Beyond the obviously partisan slant of the article, I'm genuinely curious about logical conversation and supporting data to the claims this Doctor makes
I agree, and the article is very short on details regarding anything. It just mentioned empty claims about how a mysterious treatment is superb.
It's also questionable how the main argument is that patients within the small community who reported mild symptoms didn't get worse except 3 who required special care and ventilators, considering that about 90% of all infected experience either none or mild symptoms without requiring any special care. From those numbers alone, it sounds an awful lot like what to expect from the baseline results alone.
In May Oxford U will give hydroxychloroquine to 10000
health care workers in London
wether or not they test positive. Advocates of HCQ are
coalescing around the opinion
that it works best when symptoms are hardly present and not when the patient is on death’s doorstep his body already overwhelmed by the virus.
Better still is to use it prophylacticaly which is what Oxford will be testing.
It's also questionable how the main argument is that patients within the small community who reported mild symptoms didn't get worse except 3 who required special care and ventilators, considering that about 90% of all infected experience either none or mild symptoms without requiring any special care. From those numbers alone, it sounds an awful lot like what to expect from the baseline results alone.