They are similar but they are not essentially the same. They have very different risks and HCQ is not as toxic due to how the body absorbs it. Yes with prolonged use HCQ does have toxicity issues. This wouldn't apply to the use against covid. The people in the US who currently use HCQ for autoimmune diseases take them for prolonged periods of time. The main issue is with the QT cycle and arrhythmia which can be compounded when given with Zithromax because it has similar QT cycle issues in some patients. I guess I get stuck on this because I feel like there is some strange almost excited slandering of the drug just because of the person who got overly excited about it and recklessly recommended its use with Zithromax without talking/knowing the complications and sudden death risk when taken together. These drugs are generally regarded as safe and we have no clue if they offer any benefits yet. Last thing with this study the patients that had the issues were taking CQ at high dosages. They also RECOMMENDED further study of both CQ and HCQ as a prophylactic treatment and for treatment of less severe cases. The high dosages of CQ in older patients with severe cases and existing heart issues was deemed too risky. The remaining patients in the high dosage study were not taken off CQ completely but moved to the low dosage study. Additionally, these patients were also on zithromax and oseltamivir if they thought they had flu as well. Both of these drugs cause QT cycle problems. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.07.20056424v2.full.pdf Some excerpts from the study and feel free to read it for yourself. "The preliminary findings from CloroCovid-19 trial suggest that the higher dosage of CQ (12 g total dose over 10 days) in COVID-19 should not be recommended because of safety concerns regarding QTc prolongation and increased lethality, in the Brazilian population, and more often in older patients in use of drugs such as azithromycin and oseltamivir, which also prolong QTc interval. Among patients randomized to the lower dosage group (5 days of treatment, total dose 2.7 g), given the limited number of patients so far enrolled, it is still not possible to estimate a clear benefit of CQ in patients with severe ARDS. Preliminary data on viral clearance in respiratory secretions in our confirmed cases are also indicative of little effect of the drug at high dosage. More studies initiating CQ prior to the onset of the severe phase of the disease are urgently needed." "Older patients (aged over 75) were only enrolled in the high dosage CQ arm. All the other characteristics were similar between age groups, allowing proper comparison. History of heart disease was more frequent among patients receiving the higher CQ dosage." "In two patients, myocarditis was suspected based on the CKMB elevation since the first day of hospitalization, suggesting myocarditis related to SARS-CoV-2 itself. In such cases, drugs prolonging QTc could lead to severe arrhythmias. Unfortunately, this study’s randomization, probably due to the low sample size, assigned older patients with heart disease to the high dosage arm. Therefore, one limitation for the conclusions of the study on lethality per arm is that high CQ dosage arm presented more patients prone to cardiac complications, with or without CQ. In any case, the use of CQ in elderlies with heart disease should be made with caution" "In order to better understand the role of CQ or HCQ in COVID-19, we recommend the following next steps: (1) trials evaluating its role as a prophylactic drug; (2) trials evaluating its efficacy against progression to severity when administered to patients with mild/moderate disease. Even if we fail to generate good evidence in time to control the current pandemic, the information will highly impact the way we deal with next coronavirus outbreaks in the future."
This is early results/data from remdesivir clinical trials. Note : these aren't the final results, but it looks somewhat promising : Early peek at data on Gilead coronavirus drug suggests patients are responding to treatment https://www.statnews.com/2020/04/16...uggests-patients-are-responding-to-treatment/ The University of Chicago Medicine recruited 125 people with Covid-19 into Gilead’s two Phase 3 clinical trials. Of those people, 113 had severe disease. All the patients have been treated with daily infusions of remdesivir. “The best news is that most of our patients have already been discharged, which is great. We’ve only had two patients perish,” said Kathleen Mullane, the University of Chicago infectious disease specialist overseeing the remdesivir studies for the hospital.
Bad-ass till the end ... 99-year-old army vet raises $16M for Britain's NHS by doing laps around his garden https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...-vet-raises-8-million-britain-nhs/5136182002/
How funny is it when someone who has worked for years for Gilead has been so quick from the start to slam the cheap and unpatented chloroqinue, overstate the side effects and call the studies trash when most of the patented and very expensive remdesivir's trials are also of the same sample size AND also no double blind. There is a limit on how much I can roll my eyes. I dont' believe in pharma conspiracy theories but this double standards and hypocrisy are just too much. News: chloroqinue has been used for decades by millions of people. My family and our islands used it in the 50s. Noone got blind or had heart attacks. Let alone that the suggested dose will be only for 10 days and not 10 months. And then you have celebrities like Rita Wilson coming and saying "adverse side effects" like dizziness. You know what is a severe side effect? Pneumonia caused by the covid19. Not dizziness. There are tons of medicines and drugs that have passed all trials and are deemed safe for DAILY use, and are taken by millions of people that cause dizziness. Dizziness and nausea is not deemed a "severe" side effect. Especially when you have to deal with an unknown new virus that kills.
