iguana wrote: » Under what condition would this treatment be administered? Would it be given prophylactically to asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic confirmed cases? With what we are learning about the virus that would seem unnecessary unless the patient was quite elderly or has relevant underlying health issues. Or only when a patient has started having severe symptoms but before they turn critical?
silverharp wrote: » Ireland or somewhere else?
manster wrote: » Currently taking Azithromycin Teva 250mg tablets (One per day) + Hydroxchloroquine Sulphate 200mg (one X 3 times daily) Issued by hospital pharmacy after being admitted for 4 days last week. Tested positive. Back at home now in isolation but improving every day. Not sure if it is the meds but I'm sleeping a lot.
[Deleted User] wrote: » Patients who show clinical signs of deterioration secondary to moderate-severe COVID-19.
mvl wrote: » Just reading it's approved in Ireland from 13 March - guess this is used elsewhere on the continent way before that - so maybe smaller number of weeks to wait.https://www.hse.ie/eng/about/who/acute-hospitals-division/drugs-management-programme/guidelines/specific-antiviral-therapy-in-the-clinical-management-of-acute-respiratory-infection-with-sars-cov-2-covid-19.pdf
JP Liz V1 wrote: » I was on a bottle, Bisolvon which contained Bromhexine Hydrochloride, would this be a lower form of Hydroxychloroquine?
CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: » France have done two trials. One of 6 patients and one of 80. Of the 80 patient trial (results came out 27 March) one died and one is in intensive care. I personally don't judge that as a complete success but the authors of report on the trial do.
Fleetwoodmac wrote: » What's the rationale behind waiting until this stage?
iguana wrote: » From what I've read the medication is tough on your system. If a person is likely to recover without taking them that's a better option.
JP Liz V1 wrote: » Is Teva antibiotics?
EDit wrote: » Good point. Forgot both of these are generic, so should be relatively cheap. Apparently they are being tested in larger trials with results expected in ~20 days. Fingers crossed the data look good.
begbysback wrote: » Im baffled too as to why more isnt being discussed about drug treatment of COVID19 - theres no doubts its going on in countries, when I questioned the HSE consultant in the AMA thread on their exaggerated death forecast in Ireland I got the below as a source for the predictions - what I consider to be strange is this specifies non pharmaceutical intervention, as if there was nothing available - I find it bizzare to be honest that nobody as yet has produced a larger scale report than the french one about drug treatments. Ive no doubt the Chinese have such reports, but dont seem to be sharing them, or at least us public are not told about them.I would hate to think that the large discrepancies in death numbers when comparing countries is caused by lack of shared information about a treatment.https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf
Esel wrote: » IANAD, but that seems to be a mucolytic cough medication, with absolutely no connection to Hydroxychloroquine.
The Hound Gone Wild wrote: » These are in no way related.
Arrival wrote: » This is genuinely a huge anxiety of mine during all of this, I'm worried that something will be announced to work well in other countries and we won't have had that information shared quickly and be slow on the uptake Surely there's a big effort, in European countries at least, going into sharing the data they all have to come to the best conclusions and help each other?
Millions of doses of anti-malarial drugs hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine will be distributed to hospitals across the country to try to slow the disease in seriously ill patients
Ackerman said in an interview that identifying at-risk patients for heart problems caused by the drugs will be a crucial mission for front-line health-care providers. About 10 percent of the population is at risk of a side-effect of prolonging the split-second interval between electrical recharges of the heart, he said. One percent of the population is at especially high risk, he said. If the interval reaches 500 milliseconds, the heart gets close to “getting tripped up and spiraling out of control'' in an arrhythmia that can lead to sudden heart attack and death, he said.
Fleetwoodmac wrote: » But are they not repurposed drugs with known safety parameters..that's what confused me. Given that we are being told covid19 can cause long term lung damage..
iguana wrote: » We've literally known for 92 days that this virus exists. We have no idea whatsoever that it causes long term lung damage. The more we do learn about Covid-19, the more we are learning that the vast majority of cases are either asymptomatic or genuinely mild. The odds are that most people who have had the virus will only ever know for sure when a reliable antibody test is made available. I honestly find it very hard to believe that all of those people are left with permanent lung damage. They might have lung inflammation that's visible in scans in the weeks after their recovery but it's very unlikely that a mild illness that their body fought off successfully without intervention in a matter of days/weeks causes them lifelong issues. I could be wrong but anyone saying people are left with lifelong problems from a mild experience with a virus that didn't exist 6 months ago is more likely to be scaremongering or catastrophising. Because nobody knows enough right now to be sure of something so unlikely.
plodder wrote: » An Italian doctor on RTE last week said that it does not cause permanent lung damage in survivors.
stockshares wrote: » It's far too early to know.
plodder wrote: » What we know is that one reputable doctor in an Italian hospital has said that he found no evidence of fibrosis in surviving patients. I'll go with that until I see evidence to the contrary.
The Hound Gone Wild wrote: » This is not how we inform clinical judgements. Andrew Wakefield was one reputable doctor so was Harold Shipman.
Jurgen Klopp wrote: » The Czech Republic also believe mandatory mask wearing in public is as important as washing hands and social distancing, for preventing people from shedding the virus more than preventing getting it. It's why they've made it mandatory
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w2.vanillicon.com/v2/24615175400ae675a1f589d8e5bd3285.svg)
