A mysterious company’s coronavirus papers in top medical journals may be unraveling

Chris_the_Brit

High Tory
Joined
Mar 6, 2004
Messages
30,339
On its face, it was a major finding: Antimalarial drugs touted by the White House as possible COVID-19 treatments looked to be not just ineffective, but downright deadly. A study published on 22 May in The Lancet used hospital records procured by a little-known data analytics company called Surgisphere to conclude that coronavirus patients taking chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine were more likely to show an irregular heart rhythm—a known side effect thought to be rare—and were more likely to die in the hospital.

Within days, some large randomized trials of the drugs—the type that might prove or disprove the retrospective study’s analysis—screeched to a halt. Solidarity, the World Health Organization’s (WHO’s) megatrial of potential COVID-19 treatments, paused recruitment into its hydroxychloroquine arm, for example. (Update: At a briefing on 3 June WHO announced it would resume that arm of the study.)
 

Jake45

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2014
Messages
1,847
Very worrying that so many of the coronavirus studies using widely available pharmaceuticals appear to be based on flawed data. There is a new study underway in the UK into Ibuprofen which has already been identified in other studies as potentially dangerous. The information regarding the elevated risk due to the use of ACE inhibitors also appears to be in dispute as well as some of the claimed improvements in several of the Remdesivir studies!
 
Last edited:

kolaval

Expert Member
Joined
May 13, 2011
Messages
4,692
It's 'only' been 6 months with this virus.
I'd expect some mistakes.
 

Moto Guzzi

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2004
Messages
958
It seems science is dissapointing handling SARS-COV-2 'Virus/nanoparticle' investigations, theres a load of loose ends. This virus seems multifunctional, it seems unnatural to me.
1-What does it means for treatment Malaria itself-?
2-What does it means for treatment of chronic diseases(Certain chemicals)-?
3-What does it mean for treatment using antibiotics(Certain chemicals)-?
4-What does the very long incubation period actually means end relays to-?
Seeing the very long and varying still long incubation period, how does science adopt to this situation and each infection per day within 1st exposure incubation period(to keep it simple one per day instead of one per hour).
Science is used to a base of very short incubation periods and ITS exponential explotion of a virus in a living body, but it does not seem they test for exponetialities in layers of infections each withits own exponentialities within the 1st infections long incubation period.........Do you know of any lab that clearly work by including this distinction by differentiating between old understanding of exponentiality and layers of exponentialities because of a long incubation period-?
 

Gordon_R

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 5, 2009
Messages
12,512
Old joke:
You can have anything fast, cheap and done properly. But only two of the three!? Seems to apply to this situation...
 

rustypup

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2016
Messages
725
It seems science is dissapointing handling SARS-COV-2 'Virus/nanoparticle' investigations, theres a load of loose ends. This virus seems multifunctional, it seems unnatural to me.
<snip>
Either I'm having a stroke or this was gibberish.... and I don't smell burnt toast...
 

Gordon_R

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 5, 2009
Messages
12,512
A completely separate study seems to be better quality, and returns a very muted report, with insignificant benefits and limited side-effects:
 
Top