The attacks on HCQ continue: a new "study" is used by all the MSM to say that "HCQ is deadly" (1/4)

Example: https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/05/hydroxychloroquine-linked-to-increase-in-covid-19-deaths-heart-risks/

Link to study: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31180-6/fulltext

https://www.thelancet.com/action/showPdf?pii=S0140-6736%2820%2931180-6

This is a CRAP study, but do not take my word for it, here are some facts about it.

First, this is a retrospective study. So far, all the retrospective had been deemed "dubious" or "anecdotal" when they showed positive results. But not for this one apparently, even though it is very badly done.

The study only includes patients that have been hospitalized. That means they were already in an advanced stage. But the proponents of therapies using HCQ+AZT say it is effective when patient are treated AS SOON AS they are tested positive, not when it's already too late. What is that paper showing then?

Where is the data concerning patients that did not need to be hospitalized, because they were treated early and saved? Not considered in that study. They only included patients that were in such an advanced states, that they needed to be hospitalized…

But also very importantly, the author themselves says that:

"Our study has several limitations. The association of decreased survival with hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine treatment regimens should be interpreted cautiously. Due to the observational study design, we cannot exclude the possibility of unmeasured confounding factors, although we have reassuringly noted consistency between the primary analysis and the propensity score matched analyses. Nevertheless, a cause-and-effect relationship between drug therapy and survival should not be inferred."

"WE CANNOT EXCLUDE THE POSSIBILITY OF UNMEASURED CONFOUNDING FACTORS."

"A CAUSE-AND-EFFECT RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DRUG THERAPY AND SURVIVAL SHOULD NOT BE INFERRED."

For ArsTechnica (which once was a respectable tech site, but has not become yet another Conde Nast DS propaganda outlet, with brigade of shills in the forums that enforce RIGHTSPEAK) and the rest of the MSM, it doesn't matter

-"Hydroxychloroquine linked to increase in COVID-19 deaths, heart risks"

Has anyone actually read the paper?

And furthermore – THIS IS CRUCIAL - did no one notice that they included data for patients treated with "macrolides"??? Why was this odd category chosen in the first place?

The recommended treatment is HCQ+AZT.

NOT HZQ+CLARITHROMYCINE. HCQ+AZT only.

What is the proportion of the patients that received AZT vs. Clarithromycine? It is not given.

What is that paper showing regarding the HCQ+AZT treatment then?

This should be enough to disqualify this CRAP STUDY at once.

>>9294401

The attacks on HCQ continue: a new "study" is used by all the MSM to say that "HCQ is deadly" (2/4)

And it does not stop there!

This paper does not provide essential data:

• what were the doses used? They only provide a mean dose. Who received the corrected dosage among these patients?

• what were the durations of the treatments? They only give the ICU length of stay.

• as said above, they include patients that were given clarithromycine, and journalists used those results to talk about the efficacy of HCQ+AZT. This is pure FRAUD.

• 40% of the patients are taking antiviral meds! How can you assert the antiviral effect of HCQ+/-AZT if you use other antiviral meds on top of that?

• those who received HCQ+/-AZT have a higher proportion of SPO 2<94% !!

In the COVID-19 context, that's a further indication that these patients were already in a critical state, a state at which it is known that it is already too late, the treatment as little chance of succeeding at this point.

• it's also not like Mandeep Mehra, the main author, does not know that antiviral medications must be used at the beginning of the infection: he published a paper on that topic himself!! So why is he doing a retrospective study on patients which already are at late stages of the infection? I am sure none of you is surprised.

https://www.jhltonline.org/article/S1053-2498(20)31473-X/fulltext

https://www.jhltonline.org/action/showPdf?pii=S1053-2498%2820%2931473-X

• The base group of those that did not survive, were also much sicker with ~50% more comorbidities.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EYot5j1VcAYxIpX?format=jpg

The proponents of the HCQ+AZT therapies also say that patients NEED TO BE SCREENED FOR POSSIBLE INCOMPATIBLE HEART PRECONDITIONS that would make such treatment dangerous

In these cases, the treatment MUST NOT be administered.

For example, here is the protocol used in France to ascertain the cardiac conditions of patients for incompatibilities with an HCQ+AZT treatment:

https://www.mediterranee-infection.com/procedure-de-securisation-de-la-prescription-du-traitement-hydroxychloroquine-azithromycine/

Translation:

> Prescription authorized if the corrected QT was less than 460 ms

> Discussion on a case by case basis of the risk benefit ratio in the event of a QT corrected 460 ms and 500 ms

> Contraindication in case of corrected QT greater than or equal to 500 ms.

