Chit Chat
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
18 May 20
22:07
Joined:
Date Joined:
26 Apr 12
Donald says he's taking it...
Plenty believe it will be successful in the fight.
Plenty believe it will be successful in the fight.
Show More
Mikovitz and Delores both think it's effective.
Evidence so far suggests there is no basis for their claims.
Evidence so far suggests there is no basis for their claims.
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/05/11/health/hydroxychloroquine-doesnt-work-cor...
Dolores said it killed the other coronas didnt she? sars etc
I presume that his Russian creditors are long the stock.
BBC criticism of Trump taking it makes you wonder. Is its use being restricted because the elites never patented it?
Cahill recommends it as pecker says. Yet no widespread use despite it’s very cheap.
Cahill recommends it as pecker says. Yet no widespread use despite it’s very cheap.
Who'd want to look like President Trump? A cousin of an orange chimp maybe. I hope it has a "desired" effect on him.
President Trump vs Biden - what a choice for the American people? A rock and a hard place is never more true; eat poo or starve.
President Trump vs Biden - what a choice for the American people? A rock and a hard place is never more true; eat poo or starve.
Rapid Response:
Re: Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in covid-19
Dear Editor,
The fundamental correctness in this piece cannot be disputed. Trumpian calls for wider use of chloroquine cannot be heeded until efficacy and safety are appropriately assured. That of course is what clinical trials are for.
Nevertheless, I suggest that at such a particular moment in our time, even a professional submission such as this is, should at least acknowledge the necessary influence of urgency. The speed of a convoy is the speed of the slowest ship. PHE, together with the author here, are on the bridge of that ship.
That studies to date have all employed drug doses that err on the side of plenty (although the South Koreans moderated the doses somewhat) is not surprising when the goal is to realise a clear clinical effect. But that of course raises the likelihood of poorly tolerated side effects. This, together with the author's overly pessimistic worries that chloroquine may accelerate illness progression (as per previous trials against other viruses), leads to skewed viewpoint on the emerging facts.
The author is really saying "Whoa!... not so fast! This thing has nasty side effects and might make the disease worse. Let's stick with our tightly controlled trials and see what they throw up in 12 months."
An alternate, more helpful approach might be to acknowledge what we already know about chloroquine and this SARS-CoV-2.
We know that the in-vitro studies suggested efficacy could be achieved with 500mg chloroquine phosphate per day. Yet the authors acknowledged that didn't take account of the particularly heavy sequestration of the drug in lung, liver and spleen. With such a lengthy half-life there is good reason to believe that a lower daily dose is more likely to be optimal for effect, tolerance and safety. Those trials indicated a role for the drug as prophylactic agent and early treatment.
So, whilst acknowledging that in vivo studies to date have been suboptimal in terms of construct and data reporting, there is still enough coming back to us to build reasonable confidence that there’s no evidence of disease exacerbation under studied conditions. This is important.
Certainly, trials should continue. I suggest that the evidence to date (such as it is) is largely positive for the use of chloroquine against SARS-CoV-2.
What’s needed is a large cohort study using chloroquine in dosage which brings good potential for clinical effect but with minimal risk. Surely the most elegant plan for optimal repurposing of this inexpensive drug is to employ doses already known to be universally safe.
That elegant plan indicates a prophylactic dose of 500mg Chloroquine phosphate taken once weekly (same as existing antimalarial chemoprophylaxis). For early treatment, chloroquine phosphate 500mg is taken on day 1, 3, 5 and then only on day 7 and 9 if clinical symptoms endure. The maximum total chloroquine load is 2.5g, taken over 9 days. This equates to the total dose used to safely treat non falciparum malaria over 48 hours (25mg/kg of chloroquine base equals 40mg/kg chloroquine phosphate).
These are overwhelmingly safe doses and yet still respect the values suggested from in-vitro trials.
In 2006, Dr Christopher J M Whitty (then consultant physician, now a Professor and Chief Medical Officer (Eng) and Chief Medical Adviser to UK Gov) had his paper published in the BMJ: "Malaria: an update on treatment of adults in non-endemic countries."
