timing of drug administration. Nonetheless, the findings of the present study should be considered in concert with recent COVID-19 treatment guidelines from the National Institutes of Health and Infectious Diseases Society of America as well as the statement regarding safety concerning use of hydroxychloroquine from the US Food and Drug Administration.30-32

the one bad association they had found was potentially cardiac arrest (but not arrhythmia) with the combo together versus neither. then under limitations, the bolded describes that it very well could be nonsignificant.

i'll leave it to experts as to whether the rest of the limitations are abnormally long, but also bolded above under limitations would seem to be what are going to be needed to determine whether hcq is effective against the virus. and actual clinical trials, not post-observational studies.

this one concluded that there wasn't a significant change in mortality, its primary objective, for the groups it measured. those groups were wildly different in their application (with those receiving drugs supposedly in much worse shape to start out with). if we assume all the calculations they have to make to adjust those findings to make them parallel enough to compare are accurate, hcq has been advocated by most experts that i've seen as potentially being valuable very early on. not in advanced stages, after hospital admissions, etc. whether that turns out to be the case, we'll see. what the study doesn't say is that it is worthless.

what we will see, and need to see to have any real idea, at some point is actual clinical trials, and some random double blind ones. used at various stages, i'm sure. there may be over 150 of them going on right now involving hcq or chloroquine.

[wgdsr]

wgdsr, I’m not sure what you are reading. The bottom line is that the study says hydroxychloroquine doesn’t work. There is more detail, of course, but that’s what the study concluded.

It is not an editorialization or a political statement to say Trump was wrong. He said it would work. This study says it doesn’t.

first, that's not what the study says, and it certainly didn't conclude that.

second, almost every single professional advocate for the potential of the drug that i've seen suggests that its highest effectiveness is most likely to come early on for a patient and before the virus has an opportunity to replicate. early. probably/maybe the same for remdesivir from what i can tell. if that even happens to be the case, there's likely a time in the illness that the patient/virus crosses over and the drug would be much less effective. there are other drugs being tested for that stage.

we won't know for sure until they get clinical trials posted.

[CU88]

FREE THE WHITE HOUSE!

[njbill]

We seem to have problems communicating. You have quoted excerpts, above, which support precisely what I said. I provided an overall, bottom line conclusion. That’s what this study says. Patients do no better with the drug, indeed some do worse, than without it. What that means is the drug doesn’t work according to the study (yes, with a few qualifiers whose significance or lack thereof has not been demonstrated).

Maybe other studies will come to different results. Let’s see.

You may have noticed that Trump has stopped advocating the use of this drug for some time now. I suspect there is a reason for that.

[youthathletics]

If 80% of Americans Wore Masks, COVID-19 Infections Would Plummet, New Study Says
There’s compelling evidence that Japan, Hong Kong, and other East Asian locales are doing it right and we should really, truly mask up—fast.

By David Ewing Duncan
May 8, 2020

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/05 ... ype=earned

It sounds too good to be true. But a compelling new study and computer model provide fresh evidence for a simple solution to help us emerge from this nightmarish lockdown. The formula? Always social distance in public and, most importantly, wear a mask.

If you’re wondering whether to wear or not to wear, consider this. The day before yesterday, 21 people died of COVID-19 in Japan. In the United States, 2,129 died. Comparing overall death rates for the two countries offers an even starker point of comparison with total U.S. deaths now at a staggering 76,032 and Japan’s fatalities at 577. Japan’s population is about 38% of the U.S., but even adjusting for population, the Japanese death rate is a mere 2% of America’s.

This comes despite Japan having no lockdown, still-active subways, and many businesses that have remained open—reportedly including karaoke bars, although Japanese citizens and industries are practicing social distancing where they can. Nor have the Japanese broadly embraced contact tracing, a practice by which health authorities identify someone who has been infected and then attempt to identify everyone that person might have interacted with—and potentially infected. So how does Japan do it?

