Hydroxychoroquine/Azithromycin/Zinc Sulfate

[sygn]

Safe? Perhaps since it has been used for other conditions. But we can't be sure that it won't make things worse.

Effective? We don't know. The jury is still out and no proper trials have been completed. Whether they can be? Again, we don't know. Proper trials take time.

If and when scientific evidence that it works is available we would expect it to be offered to anyone with Covid-19. We're nowhere near that yet. There is no treatment that effects a cure - yet.

Yes, but this isn't a typical situation, it's a war zone where everybody's flying blind.
I'd rather risk it than end up on one of those ventilators.

 

[icanhelp1]

The science isn't there proving any efficacy. Just some anecdotal experiences. I wish it were true but right now, it isn't.

And the CDC just pulled it's dosage recommendations so any doctor prescribing it has no guidance to follow.

The science is there in that it doesn't act as a traditional antiviral, the positive is, it, in some cases, seems to be capable of decreasing the viral load, protecting against cell intrusion and slowing ones own immune system, another words, it slows the body's immune system ( antibodies ) from killing one's self and attacking one's organs.

It's complicated at best. It is true that more studies are needed but when used as a preventative regimen it is showing some promise. I never said it was a magic bullet but there are promising studies as well as negative results. It's being used off-label till more clinical studies can be verified.

 

[Comshaw]

This showcases the degree that the left is making it political. The amount of empirical evidence that it is safe and effective is massive at this point. But if there is light at the end of the tunnel and Trump highlighted this treatment as promising then things will not land the way the left wants. So they wind-up the fake news boys and girls to block a life saving treatment. What kind of human garbage would do such a thing for political reasons? I have been disgusted with them for years but now the stench is unbearable.

The drug would be safe to use, under the direction of a physician. The problem lays in the fact that all studies and trials so far that have supported the use against the Corvid virus have been flawed. The "empirical evidence" you claim is all anecdotal in nature.

The problem with accepting such unreliable findings, is that if it doesn't work, you have given false hope to those who are ill, sent those fighting this virus on a wild goose chase and reduced the supply of the medication to those who need it.

Personally I'd be happy as a clam if it were proven to be true. The key word here is proven.

On that note you claim ,"The amount of empirical evidence that it is safe and effective is massive at this point."

Again, I would truly love for this to be true, BUT since your opinion has as much veracity as Conager's, please supply some type of verification for it. Please, not an opinion from someone but factual information.

Thanks


Comshaw

 

[Stewart_Pidd]

Great Moments in PatriotMath™ history

Spearechucker: "one times anything is one"
BotanyBoy: "two plus two equals five, if you look at it another way"
Query: "Forty percent. That's more than half.."
Conager: "30% = 65%"

https://i.imgflip.com/3w5dmi.jpg

 

[Stewart_Pidd]

https://i.imgflip.com/3w5e0t.jpg

 

[Fuzzy1975]

The amount of empirical evidence that it is safe and effective is massive at this point.

There is zero Empirical evidence, there is anecdotal evidence that it can help as a drug treatment for the Virus. There are currently several observational trials (20-50 or so) underway in the world. I think there may be some truly clinical trials started now too, but I would not quote me on that.

But if there is light at the end of the tunnel and Trump highlighted this treatment as promising then things will not land the way the left wants.

As one virologist stated " with all the current observational data out there, if this drug regiment was a 100% cure" we would know that by know. The fact we do not have such evidence means this may be a helpful method in some case's, but not all. As such over hyping it without the trial data may cause unnecessary harm.

So they wind-up the fake news boys and girls to block a life saving treatment.

And you can show such life saving evidence eh? If you could, people would not still be dying from COVID-19.

What kind of human garbage would do such a thing for political reasons? I have been disgusted with them for years but now the stench is unbearable.

Look in the mirror and unplug your nose....

 

[icanhelp1]

The drug would be safe to use, under the direction of a physician. The problem lays in the fact that all studies and trials so far that have supported the use against the Corvid virus have been flawed. The "empirical evidence" you claim is all anecdotal in nature.

The problem with accepting such unreliable findings, is that if it doesn't work, you have given false hope to those who are ill, sent those fighting this virus on a wild goose chase and reduced the supply of the medication to those who need it.