Therein Dr Whitty describes the 'non-falciparum' malaria treatment dose of chloroquine phosphate (40mg/kg over just 48hours):
"This works rapidly and reliably where there is no resistance, is safe in usual doses, and is well tolerated. It is considered safe in pregnancy.
Side effects—It can cause gastritis and mild abdominal pain. It can cause itching in some people of African ethnicity (mechanism unknown)."
Just so we agree, "safe in pregnancy" means very safe.
With such in mind, this week I surveyed 43 clinical colleagues using WhatsApp groups. These were GPs and secondary care clinicians. I asked whether they’d be willing to volunteer for an NHS-wide cohort study, using chloroquine as a medical countermeasure against COVID 19 (prophylaxis and treatment in the doses already advised). I received 37 replies. All 37 stated yes. The most frequent reason given was "potential benefit outweighs minimal risk."
That 86% of doctors would wish to take chloroquine as a medical countermeasure should not come as a surprise. Unlike the author, those doctors do acknowledge the presence of urgency:
We are faced with a fast-moving pandemic with an unacceptably high mortality and morbidity. Unfortunately, front line clinicians will be hugely over-represented in those statistics. They also understand the nature of clinical trials and the concept of risk versus benefit.
So, with written permission from Nominet-UK, I have launched a petition/campaign from my not-for-profit website (for patient information purposes): http://thevirus.uk
There is also a link there to the campaign at change.org http://chng.it/h64H785wCB
This petition is aimed at PHE and Gov Dept Health & SC. I request the creation of a large NHS cohort study with chloroquine being offered as medical countermeasure for all front-facing NHS staff. The control cohort selects itself (staff who decline or who have contraindications, not including those with CV contraindication).
This study should be created with speed. There is minimal due diligence required to repurpose a drug for trial use with doses already proven to be safe ... especially when the trial participants are cognizant of the nature of such a study and stand to benefit directly from any positive therapeutic impact.
In the long grass, several months down the line, we may learn that chloroquine wasn't the optimal anti-viral drug for COVID 19. Perhaps one of the more targeted agents will ultimately take that crown. But if chloroquine delivers on its early promise and prevents mortal disease progression in our brave front-line colleagues, then who gets the crown doesn't matter.
So people, don't panic. But acknowledging the urgency in this predicament is important. PHE need to seize the nettle and offer something that might just save our families and friends at the front-line.
Dr Philip L Davies
MRCGP
Re: Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in covid-19
Dear Editor,
The fundamental correctness in this piece cannot be disputed. Trumpian calls for wider use of chloroquine cannot be heeded until efficacy and safety are appropriately assured. That of course is what clinical trials are for.
Nevertheless, I suggest that at such a particular moment in our time, even a professional submission such as this is, should at least acknowledge the necessary influence of urgency. The speed of a convoy is the speed of the slowest ship. PHE, together with the author here, are on the bridge of that ship.
That studies to date have all employed drug doses that err on the side of plenty (although the South Koreans moderated the doses somewhat) is not surprising when the goal is to realise a clear clinical effect. But that of course raises the likelihood of poorly tolerated side effects. This, together with the author's overly pessimistic worries that chloroquine may accelerate illness progression (as per previous trials against other viruses), leads to skewed viewpoint on the emerging facts.
The author is really saying "Whoa!... not so fast! This thing has nasty side effects and might make the disease worse. Let's stick with our tightly controlled trials and see what they throw up in 12 months."
An alternate, more helpful approach might be to acknowledge what we already know about chloroquine and this SARS-CoV-2.
We know that the in-vitro studies suggested efficacy could be achieved with 500mg chloroquine phosphate per day. Yet the authors acknowledged that didn't take account of the particularly heavy sequestration of the drug in lung, liver and spleen. With such a lengthy half-life there is good reason to believe that a lower daily dose is more likely to be optimal for effect, tolerance and safety. Those trials indicated a role for the drug as prophylactic agent and early treatment.
So, whilst acknowledging that in vivo studies to date have been suboptimal in terms of construct and data reporting, there is still enough coming back to us to build reasonable confidence that there’s no evidence of disease exacerbation under studied conditions. This is important.
