Why is DJT so obsessed with pushing hydroxychloroquine?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lots of physicians are already taking hydroxycloroquin it as a prophylaxis. The story pushed by the media is that it was a failure, but there has only been limited testing, which has been inconclusive.

Of course there is no definitive proof that it works. That’s not surprising for a disease that has only been around for a few weeks. Rigorously controlled peer reviewed studies with large sample sizes take a while and are difficult to coordinate in emergency situations. That doesn’t mean that doctors and researchers can’t make educated guesses based on their years of training and experience.

Only a Trumper would think this disease has only been around for a few weeks. We already have 20,000 datapoints on the drug vs. coronavirus.

[Anonymous]

Due to presidentential promotions, hydroxychloroquine is now called Imbecillen.

[Anonymous]

Why did Chris Cuomo take it??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why did Chris Cuomo take it??

His wife is a quack medicine nut. She gave him a homeopathic formulation, which contains tiny, often immeasurable amounts of the active ingredient (that is to say, they are 100% water). She also gave him a ton of herbal remedies and made him chicken soup.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why did Chris Cuomo take it??

His wife is a quack medicine nut. She gave him a homeopathic formulation, which contains tiny, often immeasurable amounts of the active ingredient (that is to say, they are 100% water). She also gave him a ton of herbal remedies and made him chicken soup.

The question is who prescribed hydroxychloroquine?
And why exactly?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why did Chris Cuomo take it??

His wife is a quack medicine nut. She gave him a homeopathic formulation, which contains tiny, often immeasurable amounts of the active ingredient (that is to say, they are 100% water). She also gave him a ton of herbal remedies and made him chicken soup.

The question is who prescribed hydroxychloroquine?
And why exactly?

Dr. Linda Lancaster, who has a PhD, not an MD. And this was not hydroxyquinone the drug, it was a homeopathic mixture. You don't need a prescription for homeopathic medicines because they are too dilute to actual do anything good or bad at all. You can read all about it here on Mrs. Cuomo's website.
https://thepuristonline.com/2020/04/chris-cuomos-corona-protocol/

It's a veritable laundry list of quack medicine. Have at it. There is nothing there you should actually want. Except maybe the chicken soup.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why did Chris Cuomo take it??

His wife is a quack medicine nut. She gave him a homeopathic formulation, which contains tiny, often immeasurable amounts of the active ingredient (that is to say, they are 100% water). She also gave him a ton of herbal remedies and made him chicken soup.

The question is who prescribed hydroxychloroquine?
And why exactly?

Dr. Linda Lancaster, who has a PhD, not an MD. And this was not *hydroxyquinone* the drug, it was a homeopathic mixture. You don't need a prescription for homeopathic medicines because they are too dilute to actual do anything good or bad at all. You can read all about it here on Mrs. Cuomo's website.
https://thepuristonline.com/2020/04/chris-cuomos-corona-protocol/

It's a veritable laundry list of quack medicine. Have at it. There is nothing there you should actually want. Except maybe the chicken soup.

That should say hydroxychloroquine.

[Anonymous]

Someone he knows owns stock.
And Trumpers love conspiracy theories.

Who knows if he is even actually taking it? A smart doctor would give him a placebo.

[Anonymous]

Which doctor gave it to Chris Cuomo?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:From the Lancet: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanrhe/article/PIIS2665-9913%2820%2930089-8/fulltext


“Whether hydroxychloroquine works in vivo is not proven for any virus, and in fact in randomised controlled trials against a number of viruses, including influenza, it doesn't work at all,” says Douglas Richman, a virologist and infectious disease physician at the University of California, San Diego. “It's my personal prejudice that this is also going to be the case with coronavirus.”
Hydroxychloroquine has been studied as a possible antiviral for approximately the past 40 years, says Richman. The mechanism of action is not entirely clear, but it is known to decrease the acidity in endosomes, which might prevent the endosome from releasing the virus into the cytoplasm.
Hydroxychloroquine has shown activity in vitro against many viruses, including influenza and coronaviruses, but that has largely failed to translate into success in either animals or humans. In 2005, the drug showed in vitro activity against SARS-CoV, which is closely related to the current pandemic virus, but it failed to decrease viral load in mice, and clinical interest drifted away, says Christopher Tignanelli, a surgeon at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis, who is involved in clinical trials of COVID-19 treatments.
“There is not a huge amount of pre-clinical data for this drug,” says Tignanelli. “It's mostly test-tube and anecdote.”
Despite the absence of strong evidence, some people are already attempting to self-medicate with the drug, with disastrous consequences. Hydroxychloroquine can have dangerous side-effects if the dose is not carefully controlled, and cases of chloroquine poisoning have been reported in Nigeria and the USA.

Who's surprised?

Medical journal The Lancet publicly acknowledged Tuesday that a massive study on hydroxychloroquine that raised serious health concerns about the anti-malaria drug was potentially flawed.

The Lancet issued an "expression of concern" on a study it published last month of nearly 100,000 patients that tied hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine to a higher risk of death in hospitalized patients with coronavirus.

The journal said "serious scientific questions have been brought to our attention" about the study, and that the authors have commissioned an independent review of the data.

When it was published in late May, the study of 96,000 hospitalized COVID-19 patients across six continents was touted as the most definitive, and largest analysis to date on the effects of treating COVID-19 patients with hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine.

The study found that not only were the drugs largely ineffective at treating or preventing the virus, they were also linked to a higher risk of death.

https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/500792-medical-journal-says-concerns-raised-over-massive-hydroxychloroquine-study?__twitter_impression=true

[Anonymous]

Well, now. This is not good.....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well, now. This is not good.....

Next up: Bleach shots - good for you after all? Maybe! King Trump was right again!! Coming live from his bunker in 20 minutes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well, now. This is not good.....

Yet another reason why it was completely idiotic for Trump to open his mouth about this drug.

[Anonymous]

Meanwhile Trump sends 2 million doses to Brazil where it will be used in clinical trials. Brazil's health minister has now resigned.

[Anonymous]

What am I missing? Isn't this good news for Trump? maybe Hydroxy helps after all?