Oh good grief, your article pretends that the Detroit study was definitive but guess what, it wasn't.
A flawed Covid-19 study gets the White House’s attention — and the FDA may pay the price
By Matthew Herper @matthewherper
July 8, 2020
excerpt:
At the root of the conflict is the fundamental principle that the FDA uses to evaluate drugs. Decisions are based almost entirely on what is known as a randomized controlled trial, in which patients are randomly assigned to receive a treatment or not. Other types of studies have, again and again, failed to deliver accurate information about medicines’ benefits and risks, and are used sparingly in making medical decisions. Three randomized studies have now shown no benefit for hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients.
The study that sparked the latest controversy was anything but randomized. Not only was it not randomized, outside experts noted, but patients who received hydroxychloroquine were also more likely to get steroids, which appear to help very sick patients with Covid-19. That is likely to have influenced the central finding of the Henry Ford study: that death rates were 50% lower among patients in hospitals treated with hydroxychloroquine.
more at statnews.com
You complained before that others were using unscientific articles. That's all you got--anecdotal, unscientific articles. And flawed studies. I posted upthread the results of yet another randomized trial that of course you ignored. Just as you will pretend that this article doesn't exist.
You are worse than a moron. You are a moronic asshole. If anyone is responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths, it is Trump and his merry maskless followers. Like you. |
