RECOVERY didn't test Remdesivir arm at all. Confirms my suspicion,that while doctor is a respected thoracic oncologist,he is not into Active management of COVID/ review of COVID literature.
4 trials of Remdesivir so far
2 +(ACTT-1,Spinner)
1 -(SOLIDARITY)
1 equivocal.(WUHAN) https://twitter.com/cspramesh/status/1380390454911377411

Why I am fussy/piling on this issue-
1. There is a conflict between all national guidelines (US/UK/India) and WHO
2. Senior People are highly shared on twitter/WhatsApp forwards, so they should double check authenticity of info.

This is leading to a lot of understandable questioning by Patients and relatives which already hampers our daily stressed COVID Care and an impression that we are looting Patients. Contributes to Violence against Doctors.

Again here the Problem is not that science is changing,the problem is that small equivocal/neutral trials are used by Doc to convey an impression of no benefit/"treatment bites dust". https://twitter.com/cspramesh/status/1380390466366054402?s=20

See this trial cited by Doc as an assertion in support of "treatment bites the dust".
Trial estimate Hazard Ratio 1.11 (0.38-1.81) is compatible with major benefit/major harm so this Info is not helpful, yet It is implied here. https://twitter.com/cspramesh/status/1319076597807263744?s=20

And perhaps that is what followed after definitive trials of Tocilizumab RECOVERY trial,where mortality benefit was seen
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.02.11.21249258v1#:~:text=Consistent%20results%20were%20seen%20in,28%20days%20(54%25%20vs.

My thoughts on Remdesivir are shared here in this thread https://twitter.com/anupampom/status/1317704227381071872?s=20