Read on Twitter
Here’s why this study is worthless! https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2771265?guestAccessKey=053387bf-8cfb-4ea9-952c-1dd260fd4aed&utm_source=For_The_Media&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=ftm_links&utm_content=tfl&utm_term=093020
If you want to make HCQ look worthless, design the study the following way. 1). Young pts, not very susceptible to dying from covid 2). Underpower the study, low numbers of pts. 3). Test for pcr and not deaths. 4). Give high doses of HCQ (600 mg here) to increase side effects
This study had very few patients (132). This ensures the study will likely have no chance to reach statistical significance. Secondly the median age was 33. That’s an extremely low risk group. Again this ensures that it will be difficult to reach statistical significance.
Make sure to give high doses to create more side effects in HCQ pts. Prior studies have shown two tablets per week to be effective in India as prophylaxis. This increases the likelihood of dropouts in the study. Not a major issue here.
MOST IMPORTANTLY, test pcr. I’ve said this over and over. Pts on HCQ will likely develop very mild or no disease. They will likely produce attenuated/often dead viral particles. They WILL OFTEN BE PCR POSITIVE especially when you test at high cycle rates.
But they will be MUCH LESS LIKELY TO DIE or be hospitalized. They will often develop immunity, as in this study. HCQ IS VACCINE LIKE against most airborne rna viruses including the flu. Why? It interferes with endosomal acidication. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5461643/
It’s especially effective against airborne rna viruses due to its high lung concentration (up to 700 times higher than the serum). HCQ WORKS TO PREVENT DEATH and you often still develop immunity.
