An international poll of more than 6,000 doctors released Thursday found that the antimalarial drug hydroxychloroquine was the most highly rated treatment for the novel coronavirus.

The survey conducted by Sermo, a global health care polling company, of 6,227 physicians in 30 countries found that 37% of those treating COVID-19 patients rated hydroxychloroquine as the “most effective therapy” from a list of 15 options.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration gave chloroquine and its next-generation derivative, hydroxychloroquine, emergency-use authorization Monday for treating the novel coronavirus, although the drug was already being used off-label by some doctors and hospitals for COVID-19 patients.

The survey also found that the most commonly prescribed treatments are analgesics (56%), azithromycin (41%) and hydroxychloroquine (33%).
Azithromycin, known by the brand name Zithromax or Z-Pak, was rated the second-most effective therapy at 32%, followed by “nothing,” analgesics (including acetaminophen), anti-HIV drugs and cough medicine.

Hydroxychloroquine, which is sold under the brand name Plaquenil, was prescribed mainly in the United States for the most severe cases, but not so in other countries.
“Outside the U.S., hydroxychloroquine was equally used for diagnosed patients with mild to severe symptoms whereas in the U.S. it was most commonly used for high risk diagnosed patients,” the survey found.

The 30 nations surveyed included those in Europe, Asia, North America and South America, as well as Australia. No incentives were provided to participate in the poll, conducted March 25-27, according to Sermo.

[www.sermo.com]
[www.washingtontimes.com]

So we're determining effectiveness based on survey?

Sorry, this is absolute garbage.

---

Welcome to Washington Times Science reporting, where whatever folks tell us is what we go by!

---

rj
AKA
Vreemac, Moth of the Future

Quote
mattkime
So we're determining effectiveness based on survey?

Sorry, this is absolute garbage.

Agreed.

Quote
S. Pupp

Quote
mattkime
So we're determining effectiveness based on survey?

Sorry, this is absolute garbage.

Agreed.

Better than nothing at all, and they polled Doctors not trash collectors. Besides, there are a LOT of people who think the best way to pick a Leader is thru a popularity contest.

Here you can watch some guy, I think his name is Fauci, being interviewed by some people on FOX about what he thinks of those 6000 doctors "feelings".

[www.thedailybeast.com]

Quote

...

“But getting back to what you said just a moment ago that ‘X percent’—I think you said 37 percent—of doctors feel that it’s beneficial. We don’t operate on how you feel. We operate on what evidence is, and data is,” he continued. “So although there is some suggestion with the study that was just mentioned by Dr. Oz—granted that there is a suggestion that there is a benefit there—I think we’ve got to be careful that we don’t make that majestic leap to assume that this is a knockout drug.”

...

Quote
S. Pupp

Quote
mattkime
So we're determining effectiveness based on survey?

Sorry, this is absolute garbage.

Agreed.

Also agreed.

There is a very good reason that science uses double-blinded randomized controlled trials. However you test things that seem to be a good idea so I eagerly await the scientific trials of hydroxychloroquine to see if it actually works better than placebo, with acceptable side effects.

Quote
bobinmurphy
Better than nothing at all, and they polled Doctors not trash collectors. Besides, there are a LOT of people who think the best way to pick a Leader is thru a popularity contest.

This argument does not contain a formal logical fallacy; however, especially in matters of scientific/medical standards and efficacy, the "better than nothing" argument is particularly weak.

In fact, the field of medical ethics deals, in large part, with hypotheticals that test the argument that a patient can have 'nothing to lose,' or that to do nothing is a greater failing than doing something per se.

Scientific conclusions and the medical advice based on them must be based on the use of scientific tools, not journalistic or public opinion polling tools. To promote equivalency between the two types of conclusions is both damaging to the practice of science/medicine, and dangerous to the public.

---

rj
AKA
Vreemac, Moth of the Future

Quote
bobinmurphy

Quote
S. Pupp

Quote
mattkime
So we're determining effectiveness based on survey?

Sorry, this is absolute garbage.

Agreed.

Better than nothing at all...

No. It's not.

It's a political act garbed in false science and it's VERY dangerous.

Critical decisions will be made on the basis of this garbage-story from the disinformation arm of the republican party.

People will die because of it.

---

Worse than nothing, if (a) it leads people to avoid better treatment, (b) causes side effects.

Quote
bobinmurphy

Quote
S. Pupp

Quote
mattkime
So we're determining effectiveness based on survey?

Sorry, this is absolute garbage.

Agreed.

Better than nothing at all, and they polled Doctors not trash collectors. Besides, there are a LOT of people who think the best way to pick a Leader is thru a popularity contest.

Quote
rjmacs

Quote
bobinmurphy
Better than nothing at all, and they polled Doctors not trash collectors. Besides, there are a LOT of people who think the best way to pick a Leader is thru a popularity contest.

This argument does not contain a formal logical fallacy; however, especially in matters of scientific/medical standards and efficacy, the "better than nothing" argument is particularly weak.

In fact, the field of medical ethics deals, in large part, with hypotheticals that test the argument that a patient can have 'nothing to lose,' or that to do nothing is a greater failing than doing something per se.