“One reason is that nearly everyone there is wearing a mask,” said De Kai, an American computer scientist with joint appointments at UC Berkeley’s International Computer Science Institute and at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. He is also the chief architect of an in-depth study, set to be released in the coming days, that suggests that every one of us should be wearing a mask—whether surgical or homemade, scarf or bandana—like they do in Japan and other countries, mostly in East Asia. This formula applies to President Donald Trump and Vice President Mike Pence (occasional mask refuseniks) as well as every other official who routinely interacts with people in public settings. Among the findings of their research paper, which the team plans to submit to a major journal: If 80% of a closed population were to don a mask, COVID-19 infection rates would statistically drop to approximately one twelfth the number of infections—compared to a live-virus population in which no one wore masks.

We could have used some of that 18 tons of masks, gowns and other personal protection items that Trump sent to China during the first week of February.

Dr. Fauci just called you two out. He is stupid.

https://www.instagram.com/p/CADc5BlFjEp/

[a fan]

Dr. Fauci just called you two out. He is stupid.

https://www.instagram.com/p/CADc5BlFjEp/

How badly do you think Fauci regrets saying that?

I wish I was interviewing him. The next question I'd ask is: why do medical professionals need mask if they don't work?

Then he has to think for a minute, and realize what he's saying is stupid.


We're playing a game of probability here. Nothing is perfect. But when you make probabilities go down? That's where you find success. And the virus dies from a death of a thousand cuts.

[wgdsr]

We seem to have problems communicating. You have quoted excerpts, above, which support precisely what I said. I provided an overall, bottom line conclusion. That’s what this study says. Patients do no better with the drug, indeed some do worse, than without it. What that means is the drug doesn’t work according to the study (yes, with a few qualifiers whose significance or lack thereof has not been demonstrated).

Maybe other studies will come to different results. Let’s see.

You may have noticed that Trump has stopped advocating the use of this drug for some time now. I suspect there is a reason for that.

read what you want. studies set up in this format are not conclusive of anything. much less if they "don't work^. i think you already know that, but can't be sure.

btb,last week i posted a similarly built study on hcq out of a china hospital. one difference was all the patients observed were categorized the same. critical if i remember right.

actually had great results, if china can be believed. i didn't see you post on it, but i'm sure you were encouraged.

it works! study must've concluded that somewhere.

[youthathletics]

Dr. Fauci just called you two out. He is stupid.

https://www.instagram.com/p/CADc5BlFjEp/

How badly do you think Fauci regrets saying that?

I wish I was interviewing him. The next question I'd ask is: why do medical professionals need mask if they don't work?

Then he has to think for a minute, and realize what he's saying is stupid.


We're playing a game of probability here. Nothing is perfect. But when you make probabilities go down? That's where you find success. And the virus dies from a death of a thousand cuts.

You could also call it a Freudian slip. Or possibly just because you are smart it does not mean you also have common sense.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Dr. Fauci just called you two out. He is stupid.

https://www.instagram.com/p/CADc5BlFjEp/

How badly do you think Fauci regrets saying that?

I wish I was interviewing him. The next question I'd ask is: why do medical professionals need mask if they don't work?

Then he has to think for a minute, and realize what he's saying is stupid.


We're playing a game of probability here. Nothing is perfect. But when you make probabilities go down? That's where you find success. And the virus dies from a death of a thousand cuts.

You could also call it a Freudian slip. Or possibly just because you are smart it does not mean you also have common sense.

What was the date of that spot?

[Typical Lax Dad]

If 80% of Americans Wore Masks, COVID-19 Infections Would Plummet, New Study Says
There’s compelling evidence that Japan, Hong Kong, and other East Asian locales are doing it right and we should really, truly mask up—fast.

By David Ewing Duncan
May 8, 2020

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/05 ... ype=earned

It sounds too good to be true. But a compelling new study and computer model provide fresh evidence for a simple solution to help us emerge from this nightmarish lockdown. The formula? Always social distance in public and, most importantly, wear a mask.

If you’re wondering whether to wear or not to wear, consider this. The day before yesterday, 21 people died of COVID-19 in Japan. In the United States, 2,129 died. Comparing overall death rates for the two countries offers an even starker point of comparison with total U.S. deaths now at a staggering 76,032 and Japan’s fatalities at 577. Japan’s population is about 38% of the U.S., but even adjusting for population, the Japanese death rate is a mere 2% of America’s.

