- Fri Jul 03, 2020 2:31 pm
#126238
As always, RealTool opens his thread with a lie and then he continues with a partial truth. Fauci didn't apologize, obviously. We know this because RealTool said he DID. Plus the fact that there was nothing to apologize for.
Now, if RealTool had bothered to read the rest of the story---
"Researchers not involved with the study were critical. They noted that the Henry Ford team did not randomly treat patients but selected them for various treatments based on certain criteria.
"As the Henry Ford Health System became more experienced in treating patients with COVID-19, survival may have improved, regardless of the use of specific therapies," Dr. Todd Lee of the Royal Victoria Hospital in Montreal, Canada, and colleagues wrote in a commentary in the same journal.
"Finally, concomitant steroid use in patients receiving hydroxychloroquine was more than double the non-treated group. This is relevant considering the recent RECOVERY trial that showed a mortality benefit with dexamethasone." The steroid dexamethasone can reduce inflammation in seriously ill patients.
The Henry Ford team wrote that 82% of their patients received hydroxychloroquine within the first 24 hours of admission, and 91% within the first 48 hours of admission.
They wrote that in comparison, a study of patients at 25 New York hospitals started taking the drug "at any time during their hospitalization."
But patients in that New York study, published in May in the Journal of the American Medical Association, started taking hydroxychloroquine on average one day after being hospitalized.
"Maybe there's a little bit of a difference, but it's not like patients in New York were being started on day seven. That's not what happened," said Eli Rosenberg, lead author of the New York study and an associate professor of epidemiology at the University at Albany School of Public Health.
Rosenberg also pointed out that the Detroit paper excluded 267 patients -- nearly 10% of the study population -- who had not yet been discharged from the hospital.
He said this might have skewed the results to make hydroxychloroquine look better than it really was. Those patients might have still been in the hospital because they were very sick, and if they died, excluding them from the study made hydroxychloroquine look like more of a lifesaver than it really was.
Both the Detroit and New York studies were observational: they looked back at how patients did when doctors prescribed hydroxychloroquine.
While helpful, observational studies are not as valuable as controlled clinical trials. Considered the gold standard in medicine, patients in a clinical trial are randomly assigned to take either the drug or a placebo, which is a treatment that does nothing. Doctors then follow the patients to see how they fare.
Two clinical trials on hydroxychloroquine for Covid-19, one in the US and one in the UK, were stopped early because their data suggested hydroxychloroquine wasn't helpful.
The US trial, run by the National Institutes of Health[/u], enrolled more than 470 patients. [I told johnforbes this was the reason for discontinuing the NIH study and he called me a liar.]
The UK trial, run by the University of Oxford, enrolled more than 11,000 patients.
"We have concluded that there is no beneficial effect of hydroxychloroquine in patients hospitalized with COVID-19," the Oxford doctors concluded. "
Tool, you should know by now that your handlers NEVER tell you the whole truth. They only tell you the part that supports your partisan mental illness and starts you running around drooling and voting for Trump.
- By johnforbes