Scientific conclusions and the medical advice based on them must be based on the use of scientific tools, not journalistic or public opinion polling tools. To promote equivalency between the two types of conclusions is both damaging to the practice of science/medicine, and dangerous to the public.

True, but it seems like we stopped sciencing some time ago, so... anything goes!

---

It is what it is.

Quote
anonymouse1
Worse than nothing, if (a) it leads people to avoid better treatment, (b) causes side effects.

Canonball vomiting, headache, diarrhea, abdominal cramps, blurred vision and blindness. Blistering skin. Muscle and nerve problems. Heart arrhythmia... and suppressed immune system!

Yeah.

Still waiting for a real study that shows that it's useful against the virus.

---

Let's see if the numbers change with a 10 fold increase to 60,000 doctors' reports. Please report!
These are reports, not opinions. Maybe we'll find a better medicine or treatment soon.

It's very possible we'll find best practices from one or more countries.
Some of you here are just anxious that the current top ranked medicine is really the best.

If I was a patient today in intensive care or not, I would at least ask my doctor about it.

Quote
bobinmurphy

Better than nothing at all

Tell that to the people who actually need the drug for Lupus and other autoimmune diseases and are finding it harder to get.

Quote
Buck
Some of you here are just anxious that the current top ranked medicine is really the best.

I'm sure hydroxychloroquine is TREMENDOUS!

Lux, is it hard to get? I thought it was plentiful because of Malaria.

How was the survey worded?
“Which of the following ineffective treatments would you prefer?”
We’re dealing with an illness with no effective treatment. There is no adequate response to such a survey.

[www.cebm.net]

Yes, pharmacists are now saying that there is a rush on the drug as a result of Trumps previous declaration. Doctors are prescribing it because their patients are demanding it.

Quote
Sarcany

Quote
anonymouse1
Worse than nothing, if (a) it leads people to avoid better treatment, (b) causes side effects.

Canonball vomiting, headache, diarrhea, abdominal cramps, blurred vision and blindness. Blistering skin. Muscle and nerve problems. Heart arrhythmia... and suppressed immune system!

Yeah.

Still waiting for a real study that shows that it's useful against the virus.

While I agree that we need to wait for studies on the efficacy of Hydroxychloroquine to treat the Coronavirus, Millions of Americans already take this drug on a daily basis to help manage their arthritis. If the symptoms you mention were even remotely common, this would not be true.

---

Where is there dignity unless there is also honesty? - Cicero

Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a battle you know nothing about. —Wendy Mass

Quote
Buck
If I was a patient today in intensive care or not, I would at least ask my doctor about it.

I'd ask about N2O.

---

Quote
Buck
Lux, is it hard to get? I thought it was plentiful because of Malaria.

I thought toilet paper was plentiful because more people pooped each day than had Malaria. If demand suddenly spikes, supply goes to zero, even for those that it used to be plentiful for.

Quote
Carnos Jax
Yes, pharmacists are now saying that there is a rush on the drug as a result of Trumps previous declaration. Doctors are prescribing it because their patients are demanding it.

Shame on those doctors - that's not how doctoring is supposed to work.

---

It is what it is.

Quote
N-OS X-tasy!

Quote
Carnos Jax
Yes, pharmacists are now saying that there is a rush on the drug as a result of Trumps previous declaration. Doctors are prescribing it because their patients are demanding it.

Shame on those doctors - that's not how doctoring is supposed to work.

Right, it's not their patients requesting it, they're hoarding it for themselves.

[www.npr.org]

Quote

Dentists and doctors writing prescriptions for themselves

"Our members are definitely seeing more demand for this medication and possibly some people trying to hoard the medication," says Todd Brown, executive director of the Massachusetts Independent Pharmacists Association.

According to Brown, it appears the hoarders include doctors and dentists who are writing prescriptions for themselves or family members.

"Pharmacists are seeing an increase in requests and prescriptions for them in instances where it's not clear why the patient needs it at this time," he says.

Quote
Buck
If I was a patient today in intensive care or not, I would at least ask my doctor about it.

Medice, cura te ipsum

---

rj
AKA
Vreemac, Moth of the Future

LONDON (Reuters) - Britain said on Friday it was launching the biggest clinical trial of possible treatments for coronavirus in the world but a leading health official cautioned that the results were likely a few months away.

Almost 1,000 patients from 132 hospitals had been recruited in 15 days and thousands more were expected to join in the coming weeks, the health department said.

The trial is testing medicines more commonly used to treat malaria and HIV, and is designed so that when further medicines are identified, they can be added to the study within days.

England’s Deputy Chief Medical Officer Jonathan Van-Tam said the next round of clinical trials should include new medicines, including those that might be in development for other diseases and might “have a role to play”.

Quote
mattkime

Quote
Buck
Some of you here are just anxious that the current top ranked medicine is really the best.

I'm sure hydroxychloroquine is TREMENDOUS!

and getting better ratings than The Bachelor and Monday Night Football!

