6 ms·

You came up with those parameters conveniently after the study was published. The people who created and executed these studies wanted to save lives. They cre

You came up with those parameters conveniently after the study was published. The people who created and executed these studies wanted to save lives. They created a method they thought would be most likely to work, and time and time again they didn’t. Different dosages, different timing, different places. No benefit. The fact that people aren’t running more studies is not because there is a global conspiracy. It’s because the drug doesn’t do anything and researchers don’t want to waste their time and their patients lives satisfying critics who don’t care about the science. Does HCQ work if you have some magic combination of zinc? Maybe. Is that more likely than another treatment given that HCQ has been heavily studied and shown no benefit and zinc had been heavily studied for a lot of things and shown no magical properties? Probably not. So researchers spend their time on things more likely to work.

ColanR 6y ago
It sounds like you're ignoring the other studies that did show benefit. The people who came up with those studies wanted to save lives, too, just like the people who still think that HCQ is being overlooked. > You came up with those parameters conveniently after the study was published. > The fact that people aren’t running more studies is not because there is a global conspiracy. > satisfying critics who don’t care about the science > magic combination...magical properties It seems like you've suddenly made a sharp u-turn from a good-faith discussion into crazy town. I thought we were hashing out differences, and now you're suddenly accusing me of making up excuses, believing in a global conspiracy, being anti-science, and thinking zinc is somehow a miracle drug. I think I should end the conversation here.
- peter422 6y ago
  Please link me to a single RCT that shows HCQ as having a significant benefit. I also apologize if you felt I was maligning you, I’m not. However I am maligning the belief that a drug works when it’s been proven time and again to show it doesn’t.
jeffreyrogers 6y ago
I would have to check the dates, and I don't have time for that right now, but the parameters that Didier Raoult suggested have been around since April or May I believe. In any case, the author of this piece is acting as a journalist, not a scientist, and he chose to select a poorly designed study that does not measure what he purports it measures. This negatively affects the public perception of scientific communication more broadly.
- fabian2k 6y ago
  The first study by Didier Raoult did treat already hospitalized patients and it didn't use zinc. That is quite different than the parameters here, so Didier Rauolt didn't suggest anything like that initially.
  - abecedarius 6y ago
    I know nothing about Raoult, but when I heard of hydroxychloroquine months ago, shortly before it became a culture-war football, it was proposed as above: early treatment, with zinc. (Azithromycin wasn't part of the idea as I heard of it then.)

ColanR 6y ago

It sounds like you're ignoring the other studies that did show benefit. The people who came up with those studies wanted to save lives, too, just like the people who still think that HCQ is being overlooked. > You came up with those parameters conveniently after the study was published. > The fact that people aren’t running more studies is not because there is a global conspiracy. > satisfying critics who don’t care about the science > magic combination...magical properties It seems like you've suddenly made a sharp u-turn from a good-faith discussion into crazy town. I thought we were hashing out differences, and now you're suddenly accusing me of making up excuses, believing in a global conspiracy, being anti-science, and thinking zinc is somehow a miracle drug. I think I should end the conversation here.

peter422 6y ago
Please link me to a single RCT that shows HCQ as having a significant benefit. I also apologize if you felt I was maligning you, I’m not. However I am maligning the belief that a drug works when it’s been proven time and again to show it doesn’t.

jeffreyrogers 6y ago

I would have to check the dates, and I don't have time for that right now, but the parameters that Didier Raoult suggested have been around since April or May I believe. In any case, the author of this piece is acting as a journalist, not a scientist, and he chose to select a poorly designed study that does not measure what he purports it measures. This negatively affects the public perception of scientific communication more broadly.

fabian2k 6y ago
The first study by Didier Raoult did treat already hospitalized patients and it didn't use zinc. That is quite different than the parameters here, so Didier Rauolt didn't suggest anything like that initially.
- abecedarius 6y ago
  I know nothing about Raoult, but when I heard of hydroxychloroquine months ago, shortly before it became a culture-war football, it was proposed as above: early treatment, with zinc. (Azithromycin wasn't part of the idea as I heard of it then.)