> Regardless of the value of the corrected QT, prescribers are to be provided with a list of drugs that could extend the QT interval to avoid co-medication with any of these drugs.

> In addition, in case of doubt, it is recommended to control the patient's potassium level.

> Finally a "hot-line" is set up between infectiologists and cardiologists to treat problems as quickly as possible

These patients who were had heart condition comorbidities should not have been given an HCQ+AZT treatment in the first place!

So this study only confirms this well-known fact…

>>9294412

The attacks on HCQ continue: a new "study" is used by all the MSM to say that "HCQ is deadly" (3/4)

The study does not say how they really handled missing values! The data comes from 671 different hospitals. They merely say:

"A manual data entry process is used for quality assurance and validation to ensure that key missing values are kept to a minimum."

KEPT TO A MINIMUM. More details on that would be nice.

"Real-world data are collected through automated data transfers that capture 100% of the data from each health-care entity at regular, predetermined intervals, thus reducing the impact of selection bias and missing values, and ensuring that the data are current, reliable, and relevant"

THUS REDUCING THE IMPACT OF MISSING VALUES. Really? Just like that?

"The validation procedure for the registry refers to the standard operating procedures in place for each of the four ISO 9001:2015 and ISO 27001:2013 certified features of the registry: data acquisition, data warehousing, data analytics, and data reporting."

Pfeww, we're relieved, they used ISO 9001 and ISO 27001 processes. Anyone who studied these processes know that they do not mean that they are perfect. You can get certified as long as you "strive" to improve your processes over time. ISO claims are useless without providing the actual perimeter of the certification.

"The data collection and analyses are deemed exempt from ethics review."

Great…

Also, where is the full data set, so that independent analyses of the result can be done? It would have been nice, but of course, it is not provided. And I am sure they will say it's to "protect the confidentiality of the patients data".

Finally, the authors of this paper have deep conflicts of interests:

• that study was supported by the Brigham and Women's Hospital of Boston, that also does 2 studies on Remdesivir. That's not mentioned in the paper.

• Mandeep Mehra has deep ties with the pharmaceutical industry. Not necessarily an indication of malevolence, but for this guy, it's a festival of connections! As stated in the paper:

Abbott, Medtronic, Janssen, Mesoblast, Portola, Bayer, Baim Institute, NupulseCV, FineHeart, Leviticus, Roivant & Triple Gene

Another hit study against HCQ, based on cases not following the protocol put forward by their proponents:

• test everyone

• screen for possible contraindications

• if none is found, use the HCQ+AZT treatment immediately, do not wait for patients to become so bad that it has become too late for it to be useful

• NO CHLOROQUINE: it has a bad side-effect profile compared to HCQ

• NO CLARITHROMYCIN: again, do you not see the slight of hand? Who ever talked about using macrolides?

• DO IT UNDER THE CARE OF MEDICAL DOCTOR, TO MONITOR THE RESPONSE OF THE PATIENT TO THE TREATMENT!

>>9294414

The attacks on HCQ continue: a new "study" is used by all the MSM to say that "HCQ is deadly" (4/4)

And the next day - I'm sure it's just a coincidence- a new study is used by all the MSM to show that Remdesivir is great:

https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMoa2007764?articleTools=true

I have not analyzed this paper in depth yet, but I have already seen this: the authors themselves say that the data on death IS NOT STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT!

Yet, it is taken as a great success for Remdesivir.

Perpetually moving goal posts for the required level of statistical significance. I guess this will surprise no one. At least, not the Anons.

But that was enough for the French Health Minister to have his "advisory board" (who has been anti-HCQ and pro-Remdesivir from the beginning) do an emergency "reevaluation" of the prescription authorization of HCQ in 48 hours (starting Saturday, i.e. during the week-end, probably to take advantage of the fact that HCQ researchers are not working those days):

https://twitter.com/olivierveran/status/1264145851955458048

Translation:

> Following the publication in @TheLancet of a study alerting to the ineffectiveness and risks of certain treatments of #COVID ー 19 including hydroxychloroquine, I alerted the @HCSP_fr [High Council on Public Health] so that they can analyze it and propose to me within 48 hours a review of the derogating prescription rules.

HCQ was available WITHOUT PRESCRITION FOR DECADES IN FRANCE, until January 2020. Now it's the most dangerous medication in the world…

Please use this research anywhere you might think it could be useful. HCQ is again under attack. We can only convince the general population with good and truthful info.