Why did Fauci denounce Hydroxychloroquine?

[jknowgood]

But if we would've done what Trump wanted to do and not lock down.

Didn’t you realize yesterday that’s what you wanted, not Trump?

Yes I agreed with Trump, I have lived my life the same as I always have. Even when they closed my watering hole. My friends and I did happy hour at my land.

 

[colfax_m]

If we didn't shut down it would've on been a month or two.

Sure. The only way to defeat COVID is to make sure everyone gets it. That’s how it’s working in India. They’ll be on the other side of it really soon.

 

[Magnus]

Did he hate Trump so much he wanted people to die? Is he just a cold blooded killer? Is he just an ignorant boob? Could he make more money by pushing something else? Personally, i think its all of the above but i want to hear from all of you.

If Hydroxychloroquine had been so effective, why did Trump still get Covid? Remember he went around claiming that he was immune because he was swallowing tons of that stuff?

And when Trump did get Covid, did he reject all other medications in favor of Hydroxychloroquine? Of course, not. That was the last we heard of that wonder drug.

So, the real question is why did Trump push Hydroxychloroquine? Did he want people to die? Is he just a cold-blooded killer or just an ignorant boob? Was Trump making money out of the drug or something else? Personally, I think it's all of the above but I want to hear from all of you.

 

[buckeye]

COVID-19 outpatients: early risk-stratified treatment with zinc plus low-dose hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin: a retrospective case series study

The aim of this study was to describe the outcomes of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the outpatient setting after early treatmen…

www.sciencedirect.com

Fig. 2. Hospitalisation. Treatment with triple therapy of zinc, low-dose hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin was associated with significantly fewer hospitalisations compared with untreated patients of the public reference data. χ2 (1, N = 518) = 14.17; * P < 0.001.

..........

Fig. 3. All-cause deaths. Treatment with triple therapy of zinc, low-dose hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin was associated with numerically fewer all-cause deaths compared with untreated patients of the public reference data. n.s., not significant. χ2 (1, N = 518) = 1.98; P = 0.12.

This paper isn’t worth the bandwidth to download it.

The greatest flaw is that their comparison group is “publicly available information”. No idea what that means and they don’t say. They admit that this “control group” has zero information about patient characteristics.

It’s garbage. Any attempt to compare their treatment group against a control group for which they have basically zero information is idiotic.

Sounds like you aren't aware what defined risk stratification means.

And from the Discussion portion of the study:

Inherent to all retrospective analyses, our study has certain limitations, such as non-randomisation and blinding of treatment. Also, only the outcome data of the untreated control group based on the public reference were available; because no other data on patient characteristics or clinical symptoms were available, no risk adjustment was possible. Therefore, confounding factors and selection bias, among other issues, might exist. The demographic composition of the treatment group might also have had an influence on our findings. Because many physician appointments had to be managed by telehealth, vital parameters were not available for the majority of patients. Viral load and electrocardiogram (ECG) data were not analysed. Treatment with the triple therapy resulted in a numerically lower rate of all-cause death. In the absence of clinical details about the untreated patient group, the lower rate of all-cause death in the treated group was not statistically significant. However, patients in the treated group were all positively risk-stratified while the risk of the untreated group was obviously lower as this group included high- and low-risk patients. When we compared the outcome of all risk-stratified patients in the study group (treated and non-treated) with the control patients (not stratified, treated with standard therapy), hospitalisation and all-cause death were significantly less in the study group (P < 0.0001 and P = 0.0154, respectively). These data were not shown in the results section because relevant clinical information was not completely available for all patients in the control group to allow risk adjustment between groups.

To call this study idiotic and garbage is close minded, likely politically motivated and unscientific.

COVID-19 Outpatients – Early Risk-Stratified Treatment with Zinc Plus Low Dose Hydroxychloroquine and Azithromycin: A Retrospective Case Series Study

Objective: To describe outcomes of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the outpatient setting after early treatment with zinc, low dose hydroxychloroquine, and azithromycin (the triple therapy) dependent on risk stratification. Design: Retrospective case series study. Setting...

www.preprints.org

Now try these:

Early treatment of COVID-19 patients with hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin: A retrospective analysis of 1061 cases in Marseille, France - PubMed

Administration of the HCQ+AZ combination before COVID-19 complications occur is safe and associated with a very low fatality rate in patients.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

DEFINE_ME

 

[jknowgood]

If we didn't shut down it would've on been a month or two.