Quote
S. Pupp
How was the survey worded?
“Which of the following ineffective treatments would you prefer?”
We’re dealing with an illness with no effective treatment. There is no adequate response to such a survey.

No, it's way, way worse than that...

It's a website that sells itself as 'Within Sermo, doctors can talk openly about what matters most. It’s a fun, secure, and relaxing place where doctors can speak without repercussions. No other physician community provides anonymity, making us a unique community for honest peer-to-peer conversations and crowdsourcing."

These are people that self identify as doctors that are answering this survey. To claim that the results mean anything is asinine.

A mentor of mine said, "the easiest person to fool is yourself." I think it applies here, with the aforementioned doctors' "feelings."

I fear that with such reasonable statements from Fauci, he may not be long in his crucial role.

---

Quote
hal
These are people that self identify as doctors that are answering this survey. To claim that the results mean anything is asinine.

Hey, now...there are some very well know & respected doctors, I'm sure:

Dr. Johnny Fever
Dr. John
Dr. Detroit
Dr. Who
Dr. Adam "Doc" Bricker
Marcus Welby M.D.
Dr. Feelgood
Julius Irving
Etc.

Quote
Lux Interior

Quote
hal
These are people that self identify as doctors that are answering this survey. To claim that the results mean anything is asinine.

Hey, now...there are some very well know & respected doctors, I'm sure:

Dr. Johnny Fever
Dr. John
Dr. Detroit
Dr. Who
Dr. Adam "Doc" Bricker
Marcus Welby M.D.
Dr. Feelgood
Julius Irving
Etc.

Add Doc Holliday to that list!

---

It is what it is.

Don't forget Gunsmoke's Doc Adams. And Doc Marten.
.

I saw Dr. Oz mentioned above so I'm all aboard.

Quote
bobinmurphy
Better than nothing at all, and they polled Doctors not trash collectors. Besides, there are a LOT of people who think the best way to pick a Leader is thru a popularity contest.

Not necessarily true. This drug has significant side effects, some of which cause death. In those cases, nothing at all is a much better idea. Note that in this uncontrolled popularity poll, use of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine combined barely edged out the two runners up, which were "nothing" and "azithromycin or similar antibiotic".

Efficacy cannot be determined without controlled testing. Just because someone is a doctor does not mean that they are versed in drug testing and statistics.

---

"In science it often happens that scientists say, 'You know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken,' and then they would actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion." (1987) -- Carl Sagan

No love for Doc Oc? Spidey sez, "Hi!"

---

=TC

Quote
GGD

Quote
N-OS X-tasy!

Quote
Carnos Jax
Yes, pharmacists are now saying that there is a rush on the drug as a result of Trumps previous declaration. Doctors are prescribing it because their patients are demanding it.

Shame on those doctors - that's not how doctoring is supposed to work.

Right, it's not their patients requesting it, they're hoarding it for themselves.

Not how it’s ‘supposed’, but that IS the way it works. Being Indian, I have tons of family and friends that are doctors and they will tell you that whatever a patient sees on TV (hate drug commercials) is what they ask from their doctors. And they say most will ultimately give it to them.

---

It is what it is.

The ubiquity of drug rep swag that permeates every corner of every doctor's office tells you that the power of suggestion works.

Quote
hal

Quote
S. Pupp
How was the survey worded?
“Which of the following ineffective treatments would you prefer?”
We’re dealing with an illness with no effective treatment. There is no adequate response to such a survey.

No, it's way, way worse than that...

It's a website that sells itself as 'Within Sermo, doctors can talk openly about what matters most. It’s a fun, secure, and relaxing place where doctors can speak without repercussions. No other physician community provides anonymity, making us a unique community for honest peer-to-peer conversations and crowdsourcing."

These are people that self identify as doctors that are answering this survey. To claim that the results mean anything is asinine.

Oh. So it's like a "doctor's" equivalent of getting agricultural advice from members of farmerscrush.com or farmersonly.com. Giddy-up!

Quote
Buck
... These are reports, not opinions....

My teens write reports about wars but no one should take military advice from them. You think you've considered the source, but given that you don't understand the source, you haven't considered the source.

Washington Times: rarely credible. You have other choices, based on their track records. Consider taking another path for news consumption.

Note that I didn't say "bad" or "good," I said credible. The difference is as critical as a patient suffering in the ICU on a ventilator.

Quote

These are reports, not opinions

This is a very ignorant statement. It shares a similar nature with your so worthy "report, not opinion," that is, a keen example of confirmation bias' power.

---

Picasso in his studio after the liberation of Paris, taken by my friend and mentor.

Where might one read these...reports?

Quote
Dennis S
Where might one read these...reports?

I’ll try to find the most recent one on WWII. My boy’s writing one about the Great Depression currently. From what he tells me, both were “super bad.”

On the other hand, without considering the source, any interest in “reports” becomes a truly weird way to waste time.

I was given the option of that drug for something else a while back. I decided the risk of retinal damage was not worth it.

I would only take it if it was proven effective for whatever condition, the lowest dose, and the shortest time. And absolutely necessary.