Certainly, trials should continue. I suggest that the evidence to date (such as it is) is largely positive for the use of chloroquine against SARS-CoV-2.
What’s needed is a large cohort study using chloroquine in dosage which brings good potential for clinical effect but with minimal risk. Surely the most elegant plan for optimal repurposing of this inexpensive drug is to employ doses already known to be universally safe.
That elegant plan indicates a prophylactic dose of 500mg Chloroquine phosphate taken once weekly (same as existing antimalarial chemoprophylaxis). For early treatment, chloroquine phosphate 500mg is taken on day 1, 3, 5 and then only on day 7 and 9 if clinical symptoms endure. The maximum total chloroquine load is 2.5g, taken over 9 days. This equates to the total dose used to safely treat non falciparum malaria over 48 hours (25mg/kg of chloroquine base equals 40mg/kg chloroquine phosphate).
These are overwhelmingly safe doses and yet still respect the values suggested from in-vitro trials.
In 2006, Dr Christopher J M Whitty (then consultant physician, now a Professor and Chief Medical Officer (Eng) and Chief Medical Adviser to UK Gov) had his paper published in the BMJ: "Malaria: an update on treatment of adults in non-endemic countries."
Therein Dr Whitty describes the 'non-falciparum' malaria treatment dose of chloroquine phosphate (40mg/kg over just 48hours):
"This works rapidly and reliably where there is no resistance, is safe in usual doses, and is well tolerated. It is considered safe in pregnancy.
Side effects—It can cause gastritis and mild abdominal pain. It can cause itching in some people of African ethnicity (mechanism unknown)."
Just so we agree, "safe in pregnancy" means very safe.
With such in mind, this week I surveyed 43 clinical colleagues using WhatsApp groups. These were GPs and secondary care clinicians. I asked whether they’d be willing to volunteer for an NHS-wide cohort study, using chloroquine as a medical countermeasure against COVID 19 (prophylaxis and treatment in the doses already advised). I received 37 replies. All 37 stated yes. The most frequent reason given was "potential benefit outweighs minimal risk."
That 86% of doctors would wish to take chloroquine as a medical countermeasure should not come as a surprise. Unlike the author, those doctors do acknowledge the presence of urgency:
We are faced with a fast-moving pandemic with an unacceptably high mortality and morbidity. Unfortunately, front line clinicians will be hugely over-represented in those statistics. They also understand the nature of clinical trials and the concept of risk versus benefit.
So, with written permission from Nominet-UK, I have launched a petition/campaign from my not-for-profit website (for patient information purposes): http://thevirus.uk
There is also a link there to the campaign at change.org http://chng.it/h64H785wCB
This petition is aimed at PHE and Gov Dept Health & SC. I request the creation of a large NHS cohort study with chloroquine being offered as medical countermeasure for all front-facing NHS staff. The control cohort selects itself (staff who decline or who have contraindications, not including those with CV contraindication).
This study should be created with speed. There is minimal due diligence required to repurpose a drug for trial use with doses already proven to be safe ... especially when the trial participants are cognizant of the nature of such a study and stand to benefit directly from any positive therapeutic impact.
In the long grass, several months down the line, we may learn that chloroquine wasn't the optimal anti-viral drug for COVID 19. Perhaps one of the more targeted agents will ultimately take that crown. But if chloroquine delivers on its early promise and prevents mortal disease progression in our brave front-line colleagues, then who gets the crown doesn't matter.
So people, don't panic. But acknowledging the urgency in this predicament is important. PHE need to seize the nettle and offer something that might just save our families and friends at the front-line.
Dr Philip L Davies
MRCGP
Not sure what everyone is saying, the BBC is starting to make a lot of errors in the reporting of the Don, they changed the story and the wording of what they were saying he was saying through the night many times.
By this morning it was somewhat diluted, but they were falsely reporting (again) that there was no Medical Evidence, me thinks that's incorrect and there is plenty.
