Forum Replies Created
COVID-19 most probably a bioengineered gain of function pathogen with an ACE2 selective function between S1, S2 site on the virus that attaches selectively to the lung and other organs. Even those who seem to recover may have life time damage. Nasty. Instead the Pravda news says younger generations are not at risk of death and they can tough it out. People are resistant to change. They just don’t want to hear it.
Your assertion: Trump is a punk.
Your data: Its not something he’s done. Its not an established fact. Its what he failed to do: issue an executive order. We were taught that assertions were conclusions from established data.
How can your assertion be valid?
Reply to #5.
Maximize the body count. I was watching on television during 9-11 when they announced all off duty fire fighters report to the World Trade Center. Also when the first tower was hit I remember some kind of language about staying in the buildings.
“While more than 100,000 American deaths have been attributed to COVID-19, 150 million doses of hydroxychloroquine, donated by manufacturers, are deteriorating in government warehouses. There is an aggressive campaign to portray HCQ at first as “unproven” and now as also “unsafe.” Following the lead of the Food and Drug Administration’s Emergency Use Authorization (EUA), which prohibits use of HCQ being stored in the Strategic National Stockpile (SNS) outside of hospitals, most states have placed unprecedented restrictions on physicians’ ability to prescribe HCQ “off-label” for COVID-19.”
Stop interfering with the physician patient relationship!
Did Daszak’s EcoHealth Alliance participate, sponsor, cosponsor, finance, or in any other way participate in or contribute to the creation of COVID-19 in the Wuhan Virology Institute or in any other lab in China? As EcoHealth was responsible for administration of a multimillion dollar US NIH/NIAID grant to conduct Gain of Function research on corona bat viruses or possibly pangolin viruses in Chinese laboratories in order to make them highly infectious or more infectious in humans, did his work include genetic engineering modifications made on Sars-CoV-2, Sads-CoV, or GD Pangolin CoV? (Did EcoHealth Alliance conduct any Gain of Function research on H5N1?) If EcoHealth was not contracted to perform any of the aforementioned projects, then what was included in the specifications of the multimillion dollar contract? What specific EcoHealth research in this contract was reviewed and approved by the appropriate monitoring board?
Reading Daszak’s Guardian article, the only sentence that states it was not created in a lab is this: “Our report firmly concludes that Covid-19 originated in bats, in a hotspot of viral evolution along the border of Yunnan province in China, Myanmar, Laos and Vietnam.”
“The University of Utah has “mutually agreed” to terminate the faculty appointment of Amit Patel, who was among the authors of two retracted papers on Covid-19 and who appears to have played a key role in involving a little-known company that has ignited a firestorm of controversy.
“The terminated position was an unpaid adjunct appointment with the Department of Biomedical Engineering,” a university spokesperson told STAT. Patel had listed the affiliation on both papers, published in the Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine. The spokesperson declined to comment on whether the decision was related to the retractions.”
From statnews by way of PubPeer comments section
Open letter to MR Mehra, SS Desai, F Ruschitzka, and AN Patel, authors of “Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: a multinational registry analysis”. Lancet. 2020 May 22:S0140-6736(20)31180-6. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31180-6. PMID: 32450107
and to Richard Horton (editor of The Lancet).
Concerns regarding the statistical analysis and data integrity
The retrospective, observational study of 96,032 hospitalized COVID-19 patients from six continents reported substantially increased mortality (~30% excess deaths) and occurrence of cardiac arrhythmias associated with the use of the 4-aminoquinoline drugs hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine. These results have had a considerable impact on public health practice and research.
The WHO has paused recruitment to the hydroxychloroquine arm in their SOLIDARITY trial. The UK regulatory body, MHRA, requested the temporary pausing of recruitment into all hydroxychloroquine trials in the UK (treatment and prevention), and France has changed its national recommendation for the use of hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19 treatment and also halted trials.
The subsequent media headlines have caused considerable concern to participants and patients enrolled in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) seeking to characterize the potential benefits and risks of these drugs in the treatment and prevention of COVID-19 infections. There is uniform agreement that well conducted RCTs are needed to inform policies and practices.
This impact has led many researchers around the world to scrutinize in detail the publication in question. This scrutiny has raised both methodological and data integrity concerns. The main concerns are listed as follows:
1. There was inadequate adjustment for known and measured confounders (disease severity, temporal effects, site effects, dose used).
2. The authors have not adhered to standard practices in the machine learning and statistics community. They have not released their code or data. There is no data/code sharing and availability statement in the paper. The Lancet was among the many signatories on the Wellcome statement on data sharing for COVID-19 studies.
3. There was no ethics review.
4. There was no mention of the countries or hospitals that contributed to the data source and no acknowledgments of their contributions. A request to the authors for information on the contributing centres was denied.
5. Data from Australia are not compatible with government reports (too many cases for just five hospitals, more in-hospital deaths than had occurred in the entire country during the study period). Surgisphere (the data company) have since stated this was an error of classification of one hospital from Asia. This indicates the need for further error checking throughout the database.
6. Data from Africa indicate that nearly 25% of all COVID-19 cases and 40% of all deaths in the continent occurred in Surgisphere-associated hospitals which had sophisticated electronic patient data recording, and patient monitoring able to detect and record “nonsustained [at least 6 secs] or sustained ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation”. Both the numbers of cases and deaths, and the details provided, seem unlikely.
Unusually small reported variation in baseline variables, interventions and outcomes between continents (Table S3).
7. Mean daily doses of hydroxychloroquine that are 100 mg higher than FDA recommendations, whereas 66% of the data are from North American hospitals.
8. Implausible ratios of chloroquine to hydroxychloroquine use in some continents. For example, in Australia 49 received chloroquine and 50 received hydroxychloroquine. However, chloroquine is not readily available in Australia and administration requires authorization from the Therapeutic Goods Administration.
9. The tight 95% confidence intervals reported for the hazard ratios appear inconsistent with the data. For instance, for the Australian data this would imply about double the numbers of recorded deaths as were reported in the paper.
The patient data were obtained through electronic health records, supply chain databases, and financial records. The data are held by the US company Surgisphere. In response to a request for the data Professor Mehra replied: “Our data sharing agreements with the various governments, countries and hospitals do not allow us to share data unfortunately.”
Given the enormous importance and influence of these results, we believe it is imperative that:
The company Surgisphere provides details on data provenance. At the very minimum, this means sharing the aggregated patient data at the hospital level (for all covariates and outcomes)
Independent validation of the analysis is performed by a group convened by the World Health Organization, or at least one other independent and respected institution. This would entail additional analyses (e.g. determining if there is a dose-effect) to assess the validity of the conclusions
There is open access to all the data sharing agreements cited above to ensure that, in each jurisdiction, any mined data was legally and ethically collected and patient privacy aspects respected
In the interests of transparency, we also ask The Lancet to make openly available the peer review comments that led to this manuscript being accepted for publication.
This open letter is signed by clinicians, medical researchers, statisticians, and ethicists from across the world. The full list of signatories and affiliations can be found below.
Interesting study from 2003. Would be nice to see a followup.
Pubpeer, what a great site. The comments lead you to stat modeling and a slew of concerned technicians about what Surgisphere has done. If this ever gets out it will it be at the scale of something like teapot dome?
We get a lot of exposure to NPR in our house with the same day’s program coming out of our YouTube/TV several times a day. I can’t remember a single topic that didn’t come from the Democrat viewpoint.
Makes it hard to trust what they say.