This comes despite Japan having no lockdown, still-active subways, and many businesses that have remained open—reportedly including karaoke bars, although Japanese citizens and industries are practicing social distancing where they can. Nor have the Japanese broadly embraced contact tracing, a practice by which health authorities identify someone who has been infected and then attempt to identify everyone that person might have interacted with—and potentially infected. So how does Japan do it?

“One reason is that nearly everyone there is wearing a mask,” said De Kai, an American computer scientist with joint appointments at UC Berkeley’s International Computer Science Institute and at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. He is also the chief architect of an in-depth study, set to be released in the coming days, that suggests that every one of us should be wearing a mask—whether surgical or homemade, scarf or bandana—like they do in Japan and other countries, mostly in East Asia. This formula applies to President Donald Trump and Vice President Mike Pence (occasional mask refuseniks) as well as every other official who routinely interacts with people in public settings. Among the findings of their research paper, which the team plans to submit to a major journal: If 80% of a closed population were to don a mask, COVID-19 infection rates would statistically drop to approximately one twelfth the number of infections—compared to a live-virus population in which no one wore masks.

We could have used some of that 18 tons of masks, gowns and other personal protection items that Trump sent to China during the first week of February.

Dr. Fauci just called you two out. He is stupid.

https://www.instagram.com/p/CADc5BlFjEp/

When did we find our how far the virus travels and how long it can hang in the air? So, you are saying our hospitals had plenty of PPE equipment? I was wrong about you, like I said.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Fauci can’t be that stupid. I hope I am right:

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1173006

[youthathletics]

Fauci can’t be that stupid. I hope I am right:

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1173006

Certainly makes you wonder if the news media is running cover on it/him....considering “Fauci’s” own words are like Trump. You ever seen Fauci wearing a home made mask?

[Typical Lax Dad]

Fauci can’t be that stupid. I hope I am right:

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1173006

Certainly makes you wonder if the news media is running cover on it/him....considering “Fauci’s” own words are like Trump. You ever seen Fauci wearing a home made mask?

https://hub.jhu.edu/2020/04/24/covid-19-mask-glove-use/

What does tripeworld think?

[njbill]

We seem to have problems communicating. You have quoted excerpts, above, which support precisely what I said. I provided an overall, bottom line conclusion. That’s what this study says. Patients do no better with the drug, indeed some do worse, than without it. What that means is the drug doesn’t work according to the study (yes, with a few qualifiers whose significance or lack thereof has not been demonstrated).

Maybe other studies will come to different results. Let’s see.

You may have noticed that Trump has stopped advocating the use of this drug for some time now. I suspect there is a reason for that.

read what you want. studies set up in this format are not conclusive of anything. much less if they "don't work^. i think you already know that, but can't be sure.

btb,last week i posted a similarly built study on hcq out of a china hospital. one difference was all the patients observed were categorized the same. critical if i remember right.

actually had great results, if china can be believed. i didn't see you post on it, but i'm sure you were encouraged.

it works! study must've concluded that somewhere.

You are shifting now to a discussion of other studies, which is fine. That doesn't change the fact that THIS study indicates the drug doesn't help, and in fact may hurt.

Yes, there have been and are other studies, some of which claim to have some positive results. Many of those are anecdotal. You do know the FDA has cautioned against using HCQ except under certain circumstances due to heart problems, right?

https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-safety-a ... setting-or

In fact, the drug is now generally out of favor in the medical profession. Docs have moved on.

My prediction is that at the end of the day, the scientists will develop some effective and some very effective therapeutics, but HCQ will be relegated to the dust bin.

[youthathletics]

Fauci can’t be that stupid. I hope I am right:

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1173006

Certainly makes you wonder if the news media is running cover on it/him....considering “Fauci’s” own words are like Trump. You ever seen Fauci wearing a home made mask?

https://hub.jhu.edu/2020/04/24/covid-19-mask-glove-use/

What does tripeworld think?

JHU contradicting Fauci? Ask yourself why.