All things Chinese CoronaVirus

[6ftstick]

I’ll go with what the FDA and Dr. Ho say about HCQ, not Donald Trump or Internet posters.

Yeh why would you believe this guy or another 6500 doctors globally

Dr. Stephen Marshall Smith M.D. (born 1963) is an American physician specializing in Infectious Disease with primary focus in virology. He is from the small northern New Jersey town of Essex Fells. He graduated in 1985 Magna Cum Laude from Duke University. He then later graduated top of his class at Yale School of Medicine in 1989. He performed his internal residency in 2 years at the University of Virginia, doing a half year at St. Michael’s Medical Center in Newark, New Jersey. Currently, Dr. Smith operates out of St. Barnabas Hospital in Livingston, NJ.

He then began a fellowship in infectious diseases at National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease in Bethesda, MD under renowned physicians such as Dr. Anthony Fauci.

Dr. Smith was a leading researcher in HIV AIDS for a number of years, trained under renowned Dr. David Ho, discovered new HIV-2 viruses groups, and holds two patents in research and drugs related to the disease.

The Smith Center for Infectious Diseases and Urban Health was developed to address infectious diseases in the inner city.

EDUCATION:
1985 A.B. – Duke University
1989 M.D. – Yale University School of Medicine

POSTDOCTORAL TRAINING:
1989-1991: Internal Medicine Residency, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA
1992 (Jan.-Jun.): Internal Medicine Residency, St. Michael’s Medical Center, Newark, NJ
1992-1995 Medical Staff Fellow in Infectious Diseases, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Bethesda, MD
1995-1996 Post-Doc, Molecular Virology Section, Laboratory of Molecular Microbiology, National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Bethesda, MD
1996-1998 Research Scientist, Laboratory of Animal Models of AIDS, Aaron Diamond AIDS Research Center, Tuxedo and Manhattan, NY

LICENSURE: New Jersey Medical License

CERTIFICATIONS:
1986 Part I of the National Board of Medical Examiners
1989 Part II of the National Board of Medical Examiners
1990 Part III of the National Board of Medical Examiners
1992 Board Certification Internal Medicine – 145346
1994 Board Certification Infectious Diseases – 145346
2004 Board Recertification Infectious Diseases – 145346

[njbill]

You already posted this. Maybe you didn’t read the part where it says he worked under Dr. Ho. Guess this Dr. Smith should check with his old boss.

[6ftstick]

You already posted this. Maybe you didn’t read the part where it says he worked under Dr. Ho. Guess this Dr. Smith should check with his old boss.

Maybe its vice versa Dr Smith was actually saving lives real time.

[jhu72]

According to my wife, many experts have wondered since the beginning if some steroids might not be useful. Turns out one (the only one tested that I am aware of) shows high likelihood of being very useful. The interesting thing is, docs in the US were in this case also told not to make use of steroids in clinical treatment (just like most responsible HC organizations did with HCQ / CQ) as there was no proof of it being safe or effective. This has nothing to do with Trump, other than he continues to stick his nose into things to a level a depth where he is in way over his head.

This is interesting. In early April, there were a bunch of Doctors in Washington that used Actemra, an anti inflammatory used in rheumatoid arthritis.

This one is from a small uncrontrolled trial: https://www.jwatch.org/na51506/2020/05/ ... m-covid-19

This one is from China but again not a randomized trial: https://www.pnas.org/content/117/20/10970

Trials seem to be continuing but this would be in line with the results of the studies utilizing steroid control of inflamation.

Edit: here is a quick review of 2 IL-6 therapies including Actemra: https://pharmaphorum.com/news/jury-stil ... l-results/

Probably not surprising. My wife gave me the impression that interest in steroids was pretty widespread. Of course everyone has the same initial reaction. Why give someone with a very serious infection something that is known to desensitize the immune system? We will see. Great news, but still some distance to go. I had heard this AM that WHO was going to change their treatment guidelines to include dexamethasone but they now seem to have changed their minds and are urging caution which is wise.

[ggait]

You already posted this. Maybe you didn’t read the part where it says he worked under Dr. Ho. Guess this Dr. Smith should check with his old boss.

Maybe its vice versa Dr Smith was actually saving lives real time.

Six -- you don't know shirt about fork.

Bill calls your Smith (Duke, Yale), and raises you a Ho (CalTech, MIT/Harvard, lab at Columbia). Ho also happened to teach Smith.

