Discover and read the best of Twitter Threads about #HydroxychloroquineWorks

Most recents (3)

#HydroxychloroquineWorks started trending in the USA yesterday (July 27, 2020) at ~ 8:30 PM PDT. The likely cause: @realDonaldTrump retweeted a two-day old tweet containing the hashtag from an account with the catchy name of @biobiobiobior 11 minutes earlier.

cc: @ZellaQuixote
The @biobiobiobior account was created in 2009, but has almost no tweets prior to March 2020, changed names at least once, and quite possibly deleted older tweets. Most content is in French (the tweet Trump retweeted is an exception).
Although some folks are night owls and any Twitter user could be physically located anywhere, @biobiobiobior's schedule looks more normal for France (and a some other places in Europe/Africa) than North America, which mirrors the account's language use.
Read 7 tweets
Latest data from SMS hospital, #Jaipur stated #HydroxyChloroquine was given in ~4300 healthcare workers as prophylaxis. Only 45 contracted #COVID19 and got recovered later. #Hydroxychloroquineworks
health.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/diagnosti…
SMS hospital #Jaipur has been declared non-COVID hospital on June 1. Before that the hospital has emerged as a role model for #Rajasthan in managing #COVID19.
Continuous attack is going on to discredit the drug since the beginning. So much thankful to our real Physicians who did not lose hope on #hydroxychloriquine an it's efficacy as a prophylaxis. @MsAnaMcCarthy largest data from India on HCQ prophylaxis is out. Take a look.
Read 6 tweets
❌ Our meta-analysis including 15,081 patients (16 studies) does NOT support the use of hydroxychloroquine with or without azithromycin to reduce COVID-19 mortality in hospitalized patients

➡️ medrxiv.org/content/10.110…

#Hydroxychloroquine #COVID19 #Hydroxychloroquineworks
Hydroxychloroquine was not significantly associated with mortality risk (RR=0.82 [0.62-1.07], I²=82, Pheterogeneity<0.01, n=15)) within hospitalized patients, nor in association with azithromycin (RR=1.33 (95% CI: 0.92-1.92, n=6))
nor in the numerous subgroup analysis by study design, median age population, published studies (vs unpublished articles), level of bias risk
Read 9 tweets

Related hashtags

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3.00/month or $30.00/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!