COVID-19 Data & Docs

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: COVID-19 Data & Docs

Postby alloneword » Thu May 21, 2020 9:10 am

Thousands of lives could be lost to delays in cancer surgery during COVID-19 pandemic

Scientists at The Institute of Cancer Research, London, analysed existing Public Health England data on delays to cancer surgery on patients’ five-year survival rates to estimate the effect of three-month or six-month delays, respectively.

Their modelling, which factored in the risk of hospital-acquired COVID-19-infection, showed dramatic differences in the impact of delay on cancer survival depending on patients’ age, their cancer type and whether it was earlier- or later-stage cancer.

The team found that a delay of three months across all 94,912 patients who would have had surgery to remove their cancer over the course of a year would lead to an additional 4,755 deaths. Taking into account the length of time that patients are expected to live after their surgery, the delay would amount to 92,214 years of life lost.

Healthcare resource

They estimated that surgery for cancer affords on average 18.1 life years per patient, of which on average 1.0 years are lost for a three-month delay or 2.2 years are lost with a six-month delay. Considering healthcare resource more broadly, they compared this with hospital treatment for COVID-19, from which on average 5.1 life years were currently gained per patient.

https://www.icr.ac.uk/news-archive/thou ... 9-pandemic
User avatar
alloneword
 
Posts: 902
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 9:19 am
Location: UK
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: COVID-19 Data & Docs

Postby alloneword » Thu May 21, 2020 10:44 am

Government has 'terrorised' Britons into believing coronavirus will kill them, says adviser

Professor Robert Dingwall says social distancing level set at two metres because Britons had not been trusted to observe one metre

[...]

Prof Dingwall said the mandatory social distancing level was set at two metres because Britons had not been trusted to observe one metre

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/20 ... irus-will/
User avatar
alloneword
 
Posts: 902
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 9:19 am
Location: UK
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: COVID-19 Data & Docs

Postby alloneword » Thu May 21, 2020 5:21 pm

Another 'UnHerd' interview, this time with Professor Karol Sikora, (founding Dean and Professor of Medicine at the University of Buckingham Medical School and an ex-director of the WHO Cancer Programme), yesterday censored by Youtube for 'violating guidelines', now looks to have been reinstated:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uk2YZfnsOPg

https://unherd.com/thepost/professor-ka ... the-virus/
User avatar
alloneword
 
Posts: 902
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 9:19 am
Location: UK
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: COVID-19 Data & Docs

Postby alloneword » Thu May 21, 2020 6:21 pm

Some more on Simon Dolan's legal challenge (seeking Judicial Review) to the UK lockdown (pdfs):



https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/lockd ... challenge/
User avatar
alloneword
 
Posts: 902
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 9:19 am
Location: UK
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: COVID-19 Data & Docs

Postby alloneword » Sat May 23, 2020 9:42 am

Another chunk of documentation released on the 'SAGE' meetings... This week, the theme is 'children':

Consensus View Impact Interventions to Delay UK Spread 4 04-Feb
SPI-M-O Consensus View on Mass School Closures 6 11-Feb
SPI-M-O Consensus View on the impact of school closures on Covid-19 17 18-Mar
Review: What is the evidence for transmission of COVID-19 by children [or in schools]? 23 07-Apr
SPI-M: The role of children in transmission 23 07-Apr
SPI-M & SPI-B: Modelling and behavioural science responses to scenarios for relaxing school closures 30 30-Apr
Susceptibility and transmission in children: updates from the last few weeks 30 30-Apr
A full account of SPI-B input on the scenarios 30 30-Apr
Technical briefing to Dutch Parliament: role of children in the COVID-19 outbreak 31 01-May
Transmission and susceptibility in children 31 01-May
Interdisciplinary Task and Finish Group on the Role of Children in Transmission: Modelling and behavioural science responses to scenarios for relaxing school closures 31 01-May


