Posted on 03/19/2020 8:08:58 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
As the Wuhan coronavirus is ravaging countries across the globe, there may be some promising news on the horizon. According to Gregory Rigano, an advisor to Stanford University School of Medicine, a world renowned French researcher tested a promising COVID-19 treatment option with a drug that’s been around for decades and is typically used to treat malaria.
“As of this morning…a well-controlled peer reviewed study carried out by the most eminent infectious disease specialist in the world—Didier Raoult, MD, PhD—out of the south of France, in which he enrolled 40 patients…that showed a 100 percent cure rate against coronavirus," Rigano told Fox News's Tucker Carlson.
Carlson, looking shocked, said he “only knows what you’re telling me” but that it is “very unusual for a study of anything to produce results of 100 percent.”
Did he miss something, he wondered.
“That is remarkable. In fact to be able to cure a virus was said to be mathematically impossible,” Rigano said, noting that a small company did in fact create a cure for Hepatitis C.
“What we’re here to announce is the second cure to a virus of all time,” he said.
Carlson said that while it’s his job to be “skeptical of all and any claims” he said he certainly wants to believe this news and hoped the federal government could find out “if it’s true.”
UPDATE:
Full peer reviewed study has been released by Didier Raoult MD, PhD https://t.co/DzFTv13wYn.
After 6 days 100% of patients treated with HCQ + Azithromycin were virologically cured
p-value <.0001https://t.co/vttAIWbPwJ— Gregory Rigano (@RiganoESQ) March 18, 2020
“We included everyone who was in agreement [to be treated], which was almost everyone. Two towns in the protocol, Nice and Avignon, gave us [infected] patients who had not yet received treatment," Raoult said, according to The Connexion.
“We were able to ascertain that patients who had not received Plaquenil (the drug containing hydroxychloroquine) were still contagious after six days, but of those that had received Plaquenil, after six days, only 25% were still contagious.”
Interesting. It appears “several patients exited the study when they were transferred to ICU...”.
Democrats soon to be crying
RE: It appears “several patients exited the study when they were transferred to ICU...”.
Can you show us the link please. Thanks.
It’s in the article. Right up above in red.
Funny. When I was in Med School we learned a doctor follows his patient where he goes in the hospital.
FROM THE LINK PROVIDED IN THE ARTICLE:
We enrolled 36 out of 42 patients meeting the inclusion criteria in this study that had at least
six days of follow-up at the time of the present analysis.
A total of 26 patients received
hydroxychloroquine and 16 were control patients.
Six hydroxychloroquine-treated patients
were lost in follow-up during the survey because of early cessation of treatment. Reasons are as follows:
* three patients were transferred to intensive care unit, including one transferred on day2 post-inclusion who was PCR-positive on day1,
* one transferred on day3 post-inclusion who was PCR-positive on days1-2 and
* one transferred on day4 post-inclusion who was PCR-positive on day1 and day3;
* one patient died on day3 post inclusion and was PCR-negative on day2;
* one patient decided to leave the hospital on day3 post-inclusion and was PCR-negative on days1-2;
* finally, one patient stopped the treatment on day3 post-inclusion because of nausea and was PCR-positive on days1-2-3.
The results presented here are therefore those of
36 patients (20 hydroxychloroquine-treated patients and 16 control patients). None of the control patients was lost in follow-up.
Basic demographics and clinical status are presented in
Table 1. Overall, 15 patients were male (41.7%), with a mean age of 45.1 years. The proportion of asymptomatic patients was 16.7%, that of patients with URTI symptoms was 61.1% and that of patients with LRTI symptoms was 22.2%).
All patients with LRTI symptoms, had confirmed pneumonia by CTScan. Hydroxychloroquine-treated patients were
older than control patients (51.2 years vs. 37.3 years).
No significant difference was observed
between hydroxychloroquine-treated patients and control patients with regard to gender, clinical status and duration of symptoms prior to inclusion (Table 1).
You don’t go on Tucker and gush “100%” and then publish this. Sorry, this is a big red flag. At least they were honest enough to admit it. You follow the patient wherever they go, even to the morgue. Especially to the morgue if you are going to go on Tucker and claim 100%.
And the media crow is now being served.
Generic Name: azithromycin (oral/injection) (a ZITH roe MYE sin)
Brand Name: Azithromycin 3 Day Dose Pack, Azithromycin 5 Day Dose Pack, Zithromax, Zithromax IV, Zithromax TRI-PAK, Zithromax Z-Pak
Any lefties in positions of power at the FDA will stall the release of any cure long enough to (they hope) affect the election.
Is such a conclusion warranted? "Correlation does not imply causation" comes to mind here.
You enter people into a study you follow them. Who knows? The damned drugs may work. I hope it does (while hoping they find a better one fast because these a horrible drugs). But you just don’t do this, at least where I came from. If there was a death, I don’t care if they never got the damn drug, if they were registered they contribute to the data. If you publish this you defend it by saying “We did blah blah ...86% or whatever”. But you don’t rush out and breathlessly announce “100%”. It absolutely wreaks of snake oil and it’s a shame.
My instinct is to ignore this paper. Sounds to me like they heard someone else was going to beat them to press so they jumped out and went full retard. I am certain to a moral certainty had I ever told my chairman “we didn’t include him, he died”, I would have been fired on the spot.
President Trump was talking a while this morning about the drug and there are supposedly other drugs that are used in other countries
RE: Six hydroxychloroquine-treated patients were lost in follow-up during the survey because of early cessation of treatment.
WHY did they cease the treatment? That’s the question.
SIDE EFFECTS? Cure worse than the disease?
They need to explain the reason.
What?? You weren’t taught to eliminate the outliers in your data sets? I’d say “dead” is a serious outlier.
Dear God I hope you are joking.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.