Meanwhile, study finds no benefit fro Hydroxychlroquine and more deaths. Study finds no benefit, higher death rate in patients taking hydroxychloroquine for Covid-19
In a study of one, my mother in law saw a drastic reduction of symptoms, including O2 saturation, while on the first course. They relapsed drastically between courses, and after a second course she has tested negative once and is waiting to hear back on the second test for negativity.
Actually, I don't think it was a controlled scientific study. So I don't think we should jump to conclusions like the President did.
This was actually a study of medical records after the fact, ie patient had been treated. Novartis is partnering with NIAID to conduct a Phase 3 controlled trial with a minimum of 450 patients. The problems with these studies like the one that @duchen has quoted is that there is nothing controlled about them. It is just a records search. Further, right now, in the field doctors are admitting that they are literally throwing the kitchen sink at these patients in the hopes that something works. From the study: There is no standard on dose, treatment course, when in the virus cycle the drug is effective if at all, etc, etc.... Much like Doctor Fauci has preached, I would prefer to wait for the data from controlled studies conducted to the common standard for medicine before making conclusions one way or the other.
This anti-viral is going into trials during the summer. Something like this really, really needs to be identified and mass produced. I pill that will stop the virus in its tracks could save thousands of lives and the economy while we wait the 3-5 years most experts are now predicting until a vaccine is widely available. Treatments for COVID-19: Drugs being tested against coronavirus | Live Science
Abbott's rapid tests can produce false negatives under certain conditions, the company says tests run on samples collected and then stored in media for transport or storage until machine is available have a nearly 15% false negative False Negatives in Quick COVID-19 Test Near 15 Percent: Study s the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic continues with global cases nearing 2.5 million, clinicians have raised questions about the accuracy of available COVID-19 tests. After in-house testing of different available tests, one physician found that Abbott’s assay using its ID NOW device, which can provide results in 5–13 minutes, has a false-negative rate that nears 15 percent. The full results, first reported by NPR, have not been published or peer-reviewed. Gary Procop is the chairman of the commission of science, technology and policy for the American Society for Clinical Pathology, and is currently heading up COVID-19 testing at Cleveland Clinic. He and his team took 239 patient samples known to be positive for the virus and re-tested them using five products available through the US Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) emergency use authorization. The test that turned out to be the least accurate is the one known for its speed. The ID NOW machine was granted emergency use approval during the pandemic on March 27 and generated buzz after President Donald Trump unveiled it during a press conference. In Procop’s analysis, Abbott’s test had a false-negative rate of 14.8 percent. “So that means if you had 100 patients that were positive, 15 percent of those patients would be falsely called negative. They’d be told that they’re negative for COVID when they’re really positive. That’s not too good,” Procop tells NPR, adding that, ideally, test reliability should be above 95 percent. The DiaSorin Simplexa test had a false-negative rate of around 11 percent. Tests developed by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Cepheid, and Roche had false-negative rates of 0, 1.8, and 3.5 percent, respectively. In the wake of the study’s results, Procop’s facility is no longer using the Abbott test, and he is not the only administrator to make that decision.
Serious question about this. So is it the person's sample that causes the false negative or is it just a random negative. If you tested them again, would they all have the same result or would the 15 percent with false negative have the same 85% error rate?