Ho is in the Covid fight -- big time!!! He's going to save a boat load of lives if his lab's current focus works out.

Ho is bearish on HCQ. Likes remdesivir. And very bullish that a treament or vaccine will happen in 1-2 years.

The trials will tell the tale on HCQ. Likely result is that it is modestly helpful in a certain subset of patients/situations when combined with a few other drugs. A tweener single; not a home run.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/25/coronav ... ments.html

[jhu72]

I’ll go with what the FDA and Dr. Ho say about HCQ, not Donald Trump or Internet posters.

Yeh why would you believe this guy or another 6500 doctors globally

Dr. Stephen Marshall Smith M.D. (born 1963) is an American physician specializing in Infectious Disease with primary focus in virology. He is from the small northern New Jersey town of Essex Fells. He graduated in 1985 Magna Cum Laude from Duke University. He then later graduated top of his class at Yale School of Medicine in 1989. He performed his internal residency in 2 years at the University of Virginia, doing a half year at St. Michael’s Medical Center in Newark, New Jersey. Currently, Dr. Smith operates out of St. Barnabas Hospital in Livingston, NJ.

He then began a fellowship in infectious diseases at National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease in Bethesda, MD under renowned physicians such as Dr. Anthony Fauci.

Dr. Smith was a leading researcher in HIV AIDS for a number of years, trained under renowned Dr. David Ho, discovered new HIV-2 viruses groups, and holds two patents in research and drugs related to the disease.

The Smith Center for Infectious Diseases and Urban Health was developed to address infectious diseases in the inner city.

EDUCATION:
1985 A.B. – Duke University
1989 M.D. – Yale University School of Medicine

POSTDOCTORAL TRAINING:
1989-1991: Internal Medicine Residency, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA
1992 (Jan.-Jun.): Internal Medicine Residency, St. Michael’s Medical Center, Newark, NJ
1992-1995 Medical Staff Fellow in Infectious Diseases, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Bethesda, MD
1995-1996 Post-Doc, Molecular Virology Section, Laboratory of Molecular Microbiology, National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Bethesda, MD
1996-1998 Research Scientist, Laboratory of Animal Models of AIDS, Aaron Diamond AIDS Research Center, Tuxedo and Manhattan, NY

LICENSURE: New Jersey Medical License

CERTIFICATIONS:
1986 Part I of the National Board of Medical Examiners
1989 Part II of the National Board of Medical Examiners
1990 Part III of the National Board of Medical Examiners
1992 Board Certification Internal Medicine – 145346
1994 Board Certification Infectious Diseases – 145346
2004 Board Recertification Infectious Diseases – 145346

If this guy has really got something why hasn't he (or can't he) prove it to Fauci and/or Ho? Surely they are aware of his work.

[jhu72]

You already posted this. Maybe you didn’t read the part where it says he worked under Dr. Ho. Guess this Dr. Smith should check with his old boss.

Maybe its vice versa Dr Smith was actually saving lives real time.

Six -- you don't know shirt about fork.

Bill calls your Smith (Duke, Yale), and raises you a Ho (CalTech, MIT/Harvard, lab at Columbia). Ho also happened to teach Smith.

Ho is in the Covid fight -- big time!!! He's going to save a boat load of lives if his lab's current focus works out.

Ho is bearish on HCQ. Likes remdesivir. And very bullish that a treament or vaccine will happen in 1-2 years.

The trials will tell the tale on HCQ. Likely result is that it is modestly helpful in a certain subset of patients/situations when combined with a few other drugs. A tweener single; not a home run.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/25/coronav ... ments.html

I had seen this article before, when originally published. Ho's last few comments need to be understood by everyone. Perhaps they are, some people just don't like the answer. -- Time needs to be bought for the scientists. The problem has a solution.

[wgdsr]

Trump liked it so it sucks.

Trump liked HCQ solely because it happened to be a convenient prop for his daily gaslighting. HCQ, sunlight, bleach, Dem narrative, vaccine just around the corner, it's all going to go away, blah blah blah blah. It is just a daily carnival reality TV freak show.
when you put it like that, it all sounds ridiculous. trump's an idiot. unless you ask him, he's an expert on everything. ask abe lincoln. although he did some good things too, although it's always questionable. you know what i mean.
you know how trump's an even bigger idiot? if he was already gonna crown himself drug czar, warp speed king, he should make a tweet every time there's a good prelim result on something, and say he's gonna put billions of dollars behind it. when eventually one of them is right, he can claim his victory lap and ride it to reelection as the guy that saved the world. right now, the only real bets he has are hydroxy, clorox and uv light. why limit yourself?

