Hydroxychloroquine Impact on Death
This is another attempt to raise awareness of how statistics can be misinterpreted and even intentionally misused. Seldom trust the media when it reports such things.
We heard about the growing evidence that people are more likely to die if they take hydroxychloroquine. One such news headline extracted one of Trump’s many words of indiscretion, namely, “what do you have to lose” with the nutgraf answering, “with your life”.
Such sends a powerful message. The problem is it is a deception because it is an example of the Simson Effect, which is when statistics flip when all the data of the study is taken into consideration.
A famous example one will find in statistics textbooks is comparing the mortality rate of patients transported by ambulance vs. helicopter. It showed that patients were several times more likely to die if transported by helicopter. Is it the jolting around, or atmospheric pressure change, or something else?
When they dug into the data and accounted for the level of severity of medical condition, they only transported the patients that are the most serious. When they accounted for severity, the results flipped. Transporting by helicopter vs. ambulance increased your chance of survival, the opposite of the initial results.
Likewise is the case for COVID-19 and hydroxychloroquine. The initial evidence suggested patients were more than twice as likely to die if given hydroxychloroquine. But the patients who were administered hydroxychloroquine were the most critical.
When they adjusted for the level of criticality, the final results revealed hydroxychloroquine seemed to have no impact on mortality. More patients didn’t live vs. die because the were administered hydroxychloroquine.
Here’s why I was skeptical. Yes, hydroxychloroquine has been used extensively for decades, and we already have a large database of side effects and patient medical conditions for which it shouldn’t be administered. However, the individual who suggested it’s use was a medical doctor. He was explaining how it might work but that was a really a crapshoot. The reason why I was skeptical is he is only a medical doctor.
If he was a Ph.D. who specialized in the relevant areas of the human body as a post-doc researcher who has published works regarding the purported systemic and molecular processes involved, then he is the expert. Medical doctors don’t go through such training. They are experts at the practice of medicine. The Ph.D.s that bring them medicine are the experts of medicine. Also, MDs get to experience being treated as an expert without having to always prove it.
Those who achieved a relevant Ph.D. and have accomplished post-doc research repeatedly proved they are the expert, initially upon their dissertation being accepted and in published research later.
The study below suggests hydroxychloroquine may not be effective in treating critically ill COVID-19 patients, and so shouldn’t be administered (though it doesn't seem to make it worse either).
I agree with it. It won’t help critical patients any more than consuming several fresh garlic cloves a day. But the latter has been shown to have a positive impact if consumed early in the sickness or otherwise as a staple.
Now let’s see if clinical trials reveal any effectiveness if hydroxychloroquine is administered to less sick patients.
Yes, Trump jumped the gun I think on hydroxychloroquine, but the good news is it is not a new drug. We know everything about it (except it’s statistical impact on COVID-19 prognoses). But he is Trump, what can I say? (I pay attention to action not words - sick of Washington’s words, ad nauseam!)
Comments
Post a Comment