Covid and Didier Raoult (supporter of hydroxychloroquine): analyzes on the pandemic

[pedrodelavega]

This was the case for all studies on HCQ and other adjuvants, before more serious studies concluded ineffectiveness, see toxicity.

It seems that these concerns about toxicity, mentioned from the start by some, unfortunately appear to be well justified today:

[Obamot]

Damn, it's the “Si” ... ”Si” ... ”Lien / s” clan here, my word ...

Bla-bla-bla in the form of bashing and endless story, or when an argument is debunked, it resurfaces a little later and you would have to start again debunking your arguments to the nuts, in a story without end.

No, taken early, hydroxychloroquine is not dangerous in the prescribed doses of 600mg as an attack dose, then possible drop (and taking into account the medical history of the patients concerned ...) it is an extremely well-known molecule, which has been around for almost 50 years, so it is not “suddenly” that we would discover a toxicity that would have gone “unnoticed” for so long, or so guys, it is time to ask yourself about the shortcomings of the system that you claim to defend tooth and nail ...
It takes extreme bad faith to continue to use this argument repeated dozens of times.

Otherwise, sheltering yourself from fallacies by using other fallacies will never work.
It's even pretty bad, no comment.

we defend the right of Dr Risch, a respected cancer epidemiologist, to express his opinions. But he is not an expert in the epidemiology of infectious diseases

This statement is completely false! A lot of cancers are started by ... viruses. ...

No sequitur. The fact that viruses would trigger cancers does not prove that a cancer specialist would be a virus specialist.

Reminds me of a drawing teacher: "I teach art, and since art touches everything, I teach everything".

No sequitur BIS.

Epidemiology (Wikipedia):
Epidemiology is a scientific discipline which studies health problems in human populations, their frequency, their distribution in time and space, as well as the factors influencing the health and diseases of populations.

The study of the distribution and determinants of health events serves as a basis for the logic of interventions made in the interest of public health and preventive medicine.

The approaches of epidemiologists are varied: they range from "field study" (at the heart of the community, often in a public health service) at the front of research and the fight against the emergence of diseases through modeling and health monitoring.

Epidemiology is therefore not the subject at all. It is therefore rather these epidemiologists who should not go into his field of expertise. Although this way of seeing medicine is yours (and those of these “signatories” who have an extremely limited vision) because everyone knows that these experts consult each other and that the causes, the anamnesis are multifactorial (reason for the appearance of name comorbidities)

Never mind, Professor Raoult is an eminent epidemiologist and yet it is the same, his opinion and the work of his team are disputed. Whatever the argument as long as it is a question of being right at all costs It's a sham, we know the refrain ...

And I don't know your background, but you don't have to be very enlightened, because these things are obvious.

[pedrodelavega]

Never mind, Professor Raoult is an eminent epidemiologist and yet it is the same, his opinion and the work of his team are disputed.

Raoult is not an epidemiologist.

[Obamot]

He's better than that, being in scientific research he's a few levels above.

He conceptualized “a new health policy that would be able to better anticipate epidemiological risks, which he saw will become one of the major challenges of an interconnected world. Long before covid-19, he warned against the risks of overflowing French health services, and recommended to equip hospitals with infectiopoles, in particular test manufacturing units, in order to identify as quickly as possible , and as soon as possible, the first patients”(Adapted from wiki)

And you stuck me up to the point that you're stuck for a long time. In my list of ignored, given the lack of recurring interest in your words. Not enough to blow your nose for all your nonsense!

[Adrien (ex-nico239)]

Perronne's study of August 2

Unsurprisingly, the azthromicine used in dual therapy with hydroxychloroquine (or not) reduces the risks of aggravation of positive patients.
This is just a reiteration of what is now clinical evidence that doctors from Moselle and many others who had prescribed macrolides to their patients had already observed and who had all testified to the clear improvement in their condition. state.

As a reminder, they had been summoned before the council to orders for having mentioned these results ...
It's like being in the GDR with the Stasi

A funny detail, he cites the Mahevas study, which is known to have been taken up and down by the corrupt press as proof that the combination of hydroxychloroquine and azythromicin did not work while the study note the opposite ... what I had already noted here in his time.

Impact of medical care including anti-infective agents use on the prognosis of COVID-19 hospitalized patients over time

[Adrien (ex-nico239)]

This was the case for all studies on HCQ and other adjuvants, before more serious studies concluded ineffectiveness, see toxicity.

It seems that these concerns about toxicity, mentioned from the start by some, unfortunately appear to be well justified today:

Who is this zenutopia?

Do you have any details on the origin and condition of the patients mentioned in this pseudo study as well as the stage of Covid (phase 1 or 2) they were at when they were given hydroxychloroquine?

[izentrop]

It's like being in the GDR with the Stasi

In reality, this would be the case if we agreed with Peronne and Raoult. It would be the triumph of populism against established scientific facts.

It will likely come to this point when the global economy is on its knees with the debacle of resource depletion and CD.
The law of the most twisted, the strongest will once again be the rule.

[ABC2019]

And you stuck me up to the point that you're stuck for a long time. In my list of ignored, given the lack of recurring interest in your words. Not enough to blow your nose for all your nonsense!

at the rate it is going, Obamot will only argue with himself ....

[pedrodelavega]

Do you have any details on the origin and condition of the patients mentioned in this pseudo study as well as the stage of Covid (phase 1 or 2) they were at when they were given hydroxychloroquine?

More information is available in the article linked in the tweet.
We had the same alerts in France: https://www.ouest-france.fr/sante/virus ... es-6805401
https://www.prescrire.org/Fr/203/1845/5 ... tails.aspx

The cardiac toxicity of hydroxychloroquine is nothing new. It was known long before the Covid.
"The cardiac toxicity of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine is dose-dependent and cases of severe arrhythmias have been reported with overdose. but also at therapeutic dose."
"It is increased by hypokalaemia and by the combination of several drugs lengthening the QTc, "
https://www.rfcrpv.fr/chloroquine-point-dinformation/
https://www.rfcrpv.fr/hydroxychloroquin ... hromycine/

The risk is undoubtedly low but if the benefit is zero, as the RCTs and the majority of the scientific community & learned society seem to confirm, it is important not to prescribe.

[Obamot]

Blah-blah-blah