^^^ That's 'title', 'meeting number' and 'meeting date' - all released yesterday and mixed in with the previously released stuff, just to make it really easy to find + not all the titles given in the index file exactly match those on the file links. :roll:

E2A: Here are the ones from 20th May:

Dynamic CO-CIN Report to SAGE and NERVTAG 19 26-Mar
Dynamic CO-CIN Report to SAGE and NERVTAG 22 02-Apr
Dynamic CO-CIN Report to SAGE and NERVTAG 23 07-Apr
Dynamic CO-CIN Report to SAGE and NERVTAG 24 09-Apr
Dynamic CO-CIN Report to SAGE and NERVTAG 26 16-Apr
Effect on ethnicity on outcome after Covid-19 (report to SAGE and NERVTAG) 27 21-Apr
Dynamic CO-CIN report to SAGE and NERVTAG 27 21-Apr
Dynamic CO-CIN report to SAGE and NERVTAG 28 23-Apr
Investigating associations between ethnicity and outcome from COVID-19 29 28-Apr
Case fatality by age in hospitalised patients (CO-CIN Consortium) 29 28-Apr
Dynamic CO-CIN report to SAGE and NERVTAG 29 28-Apr
Dynamic CO-CIN report to SAGE and NERVTAG 30 30-Apr
Dynamic CO-CIN report to SAGE and NERVTAG 33 05-May
Dynamic CO-CIN report to SAGE and NERVTAG 34 07-May
Case fatality in hospitalised patients after 23 March 2020 35 12-May
Dynamic CO-CIN report to SAGE and NERVTAG 35 12-May
Dynamic CO-CIN report to SAGE and NERVTAG 36 14-May
User avatar
alloneword
 
Posts: 902
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 9:19 am
Location: UK
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: COVID-19 Data & Docs

Postby Elvis » Sun May 24, 2020 10:00 pm

alloneword, what would you say to writing up your conclusions as they may stand in light of the data you've collected? I have to admit haven't had/made time to read it all and sort it out. A big picture drawn from your data pixels would be most welcome.
“The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.” ― Joan Robinson
User avatar
Elvis
 
Posts: 7411
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: COVID-19 Data & Docs

Postby Grizzly » Sun May 24, 2020 10:05 pm

^^^
SAME! Agree with Elvis ... Looking forward to it.
“The more we do to you, the less you seem to believe we are doing it.”

― Joseph mengele
User avatar
Grizzly
 
Posts: 4722
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 4:15 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: COVID-19 Data & Docs

Postby alloneword » Mon May 25, 2020 6:38 pm

*Gulp*

Well... since you asked - from a UK perspective:

Despite their constant invitations to do so (the 'Boris the Clown' act, the antics of 'Prof Pantsdown' and now SPAD Cummings etc.), I cannot follow the likes of columnist Peter Hitchens in believing this situation to be the product of incompetence, exacerbated by pessimistic forecasts from Scientific Advisers and a *wholly surprising* level of 'community-minded' compliance regarding lockdown on the part of the British public.

I see more a pattern of cynical manipulation - a systematic corruption of data surrounding 'death counts', NHS capacity, demographics of those affected, messaging, and all performed with precise timing.

And through these and other mechanisms, the most cynical manipulation relates to that so expertly and successfully directed towards the minds of the public, turning the entire country into something akin to a massive-scale Stanford Prison Experiment, with a helping of Milgram and a side order of Skinner.

Image

I'll probably write up something a little more focussed - once I've made up my mind whether it belongs in the 'Mind Control' or the 'Psyops and Meme Management' forum. ;)
User avatar
alloneword
 
Posts: 902
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 9:19 am
Location: UK
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: COVID-19 Data & Docs

Postby alloneword » Tue May 26, 2020 4:38 pm

Actually, Alistair Haimes give a fairly good summary here:

We’re all in the big numbers now
User avatar
alloneword
 
Posts: 902
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 9:19 am
Location: UK
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: COVID-19 Data & Docs

Postby alloneword » Thu May 28, 2020 6:30 am

Count for nothing

We have no idea how many ‘Covid deaths’ were actually Covid

Dr John Lee

As a pathologist, I’m used to people thinking that my job mainly involves dealing with death. But nothing could be further from the truth. That is why I and many of my colleagues are so dismayed by changes introduced during the coronavirus epidemic which mean that pathology has not been able to play the role that it should have in helping to understand this new disease.

