Auntie Dee wrote:
This article still does not disclose at what point... (
I’m not claiming the study is conclusive. A lot more work is needed for that.
From the article- Heading: Methods
“Patients who received one of the treatments of interest within 48 hours of diagnosis.”
I’m not sure what relationship that has to the virus cycle but it does indicate it was administered within 48 hours.
“After controlling for multiple confounding factors (age, sex, ethnicity, body mass index, underlying cardiovascular disease and its risk factors, diabetes, underlying lung disease, smoking, immunosuppressed condition, and baseline disease severity), ...”
This is a pretty comprehensive list.
Heading: Statistical Analysis
Paragraph 3 shows how they matched patient health profiles. So, a healthy patient would be compared with a healthy patient.
I believe you’re referring to the early French study.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32387409/
Here in America, Henry Ford Hospital started our first large scale study in April.https://www.dicardiology.com/article/first-large-scale-us-study-hydroxychloroquine-covid-19-prophylaxis-begins-detroit
I’m hoping we will succeed in determining both effectiveness and risk factors. I suspect it will be useful for some, definitely not for others. We shall see.
So far as Lancet is concerned, while I’m not saying they’re pure as the driven snow, you’re not going to find a more trustworthy source.