You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
The French study (Sbidian, n=4,642) on Parisian patients has a very abnormal population study partition: ICU within 24h versus others that mix ICU post 24h and non ICU cases. Was that done to deliberately obfuscate the results of hydroxychloroquine on milder non-ICU patients?pic.twitter.com/qh6C4Smy56
Most authors are employees of the Paris hospital system and the INSERM governmental research institute . Both refractory to HCQ with a strong conflict of interest in proving HCQ would not have saved lives post-hoc. Hence the glaring lack of cohort matching on ICU admission?
As a perfect illustration of Paris obstruction to HCQ and in complete contradiction with Dr Raoult's protocol, the Sbidian study shows that 51% of patients admitted in ICU after more than 24h (76/148) initiated the treatment only AFTER their ICU admission.
Actually even doing so (and counting people who received HCQ two hours before being admitted to ICU) you can still read positive results. Look at @CorinneReverbel and @dperetti
Well theyre killing us while they do it
Sorry for asking. But what does that mean for someone like me who's not an expert? Thanks
This means that even if the groups compared are poorly designed and not comparable without questionable adjustments, we clearly see a significant positive effect of the HCQ. Given the size of the control group, the groups could have been designed to be comparablepic.twitter.com/mAJzXOFF6z
Didier Raoult protocole is simple and easy: We've had a 97% cure for the COVID-19er since February. 1. Azithromycin 2. Zinc 3. Hydroxychloroquine 5 days later non contagious for 97% of patients period
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
