Showing posts with label Hydroxychloroquine. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hydroxychloroquine. Show all posts

Wednesday, 10 June 2020

Wax-Nose "Truth"

Lancetgate Is a Humiliation for Trump’s Medical Critics

Nude Emperor Caught Out Once Again

James Delingpole
Breitbart News

The Lancet — one of the world’s oldest, best known, and most respected medical journals — has formally retracted a paper which claimed that hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) is ineffective and potentially dangerous in the treatment of Chinese coronavirus.

The paper — ‘Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: a multinational registry analysis’ — received widespread publicity across the mainstream media because it was the biggest and most damning study about HCQ.

Supposedly based on the records of 96,032 patients in 671 hospitals, the study claimed that coronavirus patients who took HCQ were more likely to die than those who took nothing.  It was so damning that the World Health Organization (WHO) immediately halted all its trials of HCQ. France banned its use altogether in treatments for Covid-19.

But arguably the main reason the study got so much publicity was because HCQ has been championed by President Donald Trump. Trump has admitted to taking HCQ himself as a prophylactic against the Chinese coronavirus. So here was a perfect opportunity for his many critics in the mainstream media to make him look ignorant and foolish.

This story by the BBC was fairly typical, headlined ‘Trump drug hydroxychloroquine raises death risk in Covid patients, study says’.

It began:
The drug U.S. President Donald Trump said he was taking to ward off Covid-19 actually increases the risk of patients with the disease dying from it, a study in the Lancet has found.
In other words, the MSM was in no doubt where the real significance of the Lancet study lay: it represented a humiliation for Trump.  Trump’s ideological enemies were quite unable to hide their glee.  Senator Ed Markey (D-Mass.) tweeted that “the science is clear and the president, as usual is dangerously wrong”.

This antipathy towards Trump was very much shared by the Lancet, which, for 25 years, has been edited by a hard-left activist Richard Horton.  As Rebecca Weisser notes in a piece for Spectator Australia, Horton has a long track record of championing fashionable leftist causes:
Horton’s causes célèbres include publishing an inflated Iraq War death toll, a letter on Gaza from pro-Hamas doctors and calling for physicians to join Extinction Rebellion.

Horton and the Lancet are also, it goes almost without saying, fanatical proponents of the man-made global warming narrative.

Last month, the Lancet published an editorial urging Americans to “put a president in the White House…who will understand that public health should not be guided by partisan politics.”  This month, however, it has been exposed as having engaged in what look very much like “partisan politics” itself. The way the Lancet has suddenly taken a paper of “such consequence” only to discard it “like a used tissue” has been described as ‘one of the most consequential retractions in modern history’.

Oddly it was the left-wing Guardian that blew the whistle.

A writer for its Australian edition, Melissa Davey, rang round Australian hospitals and found that the real Australian data did not tally with the claims made in the study.  This raised serious questions about the credibility of Surgisphere, the hitherto unknown analytics company which had produced the study.

As the Guardian reported:


  • A search of publicly available material suggests several of Surgisphere’s employees have little or no data or scientific background. An employee listed as a science editor appears to be a science fiction author and fantasy artist whose professional profile suggests writing is her fulltime job. Another employee listed as a marketing executive is an adult model and events hostess, who also acts in videos for organisations.
  • The company’s LinkedIn page has fewer than 100 followers and last week listed just six employees. This was changed to three employees as of Wednesday.
  • While Surgisphere claims to run one of the largest and fastest hospital databases in the world, it has almost no online presence. Its Twitter handle has fewer than 170 followers, with no posts between October 2017 and March 2020.
  • Until Monday, the “get in touch” link on Surgisphere’s homepage redirected to a WordPress template for a cryptocurrency website, raising questions about how hospitals could easily contact the company to join its database.
  • Desai has been named in three medical malpractice suits, unrelated to the Surgisphere database. In an interview with the Scientist, Desai previously described the allegations as “unfounded”.
  • In 2008, Desai launched a crowdfunding campaign on the website Indiegogo promoting a wearable “next generation human augmentation device that can help you achieve what you never thought was possible”. The device never came to fruition.
  • Desai’s Wikipedia page has been deleted following questions about Surgisphere and his history, first raised in 2010.

Why was a once-respected medical journal prepared to run a study from so dubious a source having apparently submitted it to so little scrutiny?  As Toby Young, among others, argues at Lockdown Sceptics, the decision appears as if it had more to do with political activism than with disinterested science.

The question is, why did the “independent” fact-checkers fail to spot this bit of fake news when they’ve been so quick to jump on anything purporting to show HCQ is effective? Could it be that they’re not actually independent at all, but Establishment lackeys determined to discredit anything that suggests COVID-19 isn’t the deadly pathogen it’s made out to be by governments around the world, particularly if it emanates from the White House?

With suspiciously convenient timing, within 24 hours of the Lancet retraction, yet another study — from the University of Oxford, part of the so-called Recovery Trial — allegedly debunking hydroxychloroquine was publicised in the mainstream media.

In the Telegraph, the story was reported under the headline ‘Researchers halt trial into hydroxychloroquine after they found it was “useless” against coronavirus’.