Sure. The only way to defeat COVID is to make sure everyone gets it. That’s how it’s working in India. They’ll be on the other side of it really soon.

With a virus with over 99% survival rate, you don't shut your economy down.

 

[buckeye]

Did he hate Trump so much he wanted people to die? Is he just a cold blooded killer? Is he just an ignorant boob? Could he make more money by pushing something else? Personally, i think its all of the above but i want to hear from all of you.

Hydroxychloroquine doesn’t work. That’s why.

It’s really very simple.

Actually retard it does work according to doctors as has been repeatedly told to you

These doctors can say whatever they want. It’s irrelevant unless they have data to back it up.

There isn’t good data supporting it’s efficacy.

I note you have no data showing it doesn't work.

All you need to do is ask!
Doesn’t work with hospitalized patients.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2022926

Doesn’t work with mild/moderate disease.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa2019014

Doesn’t work as prophylaxis.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa2021801

There is no study here on patients newly diagnosed and not hospitalized.

That's the key to HCQ and azithromycin. Also no study here included zinc.

 

[colfax_m]

To call this study idiotic and garbage is close minded, likely politically motivated and unscientific.

It is garbage. How can you make a comparison between two groups when you have no demographic information on one of the groups?

Risk stratification was used for their treatment group. It had nothing to do with their control.

 

[colfax_m]

If we didn't shut down it would've on been a month or two.

Sure. The only way to defeat COVID is to make sure everyone gets it. That’s how it’s working in India. They’ll be on the other side of it really soon.

With a virus with over 99% survival rate, you don't shut your economy down.

You do if you’re unwilling to accept responsibility for the millions of dead who will result from it.

How do people feel about what’s going on in India?

 

[Burgermeister]

Did he hate Trump so much he wanted people to die? Is he just a cold blooded killer? Is he just an ignorant boob? Could he make more money by pushing something else? Personally, i think its all of the above but i want to hear from all of you.

Because it doesn't work.

Derp.

Gee, where did you get your fake medical degree????

New study reveals success of hydroxychloroquine as COVID treatment

The same place Faux Niwz did.

 

[HaShev]

Did he hate Trump so much he wanted people to die? Is he just a cold blooded killer? Is he just an ignorant boob? Could he make more money by pushing something else? Personally, i think its all of the above but i want to hear from all of you.

NiH were involved /partnered with the Moderna vaccine, that's why I said months ago they need to take a look at who in the NIH made a lot of money/investments from pushing the vaccine and supressing remedies. Not to long after many people got fired or left the NIH.

They had the vaccine before Trump ever opened his big mouth about his hydroxychloroquine..

And they had gas-x before you opened yours, that still does not change the fact people supressed remedies who were invested in vaccines.

 

[basquebromance]

/thread

 

[jknowgood]

If we didn't shut down it would've on been a month or two.

Sure. The only way to defeat COVID is to make sure everyone gets it. That’s how it’s working in India. They’ll be on the other side of it really soon.

With a virus with over 99% survival rate, you don't shut your economy down.

You do if you’re unwilling to accept responsibility for the millions of dead who will result from it.

How do people feel about what’s going on in India?

If we let the elderly and people with low immune systems. Let the healthy lived their lives it wouldn't of been bad.

 

[Nostra]

The Democrat Cult is so insane with hate that they do not care how many people that they have killed.
Big Tech even censored talking about using hydroxychloroquine to save lives.
If President Trump had said that people should NOT use hydroxychloroquine, they would have attacked him for that also.

​

​

NOBODY with any scientific authority said anything of the kind. They all said that the drug was killing people.

Most of the studies of the effectiveness of the drug, had to be halted, because the death rate for those getting hydroxychloroquine were DYING.

NIH halts clinical trial of hydroxychloroquine

Study shows treatment does no harm, but provides no benefit

www.nih.gov

FDA cautions use of hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine for COVID-19

Does not affect FDA-approved uses for malaria, lupus, and rheumatoid arthritis

www.fda.gov

Coronavirus: WHO halts trials of hydroxychloroquine over safety fears

Testing of hydroxychloroquine as a possible coronavirus treatment is suspended by the health agency.

www.bbc.com

The drug has been used for other illnesses safely for over 50 years, Dumbass.