Personally I'd be happy as a clam if it were proven to be true. The key word here is proven.

On that note you claim ,"The amount of empirical evidence that it is safe and effective is massive at this point."

Again, I would truly love for this to be true, BUT since your opinion has as much veracity as Conager's, please supply some type of verification for it. Please, not an opinion from someone but factual information.

Thanks


Comshaw

Hydroxychloroquine /azithromycin for COVID-19: New Clinical ...
www.physiciansweekly.com › hydroxychloroquine-azithromycin-for-

Abstract
Background
Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine have been found to be efficient on SARS-CoV-2, and reported to be efficient in Chinese COV-19 patients. We evaluate the role of hydroxychloroquine on respiratory viral loads.

Patients and methods
French Confirmed COVID-19 patients were included in a single arm protocol from early March to March 16th, to receive 600mg of hydroxychloroquine daily and their viral load in nasopharyngeal swabs was tested daily in a hospital setting. Depending on their clinical presentation, azithromycin was added to the treatment. Untreated patients from another center and cases refusing the protocol were included as negative controls. Presence and absence of virus at Day6-post inclusion was considered the end point.

Results
Six patients were asymptomatic, 22 had upper respiratory tract infection symptoms and eight had lower respiratory tract infection symptoms.

Twenty cases were treated in this study and showed a significant reduction of the viral carriage at D6-post inclusion compared to controls, and much lower average carrying duration than reported of untreated patients in the literature. Azithromycin added to hydroxychloroquine was significantly more efficient for virus elimination.

Conclusion
Despite its small sample size our survey shows that hydroxychloroquine treatment is significantly associated with viral load reduction/disappearance in COVID-19 patients and its effect is reinforced by azithromycin.

Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine have been found to be efficient on SARS-CoV-2, and reported to be efficient in Chinese COV-19 patients. We evaluate the role of hydroxychloroquine on respiratory viral loads.

Patients and methods
French Confirmed COVID-19 patients were included in a single arm protocol from early March to March 16th, to receive 600mg of hydroxychloroquine daily and their viral load in nasopharyngeal swabs was tested daily in a hospital setting. Depending on their clinical presentation, azithromycin was added to the treatment. Untreated patients from another center and cases refusing the protocol were included as negative controls. Presence and absence of virus at Day6-post inclusion was considered the end point.

Proportion of patients with virological cure (negative nasopharyngeal PCR) by day, in COVID-19 patients treated with hydroxychloroquine and in COVID-19 control patients.


Proportion of patients with virological cure (negative nasopharyngeal PCR) by day, in COVID-19 patients treated with hydroxychloroquine only, in COVID-19 patients treated with hydroxychloroquine and azithomycin combination, and in COVID-19 control patient.




Percentage of patients with PCR-positive nasopharyngeal samples from inclusion to day6 post-inclusion in COVID-19 patients treated with hydroxychloroquine and in COVID-19 control patients.

 

[Lancecastor19]

Google this thread's name "Hydroxychoroquine/Azithromycin/Zinc Sulfate"

And this thread is in the Top Results.

We've done more to legitimize this cure than pretty much everyone.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Hydroxychloroquine /azithromycin for COVID-19: New Clinical ...
www.physiciansweekly.com › hydroxychloroquine-azithromycin-for-

Abstract
Background
Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine have been found to be efficient on SARS-CoV-2, and reported to be efficient in Chinese COV-19 patients. We evaluate the role of hydroxychloroquine on respiratory viral loads.

Patients and methods
French Confirmed COVID-19 patients were included in a single arm protocol from early March to March 16th, to receive 600mg of hydroxychloroquine daily and their viral load in nasopharyngeal swabs was tested daily in a hospital setting. Depending on their clinical presentation, azithromycin was added to the treatment. Untreated patients from another center and cases refusing the protocol were included as negative controls. Presence and absence of virus at Day6-post inclusion was considered the end point.

Results
Six patients were asymptomatic, 22 had upper respiratory tract infection symptoms and eight had lower respiratory tract infection symptoms.

Twenty cases were treated in this study and showed a significant reduction of the viral carriage at D6-post inclusion compared to controls, and much lower average carrying duration than reported of untreated patients in the literature. Azithromycin added to hydroxychloroquine was significantly more efficient for virus elimination.