But as ever the devil is in tbe detail, being used to treat people infected and being used to prevent infection is very different, chloraQ. is used to prevent m as laria right? That's its main use and it works it would appear, it also has been. Shown to cure but mostly in conjuction with other drugs, well an antibiotic and in some studies zinc as well.
However the reason I post is to suggest a few things, the context that trump was talking was tl some retail food group,I think the reason chlora is getting talked about is because right now we don't have anything in the armoury to throw at it if it comes back soon, lock down and state handouts are imo finite, really we ain't gunna lock down again imo, the machine will be revved up and we're off again and we ain't stopping again imo.
Some folks need reassured and right now without lying we don't have anything, so the Don is suggesting chlora, and he must be taking it as if was lying he could be impeached, also the BBC were quick to suggest he was responsible for killing some stoopid dude that was fed fish tank cleaner by his Mrs even though that was like 10 x the base w/w and 100x the dose. Maybe he just want to show that there is summit. If it comes back rapido, everyone can take it and we can all crack on.
Apparently the D is Rh- anyway, prob ecplains lack of mask early on as well.
There is loads of evidence chlora works in conjunction with other meds, also the clap trap about clinical trials is unbelievable as its been used for donkeys years, it has a long life in the body, softens the cell walls and allows zinc to do a job on proteins, lowering acidity and preventing Covid reproduction.
My own go to that's safer thasn chloro would be asperin, think it's got as roll in helping those that are infected, helps in many ways imo, low dose baby asperin, although was surprised to see its used in very high doses in kawasaki disease.
One thing for sure it looks like many elderly in many countries did not even get a sniff of oxygen let alone a fookin asperin or the deadly trump posion, instead they were told to sign DNR forms and stay at home only coming out to Clap the NHS.
Byethebye how did antiB test go SE?
By this morning it was somewhat diluted, but they were falsely reporting (again) that there was no Medical Evidence, me thinks that's incorrect and there is plenty.
But as ever the devil is in tbe detail, being used to treat people infected and being used to prevent infection is very different, chloraQ. is used to prevent m as laria right? That's its main use and it works it would appear, it also has been. Shown to cure but mostly in conjuction with other drugs, well an antibiotic and in some studies zinc as well.
However the reason I post is to suggest a few things, the context that trump was talking was tl some retail food group,I think the reason chlora is getting talked about is because right now we don't have anything in the armoury to throw at it if it comes back soon, lock down and state handouts are imo finite, really we ain't gunna lock down again imo, the machine will be revved up and we're off again and we ain't stopping again imo.
Some folks need reassured and right now without lying we don't have anything, so the Don is suggesting chlora, and he must be taking it as if was lying he could be impeached, also the BBC were quick to suggest he was responsible for killing some stoopid dude that was fed fish tank cleaner by his Mrs even though that was like 10 x the base w/w and 100x the dose. Maybe he just want to show that there is summit. If it comes back rapido, everyone can take it and we can all crack on.
Apparently the D is Rh- anyway, prob ecplains lack of mask early on as well.
There is loads of evidence chlora works in conjunction with other meds, also the clap trap about clinical trials is unbelievable as its been used for donkeys years, it has a long life in the body, softens the cell walls and allows zinc to do a job on proteins, lowering acidity and preventing Covid reproduction.
My own go to that's safer thasn chloro would be asperin, think it's got as roll in helping those that are infected, helps in many ways imo, low dose baby asperin, although was surprised to see its used in very high doses in kawasaki disease.
One thing for sure it looks like many elderly in many countries did not even get a sniff of oxygen let alone a fookin asperin or the deadly trump posion, instead they were told to sign DNR forms and stay at home only coming out to Clap the NHS.
Byethebye how did antiB test go SE?