 

[Nostra]

The Democrat Cult is so insane with hate that they do not care how many people that they have killed.
Big Tech even censored talking about using hydroxychloroquine to save lives.
If President Trump had said that people should NOT use hydroxychloroquine, they would have attacked him for that also.

​

​

NOBODY with any scientific authority said anything of the kind. They all said that the drug was killing people.

Most of the studies of the effectiveness of the drug, had to be halted, because the death rate for those getting hydroxychloroquine were DYING.

NIH halts clinical trial of hydroxychloroquine

Study shows treatment does no harm, but provides no benefit

www.nih.gov

FDA cautions use of hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine for COVID-19

Does not affect FDA-approved uses for malaria, lupus, and rheumatoid arthritis

www.fda.gov

Coronavirus: WHO halts trials of hydroxychloroquine over safety fears

Testing of hydroxychloroquine as a possible coronavirus treatment is suspended by the health agency.

www.bbc.com

because the death rate for those getting hydroxychloroquine were DYING.

Brilliant statement.

 

[colfax_m]

If we let the elderly and people with low immune systems. Let the healthy lived their lives it wouldn't of been bad.

We aren’t that healthy or a country. It wouldn’t work. You can’t isolate the people with risk factors. You just can’t. It would have been horrendous.

 

[jknowgood]

If we let the elderly and people with low immune systems. Let the healthy lived their lives it wouldn't of been bad.

We aren’t that healthy or a country. It wouldn’t work. You can’t isolate the people with risk factors. You just can’t. It would have been horrendous.

Then why are they saying the lock downs were worse.

 

[buckeye]

To call this study idiotic and garbage is close minded, likely politically motivated and unscientific.

It is garbage. How can you make a comparison between two groups when you have no demographic information on one of the groups?

Risk stratification was used for their treatment group. It had nothing to do with their control.

And why was risk stratification used in the treatment group?

Those patients were statistically more vulnerable than the average, which the study goes to great length to show. You missed this (among many other parts of the study!):

Patients received a prescription for triple therapy only if they met one of the following risk stratification requirements during a medical office-based or telehealth consultation: Group A, age >60 years, with or without clinical symptoms; Group B, age ≤60 years and shortness of breath (SOB); or Group C, age ≤60 years, clinically symptomatic and with at least one of the following co-morbidities: hypertension, hyperlipidaemia, diabetes mellitus, obesity [body mass index (BMI) ≥ 30 kg/m2], cardiovascular disease, heart failure, history of stroke, history of deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism, asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), other lung disease, kidney disease, liver disease, autoimmune disease or history of cancer. Pregnant women, if any, were also included in this group.

And I'll post this for you again. Perhaps this time you'll read it.

However, patients in the treated group were all positively risk-stratified while the risk of the untreated group was obviously lower as this group included high- and low-risk patients. When we compared the outcome of all risk-stratified patients in the study group (treated and non-treated) with the control patients (not stratified, treated with standard therapy), hospitalisation and all-cause death were significantly less in the study group (P < 0.0001 and P = 0.0154, respectively). These data were not shown in the results section because relevant clinical information was not completely available for all patients in the control group to allow risk adjustment between groups.

The devil is always in the details, colfax.

 

[colfax_m]

If we let the elderly and people with low immune systems. Let the healthy lived their lives it wouldn't of been bad.

We aren’t that healthy or a country. It wouldn’t work. You can’t isolate the people with risk factors. You just can’t. It would have been horrendous.

Then why are they saying the lock downs were worse.

We did lockdowns and half a million people still died. How many more dead are you gunning for?

 

[progressive hunter]

If we let the elderly and people with low immune systems. Let the healthy lived their lives it wouldn't of been bad.

We aren’t that healthy or a country. It wouldn’t work. You can’t isolate the people with risk factors. You just can’t. It would have been horrendous.

Then why are they saying the lock downs were worse.

We did lockdowns and half a million people still died. How many more dead are you gunning for?

its been proven lockdowns caused more death not less,,,

 

[colfax_m]

And why was risk stratification used in the treatment group?

Because that was the population they wanted to target for treatment.

I don’t know why you think this has anything to do with the criticism that the comparison group is useless. They don’t know anything about the comparison group. Nothing. Therefore you simply can’t compare anything to them.