End of the day, the docs have done NOTHING differently regarding HCQ than they would have if Trump had kept his mouth shut.
i would certainly hope so. is everybody aware there were shortages of hcq here and worldwide before he ever whispered its name?

Docs have been (and still are) able to prescribe it off label. Some are doing that, some not. Lots of studies going on. Tea leaves indicating: it doesn't work for the very sick; it doesn't work as a preventive; may work (extent TBD) if given early on as HCQ/AZ/Z. Could be that the AZ/Z (not the HCQ) is what actually helps. End of the day, the virus will respond to the science, docs, and clinical trials. Not the Gaslighter in Chief.
wouldn't be so sure about this one. where are the clinical trials to know? on any of them, for that matter? with zinc, proper dosage, yada.
anyway, you may have missed these 2 in the last couple weeks out of india, who are big on getting it/recommending it to frontline workers, including in healthcare:
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101 ... l.pdf+html
https://indianexpress.com/article/india ... y-6442948/
well, lookey there, an 80% drop in covid infection in the smaller, published study (@medrxiv, no less) and according to the author of a much larger study that might take a bit to see something published... an 80% drop as well. think we'll ever hear about these from our favorite, informative, main street media? don't think you will.
oh well, at least indian healthcare workers will be protected! and maybe that means all the hydroxy they produce in india can stay home and that can help quell the present outbreak they're going thru. at the very least everyone can breath a sigh of relief that a drug that's been used safely for decades isn't hazardous to the cardiology of indian healthcare workers.
a while back i posted how 10,000 policemen in india were tracked, was about 50/50 on who was taking it as prophylactic. only data point at the time was 9 vs 0 had died of those not taking vs taking. couldn't pull an update on that one, so maybe nothing.
meanwhile, at least there are still over a hundred trials going for old hcq, and maybe some of them will be testing preexposure, early exposure usage and results throughout the sickness, with zinc, with doxycycline maybe, yada. maybe some randomized clinical trials mixed in!

Meanwhile, Trump moves on to tell you that the old guy in Buffalo was using his iphone to jam police radio signals. It is all just bull shirt.

New poll says decrepit demented sniffing Ukraine-ing Sleepy/Creepy Joe spanking Trump by 16 points in Michigan.

Let's goe Joe! Let's go Joe!

[Farfromgeneva]

I just don’t bother setting expectations. It’s not like I love Biden, if I even decide to vote in Nov, but so tired of what we’ve got that I don’t want to be let down in Nov by four more years of pomposity, degrading to the fiat status of our money and just atrocious overall environment that’s come since Jan 2017 that it seems better to set no expectations at all.

[wgdsr]

You already posted this. Maybe you didn’t read the part where it says he worked under Dr. Ho. Guess this Dr. Smith should check with his old boss.

Maybe its vice versa Dr Smith was actually saving lives real time.

Six -- you don't know shirt about fork.

Bill calls your Smith (Duke, Yale), and raises you a Ho (CalTech, MIT/Harvard, lab at Columbia). Ho also happened to teach Smith.

Ho is in the Covid fight -- big time!!! He's going to save a boat load of lives if his lab's current focus works out.

Ho is bearish on HCQ. Likes remdesivir. And very bullish that a treament or vaccine will happen in 1-2 years.

The trials will tell the tale on HCQ. Likely result is that it is modestly helpful in a certain subset of patients/situations when combined with a few other drugs. A tweener single; not a home run.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/25/coronav ... ments.html

I had seen this article before, when originally published. Ho's last few comments need to be understood by everyone. Perhaps they are, some people just don't like the answer. -- Time needs to be bought for the scientists. The problem has a solution.

this article was in april. we are in the middle of a pandemic. which truncates time, and yes, magnifies mistakes. including conclusions. which he seems to like to draw for some paradoxically and not for others. that's of course coming from an absolute amateur re: an absolute expert. i'm very agreeable to that perspective.
that said, i've seen what experts cite as egregious errors by other so-called experts so frequently lately, mix in some of my own observations and the political environment (and the big money that drives pharma), that i find the whole cohort to be really tough to believe.
hopefully, real science, done right, gets us there.
and again that said... remdesivir... i've been high on (hope, anyway) before the late april release on their study... where's the study? where's the data? it was touted to be standard of care within 24 hours. it's now past mid-june, and the one trial with 2 initial readouts has still yet to simply publish their data. seems weird.

