| Asteroid X | 06 Jun 2020 5:55 p.m. PST |
The first research scandal of the coronavirus pandemic has created unnecessary distraction around the politically divisive drug hydroxychloroquine, scientists say.On Thursday, most of the authors of major studies that appeared in The Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) retracted their work. The issued apologies, saying they could no longer vouch for their data after the firm that supplied it -- Chicago-based Surgisphere -- refused to be audited. link Apologies are due: TMP link |
Dn Jackson  | 06 Jun 2020 6:29 p.m. PST |
The ONLY thing that made the use of this drug politically divisive was who suggested it be used to treat the virus. People may have died because some people hate that man so much they were willing to lie about it because it might make him look good. On top of that these two publications; The Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine, have done massive damage to their reputations. |
| Martin From Canada | 06 Jun 2020 7:11 p.m. PST |
What apologies? I was pointing out that this paper was continuing the trend of a lack of effectiveness in vivo, and it was the biggest to date. |
| Asteroid X | 06 Jun 2020 10:18 p.m. PST |
Well, I didn't single you out but now that you ask… Once again, while hydroxychloroquine continues to look good in vitro, it has failed tremendously in vivo. In other words, it's acting like an army that looks smart on the parade ground and fails utterly in combat. You nailed your colours on making the conclusive statement of "IT HAS FAILED TREMENDOUSLY" (emphasis mine). A proper and professional response would be "it appears" or "it seems". You'll learn that in undergraduate studies, but you should have learned that in elementary school. |
| Martin From Canada | 06 Jun 2020 11:24 p.m. PST |
Are we going to argue grammar? Once again, implies that I'm not relying on just one study. Besides, my default position is that I will defer to subject matter experts in their own fields. In this case, I've been following l'affaire hydroxychloroquine mostly via Dr. David Gorski's blog and twitter feed.
link link BTW, here's Friday's NEJM study in and found no likely benifit, and some likely harm (hydroxychloroquine isn't risk free). link |
 Inari7 | 07 Jun 2020 5:05 a.m. PST |
I've also been following this story and Surgisphere should be investigated. Providing false information especially during a pandemic. |
| Asteroid X | 07 Jun 2020 10:23 a.m. PST |
Are we going to argue grammar? It's not grammar. You should know that. Please stop deflecting. my default position is that I will defer to subject matter experts in their own fields. Then please remember that. |
| Mithmee | 07 Jun 2020 4:34 p.m. PST |
What apologies?I was pointing out that this paper was continuing the trend of a lack of effectiveness in vivo, and it was the biggest to date. It was a bias & agenda driven article which means it was nothing but a piece of junk. |
 20thmaine | 08 Jun 2020 4:34 a.m. PST |
Are we suggesting then that, like bleach and a nice skincancer inducing burst of UV, this is not going to be biggly important in treating the pandemic? Who would ever have guessed?  |
| Mithmee | 08 Jun 2020 8:37 a.m. PST |
Well as a pandemic it has been over-hyped and well not that much of an impact world wide unlike past pandemics. Not even front page news anymore. Inflated death counts with gunshot victims being counted as dying from COVID 19 instead of being shot to death. Every study that has come up has been based on bias & agendas. |
| 20thmaine | 08 Jun 2020 9:06 a.m. PST |
Yeah, that was sort of the point of doing something to reduce the spread…so that you have ~120,000 deaths in USA rather than several million – or maybe tens of millions – if you do nothing and just let it burn itself out "the old fashioned way". |
| Martin From Canada | 08 Jun 2020 10:29 a.m. PST |
Inflated death counts with gunshot victims being counted as dying from COVID 19 instead of being shot to death. You're fixated on those 5 cases aren't you? You're aware how a ledger works right? In this case you're focusing on a statistical rounding error on one side, and ignoring the mountain of evidence on the other (massive difference in year-over-year death rate). link |
| Asteroid X | 08 Jun 2020 10:42 a.m. PST |
Martin, you're not trying to gaslight, are you? |
| Mithmee | 08 Jun 2020 1:23 p.m. PST |
You're fixated on those 5 cases aren't you? If there is even one then there are thousands more, they wanted more dead so this would look like something more dangerous than it actually is. Oh and with around 7,500 individuals dying everyday on average it was very easy to inflate the numbers. But I know you much rather prefer that they lie about the real numbers because you brought into the hype that they were selling. Want to prove me wrong then get the data on every single death since the beginning of this year. |
weighs the pros and cons of using a power drill on the minis workbench.