The word ‘pathology’ tends to conjure up images of body bags, mortuaries and murder investigations. ‘Ho ho,’ people say, ‘your patients can’t answer back.’ They imagine days spent trudging across fields to reach murder scenes, Silent Witness-style, and nights sifting through arcane evidence to catch the perpetrators. And a rare type of pathologist — the forensic pathologist — does indeed do that.

Most pathologists, though, spend the majority of their careers looking after the living. After all, pathology is the study of disease, and the whole point of knowing about diseases is to inform our approaches to preventing and treating them.

There are four main types of pathologist. Microbiologists specialise in the study of infectious diseases — a subtype is the virologist, in particular demand at the moment. Chemical pathologists are experts in the liquid parts of the blood; they analyse the endless samples that pour into path labs day and night, looking for changes in chemicals and hormones that indicate disease. Haematologists are experts in diseases of the blood cells, the red cells and white cells that can cause problems such as anaemia or leukaemia.

And then there is my own speciality of histopathology, or cellular pathology. We are experts in analysing changes in the fabric of our bodies that result from disease. Many diseases affect our tissues in ways that can be seen down the microscope, allowing them to be accurately diagnosed and monitored, particularly tumours and inflammations. Every time a biopsy or surgical sample is taken, it comes to the histopathology lab to be examined. Histopathology is often regarded as a ‘gold standard’ for diagnosis of diseases that change tissue structure. A clinical examination or X-ray may suggest that a tumour or fibrosis of the lung, say, is present, but you need to examine a tissue sample microscopically to be sure that it’s really there, what type it is, and how advanced. Tissue can also be examined genetically to look for the presence of infectious agents or cellular receptors that may determine how deadly it is.

The other thing that some histopathologists do is autopsies — hence the confusion with forensic pathology. But in this case the autopsies are not typically looking for evidence of foul play. They are usually requested by a coroner to ascertain the cause of death. Relatives, even doctors, are often surprised by the need for this in the world of modern medicine. Surely all the examinations, tests and imaging carried out in life mean that the treating doctors know what was wrong with the patient when they die? But no, it turns out that autopsies often reveal the unexpected. Tests and images can be misleading, and treating doctors may have fixed ideas about what the matter is, based on first impressions or incomplete evidence.

Autopsy — auto opsis — literally means seeing for oneself. And the person doing the seeing should be clear-eyed — an independent specialist medical practitioner, with no emotional or professional vested interest in what happened to the patient. Autopsy studies typically show major discrepancies between actual findings and clinical diagnosis in a quarter to a third of cases. And in about a sixth of the cases, knowing about these hidden pathologies in life could have made differences to treatment that might have prevented death. In the UK in recent decades about one in six deaths have had an autopsy examination — a deceased person’s last gift to the living.

The results contribute to maintaining and improving care, verifying and upholding the standards of public health statistics, preventing diagnostic drift, and basically keeping medicine honest. Autopsies also allow sampling of tissues from more organs than is usually possible in life, facilitating molecular and genetic studies.

And nowhere are autopsy studies more important than in the study of new diseases and new treatments. The best example of this in recent years was acquired immune deficiency syndrome, or Aids. When Aids first appeared in the early 1980s no one knew what it was, how it affected victims, how to treat it, or what effects potential treatments had. Knowledge about all of these aspects was substantially acquired by study of tissue samples taken during life, and by autopsy examinations, with study of samples acquired after death. There was much uncertainty and worry at the time about how the disease was spread, and possible contagion to healthcare workers and to the general population. But work continued, and the results were of immense help in understanding the disease and developing treatments.

