Hydroxychloroquine studies show drug is not effective for early treatment of mild covid-19

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

Source: Washington Post

The first randomized clinical trial testing hydroxychloroquine as an early treatment for mild covid-19 found the drug was no better than a placebo in patients who were not hospitalized.

The trial results were published Thursday in the journal Annals of Internal Medicine. The study, conducted by researchers at the University of Minnesota Medical School, involved 491 adults and showed that the medication did not work better than a placebo at reducing the severity of symptoms over 14 days. Results from a similar trial conducted in Spain were published shortly afterward.

Patients in the Minnesota trial were enrolled within the first four days of having symptoms, and 56 percent were enrolled within one day of the onset of symptoms. The patients were seen at doctors’ offices or outpatient or urgent-care clinics.

The randomized trial from Spain, published in the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases, found the drug did not reduce the time patients had symptoms or the risk of hospitalization for patients with mild covid-19, the illness caused by the novel coronavirus.

Read more: https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/hydroxychloroquine-studies-show-drug-is-not-effective-for-early-treatment-of-mild-covid-19/ar-BB16PLeI?li=BBnb7Kz

---

So much for Dr. Trump's medical device.

[hlthe2b]

1. Well, duh...

[winstars]

2. Oh snap!!! What am I to do with the 63,000,000 doses I have in my garage!!!!!!! LOL

[LetMyPeopleVote]

3. Post overstates study's '200%' finding on hydroxychloroquine's power vs COVID-19

I saw this bullshit study being cited by some low IQ TFG supporters and knew that it was bogus. This study is so bad and poorly done that only a TFG supporter who is clueless as to science and the scientific process would cite it.

Link to tweet

For example, this is not a peer review study but was taken from a site that does not deal in peer review works

The study is posted on a website that publishes “preprints” — studies that “have not been finalized by authors, might contain errors and report information that has not yet been accepted or endorsed in any way by the scientific or medical community.”....

The study was posted May 31 on medRxiv, a website that publishes studies that have not been fully vetted. This note is posted with the study: "This article is a preprint and has not been peer-reviewed. It reports new medical research that has yet to be evaluated and so should not be used to guide clinical practice."

he website also says about its "preprint" or "unrefereed" articles: "Before formal publication in a scholarly journal, scientific and medical articles are traditionally certified by ‘peer review.’ In this process, the journal’s editors take advice from various experts — called ‘referees’ — who have assessed the paper and may identify weaknesses in its assumptions, methods and conclusions … Readers should therefore be aware that articles on medRxiv have not been finalized by authors, might contain errors, and report information that has not yet been accepted or endorsed in any way by the scientific or medical community."

The analysis concludes that this study is poorly designed and the conclusions are not supported. Politifact interviewed several real scientists who concluded that this study is flawed and should not be relied on (even by low IQ TFG supporters).

Here is the conclusion about this study

Our ruling
A widely shared social media post stated: "Study: hydroxychloroquine can boost COVID-19 survival chances by nearly 200%."

A study says a certain dosing of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin "improves survival by nearly 200%" among hospitalized COVID-19 patients who received invasive mechanical ventilation, but the post exaggerates the finding’s significance.

The study is posted on a website that publishes studies that "have not been finalized by authors, might contain errors and report information that has not yet been accepted or endorsed in any way by the scientific or medical community." Experts told PolitiFact the study is poorly designed and that no conclusion about cause and effect should be drawn from it.

For a statement that contains only an element of truth, our rating is Mostly False.

I am amused that the RWNJ believe that this study is meaningful.