[ggait]

WG — on HCQ, I’ve been waiting to hear the results from the UMinn and UPenn trials, both of which started in late March.

Tea leaves from UMinn suggest HCQ is not a preventive. Any thoughts WG on UMinn’s study? They treated a big slug of health care workers. Results were no better than placebo.

I’ve seen nothing from UPenn yet.

The lack of positive HCQ news after 2.5 months does not seem encouraging. But the results will be the results.

[jhu72]

You already posted this. Maybe you didn’t read the part where it says he worked under Dr. Ho. Guess this Dr. Smith should check with his old boss.

Maybe its vice versa Dr Smith was actually saving lives real time.

Six -- you don't know shirt about fork.

Bill calls your Smith (Duke, Yale), and raises you a Ho (CalTech, MIT/Harvard, lab at Columbia). Ho also happened to teach Smith.

Ho is in the Covid fight -- big time!!! He's going to save a boat load of lives if his lab's current focus works out.

Ho is bearish on HCQ. Likes remdesivir. And very bullish that a treament or vaccine will happen in 1-2 years.

The trials will tell the tale on HCQ. Likely result is that it is modestly helpful in a certain subset of patients/situations when combined with a few other drugs. A tweener single; not a home run.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/25/coronav ... ments.html

I had seen this article before, when originally published. Ho's last few comments need to be understood by everyone. Perhaps they are, some people just don't like the answer. -- Time needs to be bought for the scientists. The problem has a solution.

this article was in april. we are in the middle of a pandemic. which truncates time, and yes, magnifies mistakes. including conclusions. which he seems to like to draw for some paradoxically and not for others. that's of course coming from an absolute amateur re: an absolute expert. i'm very agreeable to that perspective.
that said, i've seen what experts cite as egregious errors by other so-called experts so frequently lately, mix in some of my own observations and the political environment (and the big money that drives pharma), that i find the whole cohort to be really tough to believe.
hopefully, real science, done right, gets us there.
and again that said... remdesivir... i've been high on (hope, anyway) before the late april release on their study... where's the study? where's the data? it was touted to be standard of care within 24 hours. it's now past mid-june, and the one trial with 2 initial readouts has still yet to simply publish their data. seems weird.

I'll have to agree with you about the conflicting views of so called medical experts. There is politics in medicine and other branches of science. Not so much in the real scientific publications but marketing is prevalent wherever you have so much money involved. Brings us back to my original statement about Fauci, "good scientist but he knows how to play the game". Can be both a good thing and a bad thing. None of these guys are gods. Ho in my opinion sometime comes across like he is. He may be as close as we will get and we are better off with him than without.

The answer is don't trust the individuals 100%. Trust the system! The FDA and CDC have a tried and true systems. They are not perfect but they have a history of being the best in the world. The last thing we need is politicians and amateurs coming in an f'ing them up and trying to end run them.

Like you I am surprised and disappointed that we have not heard as much about remdesivir as well. It most likely means things have not gone as well as the generalized marketing hype.

[Typical Lax Dad]

You already posted this. Maybe you didn’t read the part where it says he worked under Dr. Ho. Guess this Dr. Smith should check with his old boss.

Maybe its vice versa Dr Smith was actually saving lives real time.

Six -- you don't know shirt about fork.

Bill calls your Smith (Duke, Yale), and raises you a Ho (CalTech, MIT/Harvard, lab at Columbia). Ho also happened to teach Smith.

Ho is in the Covid fight -- big time!!! He's going to save a boat load of lives if his lab's current focus works out.

Ho is bearish on HCQ. Likes remdesivir. And very bullish that a treament or vaccine will happen in 1-2 years.