Looking at the current crisis, the response so far has been very different. We are still struggling to understand coronavirus. I can think of no time in my medical career when it has been more important to have accurate diagnosis of a disease, and understanding of precisely why patients have died of it. Yet very early on in the epidemic, rules surrounding death certification were changed — in ways that make the statistics unreliable. Guidance was issued which tends to reduce, rather than increase, referrals for autopsy.

Normally, two doctors are needed to certify a death, one of whom has been treating the patient or who knows them and has seen them recently. That has changed. For Covid-19 only, the certification can be made by a single doctor, and there is no requirement for them to have examined, or even met, the patient. A video-link consultation in the four weeks prior to death is now felt to be sufficient for death to be attributed to Covid-19. For deaths in care homes the situation is even more extraordinary. Care home providers, most of whom are not medically trained, may make a statement to the effect that a patient has died of Covid-19. In the words of the Office for National Statistics, this ‘may or may not correspond to a medical diagnosis or test result, or be reflected in the death certification’. From 29 March the numbers of ‘Covid deaths’ have included all cases where Covid-19 was simply mentioned on the death certificate — irrespective of positive testing and whether or not it may have been incidental to, or directly responsible for, death. From 29 April the numbers include the care home cases simply considered likely to be Covid-19.

So at a time when accurate death statistics are more important than ever, the rules have been changed in ways that make them less reliable than ever. In what proportion of Covid-19 ‘mentions’ was the disease actually present? And in how many cases, if actually present, was Covid-19 responsible for death? Despite what you may have understood from the daily briefings, the shocking truth is that we just don’t know. How many of the excess deaths during the epidemic are due to Covid-19, and how many are due to our societal responses of healthcare reorganisation, lockdown and social distancing? Again, we don’t know. Despite claims that they’re all due to Covid-19, there’s strong evidence that many, perhaps even a majority, are the result of our responses rather than the disease itself.

It might have been possible to check these proportions by examining the deceased. But at a time when autopsies could have played a major role in helping us understanding this disease, advice was given which made such examinations less likely than might otherwise have been the case. The Chief Coroner issued guidance on 26 March which seemed designed to keep Covid-19 cases out of the coronial system: ‘The aim of the system should be that every death from Covid-19 which does not in law require referral to the coroner should be dealt with via the [death certification] process.’ And even guidance produced by the Royal College of Pathologists in February stated: ‘In general, if a death is believed to be due to confirmed Covid-19 infection, there is unlikely to be any need for a post-mortem examination to be conducted and the Medical Certificate of Cause of Death should be issued.’

We need proper information to inform our responses to the virus, both clinical and societal. Instead, we have no idea how many of the deaths attributed to Covid-19 really were due to the disease. And we have no idea how many of the excess deaths were really due to Covid-19 or to the effects of lockdown. Officials should be releasing, as a matter of urgency, detailed information on the surge in deaths, both apparent Covid and non-Covid — particularly in care homes. How many are dying of Covid acquired in hospitals? Data presumably exists on this too, but is not released.

The first rule in a pandemic should be to ensure transparency of information. Without it, errors can go undiscovered — and lives can be lost. We will never be able to find out for sure what this disease was like, or what it did in the early stages of the crisis.

One of the unappreciated tragedies of this epidemic so far is the huge lost opportunity to understand Covid-19 better. We like to beat ourselves up for having the worst Covid death toll in Europe — but we will never know, because we decided not to count properly. In a country that has always prided itself on the quality of its facts and figures, the missing Covid-19 data is a national scandal.

-

Dr John Lee is a retired professor of pathology and a former NHS consultant pathologist.

https://app.spectator.co.uk/2020/05/27/ ... ntent.html
User avatar
alloneword
 
Posts: 902
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 9:19 am
Location: UK
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: COVID-19 Data & Docs

Postby JackRiddler » Thu May 28, 2020 8:38 am

JackRiddler » Wed May 27, 2020 9:25 pm wrote:.