May 19, 2020 -- 11:00AM, breadnbutter wrote:
Not sure what everyone is saying, the BBC is starting to make a lot of errors in the reporting of the Don, they changed the story and the wording of what they were saying he was saying through the night many times.By this morning it was somewhat diluted, but they were falsely reporting (again) that there was no Medical Evidence, me thinks that's incorrect and there is plenty.But as ever the devil is in tbe detail, being used to treat people infected and being used to prevent infection is very different, chloraQ. is used to prevent m as laria right? That's its main use and it works it would appear, it also has been. Shown to cure but mostly in conjuction with other drugs, well an antibiotic and in some studies zinc as well.However the reason I post is to suggest a few things, the context that trump was talking was tl some retail food group,I think the reason chlora is getting talked about is because right now we don't have anything in the armoury to throw at it if it comes back soon, lock down and state handouts are imo finite, really we ain't gunna lock down again imo, the machine will be revved up and we're off again and we ain't stopping again imo.Some folks need reassured and right now without lying we don't have anything, so the Don is suggesting chlora, and he must be taking it as if was lying he could be impeached, also the BBC were quick to suggest he was responsible for killing some stoopid dude that was fed fish tank cleaner by his Mrs even though that was like 10 x the base w/w and 100x the dose. Maybe he just want to show that there is summit. If it comes back rapido, everyone can take it and we can all crack on.Apparently the D is Rh- anyway, prob ecplains lack of mask early on as well.There is loads of evidence chlora works in conjunction with other meds, also the clap trap about clinical trials is unbelievable as its been used for donkeys years, it has a long life in the body, softens the cell walls and allows zinc to do a job on proteins, lowering acidity and preventing Covid reproduction.My own go to that's safer thasn chloro would be asperin, think it's got as roll in helping those that are infected, helps in many ways imo, low dose baby asperin, although was surprised to see its used in very high doses in kawasaki disease.One thing for sure it looks like many elderly in many countries did not even get a sniff of oxygen let alone a fookin asperin or the deadly trump posion, instead they were told to sign DNR forms and stay at home only coming out to Clap the NHS.Byethebye how did antiB test go SE?
I wouldn't be surprised if a few of them were deprived of oxygen via a pillow
I find the bbc link accurate..... Are they still telling lies about there being " no medica evidence"? A quick gooooogle will prove otherwise, they are flying close to the wind again and the edited video on the disinfectant and light claims were a disgrace to journalism, they are bearly credible, trashy rogue red top outfit. Glad I don't pay for it.
Almost every news outlet agrees that the treatment is unproven and breadnbitter goes on a anti-bbc rant
Crazy thing to do': Health experts alarmed by Trump's use of unproven drug
The treatment has no proven benefits for the coronavirus patients and can cause heart problems.
There's no substantiated evidence that taking hydroxychloroquine prevents COVID-19 infections
Trump has spent weeks pushing the drug as a potential cure for COVID-19, despite there being no consensus on its effectiveness or safety.
Trump says he's taking hydroxychloroquine to prevent COVID-19
The antimalarial drug is unproven as a treatment for the coronavirus, and the FDA has warned against its use outside hospital settings.
Crazy thing to do': Health experts alarmed by Trump's use of unproven drug
The treatment has no proven benefits for the coronavirus patients and can cause heart problems.
There's no substantiated evidence that taking hydroxychloroquine prevents COVID-19 infections
Trump has spent weeks pushing the drug as a potential cure for COVID-19, despite there being no consensus on its effectiveness or safety.
Trump says he's taking hydroxychloroquine to prevent COVID-19
The antimalarial drug is unproven as a treatment for the coronavirus, and the FDA has warned against its use outside hospital settings.
It can't be very dangerous if the BBC are trying to stop Donald Trump taking it.
Why only a single pill a day for the fatman? Take two, or four
Hydroxychloroquine has been around for decades and its patent expired decades ago. It can be made generically now by any pharma company. Patents only last a certain period, then the drug is effectively public property.
That Dolores woman was on about this drug too. She is highly qualified but she also said that people who had SARS 1 are immune for life to Covid and that people who have had Covid are also immune for life. There is no basis for any of this, even if she's right it's a very dangerous thing to say and she has no expertise in the treatment of patients for Covid.
