People in the control group survived because the virus doesn’t kill most people. Especially in a group of people who weren’t all elderly or didn’t all have pre-existing conditions.
If you pick a random group of 20 people and everyone in that group is infected, there’s a strong chance that no one in that group dies simply by being given non-targeted medical treatment.
Without a large control trial it’s very difficult to say that it would dramatically reduce the death rate.
The government is mostly allowing their usage because they are considered relatively safe drugs. Not because their effectiveness is well established.
“3). At day6 post-inclusion, 100% of patients
treated with hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin combination were virologicaly cured
comparing with 57.1% in patients treated with hydroxychloroquine only, and 12.5% in the
control group”
and the one who died was excluded for 2 reasons.
didn’t finish the study
“one patient died on day3 post inclusion and was PCR-negative on day2;”
not only that, but the average age of patients taking the drugs was 51, while the average of the control group was 37. At 37, the virus ain’t that bad.
Try to have a discussion without resorting to the words “racist” or “conspiracy” to dismiss the other persons position.
There is a globalist agenda to establish a single over-arching world government. That is indisputable. They have strategies to move the world in that direction. There is a populist nationalist agenda to resist and replace the globalist model. That is also obvious. We are seeing that struggle played out. It’s not a conspiracy any more. It’s out in plain sight.
I commented above that I was looking at the study after you brought it up. I know this is the internet, but you don’t have to pretend that you’ve been studying this for months
I pointed out that while it showed promising results, it hasn’t been proven to lower the mortality rate and that point still stands.
So where did I say “I read that study a long time ago”…? I mentioned that I was looking at it and I didn’t see anything suggesting it was a miracle cure like you were suggesting.
It reduced the recovery time of some of the patients and it shows promise. However, even the control group survived and a couple even got “cured” in the same time frame.
The study isn’t large enough for us to know if there are other caveats. We can say that the people in that study recovered faster on average than people in the control group.
Remember, I never said that the treatment isn’t effective. I just said it hasn’t been tested extensively enough to come to your conclusions.
You are the one making it seem that I some how claimed to have known everything about the study while I was openly inquiring about what studies you were referring to and specifically said that I was looking at one of them.
I still haven’t found the one where you said it had 80 patients?