The case for UNDERCOUNT.

Facebook link, sorry.
https://www.facebook.com/johnhaller/pos ... 1160085416

John Haller wrote:
Looking at health data on the CDC website after someone on reddit brought this up: Florida, which claims 2,252 Covid-19 deaths as of today, has seen over 5,000 deaths coded as pneumonia during the pandemic. In the last 7 years during the same time-frame, under 1,000 people on average die from pneumonia in Florida. Kentucky's official death toll is 391 while at the same time seeing over 900 more pneumonia deaths than expected. Also from the courier journal's article:

Indiana: 1,832 COVID-19 deaths; 2,149 pneumonia deaths (five-year average: 384)

Illinois: 4,856 COVID-19 deaths; 3,986 pneumonia deaths (five-year average: 782)

Tennessee: 336 COVID-19 deaths; 1,704 pneumonia deaths (five-year average: 611)

Ohio: 1,969 COVID-19 deaths; 2,327 pneumonia deaths (five-year average: 820)

Virginia: 1,208 COVID-19 deaths; 1,394 pneumonia deaths (five-year average: 451)

West Virginia: 72 COVID-19 deaths; 438 pneumonia deaths (five-year average: 117)

Indiana: 1,832 COVID-19 deaths; 2,149 pneumonia deaths (five-year average: 384)

Illinois: 4,856 COVID-19 deaths; 3,986 pneumonia deaths (five-year average: 782)

Tennessee: 336 COVID-19 deaths; 1,704 pneumonia deaths (five-year average: 611)

Ohio: 1,969 COVID-19 deaths; 2,327 pneumonia deaths (five-year average: 820)

Virginia: 1,208 COVID-19 deaths; 1,394 pneumonia deaths (five-year average: 451)

West Virginia: 72 COVID-19 deaths; 438 pneumonia deaths (five-year average: 117)

Source for Kentucky in addition to CDC data (note that it is paywalled): https://www.courier-journal.com/.../spi ... 245237002/

Here's the current CDC data for Covid-19 and Pneumonia by state: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/index.htm

Here's CDC Wonder for previous years:
https://wonder.cdc.gov/ucd-icd10.html

As an example set of parameters, here's the one the reddit user posted:
"Dataset: Underlying Cause of Death, 1999-2018"
"ICD-10 113 Cause List: Influenza (J09-J11); Pneumonia (J12-J18)"
"States: Florida (12)"
"Year/Month: 2013; 2014; 2015; 2016; 2017; 2018"
"Group By: Month; ICD-10 113 Cause List"
"Show Totals: Disabled"
"Show Zero Values: False"
"Show Suppressed: False"
"Calculate Rates Per: 100,000"
"Rate Options: Default intercensal populations for years 2001-2009 (except Infant Age Groups)"


a commenter wrote:I had been watching the numbers come out of Florida and Georgia for a few weeks and they did not seem to add up. Their governors were brazenly reopening against CDC guidelines and yet 2 weeks later they were reporting 3-10 deaths a day while other states had dozens if not hundreds. There was also evidence that Florida was intentionally manipulating/suppressing the true numbers. It seemed odd, but it looks like a Kentucky newspaper found the missing bodies. Deaths from pneumonia have skyrocketed. I have seen people on the right claim the numbers are inflated so hospitals can claim Covid benefits. I have seen people on the left claim numbers are suppressed so hospitals can bring back profitable elective surgeries. I don't know if this is a coordinated strategy to make numbers look artificially low so politicians can save face, but it looks shady. And it looks like they found the missing bodies, and there are a lot of them. Official cause of death: pneumonia. Covid or not, these numbers are staggering.