Immediately underneath, an anti-Trump standfirst:
‘This could be the end of the road for a drug touted as a ‘game-changer’ by U.S. president Donald Trump’.
Well it could.  Except, almost immediately, doubts were being raised about the reliability of this trial too, especially with regard to the dosage of HCQ used.

Of course it’s quite possible that the many doctors (such as France’s Didier Raoult) who claim to have used HCQ successfully as a treatment for Covid-19 — often in conjunction with zinc — may yet be confounded by a definitive study.

But it’s equally possible that Trump — and those doctors — may yet be vindicated.

Tuesday, 26 May 2020

Dumb and Dumber

Trump Hate Is Making It Harder to Study Hydroxychloroquine


By David Harsanyi
National Review Online

Yesterday, I pointed out the potential consequences of having an overwrought, childish, partisan debate over a lifesaving drug that’s used by millions of Americans. Today, I see, Joe Biden is comparing hydroxychloroquine to poison. “It’s like saying maybe if you inject Clorox into your blood it may cure you,” Biden said of Donald Trump’s admission that he takes the drug. “C’mon, man! What is he doing? What in God’s name is he doing?”

Now, I get that Biden thinks it’s cute to merge the myth that Trump wants Americans to inject themselves with bleach and the president’s unproven prophylactic use of hydroxychloroquine. It’s worth noting, however, that the presumptive Democratic Party nominee is also now telling Americans — including those who need this low-risk prescribed drug that has been approved for all public use for over 70 years — that taking hydroxychloroquine is tantamount to injecting yourself with bleach.

Listen to this NPR interview with some doctors trying to conduct tests of hydroxychloroquine effectiveness. Dr. John Giles, a rheumatologist at Columbia University, who says that the partisan fight over hydroxychloroquine has made it virtually impossible for him to find people to test the effectiveness of the drug against coronavirus. Why would anyone want to swallow Clorox, right?

“We are hearing now from some participants that the study and the drug feel too political and they just don’t want to participate at all,” says Dr. Christine Johnston at the University of Washington.

Monday, 25 May 2020

Asinine "Debate"

The Hydroxychloroquine Meltdown

The president claims he’s taking it as a prophylactic. The media met that with hysteria instead of conscientious coverage.

By David Harsanyi
National Review Online


President Donald Trump claims that he’s taking hydroxychloroquine as a preventive measure against contracting coronavirus, and that he has taken zinc and antibiotic azithromycin as well.

There’s no consensus that hydroxychloroquine is an effective therapeutic treatment for COVID-19 (early studies have yielded different results, and the NIH recently began a controlled clinical trial). Few people I’ve read argue that it’s a useful prophylactic. Nevertheless, the frenzied and childish reaction to Trump’s championing what amounts to a commonly used prescription drug is more destructive than his annoying habit of bringing it up.

A CNN columnist warns of “the danger in Trump’s decision to self-medicate.” If Trump is taking the drug, it’s been prescribed and presumably he’s being monitored, yet the CNN piece tries to create impression that the president is popping hydroxychloroquine tablets like mints to soothe his anxieties.

Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer called Trump’s remarks about hydroxychloroquine “dangerous,” though for the general public, the drug itself is no more dangerous than a vast number of pharmaceuticals used every day by millions of Americans to help them live with less pain or to keep them alive.

“Side effects of hydroxychloroquine include paranoia, hallucinations and psychosis,” notes the New York Times’ Michelle Goldberg, reading one of the many rare side effects of the drug. Wait until she reads the warning labels on the abortifacients that she wants the government to subsidize.

For that matter, we’re often lectured that killing an unborn baby is a decision made solely by a woman in conjunction with her doctor. Yet taking hydroxychloroquine is apparently a joint decision between a man, his doctor, every Democrat in congress, all the anchors on CNN, and an entire slate of New York Times op-ed columnists.

Saturday, 11 April 2020

Douglas Wilson's Letter From America

And Now for a Spot of Good News . . . .

However Unwelcome That Might Be

Douglas Wilson
Blog&Mablog

Introduction

By way of reminder, we have been visited with three distinct disasters. The first is the COVID virus itself. The second is the economic devastation that has been caused by a dramatic and unnecessary over-reaction to the virus. And the third is the threat to civil liberties that is posed by a thoughtless granting of sweeping emergency powers to the government.

What I would like to do here is bring you a bit of good news regarding the first rock that was dislodged at the top of this particular avalanche — meaning the virus, and possible treatments. And then I would like to discuss, for your edification and pleasure, why this news that is manifestly good news is not being treated by many as though it were good news. Even though it is.

Some Background

And as per the @IHME_UW projections, here is what happened in New York State (as of April 5). It is a comparison of the projection over against what actually happened.

In New York State, 69K hospital beds were projected as needed, and what were actually needed were 16.5K. The projection for needed ICU beds were 12.3K beds, and the beds that were actually required were 4K. For links to follow on this and related issues, check in with @AlexBerenson.

Good Old Hydroxychloroquine

First, let’s get the big picture.