Changes

<center>''See also: [[Hydroxychloroquine denial]]''</center>

<center>''See also: [[Hydroxychloroquine denial]]''</center>

'''Flawed coronavirus treatment studies''' are being promoted by [[Opposition to Donald Trump|Never-Trump]]ers, particularly as a way to disparage the effective treatment of [[hydroxychloroquine]].

Among the flaws in these studies are:

*Preferentially using [[hydroxychloroquine]] to treat the sickest patients (when compared to the control group)

*Delayed initiation of treatment

*Varied initiation of treatment

*Not having a large enough sample size to achieve statistical significance.

Depending on which study the media cites to discourage the use [[hydroxychloroquine]], the studies have one or more of these flaws.

* a placebo is not used for the control group, and instead another treatment is used which might also be effective (such as doses of Vitamin C)

* the patients studied are all very sick and thus unlikely to respond to any effective medication

* the patients studied are all relatively healthy and thus likely to recover regardless of the effectiveness of medication

Reports of inclusive results with the use of hydroxychloroquine typically have one of the above design flaws, perhaps intentionally so by someone who cares most about defeating President Trump for reelection, or perceives his employer or funding source for the study to have that priority.

Outcomes of hydroxychloroquine usage in United States veterans hospitalized with Covid-19, also known as the VA study, was one of the first studies to suggest that the use of [[hydroxychloroquine]] could be harmful... The paper stated there were 27 deaths (27.8%) in the HCQ group, 25 deaths (22.1%) in the HCQ + azithromycin group, and 18 deaths (11.4%) in the no HCQ group.<ref name=VAstudy>[https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.16.20065920v1.full.pdf Outcomes of hydroxychloroquine usage in United States veterans hospitalized with Covid-19] by Joseph Magagnoli et al. (April 21, 2020) 10.1101/2020.04.16.20065920v1</ref>  The first flaw in this study was that it was small... it only had 368 patients.  The second flaw was that it delayed treatment with [[hydroxychloroquine]]... the drug works best when it is given early in the disease progression.  The third and most egregious flaw was that it was giving [[hydroxychloroquine]] preferentially to the sickest patients. 

{{cquote|Baseline demographic and comorbidity characteristics were comparable across the three treatment groups. However, hydroxychloroquine, with or without azithromycin, was more likely to be prescribed to patients with more severe disease, as assessed by baseline ventilatory status and metabolic and hematologic parameters. Thus, as expected, increased mortality was observed in patients treated with hydroxychloroquine, both with and without azithromycin.<ref name=VAstudy/>}}

 

If one gives [[hydroxychloroquine]] preferentially to the sickest patients when compared to the control group, then the fact that more patients died when they were given [[hydroxychloroquine]] should be unsurprising.  

== Lancet study ==

== Lancet study ==

 

[https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31180-6/fulltext Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: a multinational registry analysis]<ref name =Lancetstrikesagain>[https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31180-6/fulltext Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: a multinational registry analysis]</ref>, also known as Surgisphere, was one of the next studies to suggest that [[hydroxychloroquine]] was harmful. According to its authors, hydroxychloroquine had a 18% mortality rate when used to treat COVID-19 and the mortality rate raised to 23.8% when it was combined with an antibiotic, whereas the control group only had a 9.3% mortality rate.  The main problem with this study was that it was a ''complete'' fraud.  The following is a partial list of its flaws. 

A widely publicized study published about [[hydroxychloroquine]] (HCQ) in the [[Leftist]] ''Lancet'' medical journal in [[England]] suffered from at least three fundamental flaws:<ref>https://melwy.com/blog/lancet-paper-on-chloroquine-is-overhyped-real-world-data-should-not-be-a-black-box</ref>

*No reproducibility<ref name=blackbox>https://melwy.com/blog/lancet-paper-on-chloroquine-is-overhyped-real-world-data-should-not-be-a-black-box</ref><ref name=JamesWatson/>

*No traceability of the data<ref name=blackbox/><ref name=JamesWatson/>

*No traceability of the data

*No transparency of the review<ref name=blackbox/><ref name=JamesWatson/>

*No transparency of the review

*Data was too "clean" to have occurred naturally<ref name=Csmoke>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uggOJcZBFoI&list=PLRgTUN1zz_oeQpnJxpeaEkFimDeepqyWf&t=970 Grim Milestone: 100k+ US Coronavirus Deaths] by Chris Martenson (May 26,2020) ''PeakProsperity''</ref><ref name =arkancide>[https://twitter.com/Arkancideisreal/status/1264032084944814082 Arkanacideisreal's twitter post] by arkancideisreal (May 22,2020) ''Twitter''</ref>

 

*Impossible to collect the data in the way the researchers claimed without violating privacy laws<ref name =Guardian>[https://www.theguardian.com/science/2020/may/28/questions-raised-over-hydroxychloroquine-study-which-caused-who-to-halt-trials-for-covid-19 Questions raised over hydroxychloroquine study which caused WHO to halt trials for Covid-19] by Melissa Davey (27 May 2020 22.27 EDT) ''The Guardian''</ref><ref name =arkancide/>

The ''Lancet'' was further flawed in that it did not examine QT intervals, and it used high, toxic doses of HCQ.  The study also failed to use zinc in combination with HCQ despite how that combination is widely publicized as the effective protocol.

*Not enough authors to conduct a study of its size<ref name =Guardian/>

 

*Too many Australian deaths... it's data claimed to have recorded 73 Australian deaths by April 21 but the number of COVID-19 deaths in Australia didn't reach 73 until April 23.<ref name =Guardian/>}}

Numerous critics of the ''Lancet'' article have picked it apart and debunked it.<ref>[https://www.medicineuncensored.com/a-study-out-of-thin-air A Study Out of Thin Air]</ref>

*Mean daily doses of hydroxychloroquine that are 100 mg higher than FDA recommendations.<ref name=JamesWatson>[https://zenodo.org/record/3862789#.Xw5L2xOSlEb An open letter to Mehra et al and The Lancet] by James Watson (May 28, 2020) 10.5281/zenodo.3862788  </ref>  

==References==

==References==