tomo

http://bishophill.squarespace.com/process/%C2%A3https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2020/aug/12/uk-coronavirus-live-confusion-a-level-grades-england-scotland-covid-19-latest-updates

Instead we now have a new objective. The Virus must be DESTROYED and here we get into the major problems. Firstly this is the real world, not a petri dish and there is not reasonably practical way to isolate EVERY single person at the same time for the required period. Second that was never the deal. The deal was to Flatten the Curve to protect the hospitals. In the UK they openly stated it – Save the NHS.

(frankly if lives were really in danger and I could protect them by running the NHS into the dirt then bye bye NHS. Hospitals exist to protect the public health. Run it into the ground and build a new one later with all those people who are now not dead. Any public service that is not at breaking point during a major emergency is not being pushed hard enough. They exist to serve and protect the public.)

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/08/11/covid-19-lock-downs-or-cock-ups/#comment-3055977

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p08ncr88

PHE to revise Covid-19 testing

https://conservativewoman.co.uk/why-wont-these-medical-journals-tell-the-truth-about-covid/

Lying Climate Scaremongers are probably to blame

Early in the coronavirus pandemic, a survey of the world’s frontline physicians showed hydroxychloroquine to be the drug they considered the most effective at treating COVID-19 patients. That was in early April, shortly after a French study showed it was safe and effective in lowering the virus count, at times in combination with Azithromycin. Next we were told hydroxychloroquine was likely ineffective, and also dangerous, and that that French study was flawed and the scientist behind it worthy of mockery. More studies followed, with contradictory results, and then out came what was hailed by some as a definitive study of 96,000 patients showing the drug was most certainly dangerous and ineffective, and indeed that it killed 30% more people than those who didn’t take it. Within days, that study was retracted, with the editor of one of the two most respected medical journals in the Western world conceding it was “a monumental fraud.” And on it went.

https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/science/articles/hydroxychloroquine-morality-tale

So clipe - what’s new? Why have I sacrificed numerous brain cells reading material selected by you that most people are fully aware of?

AK, ever since Trump mentioned Hydroxychloroquine (a cheap generic drug without Royalties to pay, with known benefits and side effects) ) , there has been an organised effort to discredit it.

It is not a miracle cure, but does seem to help the body resist the development of the severe consequences of Coronavirus, especially when used in conjunction with other known potions.

Those quickest to defend the lies and corruption of Climate Science seem quickest to attack Hydroxychloroquine, its benefits, and further lifesaving research developments.

So GC what’s new? Why have I sacrificed numerous brain cells reading material selected by you that most people are fully aware of?

Excellent article showing the many ways in which the false narrative that hydroxochloroquine doesn't work has been pushed -

https://phibetaiota.net/2020/08/mongoose-meryl-nass-md-on-the-false-hydroxychloroquine-narrative-pbi-that-led-to-the-mass-murder-of-hundreds-of-thousands/

"Why have I sacrificed numerous brain cells reading material selected by you that most people are fully aware of?
Aug 15, 2020 at 9:26 AM AK"

Why do people oppose the use of a cheap generic drug, and scaremonger about it? Is it purely because Trump promoted it?

The Mail is reporting that the source of the No 10 Downing St outbreak that took out DomCum and BoJo may have been Seamus Milne, Corbyn's rottweiler.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8631473/Did-Jeremy-Corbyns-Marxist-henchman-Seumas-Milne-infect-Boris-Johnson-coronavirus.html

I don't think this was deliberate

On a lighter note, there have been suggestions for new online dating sites for these strange times......

Two-Meeters

Spreadr

(from the Spectator)

https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/07/trial-data-support-dexamethasone-not-hydroxychloroquine-covid-19

While there is an outside possibility that the rejection of hydroxychloroquine might be political, it's doubtful. I think that they just found other drugs were more reliably effective. Dexamethasone is also cheap and freely available.

I wouldn't use Conservative Woman as a reliable source of information. It's as ideologically biased as the Morning Star or Left Foot Forward.

From that article: I wish that hydroxychloroquine had been successful, but it has been conclusively found to be ineffective," said Gallagher, who was not involved in either study. "All of the well-designed, randomized, controlled trials have found the same thing—it does not work."

Many experts are now unequivocal, eg:-

At this point, any doctor recommending hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19 is a quack

Dr. Gideon Meyerowitz-Katz

Random trials specifically on non-hospitalised/early-onset/mild symptom use:

https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-4207
https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/cid/ciaa1009/5872589

No COVID prophylactic effect in patients taking HCQ for Lupus:

https://www.healio.com/news/rheumatology/20200612/hydroxychloroquine-fails-to-prevent-covid19-in-patients-with-lupus

A handy Medium post collating the evidence and media on Hydroxychloroquine, with links.

TinyCO2, I looked at the CIDRAP report:

"There was no mortality benefit from dexamethasone, however, among patients not needing respiratory support. In fact, deaths were higher among patients in the dexamethasone arm (17.8% vs 14.0%; rate ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.91 to 1.55)."

There is a considerable difference between treatment at the early stage of the disease and treatment for patients on respiratory support.

As for the political aspect, this might help with your understanding:

http://covexit.com/covid-19-treatments-please-lets-have-a-bit-of-common-sense/

Clarky, here is the "quack" in Marseilles:

http://covexit.com/professor-raoult-comments-on-covid-19-treatments-researched-around-the-world/

Another view:

http://covexit.com/the-esteemed-professor-david-katz-weighs-in-on-hydroxychloroquine/