The trials will tell the tale on HCQ. Likely result is that it is modestly helpful in a certain subset of patients/situations when combined with a few other drugs. A tweener single; not a home run.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/25/coronav ... ments.html

I had seen this article before, when originally published. Ho's last few comments need to be understood by everyone. Perhaps they are, some people just don't like the answer. -- Time needs to be bought for the scientists. The problem has a solution.

this article was in april. we are in the middle of a pandemic. which truncates time, and yes, magnifies mistakes. including conclusions. which he seems to like to draw for some paradoxically and not for others. that's of course coming from an absolute amateur re: an absolute expert. i'm very agreeable to that perspective.
that said, i've seen what experts cite as egregious errors by other so-called experts so frequently lately, mix in some of my own observations and the political environment (and the big money that drives pharma), that i find the whole cohort to be really tough to believe.
hopefully, real science, done right, gets us there.
and again that said... remdesivir... i've been high on (hope, anyway) before the late april release on their study... where's the study? where's the data? it was touted to be standard of care within 24 hours. it's now past mid-june, and the one trial with 2 initial readouts has still yet to simply publish their data. seems weird.

I'll have to agree with you about the conflicting views of so called medical experts. There is politics in medicine and other branches of science. Not so much in the real scientific publications but marketing is prevalent wherever you have so much money involved. Brings us back to my original statement about Fauci, "good scientist but he knows how to play the game". Can be both a good thing and a bad thing. None of these guys are gods. Ho in my opinion sometime comes across like he is. He may be as close as we will get and we are better off with him than without.

The answer is don't trust the individuals 100%. Trust the system! The FDA and CDC have a tried and true systems. They are not perfect but they have a history of being the best in the world. The last thing we need is politicians and amateurs coming in an f'ing them up and trying to end run them.

Like you I am surprised and disappointed that we have not heard as much about remdesivir as well. It most likely means things have not gone as well as the generalized marketing hype.

Yes. We have been developing drugs and vaccines for a long time. Nobody needs a Trump Vaccine to go along with a Trump Steak and Trump Water and a Trump board game. When it came out of my mouth, I figured it wouldn’t be all that successful. That has been the guy’s track record pretty much his whole career with a couple of exceptions.

[CU77]

On Tuesday, nine states — Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Nevada, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Carolina and Texas — had reported either new single-day highs or set a record for seven-day new case averages

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2 ... pdates-us/

Heck of a job, Donnie!

But you'll be doing your part on Saturday to get Oklahoma's numbers even HIGHER!

MOkGA!

[wgdsr]

WG — on HCQ, I’ve been waiting to hear the results from the UMinn and UPenn trials, both of which started in late March.

Tea leaves from UMinn suggest HCQ is not a preventive. Any thoughts WG on UMinn’s study? They treated a big slug of health care workers. Results were no better than placebo.

I’ve seen nothing from UPenn yet.

The lack of positive HCQ news after 2.5 months does not seem encouraging. But the results will be the results.

there has actually been plenty of positive news. you just won't find it trumpeted here in the u.s. has there been a real confirmation thru randomized clinical trials? any done for what it might be useful for? nope.

i, too, am looking forward to the clinical trials from penn. do you know when they are ending/releasing? when i first saw them (you referencing) they didn't mention dates. i gave my thoughts on the minny trial released a page ago. here they were:
minnesota study...
guy had 5 grand. maybe got a bit more, asked the us govt and he was denied.
mailed out drugs. no doctor's care across the board.
many were never tested for covid. just went by patients reporting symptoms.
trial groups were pre-exposed to people who DID have confirmed covid supposedly.
endpoint was if they had self-observed symptoms.
that's the list.
not how quick did they clear it, who went to the hospital, who got on intubation, who died. just who got a symptom. after being preexposed.

many taking hcq didn't take their full dosage. ~20% fewer actually got symptoms but not statistically signif enough.

sound like a gold standard clinical trial to you? everything vetted on possible benefit to the drug?


so anyway... the minnesota trial (boulware) that's been published had this and many more problems. including not even knowing who/how many people were covid+ before even starting. or ending for that matter. actually not even worth discussing.
the only thing that was found out was that hcq does not vanquish the virus before you ever get a symptom. wouldn't call that useful.

boulware tweeted a week ago that his 2nd study is ready and out for publication. i believe early treatment. many of the protocols the same, i think. so not really scientific unless the testing is tighter and the load observation/symptom and various result endpoints are observed. unless it blows away at either end, i wouldn't expect much as it doesn't seem very professional. he's trying to do something, so i'm not gonna hammer him. he is on gilead's payroll for something, so throw that large grain of salt on there, too.

