(07-29-2020 04:33 PM)bobdizole Wrote: So in short, when they say it isn't effective it isn't to say it isn't effective at all, just not up to the standard to keep the EUA in effect
You summed it up perfectly.
(07-29-2020 05:30 PM)JRsec Wrote: Fauci continues to reference studies. But both studies he references are flawed. The Lancet study has been retracted and repudiated. The Brazil study only used late stage patients treated with Hydroxychloroquine and then in doses which Bayer had deemed potentially lethal. This is why this continues to be a disingenuous issue. And waiting for more studies when the countries using Hydroxychloroquine have actually faired better on both infection rate and morbidity than have the Western European countries and the U.S. who have delayed, defrayed, or discouraged its use.
But towing the party line of whatever corporation sounds reasonable, but whether it is or not is wholly dependent upon what studies they will acknowledge and which ones they won't. It doesn't change the political football nature of this matter at all. What is especially confounding the ignoring of data that has come from actually treating the virus.
Yes. Far too many people either ignorant of the meanings of words or willing to forget them if they think they know the answer.
(07-29-2020 06:41 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote: “The FDA has a responsibility to regularly review the appropriateness of an EUA, and as such, the agency will review emerging information associated with the emergency uses for the authorized products. Recent results from a large randomized clinical trial in hospitalized patients, a population similar to the population for which chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine were authorized for emergency use, demonstrated that hydroxychloroquine showed no benefit on mortality or in speeding recovery. This outcome was consistent with other new data, including data showing that the suggested dosing regimens for chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine are unlikely to kill or inhibit the virus that causes COVID-19. The totality of scientific evidence currently available indicate a lack of benefit.“
Will they close the door... no. Have clinical trials proven hydroxychloroquine to be ineffective in fighting Covid? Yes.
https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-an...oquine-and
I understand that you think this... but the bold is just flat wrong.
Key words... While not a clinical trial, the members of the cohort for which this EUA was applied showed efficacy consistent with
A clinical study on a
similar population.... and other data suggesting the
dosing regimens are unlikely to benefit....
Also note from Fauci's comment listed above regarding the Brazil study... that they are apparently using what Bayer, in their APPROVED uses of the drugs calls a 'lethal dose'. So dosing seems to be a key driver, and all this proves is that at 'this' dose (which is the 'on-label dose' for another disease) is not effective in treating 'this' population. I suggested this in my first response, so it's clear that I saw this because I do this... and you apparently still haven't.
Getting approval for an EUA requires using approved dosing... otherwise as anyone with a brain would expect, the FDA is going to want to test specifically that higher dosing... which is NOT part of an EUA.... it would be part of a clinical trial.
The best example would be someone asking for an Emergency Use Authorization to treat people with Pancreatic Cancer with Aleve (it's OTC but pretend it isn't... I'm trying to use a drug I'm sure you're familiar with). Let's say the approved dosing of Aleve for muscle pain is 220mg... and 220mg is ineffective against Pancreatic Cancer in people 65+. Other studies may show that 440mg is effective against a general population or against people under 65... but a dosing of 440mg is not authorized under an EUA... and a population of people under 65 was not provided in the EUA. And of course, 440mg may be considered 'too dangerous' to treat muscle pain, but perhaps its negative effects would be authorized for say... pancreatic cancer (something much more deadly). But the FDA requires an actual clinical study of those things and not an EUA.
You need to quit reading such technical writing with your preconception already in your mind. It's poisoning your ability to reason... and I'm doing you the favor of thinking this just isn't your area of expertise.