50 Comentários
← Voltar ao fio
Comentário removido
Mar 19, 2023
Comment removed
Expand full comment

RJ, I am a leftist. An old-fashioned left. Leninist. Who still criticizes the power of big corporations.

You are so unqualified that you don't know if the study is on early treatment or hospitalized.

Those two meta-analyses there include hospitalized (and overdosing) patients.

Your talk lacks science.

Expand full comment

Most American and British leftists are pharma shills because they are controlled by propaganda media controlled by the intel community, which is in bed with pharma.

Expand full comment
Comentário removido
Mar 19, 2023Editado
Comment removed
Expand full comment

Skipper

Hospitalization:

HCQ = 4 of 231

Placebo = 8 of 234

50% less.

P=0.29

Mitja

Hospitalization:

HCQ = 8 of 136

Placebo = 11 of 157

16.0% lower

p = 0.64

If you look at this data, and say "it does not work", you are an idiot.

Thanks for reading.

Expand full comment

Skipper was underpowered to conclusively (0.05) reject the Null Hypothesis.

Expand full comment
Comentário removido
Mar 19, 2023Editado
Comment removed
Expand full comment

Your risk-benefit analysis is clueless. All the HCQ studies, randomized, in early treatment, those taking HCQ did better than those taking placebo. “by chance."

If you had any concern about RCTs reaching statistical significance, double blind, impact journal, you would be begging all doctors to use fluvoxamine instead of Paxlovid and Remdesivir.

You are a sellout to big pharma.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2790742

Expand full comment

Of course there's statistical significance in Skipper, even if it's not conclusive enough to reject the Null Hypothesis. Most likely Skipper was underpowered.

Too bad you don't understand statistics.

Expand full comment