one of the reasons cited by boulware, as well as a guy at mcgill trying to do similar rct's is that the political back and forth the last 2 months has prevented getting volunteers for the studies completed and delayed things. maybe the same for penn and many others. ironic. had trump told people to "jump in on clinical trials" instead of "whaddaya got to lose?... take it!!!" we'd probably have answers by now.

here's some more good news on hcq, as you mentioned (you didn't like the 80% decrease in prEP?)... the preprint out of china i shared in late april has been gilded peer-reviewed by none other than our NIH in mid-may. did you see all the headlines on it?
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32418114/
a study, not a trial (what isn't?). patients that went on ventilation. hcq vs non-hcq in wuhan. 19% died vs 47%. p val< 0.001. china, so willing to go with a grain of salt as well. hope it's part of enough for NIH to keep running trials, as it seems the FDA and the WHO continue to keep reversing themselves on all matters covid depending on the day of the week.

look up hcq /zinc /nyc langone if you want more good news and missed it. that was over a month ago. rando clinical trials i'm sure are up next!

[jhu72]

Another likely outcome of the CV pandemic.

[Typical Lax Dad]

https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/o ... ees-assume

[ardilla secreta]

WG — on HCQ, I’ve been waiting to hear the results from the UMinn and UPenn trials, both of which started in late March.

Tea leaves from UMinn suggest HCQ is not a preventive. Any thoughts WG on UMinn’s study? They treated a big slug of health care workers. Results were no better than placebo.

I’ve seen nothing from UPenn yet.

The lack of positive HCQ news after 2.5 months does not seem encouraging. But the results will be the results.

there has actually been plenty of positive news. you just won't find it trumpeted here in the u.s. has there been a real confirmation thru randomized clinical trials? any done for what it might be useful for? nope.

i, too, am looking forward to the clinical trials from penn. do you know when they are ending/releasing? when i first saw them (you referencing) they didn't mention dates. i gave my thoughts on the minny trial released a page ago. here they were:
minnesota study...
guy had 5 grand. maybe got a bit more, asked the us govt and he was denied.
mailed out drugs. no doctor's care across the board.
many were never tested for covid. just went by patients reporting symptoms.
trial groups were pre-exposed to people who DID have confirmed covid supposedly.
endpoint was if they had self-observed symptoms.
that's the list.
not how quick did they clear it, who went to the hospital, who got on intubation, who died. just who got a symptom. after being preexposed.

many taking hcq didn't take their full dosage. ~20% fewer actually got symptoms but not statistically signif enough.

sound like a gold standard clinical trial to you? everything vetted on possible benefit to the drug?


so anyway... the minnesota trial (boulware) that's been published had this and many more problems. including not even knowing who/how many people were covid+ before even starting. or ending for that matter. actually not even worth discussing.
the only thing that was found out was that hcq does not vanquish the virus before you ever get a symptom. wouldn't call that useful.

boulware tweeted a week ago that his 2nd study is ready and out for publication. i believe early treatment. many of the protocols the same, i think. so not really scientific unless the testing is tighter and the load observation/symptom and various result endpoints are observed. unless it blows away at either end, i wouldn't expect much as it doesn't seem very professional. he's trying to do something, so i'm not gonna hammer him. he is on gilead's payroll for something, so throw that large grain of salt on there, too.

one of the reasons cited by boulware, as well as a guy at mcgill trying to do similar rct's is that the political back and forth the last 2 months has prevented getting volunteers for the studies completed and delayed things. maybe the same for penn and many others. ironic. had trump told people to "jump in on clinical trials" instead of "whaddaya got to lose?... take it!!!" we'd probably have answers by now.

here's some more good news on hcq, as you mentioned (you didn't like the 80% decrease in prEP?)... the preprint out of china i shared in late april has been gilded peer-reviewed by none other than our NIH in mid-may. did you see all the headlines on it?
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32418114/
a study, not a trial (what isn't?). patients that went on ventilation. hcq vs non-hcq in wuhan. 19% died vs 47%. p val< 0.001. china, so willing to go with a grain of salt as well. hope it's part of enough for NIH to keep running trials, as it seems the FDA and the WHO continue to keep reversing themselves on all matters covid depending on the day of the week.

look up hcq /zinc /nyc langone if you want more good news and missed it. that was over a month ago. rando clinical trials i'm sure are up next!

When you go on about prospective drugs I think...
https://youtu.be/bgmdnxtz3Bo

[wgdsr]

v good pull.

[RedFromMI]

Cases in the US per million population, by the major regions of the country: