4 ms·
The study from France seems to suck, though. Not very valuable data. They measured virus, not outcomes, they measured virus in the throat, not the lungs, the s
by arrrg 7y ago
The study from France seems to suck, though. Not very valuable data.
They measured virus, not outcomes, they measured virus in the throat, not the lungs, the starting point was not the start of the disease but some later (more arbitrary) point in time, the two groups were not randomly assigned and the study wasn’t really blind.
It could be that they just happened to compare two groups where the treatment group was further along in the illness – especially since they try to sell that as a disadvantage for them, but that could honestly be an advantage for them. We know that virus in the throat decreases as the illness progresses. (Virus in the lungs is much more relevant and also dangerous here, better would probably be outcomes.)
Not really evidence, sorry.
- mytailorisrich 7y agoOn the 26th February, in an interview, one of the researchers behind the French study said that he wasn't worried about Covid-19 and that it was just a flu...
- tasogare 7y agoI wanted to write this comment. The researcher is indeed a specialist from what I read on the internet but given his total turn about concerning Covid I would personally not put any trust in his work. He participated in the crisis the country is facing right now, by saying on social networks there was no real danger about the virus.
- ggm 7y agoScientists make mistakes. Scientists change their mind in the light of the evidence. Your distrust of this scientist is distrust of science. Please, don't do this.
- jfkebwjsbx 7y agoWhat? There was more than enough evidence. They are the ones anti-science.
- roenxi 7y agoNot knowing the evidence doesn't make someone unscientific. Most scientists don't know most evidence. If he had the evidence explained to him and then just assumed it would be different in France that would be unscientific, but we'd all need to read French to ague about that.
- mytailorisrich 7y agoIn February the situation in China was public knowledge. It's difficult to understand why a country would go on lockdown and build emergency hospitals for something nor worse than seasonal flu...
- lurquer 7y agoA reasonable explanation: there was a release (either intentional or accidental) from a facility housing a multitude of lethal viruses. The gov't locked down out of abundance of caution as it was not entirely clear what might have been released. Perhaps the virus they were REALLY worried about WAS contained. It would certainly explain the bizarre and unprecedented reaction at Wuhan. Let's face reality... but for the Chinese flipping out, this covid-19 story would be a run-of-the-mill story on page 3 similar to H1N1, SARS, MERS, Zika, west Nile, etc...
- mytailorisrich 7y agoPlease this is not the moment to spread loony conspiracy theories.
- lurquer 7y agoWhat conspiracy? You don't think the US wouldn't lock down Maryland if there were suddenly 100+ people within a mile or two of Ft. Dietrick (a repository for some very lethal viruses) came down with sudden fevers and pneumonia? It's is a theory... not a conspiracy theory. Why do you think China suddenly had s massively unusually change in policy for this particular bug? You think the proximity to the Wuhan bioresearch facility had NOTHING to do with Bejing's swift and unprecedented lockdown?
- pnako 7y agoI don't really get your point. He's indeed a specialist in infectious disease (he runs the most important infectious diseases lab in France)... but because his opinion on that virus disagrees with, what, hacker news, twitter and the mass media... then he's wrong? WTF.
- mytailorisrich 7y agoIn February millions of people were in lockdown in China and thousands were dying. That's why it's difficult to understand how an expert could casually claim that this was nothing more than seasonal flu.
- pbreit 7y agoDo you have a link?
- mytailorisrich 7y agoIt's all in French: 1st February: https://www.lejdd.fr/Societe/le-professeur-didier-raoult-ce-coronavirus-nest-pas-si-mechant-3946957 https://www.lejdd.fr/Societe/le-professeur-didier-raoult-ce-... "This coronavirus isn't so bad" 26th February: http://m.lamarseillaise.fr/analyses-de-la-redaction/decryptage/80675-entretien-didier-raoult-le-coronavirus-n-est-pas-plus-dangereux-qu-une-grippe-de-saison http://m.lamarseillaise.fr/analyses-de-la-redaction/decrypta... "The coronavirus isn't more dangerous than seasonal flu."
- tompagenet2 7y agoThanks, I've found it hard to understand the French study. Do you have a good link to an (English, sorry) summary or critique?
- pbreit 7y agoOP called it "quite flawed". But it is most definitely evidence.
- arrrg 7y ago“Quite flawed” is wild praise for this trash. I don’t think it’s intentionally bad but it’s still bad. In the end it’s easier to make things worse … and chloroquine could, we don’t know. So I wouldn’t touch it.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- egfx 7y agoThis article shares insight into how the virus progresses. https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2020/03/biography-new-coronavirus/608338/ https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2020/03/biograph...
- abalashov 7y agoInsightful read in plain-spoken, non-specialist language! Thanks!