Conclusion
Despite its small sample size our survey shows that hydroxychloroquine treatment is significantly associated with viral load reduction/disappearance in COVID-19 patients and its effect is reinforced by azithromycin.

Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine have been found to be efficient on SARS-CoV-2, and reported to be efficient in Chinese COV-19 patients. We evaluate the role of hydroxychloroquine on respiratory viral loads.

Patients and methods
French Confirmed COVID-19 patients were included in a single arm protocol from early March to March 16th, to receive 600mg of hydroxychloroquine daily and their viral load in nasopharyngeal swabs was tested daily in a hospital setting. Depending on their clinical presentation, azithromycin was added to the treatment. Untreated patients from another center and cases refusing the protocol were included as negative controls. Presence and absence of virus at Day6-post inclusion was considered the end point.

Proportion of patients with virological cure (negative nasopharyngeal PCR) by day, in COVID-19 patients treated with hydroxychloroquine and in COVID-19 control patients.


Proportion of patients with virological cure (negative nasopharyngeal PCR) by day, in COVID-19 patients treated with hydroxychloroquine only, in COVID-19 patients treated with hydroxychloroquine and azithomycin combination, and in COVID-19 control patient.




Percentage of patients with PCR-positive nasopharyngeal samples from inclusion to day6 post-inclusion in COVID-19 patients treated with hydroxychloroquine and in COVID-19 control patients.

That is the French study, which I actually posted a link to the full study in another thread.

One NON peer reviewed study, in which no placebo's were used, on a sample size so small, does not add up to Emperical.

Give this one more month, and the evidence will be in, in the mean time, seems more like people grasping at straws than anything else....

 

[dolf]

If there was a cheap, effective treatment out there, what possible motivation would the NHS have for not using it? They're trying shitloads of things in the hopes that something will show some promise. There's no benefit to spending huge amounts on keeping people in intensive care and crippling the economy with a needless lockdown. You think thousands of medical staff are watching patients and then colleagues die just to make trump look silly?

I'm willing to believe in conspiracy where conspiracy would make sense.

 

[icanhelp1]

Google this thread's name "Hydroxychoroquine/Azithromycin/Zinc Sulfate"

And this thread is in the Top Results.

We've done more to legitimize this cure than pretty much everyone.

The point is, it's not being lauded as a cure!

 

[Aglaopheme]

Hydroxychloroquine /azithromycin for COVID-19: New Clinical ...
www.physiciansweekly.com › hydroxychloroquine-azithromycin-for-
.

http://forum.literotica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2094049&stc=1&d=1586539239

https://twitter.com/ryanmarino/status/1247486136949317635?s=21


https://twitter.com/mvp_pediatric/status/1248160599868993536?s=21

 

[Aglaopheme]

That is the French study, which I actually posted a link to the full study in another thread.

One NON peer reviewed study, in which no placebo's were used, on a sample size so small, does not add up to Emperical.

Give this one more month, and the evidence will be in, in the mean time, seems more like people grasping at straws than anything else....

From post 57:


“And the French study has since been discredited: The scientific group that oversees the journal where it was published said the study did not meet its standards.”

 

[icanhelp1]

That is the French study, which I actually posted a link to the full study in another thread.

One NON peer reviewed study, in which no placebo's were used, on a sample size so small, does not add up to Emperical.

Give this one more month, and the evidence will be in, in the mean time, seems more like people grasping at straws than anything else....

It is the french study evaluated further by american doctors.

There are off-label uses that have positive results. Clinical studies are being held close to the vest but off label results give some insight as to whether it's helpful or not. The possible cardiac arrhythmia with a sick cardiovascular, respiratory system is troubling.

 

[doowdniw]

I'm going to Alex Jones for my anti-virals. He's the only one who knows anything about anything.

 

[oggbashan]

I'm going to Alex Jones for my anti-virals. He's the only one who knows anything about anything.

Just listen to Bruce Springsteen. That music will send anything away...

 

[icanhelp1]

http://forum.literotica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2094049&stc=1&d=1586539239

https://twitter.com/ryanmarino/status/1247486136949317635?s=21


https://twitter.com/mvp_pediatric/status/1248160599868993536?s=21

post #82

 

[Conager]

I'm not about to debate with you what is and what is not a reputable new source. Here is the full statement by the colonel.