Abbott's rapid tests can produce false negatives under certain conditions, the company says tests run on samples collected and then stored in media for transport or storage until machine is available have a nearly 15% false negative False Negatives in Quick COVID-19 Test Near 15 Percent: Study s the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic continues with global cases nearing 2.5 million, clinicians have raised questions about the accuracy of available COVID-19 tests. After in-house testing of different available tests, one physician found that Abbott’s assay using its ID NOW device, which can provide results in 5–13 minutes, has a false-negative rate that nears 15 percent. The full results, first reported by NPR, have not been published or peer-reviewed. Gary Procop is the chairman of the commission of science, technology and policy for the American Society for Clinical Pathology, and is currently heading up COVID-19 testing at Cleveland Clinic. He and his team took 239 patient samples known to be positive for the virus and re-tested them using five products available through the US Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) emergency use authorization. The test that turned out to be the least accurate is the one known for its speed. The ID NOW machine was granted emergency use approval during the pandemic on March 27 and generated buzz after President Donald Trump unveiled it during a press conference. In Procop’s analysis, Abbott’s test had a false-negative rate of 14.8 percent. “So that means if you had 100 patients that were positive, 15 percent of those patients would be falsely called negative. They’d be told that they’re negative for COVID when they’re really positive. That’s not too good,” Procop tells NPR, adding that, ideally, test reliability should be above 95 percent. The DiaSorin Simplexa test had a false-negative rate of around 11 percent. Tests developed by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Cepheid, and Roche had false-negative rates of 0, 1.8, and 3.5 percent, respectively. In the wake of the study’s results, Procop’s facility is no longer using the Abbott test, and he is not the only administrator to make that decision. the guidance from the lab said the sample was being diluted by the media it was stored in and that was increasing the false negative rate. that is what I got out of it. take the sample directly from the nostril to the machine and the false negative rate dropped to less than 5% which is within "acceptable" standards
UMass Memorial says its first COVID-19 patient to receive a plasma transfusion has ‘dramatically improved’ The hospital is asking for local residents who have recovered from the coronavirus to consider donating plasma to help other patients. –John Blanding, Boston Globe staff UMass Memorial Medical Center says its seeing encouraging results after performing its first plasma transfusion for a severely ill COVID-19 patient at the Worcester hospital. “After hours of transfusion, the patient has dramatically improved overall and is now starting to wean off of the ventilator after having required near maximal settings to oxygenate him prior to the plasma transfusion,” the hospital said in a statement Tuesday. The procedure comes after the medical center put out a call to residents in central Massachusetts last week, asking those who have recently recovered after testing positive for coronavirus to consider signing up to potentially become a convalescent plasma donor. “People who have fully recovered from COVID-19 have antibodies in their plasma that can attack the virus,” the plasma donor registry webpage says. “This convalescent plasma is being evaluated as treatment for patients with serious or immediately life-threatening COVID-19 infections, or those judged by a healthcare provider to be at high risk of progression to severe or life-threatening disease.” ........ Friend posted this on fb.
New Study - NYC Legit Numbers for discussion 80% on ventilators died Hypertension, obesity, diabetes major pre-exisiting conditions. death rate (20% of admissions) same as pre-covid death rate of those admitted with respiratory virus......see, I told you it was just like the flu crowd cheers wildly.....go team apparently we need a new way to introduce O2 other than ventilators for those that crash In New York’s largest hospital system, 88 percent of coronavirus patients on ventilators didn’t make it Now five weeks into the crisis, a paper published in the journal JAMA about New York State’s largest health system suggests a reality that like so much else about the novel coronavirus, confounds our early expectations. Researchers found that 20 percent of all those hospitalized died — a finding that’s similar to the percentage who perish in normal times among those who are admitted for respiratory distress. But the numbers diverge more for the critically ill put on ventilators. Eighty-eight percent of the 320 covid-19 patients on ventilators who were tracked in the study died. That compares with the roughly 80 percent of patients who died on ventilators before the pandemic, according to previous studies — and with the roughly 50 percent death rate some critical care doctors had optimistically hoped when the first cases were diagnosed. The analysis is the largest and most comprehensive look at outcomes in the United States to be published so far. Researchers looked at the electronic medical records of 5,700 patients infected with covid-19 between Mar. 1 and Apr. 4 who were treated at Northwell Health’s 12 hospitals located in New York City, Long Island, and Westchester County — all epicenters of the outbreak. Sixty percent were male, 40 percent female and the average age was 63. “It’s important to look to American data as we have different resources in our health care system and different demographics in our populations,” Davidson said.
CNBC breaking news Remdesivir has flopped in trial Stocks quickly cut gains after report says potential Gilead virus treatment flops in trial
info was leaked though. China has no upside to report failure as they patented the drug for themselves. they have lots of reasons to promote a win, not so many to promote a failure
