Deaths from hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19 patients

[Hoosier8]

ONE study shows that it "slows some signal for the heart"???? ONE??? You are talking about QTc prolongation, which is a known effect of HCQ for 13 years when the FDA first entered a warning against it into the HCQ official monograph in 2007, much before the SARS-CoV-2 even existed. It's been noticed EVERYWHERE. What are you talking about, ONE study? There are dozens of studies and case reports showing the problem. Maybe YOU read only ONE study, but this is not some fringe unknown side effect.

I didn't read them all. Have you?

[CenterField]

It was a peer reviewed, 3,000 person, randomized, double-blinded study. The Lancet study widely referenced in the media saying it had no effect had to be retracted.

No, it was not randomized nor double-blinded. Like I said, I've read the study. Have you? If you had, you wouldn't be saying so as it was CLEARLY a retrospective observational study. Do you know what a retrospective observational study is? Hint: not double-blind, not randomized. The very nature of an observational study prevents it from being double-blinded or randomized, because the investigators do not control what is happening to the patients. They merely observe retrospectively what happened (do you actually know what double-blind means???). And if they retrospectively analyze a group that took the medication versus one that didn't, necessarily there was no randomization because nobody prospectively assigned one group to a medication and the other to the lack of that medication. Do you realize that this type of study just looks a charts after the fact and tabulates the treatments and outcomes?

Peer reviewed, yes, big deal. A peer review doesn't mean that a retrospective observational study delivers proof. It just means that it is appropriate for publication as it generates a hypothesis. Unfortunately, the hypothesis it generated has been already decimated by the Oxford study (which did deliver proof, as that one, unlike the Henry Ford one, *is* indeed an RCT).

The Lancet study was fraudulent. True.

The one I've just mentioned, the Oxford one, which *is* a double-blind, randomized study, is anything but fraudulent.

The fact that a fringe group called Surgisphere in the United States decided to publish a fraudulent study (most likely, paid for by some financial interest bent on discrediting HCQ for some reason, or some political group willing to do damage to Donald Trump, or whatever other reason), doesn't mean that the Oxford study done at multiple sites of the UK's NHS is also fraudulent.

The fact that someone robs a bank doesn't make of me a bank robber.

You can't say "one study was fraudulent therefore all studies are fraudulent." Because if you say so, then you'll need to also say that the Henry Ford study is fraudulent.

[CenterField]

I didn't read them all. Have you?

Not all which is impossible, but by now I've probably read more than 200. Since the pandemic started I read a few almost every day, and some days, 10 or so. Well, some days I don't read any as even I get sick and tired of it all.

[nathanbforrest45]

Feel free to follow your own hyperbolic advice. Me, I just said that people should be cautious.

LOL

OK, Chicken Little, I will keep that in mind.

[CenterField]

LOL

OK, Chicken Little, I will keep that in mind.

Chicken Little, really? Those types are supposed to be afraid of imaginary dangers, while the pandemic of COVID-19 is anything but imaginary.

[carolina73]

Your number is not in the link, does not specify over how many years or provide any reasons. Does this include the fish tank cleaning people? Did they take the prescribed amount? Was it even prescribed to them? That's the only way you get HCQ.

[CenterField]

Your number is not in the link, does not specify over how many years or provide any reasons. Does this include the fish tank cleaning people? Did they take the prescribed amount? Was it even prescribed to them? That's the only way you get HCQ.

How many years? Just now, since this pandemic started. Just in 2020.
Reasons? Likely cardiac toxicity which is what kills COVID-19 patients on HCQ.
Fish cleaning chloroquine? No, of course not.
Prescribed amount? Yes, standard doses.
Prescribed to them? Yes, of course, it's a prescription medicine. Some idiotic doctors still haven't realized that the risks outweigh the benefits so the morons keep prescribing it. Not the first nor the last time that it happens. Not all doctors are created equal. Do you know what you call the guy who graduated last in his class from America's worst medical school? Doctor.
It's the only way you get HCQ. Yep. Do you think you're actually teaching me something new? Do you actually think *I* don't know that HCQ and CQ are prescription medicines???

[CenterField]

Your number is not in the link, does not specify over how many years or provide any reasons. Does this include the fish tank cleaning people? Did they take the prescribed amount? Was it even prescribed to them? That's the only way you get HCQ.

Oh and by the way, yes, the numbers are in my link. Like I said, see tables 4 and 5 on page 6. The numbers are there.
Again, of course the numbers are for what is going on now, because before 2020, nobody was giving HCQ and CQ to Covid-19 people, because... this virus wasn't known and this disease didn't exist.