“As a matter of practice the National Center for Medical Intelligence does not comment publicly on specific intelligence matters. However, in the interest of transparency during this current public health crisis, we can confirm that media reporting about the existence/release of a National Center for Medical Intelligence Coronavirus-related product/assessment in November of 2019 is not correct. No such NCMI product exists.” -Col. R. Shane Day, Spokesman, National Center for Medical Intelligence (NCMI), a division of the rarely heard from Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA)

I'm surprised it was as wordy as it was.

The original story was bullshit and everyone should have known it was bullshit because even a Chinese didn't have that level of certitude in November.

There's nothing wrong with anonymous sources from reporters and outlets that have a track record a being correct on a particular area. You don't know who the guys source is but you know that he's got one.

All too often during the get Trump media blitz you have unnamed sources from reporters who have no previous track record in that field of expertise claiming things that are then refuted. When that same outlet does not publish the denial and did not seek confirmation you really should rethink what you consider a reputable news source.

 

[Comshaw]

I'm going to Alex Jones for my anti-virals. He's the only one who knows anything about anything.

Damn straight. I believe every word. I gotta get me some of that toothpaste. Brush my teeth an no more Corona virus! Fuckin' A!

Comshaw

 

[HisArpy]

post #82

It probably would have been more fruitful had they spelled it correctly.

Just sayin'.

 

[icanhelp1]

I'm not about to debate with you what is and what is not a reputable new source. Here is the full statement by the colonel.

“As a matter of practice the National Center for Medical Intelligence does not comment publicly on specific intelligence matters. However, in the interest of transparency during this current public health crisis, we can confirm that media reporting about the existence/release of a National Center for Medical Intelligence Coronavirus-related product/assessment in November of 2019 is not correct. No such NCMI product exists.” -Col. R. Shane Day, Spokesman, National Center for Medical Intelligence (NCMI), a division of the rarely heard from Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA)

I'm surprised it was as wordy as it was.

The original story was bullshit and everyone should have known it was bullshit because even a Chinese didn't have that level of certitude in November.

There's nothing wrong with anonymous sources from reporters and outlets that have a track record a being correct on a particular area. You don't know who the guys source is but you know that he's got one.

All too often during the get Trump media blitz you have unnamed sources from reporters who have no previous track record in that field of expertise claiming things that are then refuted. When that same outlet does not publish the denial and did not seek confirmation you really should rethink what you consider a reputable news source.

Who are you directing that at?

 

[OldJourno]

Got a prescription of this stuff and I've got to tell you, it's great. I pop just one pill in my aquarium a day and it has never been cleaner.

As for human consumption, I've seen and read too many stories of people who have taken the drug combination, many times when they felt they were in critical condition, and the improvement in their health was dramatic and relatively quick.
Dismiss the drug out of hand if you wish, but it has worked.

 

[Wrong Element]

If there was a cheap, effective treatment out there, what possible motivation would the NHS have for not using it? They're trying shitloads of things in the hopes that something will show some promise. There's no benefit to spending huge amounts on keeping people in intensive care and crippling the economy with a needless lockdown. You think thousands of medical staff are watching patients and then colleagues die just to make trump look silly?

I'm willing to believe in conspiracy where conspiracy would make sense.

There's always an unnamed "they" who allegedly want the disease to persist, because who the hell knows why. It's the same crowd who believe we discovered a cure for cancer in 1966 but it's been suppressed by the AMA because then none of their people would have jobs anymore.


Treatment for Covid-19, as opposed to prevention in the form of a vaccine, seems to me to be necessary for the resumption of anything like normal life ("treatment" meaning anything that lessens the seriousness of the disease for those who contract it, lessening the likelihood of having to use a ventilator, etc). Doctors all over the world are throwing everything at it, and I guess if you're an optimist you have faith one of them will work eventually.


But I'll wait to see what the doctors have to say, not a politician or sleazebag with something to sell me.

 

[icanhelp1]

It probably would have been more fruitful had they spelled it correctly.

Just sayin'.

Well I tried! I posted the article in full. Surprised I'm not bamhammered already!

 

[Conager]

Who are you directing that at?

Comshaw wanted a cite. I was busy and didn't hit enter for a while.