RT @MathieuMolimard: Il est très rare de voir dans un essai randomisé un risque cardiaque du fait des conditions drastiques d'exclusion des…
RT @MathieuMolimard: Il est très rare de voir dans un essai randomisé un risque cardiaque du fait des conditions drastiques d'exclusion des…
RT @MathieuMolimard: Il est très rare de voir dans un essai randomisé un risque cardiaque du fait des conditions drastiques d'exclusion des…
Normalement, les patients à risque cardiaque sont exclus des études randomisées. Et pourtant, dans le cas de la chloroquine ...
RT @MathieuMolimard: Il est très rare de voir dans un essai randomisé un risque cardiaque du fait des conditions drastiques d'exclusion des…
RT @MathieuMolimard: Il est très rare de voir dans un essai randomisé un risque cardiaque du fait des conditions drastiques d'exclusion des…
Il est très rare de voir dans un essai randomisé un risque cardiaque du fait des conditions drastiques d'exclusion des patients à risque... et pourtant https://t.co/OwFFwfVkB0 Dire que l'#hydroxychloroquine n'a pas de risque dans le contexte #COVID19 est
@jg091297 @capricrooner @thebroker00 @LordSarix @Jayonei11 @Penguin_Bakame @nytimes New England Journal of Medicine. The world’s best medical journal. https://t.co/h0dpPK8R7B
Hydroxychloroquine with or without Azithromycin in Mild-to-Moderate Covid-19 | NEJM https://t.co/o1NeDinU7n
RT @AltGovDoc: In case there was remaining doubt, it’s a definite no to this treatment regime. Hydroxychloroquine with or without Azithro…
In case there was remaining doubt, it’s a definite no to this treatment regime. Hydroxychloroquine with or without Azithromycin in Mild-to-Moderate Covid-19 | NEJM https://t.co/hVFWzc33TJ
@SpiralEvolutio1 @cnnbrk HCQ has been consistently shown not to work, even with zinc or Azithromycin. I haven't seen studies on the rest https://t.co/AuIYenDQyB https://t.co/ga0RRUCEpl
RT @pietro_merli: @intuslegens https://t.co/usYFI7AK9o È solo il New England Journal of Medicine eh.... Faccia una cosa saggia. Se lo legg…
@intuslegens https://t.co/usYFI7AK9o È solo il New England Journal of Medicine eh.... Faccia una cosa saggia. Se lo legga.
@drjahanpur این دومقاله، هر دو در نجم، ولی باز هم هستن. https://t.co/rgDpsqBYAw https://t.co/tOkjboC4NN
"軽度から中等度のCovid-19で入院した患者において、ヒドロキシクロロキンを単独またはアジスロマイシンと併用しても、標準治療と比較して15日目の臨床状態の改善は見られなかった。" Hydroxychloroquine with or without Azithromycin in Mild-to-Moderate Covid-19 | NEJM https://t.co/3wtUey2gDx
RT @septian: Mengenai regimen obat yang diuji oleh Unair, sebenarnya tidak semuanya baru-baru amat, ada yg sudah diuji di tempat lain. Buka…
Among patients hospitalized with mild-to-moderate #COVIDー19 the use of hydroxychloroquine, alone or with azithromycin, did not improve clinical status at 15 days as compared with standard care https://t.co/1lRn3qzEue
@AGuy51623866 @SecAzar @WhiteHouse "Among patients hospitalized with mild-to-moderate Covid-19, the use of hydroxychloroquine, alone or with azithromycin, did not improve clinical status at 15 days as compared with standard care." https://t.co/a1ZF4OMNX0
@LaraLeaTrump @realDonaldTrump Do you know how to read a proper journal article, @LaraLeaTrump @realDonaldTrump? It would be awesome to get out of this pandemic of which we’ve all become weary, but “undoubtedly” is probably an irresponsible word to use.
RT @sameeh57: دراسه من البرازيل تنهي الجدل علي فاعلية دواء هيروكسي كلوروكوين في علاج كوفيد ١٩. لا يوجد علامات تحسن سريرية بين من تلقوا الدو…
@TruthFairy17 @Bolt_RSS Yay! Another randomised trial! Uh oh ... "...the use of hydroxychloroquine, alone or with azithromycin, did not improve clinical status at 15 days as compared with standard care." https://t.co/3pWN5sxVGO
@Laurlam415 It's not banned, and it doesn't work. CONCLUSIONS “Among patients hospitalized with mild-to-moderate Covid-19, the use of hydroxychloroquine, alone or with azithromycin, did not improve clinical status at 15 days as compared with standard care.
RT @TCBPubHealth: The science around Hydroxychloroquine in real clinical trials continues to accumulate - there is no evidence of benefit u…
@QtScience @xazalbert @DarylVanHorne7 @ArtLeroux @medicalfollower @jcl_lambert @philippefroguel @joex92_ Ce qui est bizarre c'est que dans le seul pays où le protocole Raoult est donné selon les prescrits du Druide de la Canebière, les résultats ne concord
@j61906638 But science has already shown there is absolutely no difference when using Hydroxychloriquin. https://t.co/dDIT9y8u3Q
@rlak30 @HubcapDave69 @vicjc22 @drsimonegold Here's a few that show HCQ does not work, among many many others https://t.co/TKcLSOQ6Wg https://t.co/tqUnl9Oed0 https://t.co/bMx3riwg7x https://t.co/DKgrwfTOqE
"Overwhelming support of using HCQ"? Apparently, overwhelming support means much controversy in the literature with many of sources showing that is does not work. Just a few: https://t.co/TKcLSOQ6Wg https://t.co/tqUnl9Oed0 https://t.co/bMx3riwg7x https://
@zev_dr @ConseDemo Curious, your take on this study: https://t.co/mnSSV44FhH Azithromycin is an antibiotic. Are you hoping to wipe out complicating bacteria?
@CCPRealista @guillesequera Y lastimosamente hay muchas evidencias de que tampoco funcionan para estadios tempranos o para profilaxis y pocas evidencias a favor. Lo mejor es no seguir perdiendo tiempo con tratamientos poco efectivos, cuando hay cosas que f
@k2kQue @diamondj48 @MikeStankiewic_ @HillaryClinton Except the Lancet article is outdated at this point. There are better studies. https://t.co/RogIWCxeuk
@PowerGuidoOne @Filipioliveir20 Sua toxicidade e sua falta de informação me preocupam. Distorcer a fala do @atila só presta desfavor a sociedade. Pense antes de falar, ou melhor escrever. Leia para entender: https://t.co/NRwsMpwzim
@kenkates1943 @kksheld Nobody died because they didn’t get HCQ. It doesn’t work for COVID! It’s too bad, but it’s ineffective. https://t.co/dMQcrasJDr
@BGrace2809 @WhitestoneArt @AGoodDeath79 @badashootr @John_F_Kennnedy Doctors can prescribe HCQ for diseases such as malaria, lupus, and rheumatoid arthritis. None of them are caused by respiratory viruses. HCQ does not benefit COVID-19 patients. SARS-CoV-
@Despeerad0s @fluidloading @raoult_didier Cadeau, Étude randomisée en double aveugle, juillet USA https://t.co/Won04RSYWW Étude randomisée (dans 55 hôpitaux brésiliens, pays où le protocole de Raoult est suivi à la lettre depuis mai) https://t.co/tvonUy
@Tbaggins415 @wadetsmith @TheRightMelissa @Acosta An actual, scientific HCQ study: https://t.co/0aMTfMY6GC
@aik_arif Studi yang RCT baru 1 mas, dipublish di NEJM, kesimpulannya HCQ+Azi "did not improve clinical status at 15 days as compared with standard care." Jadi kalau tim Unair menemukan hasil yang sebaliknya, monggo disubmit ke NEJM juga, jurnal prestisius
@comedianmikerao @TomFitton @realDonaldTrump Sorry, c19study is the one having a problem with the truth. Name 1, just 1 randomized controlled trial showing it works. Here are some early ones that say it does not: https://t.co/5S2bmq1udx https://t.co/HKpMWq
Calvacanti NEJM RCT Brésil Hydroxychloroquine, alone or with azithromycin, did not improve clinical status at 15 days as compared with standard care. https://t.co/bv5kmGtRDj
RT @NikolovScience: Yet another article published in NEJM claims no effect of HCQ on hospitalized COVID19 patients: https://t.co/SAHCLmq9GJ…
RT @nelson_alv: Hydroxychloroquine with or without Azithromycin in Mild-to-Moderate Covid-19 https://t.co/bJatlcH2dO Pacientes hospitalizad…
RT @NikolovScience: Yet another article published in NEJM claims no effect of HCQ on hospitalized COVID19 patients: https://t.co/SAHCLmq9GJ…
@K_JOE_ Hydroxychloroquine did not substantially reduce symptom severity in outpatients with early, mild COVID-19." https://t.co/EwT9mzsNBG , https://t.co/0YzSPmoJ0d , https://t.co/U3l6Vm4Uff
RT @Luca80772167: @MichaelLegare @mbandercoot Yes, and, apparently, even them seem to think HCQ has little to no effects (photo below, July…
@Evanish It looks like this randomized control study looked at albeit without zinc and found “the use of hydroxychloroquine, alone or with azithromycin, did not improve clinical status” https://t.co/O2O7Oc3BZc
RT @babs_zone: Regardless of Twitter and their repose to misinformation or disinformation, here are the current best trials in covid #hydro…
Regardless of Twitter and their repose to misinformation or disinformation, here are the current best trials in covid #hydroxychloroquine literature: https://t.co/5VwVUkPd4q https://t.co/Zx6f0mA5PK
@ChristophePaye9 @Armiansk1 @raoult_didier @IHU_Marseille Faut que je retrouve l'autre.. Tellement de bookmarks que je m'y perds :) Je suis retombé la dessus mais pas spécifique au choc cytokinique https://t.co/XavZCnvUYQ
Don't ask nor PDJTS. Argue with those doctors who know because you're the all-knowing arrogatingly-authoritative genius(?) who is blaming my president, damn you!
@StarBLDR https://t.co/vZWlsNIh0n and https://t.co/qvMrV6WgUm - whom do you believe? The Italians say maybe 30% not 80% and the Americans say it makes NO DIFFERENCE.
@iamninajr Sure, but there are already multiple RCTs. Spending more valuable resources on this drug that has already been more well studied for covid than lupus, for which it is proven& approved, when time is of the essence, is not wise imo. https://t.
@jangajentaan @pesla @wierdduk @mkeulemans @OscarLamme Yep, hoe slechter het onderzoek, hoe groter het resultaat. Flinke effecten in observationele studies. RCTs zijn grotendeels underpowered. Nieuwere RCT's ontbreken, zoals https://t.co/mIb4XtMvTp en dez
@jangajentaan Ja, bekende en het volgt steeds hetzelfde patroon. Hoe slechter de kwaliteit van het onderzoek, hoe groter het effect. Deze 2 RCT's staan er bv niet tussen: https://t.co/mIb4XtMvTp https://t.co/aXK0DGe3oa HCQ is irrelevant
@mcm_ct @US_FDA @realDonaldTrump Ok, here is the gold standard data: https://t.co/5VwVUkPd4q https://t.co/Zx6f0mA5PK
@WtfAllSkill @zev_dr Ok, here are the current gold standard RCTs: https://t.co/5VwVUkPd4q https://t.co/Zx6f0mA5PK
@blueandfrida @zev_dr Yea I bet they do. Confirmation bias is a hell of a drug itself. Anyway, as I said, it is doubtful that they have the ability to distinguish what makes good science. If they did, they would keep these RCTs handy: https://t.co/5VwVUkP
@elpeor That is not what this study says. This is observational, and does not so much as mention the completed and well regarded randomized trials: https://t.co/5VwVUkPd4q https://t.co/Zx6f0mA5PK https://t.co/sjq9Q5iTZm
RT @babs_zone: @PeterNavarro45 This is an observational study that does not so much as mention either of the current randomized trials, whi…
@Bi_go_de @MasterDoZapZap1 @conexaopolitica Não há estudo que comprove sua afirmação. O contrário existe, de que tratamento precoce com cloroquina não funciona https://t.co/J2FplUOPdn
@MaximinPower @MSNBC And you’re telling me you read these two studies? If that’s the case and you’re still going off in my mentions, you should read them again and then maybe ask a biology professor to help ya out. I’m done here. https://t.co/5VwVUkPd4q
@MasterDoZapZap1 @conexaopolitica Tem vários que testaram o tratamento precoce ou profilático: https://t.co/QHy8Ldyz7X, https://t.co/ac18EKyF8v, https://t.co/w9MZIQmi0k O segundo é o que mais atende exatamente a questão: randomizado, clínico, teste de covi
@PeterNavarro45 This is an observational study that does not so much as mention either of the current randomized trials, which are a more highly regarded scientific standard. This is not “evidence.” Here are the RCTs in case you missed them: https://t.co/