That 86% of doctors would wish to take chloroquine as a medical countermeasure should not come as a surprise. Unlike the author, those doctors do acknowledge the presence of urgency:
That 86% of doctors would wish to take chloroquine as a medical countermeasure should not come as a surprise. Unlike the author, those doctors do acknowledge the presence of urgency:
That 86% of doctors would wish to take chloroquine as a medical countermeasure should not come as a surprise. Unlike the author, those doctors do acknowledge the presence of urgency:
That 86% of doctors would wish to take chloroquine as a medical countermeasure should not come as a surprise. Unlike the author, those doctors do acknowledge the presence of urgency:
That 86% of doctors would wish to take chloroquine as a medical countermeasure should not come as a surprise. Unlike the author, those doctors do acknowledge the presence of urgency:
That 86% of doctors would wish to take chloroquine as a medical countermeasure should not come as a surprise. Unlike the author, those doctors do acknowledge the presence of urgency:
That 86% of doctors would wish to take chloroquine as a medical countermeasure should not come as a surprise. Unlike the author, those doctors do acknowledge the presence of urgency:
That 86% of doctors would wish to take chloroquine as a medical countermeasure should not come as a surprise. Unlike the author, those doctors do acknowledge the presence of urgency:
That 86% of doctors would wish to take chloroquine as a medical countermeasure should not come as a surprise. Unlike the author, those doctors do acknowledge the presence of urgency:
That 86% of doctors would wish to take chloroquine as a medical countermeasure should not come as a surprise. Unlike the author, those doctors do acknowledge the presence of urgency:
That 86% of doctors would wish to take chloroquine as a medical countermeasure should not come as a surprise. Unlike the author, those doctors do acknowledge the presence of urgency:
That 86% of doctors would wish to take chloroquine as a medical countermeasure should not come as a surprise. Unlike the author, those doctors do acknowledge the presence of urgency:
That 86% of doctors would wish to take chloroquine as a medical countermeasure should not come as a surprise. Unlike the author, those doctors do acknowledge the presence of urgency:
She also said she had remained quiet on the topic until she did that interview on 11 May, a week before the lockdown in Ireland was due to be eased.
Why? It's a bit late to be coming out with a load of anti-lockdown stuff at this stage. Most of this would have been known to her in Feb and March but she didn't pipe up then.
Her claim that she will personally stand over the use of HQ to treat and full release of the lockdown is worthless. If it goes títs up what good will it do going after her? It's ridiculous to say that.
She is also Chairwoman of the Irish Freedom Party, an anti-EU party with zero support in Ireland and which wants Ireland to leave the EU.
Why? It's a bit late to be coming out with a load of anti-lockdown stuff at this stage. Most of this would have been known to her in Feb and March but she didn't pipe up then.
Her claim that she will personally stand over the use of HQ to treat and full release of the lockdown is worthless. If it goes títs up what good will it do going after her? It's ridiculous to say that.
She is also Chairwoman of the Irish Freedom Party, an anti-EU party with zero support in Ireland and which wants Ireland to leave the EU.
She also estimated that 7-15% of people in Ireland had SARS 1 antibodies, 400k people she said approximately, and that they were all immune to covid for life.
There were less than 9,000 cases of SARS 1 worldwide and 2 (two) cases in Ireland.
There were less than 9,000 cases of SARS 1 worldwide and 2 (two) cases in Ireland.
Hydroxychloroquine, the anti-malarial drug being taken by Donald Trump to try to prevent catching coronavirus, is being bought by the UK government as part of a £35m contract put out to tender on Friday.
Ministers are seeking 16m tablets of the drug in packets of up to 100 as part of clinical trials to evaluate it as a treatment.
The contract, which was uploaded to a government website on 15 May, is an “open opportunity” for pharmaceutical suppliers to supply more than 33m tablets of various drugs between June and next January.
Ministers are seeking 16m tablets of the drug in packets of up to 100 as part of clinical trials to evaluate it as a treatment.
The contract, which was uploaded to a government website on 15 May, is an “open opportunity” for pharmaceutical suppliers to supply more than 33m tablets of various drugs between June and next January.
Mrs. Doyle said take one a day with a cuppa and say three hail marys everything will be fine..
Most people (in this country, anyway) don't even use it for Malaria anymore, due to its many and extremely unpleasant side effects. Malarone is much beter and doesn't need to be taken for such a long period. Mind you the hair loss might be a bonus in Trump's case.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539