We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15983
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: COVID-19 Data & Docs

Postby Grizzly » Thu May 28, 2020 11:16 am

What Anthropology Teaches Us about COVID-19: A Conversation between Cultural Anthropologist, Dr. Alma Gottlieb and Physician-Anthropologist, Dr. Bjørn Westgard
http://publicanthropologist.cmi.no/2020/05/10/what-anthropology-teaches-us-about-covid-19-a-conversation-with-physician-anthropologist-dr-bjorn-westgard/
“The more we do to you, the less you seem to believe we are doing it.”

― Joseph mengele
User avatar
Grizzly
 
Posts: 4722
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 4:15 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: COVID-19 Data & Docs

Postby alloneword » Sat May 30, 2020 11:10 am

User avatar
alloneword
 
Posts: 902
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 9:19 am
Location: UK
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: COVID-19 Data & Docs

Postby alloneword » Sun May 31, 2020 5:25 pm

^^^ Interestingly, on 24th April, the Telegraph told us that:

Mr Cummings is understood to have attended several of the meetings, including the one on March 23


Yet if you look at the minutes purporting to be of that March 23rd SAGE meeting, his presence is not recorded.

Whoever prepared them for release was clear to note:

Redactions within this document have been made to remove any names of junior officials (not Senior Civil Service) or names of anyone for national security reasons. SAGE 18 includes redactions of 10 junior officials.


- that is: No redactions were made for 'national security reasons' in this instance (elsewhere, in other meetings, such redactions are noted).

Cummings is listed as attending the Thirteenth (5th March) and Twenty-fifth (14th April) meetings.

Everything after meeting Seventeen (18th March) is rendered as an image of the text, therefore making it impossible to search the text (or copy and paste from) - except for the first page of meeting Twenty-one. Bizarre. Generally, when they try to make it difficult to process the results of FOI requests, there worth looking at a bit harder. ;)

A more in-depth look at the contents of the files is available on this twitter thread: https://twitter.com/alberttrigg/status/ ... 6019680256
User avatar
alloneword
 
Posts: 902
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 9:19 am
Location: UK
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: COVID-19 Data & Docs

Postby alloneword » Wed Jun 03, 2020 2:35 pm

Governments and WHO changed Covid-19 policy based on suspect data from tiny US company

Surgisphere, whose employees appear to include a sci-fi writer and adult content model, provided database behind Lancet and New England Journal of Medicine hydroxychloroquine studies

The World Health Organization and a number of national governments have changed their Covid-19 policies and treatments on the basis of flawed data from a little-known US healthcare analytics company, also calling into question the integrity of key studies published in some of the world’s most prestigious medical journals.

A Guardian investigation can reveal the US-based company Surgisphere, whose handful of employees appear to include a science fiction writer and an adult-content model, has provided data for multiple studies on Covid-19 co-authored by its chief executive, but has so far failed to adequately explain its data or methodology.

Data it claims to have legitimately obtained from more than a thousand hospitals worldwide formed the basis of scientific articles that have led to changes in Covid-19 treatment policies in Latin American countries. It was also behind a decision by the WHO and research institutes around the world to halt trials of the controversial drug hydroxychloroquine. On Wednesday, the WHO announced those trials would now resume.

Two of the world’s leading medical journals – the Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine – published studies based on Surgisphere data. The studies were co-authored by the firm’s chief executive, Sapan Desai.

Late on Tuesday, after being approached by the Guardian, the Lancet released an “expression of concern” about its published study. The New England Journal of Medicine has also issued a similar notice.

An independent audit of the provenance and validity of the data has now been commissioned by the authors not affiliated with Surgisphere because of “concerns that have been raised about the reliability of the database”.


The Guardian’s investigation has found:

A search of publicly available material suggests several of Surgisphere’s employees have little or no data or scientific background. An employee listed as a science editor appears to be a science fiction author and fantasy artist. Another employee listed as a marketing executive is an adult model and events hostess.