@vanranstmarc An observational study that does not mention either of the major hydroxychloroquine randomized trials? Idk that’s a low bar for a study. RCTs: https://t.co/5VwVUkPd4q https://t.co/Zx6f0mA5PK https://t.co/SDMj8sh2AS
@pablo_honey1 @replouiegohmert Precisely. The data does not support his conclusion which is why we do RCTs, to ensure that the mechanism of the drug is specifically what is causing what we can observe. Here are those hydroxychloroquine trials, for the curi
@hapelensrob Niet alleen retrospectief, maar kijk naar hun verklaring, nl. lage dosis (400 mg) tav RECOVERY (2g). Die verklaring is echter al onderuit gehaald door 2 RCT's: 1. (800mg per dag) https://t.co/mIb4XtMvTp 2. (400 mg per dag) https://t.co/aX
@Zphyr90805533 @AlizeeRenault @sebsebseb1975 @777Antoine777 @Cdric88310689 @DIVIZIO1 Ok, prenons cette étude : https://t.co/J4uuDnMz3U Donnez moi les différences avec le protocole Raoult? Administré au même moment, avec posologie proche, donné au même mome
@amigo_itali @TicoDiego84 @fernandokike @luizaerundina @jairbolsonaro E obviamente foi só por causa da cloroquina, não tem nenhuma outra medida, como até a higienização de locais públicos com peróxido de hidrogênio a noite, foi só a cloroquina... Sério...
@Zphyr90805533 @sebsebseb1975 @AlizeeRenault @777Antoine777 @Cdric88310689 @DIVIZIO1 Moi à l'inverse, je peux vous donner un tas de sources (synthèses, études, rapport d'experts) : https://t.co/jS2Hv5K53R https://t.co/koIVqTe3RG https://t.co/7KXp8T34s2 htt
@jangajentaan @BruggeXander @mkeulemans Dit is een propaganda site. De RCTs met negatieve resultaten worden "inconclusive" genoemd, bij positieve resultaten worden nooit vragen gesteld. https://t.co/5S2bmq1udx en https://t.co/HKpMWqCVeM bijvoorbeeld.
@JanieHsieh Still an observational study, and considering it was published in August, I can’t imagine why there wasn’t even a mention of the two randomized trials: https://t.co/5VwVUkPd4q https://t.co/Zx6f0mA5PK
@satya_yadav Still an observational study, and doesn’t even mention either of the randomized trials done, which leaves me 🤔 RCTs: https://t.co/5VwVUkPd4q https://t.co/Zx6f0mA5PK https://t.co/QDdhwKdp1i
@Covid19Crusher Still an observational study, and doesn’t even mention either of the randomized trials done, which leaves me 🤔 RCTs: https://t.co/5VwVUkPd4q https://t.co/Zx6f0mA5PK https://t.co/i9ixwmv8Ry
@dontbei Still an observational study, as they themselves note, and also doesn’t mention the randomized trials completed 🤷🏻♀️ https://t.co/5VwVUkPd4q https://t.co/Zx6f0mA5PK https://t.co/Gp23OvHu5N
@raoult_didier Still an observational study, as they themselves note, and does not even mention the two randomized trials: https://t.co/5VwVUkPd4q https://t.co/Zx6f0mA5PK https://t.co/b9HmolUmWW
Current randomized trials of hydroxychloroquine: https://t.co/5VwVUkPd4q https://t.co/Zx6f0mA5PK
@JayyMinds @boodiebooboo @LeadersMaster @realDonaldTrump Because it doesn’t exhaust. Let me refer you to actual medical literature: https://t.co/r5tByz9w24
@MaximinPower @MSNBC Seems like you’re behind on the gold standard science, here are some links that may answer some questions! https://t.co/5VwVUkPd4q https://t.co/Zx6f0mA5PK
@Boilergal1 Thank you! It was a serious question! Apparently it has also been paired with other drugs in trials "Hydroxychloroquine with or without Azithromycin in Mild-to-Moderate Covid-19 | NEJM" https://t.co/VhqVeHjMLZ
@GregWest_HALOJM Or not. As I posted in my thread, hcq and zpaks have been paired in trials. Which would explain why he got one "Hydroxychloroquine with or without Azithromycin in Mild-to-Moderate Covid-19 | NEJM" https://t.co/VhqVeHjMLZ
Ah! It was paired in studies with hydroxychloroquine: "Hydroxychloroquine with or without Azithromycin in Mild-to-Moderate Covid-19 | NEJM" https://t.co/VhqVeHjMLZ