Chill. It is still going to be used. The gist is that it has different effects on different individuals. In a way like Covid had. Tom Hanks' wife at the bottom.
I completely agree and don't like that it is politicized. HCQ and CQ show a lot of promise as a treatment but as your and other information shows we still don't fully understand how they apply to COVID 19. We don't know yet what is the best dosage and a lot of other things. I would rather err on the side of caution than have a mad rush to take it when we don't fully understand it. There have already been people who have died taking it and similar substances. Also that it is used widely for treatments of other diseases that we know about but now those people taking it are facing shortages because other people are already hoarding it.
That's actually in the story. lol. But I agree... just wait for the final results. This, however, is pretty good news considering the condition of the patients and the percentage that seemingly recovered. We'll see.
But.... Then that doesn't make the Monies!!! Haha, I'm not serious, but I definitely agree with your points. PR and no generic options, I mean no one would be getting richer overnight if chloroquine came out as an alternative. I'll be interested to see further reports/trial data, if there's any chance the trial/news changes/doesn't have a positive spin it won't release until after the US market closes tomorrow. There's basically too much money riding on this atm. At least that's how I figure this will play out. I also mean PR/News release that would move the market - so more than what's been stated, so not stating something conspiracy like, just that the rich get richer
Oh yay it's the Washinton Free Beacon and all their hats. Here's the top headline in giant letters on their website: "The Pelosi Recession" Headline 2 is "Let the Horns Play: Thousands Flood Lansing to Protest [Governor] Whitmer Shutdown" What a credible source you've found! **** off already.
We better all understand our reality. Let us go and PRAY that chloroqinue or hydroxychloroqinue works even slightly. Or something else like ivermectin., colchicine. Even tocilizumab or other anti-IL6 which at least has already a production line. If the ONLY effective drug is something like remdesivir you think you will get it? You think you can get it subscribed? You think you can click a button and buy it online from amazon or wherever? L O L Maybe in 3 years if you are lucky. There isn't a line of production because it was till now a complete failure of a drug. It is patented , the production is highly sophisticated and needs special lab equipment and is going to cost a ton of money. The maximum production they can do is 1 million doses if they start NOW to the end of the year. Who will get these doses? You and me? A pittance will be given to hospitals for those in their deathbeds, and the rest will go to the rich. What's the point of a treatment if said treatment is not available. Might as well try warm water with lemon and salt
It's good news but the double standards and the hypocrisy needs to be called out. Do not listen only to big pharma cronies who have a money interest and try to pose as infallable and objective scientists. They are not.
Can't recall where, but I read that Gilead will charge $2,200 for the Redemsivir treatment, so you're on point about availability and accessibility.
Yeah, this is very true, I mean we even saw that with the rich (w/ no conditions) being able to get tested ahead of even at risk patients. I mean I wouldn't expect anything different but it sucks. The drug companies are interested in helping but unfortunately money is needed, so I expect them to charge something, but some of the drug/medical/research costs are so inflated that it can bankrupt people.
Hmm... these Twitter accounts/websites seem to be dedicated for price gouging: https://twitter.com/JiggedIO https://twitter.com/ShaSoIutions I mean... "retail arbitrage" in normal times. Now? Price gouging.
It is not only the price. Many people will be willing to pay 2 thousands dollars to save their lives. Most people in the developed world. Even if they have to work 1 year to pay off the debt. It will just not be available at all. Because the rich will get it first at 100 times this cost and hoard it. Just in case they get sick. So what I am saying is, don't be quick to slam chloroqinue just because you are biased against Trump or whoever else. The critisism are valid BUT so are about remdesivir's trial methodology. And even if chloroqinue has only 10% efficasy so what? That will be our option because we aren't in the 1%.
China just revised Wuhan's deaths. + 50%, 1300 fatalities more. Yeah maybe if you add another 0 behind that number it will be more believable.