The company’s LinkedIn page has fewer than 100 followers and last week listed just six employees. This was changed to three employees as of Wednesday.

While Surgisphere claims to run one of the largest and fastest hospital databases in the world, it has almost no online presence. Its Twitter handle has fewer than 170 followers, with no posts between October 2017 and March 2020.

Until Monday, the “get in touch” link on Surgisphere’s homepage redirected to a WordPress template for a cryptocurrency website, raising questions about how hospitals could easily contact the company to join its database.

Desai has been named in three medical malpractice suits, unrelated to the Surgisphere database. In an interview with the Scientist, Desai previously described the allegations as “unfounded”.

In 2008, Desai launched a crowdfunding campaign on the website indiegogo promoting a wearable “next generation human augmentation device that can help you achieve what you never thought was possible”. The device never came to fruition.

Desai’s Wikipedia page has been deleted following questions about Surgisphere and his history.


At a press conference on Wednesday, the WHO announced it would now resume its global trial of hydroxychloroquine, after its data safety monitoring committee found there was no increased risk of death for Covid patients taking it.

Director General Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said that all parts of the Solidarity trial, which is investigating a number of potential drug treatments, will go ahead. So far, more than 3500 patients have been recruited to the trial in 35 countries.

“On the basis of the available mortality data, the members of the committee recommended that there are no reasons to modify the trial protocol,” said Tedros. “The executive group received this recommendation and endorsed continuation of all arms of the Solidarity Trial, including hydroxychloroquine.”


Doubts over Lancet study

Questions surrounding Surgisphere have been growing in the medical community for the past few weeks.

On 22 May the Lancet published a blockbuster peer-reviewed study which found the antimalarial drug hydroxychloroquine, which has been promoted by Donald Trump, was associated with a higher mortality rate in Covid-19 patients and increased heart problems.

Trump, much to the dismay of the scientific community, had publicly touted hydroxychloroquine as a “wonder drug” despite no evidence of its efficacy for treating Covid-19.

The Lancet study, which listed Desai as one of the co-authors, claimed to have analysed Surgisphere data collected from nearly 15,000 patients with Covid-19, admitted to 1,200 hospitals around the world, who received hydroxychloroquine alone or in combination with antibiotics.

The negative findings made global news and prompted the WHO to halt the hydroxychloroquine arm of its global trials.

But only days later Guardian Australia revealed glaring errors in the Australian data included in the study. The study said researchers gained access to data through Surgisphere from five hospitals, recording 600 Australian Covid-19 patients and 73 Australian deaths as of 21 April.

But data from Johns Hopkins University shows only 67 deaths from Covid-19 had been recorded in Australia by 21 April. The number did not rise to 73 until 23 April. Desai said one Asian hospital had accidentally been included in the Australian data, leading to an overestimate of cases there. The Lancet published a small retraction related to the Australian findings after the Guardian’s story, its only amendment to the study so far.

The Guardian has since contacted five hospitals in Melbourne and two in Sydney, whose cooperation would have been essential for the Australian patient numbers in the database to be reached. All denied any role in such a database, and said they had never heard of Surgisphere. Desai did not respond to requests to comment on their statements.

Another study using the Surgisphere database, again co-authored by Desai, found the anti-parasite drug ivermectin reduced death rates in severely ill Covid-19 patients. It was published online in the Social Science Research Network e-library, before peer-review or publication in a medical journal, and prompted the Peruvian government to add ivermectin to its national Covid-19 therapeutic guidelines.

The New England Journal of Medicine also published a peer-reviewed Desai study based on Surgisphere data, which included data from Covid-19 patients from 169 hospitals in 11 countries in Asia, Europe and North America. It found common heart medications known as angiotensin-converting–enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin-receptor blockers were not associated with a higher risk of harm in Covid-19 patients.

[cont...]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... hloroquine
User avatar
alloneword
 
Posts: 902
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 9:19 am
Location: UK
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to Data & Research Compilations

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests