More caveats about the COVID-OUT of Metformin for #longСОVΙD. The benefits of Metformin were diminished by vaccination but it was only taken for 14 days (“500 mg on day one, 500 mg twice daily on days 2–5, then 500 mg in the morning and 1000 mg in the evening up to day 14”).🧵
There are plenty of studies of viral persistence, showing the ongoing presence of replication-competent virus for many months after the acute illness. In chronic hepatitis C, we treat with antivirals not for 2 weeks but for 12 to 24 weeks!
The BMJ editorial also states, “Other arms of the trial looked at…fluvoxamine and found that [it did not decrease] the risk of long СОVΙD.” That should say, “looked at a subclinical dose of Fluvoxamine” and found it didn’t work. A half-dose of Metformin probably wouldn’t either.
By comparison to the homeopathic dose of Fluvoxamine, 1500 mg/day of Metformin is quite a decent dose of the drug and they uptitrate to this target dose much faster than is typical when treating diabetes with this drug.
The Lancet study clearly states this: “For fluvoxamine, placebo-controlled trials showed no clinical effect with 50 mg twice daily (ACTIV-6) and clinical benefit with 100 mg twice daily (TOGETHER trial).” Meta-analyses agree with this.
Unsurprisingly, the Lancet COVID-OUT authors also state: “The fluvoxamine group was closed on Jan 7, 2022, by the independent data and safety monitoring board.” It was not ethical to continue trialling a proven homeopathic drug dose. Whoops. thelancet.com/journals/lanin…
I'm old enough to recall the controversy around AZT in HIV and whether it did anything. There was much debate, but then a meta-analysis showed a small survival benefit. It was tiny, but it was still a triumph because it was the first time an antiretroviral had been proven to work
Metformin monotherapy reminds me of AZT. On its own, the antiviral effect is minor but the magic only happened in antiretroviral therapy when they started to combine drugs with different mechanisms.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
None of this is original. Anti-contagionists opposed us drinking cholera-free clean water and pulled similar crazy stunts back in the 19th century to gaslight us. Once cleanwater systems were in place, they found it had other health benefits beyond cholera.
Pettenkofer ordered Vibrio cholerae culture from Robert Koch’s lab and proceeded to drink it before witnesses to “prove” it was not a contagious germ-spread disease. Vinay is our modern Pettenkofer.
Pettenkofer’s views were favoured among those who favour a fatalistic laissez-faire view that regarded intervention to clean our drinking water as futile and harmful. They argued that intervention was worse than the disease because it induced “panic”.
A review of the @readimask N95. Unless you consistently pass a fit test in it, as many do, I recommend taking care with using the Readimask as your standard everyday respirator, but hands up everyone who goes to the hairdresser.🙋♀️🙋♂️
The @readimask is metal-free, making it ideal for MRI scans. Other respirators with aluminium nose-wires may be MRI-safe, but the metal degrades the image quality of brain scans and should be avoided. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/P…
You can wear them as a nasal respirator at the dentist as well. I don't know how effective it is but it's not like there's any alternative. I suggest the size S ones for this purpose.
You could argue that there are no cluster RCTs randomising districts to fire station vs no fire station. Firefighting is, you could proclaim, pointless, as it has never been “proven” by RCT to reduce the adverse impacts of fires. Disband the fire service now! 🧵
And when the firefighters do come rushing to put out the fire, guess what they will be wearing? Firefighting respiratory protective equipment. Not tested by RCT.
This article takes a step in the right direction by admitting RCTs are not a universal scientific method suitable for every question, e.g. “Is the earth round?” But clinicians need to go even further beyond their training to study broader questions in the philosophy of science.🧵
We must look at applied physics and engineering to ask ourselves why medicine failed to develop normatively as a science by creating models with high predictive power. We know that models like the rotundity of the earth and the heliocentric solar system work without RCTs.
We know that hydrogen bombs work as a weapon of mass destruction without ever being lethally live-tested on a human population vs placebo.
Why do we think predictions based on physics are valid when none of it has been lethally live-tested in
RCTs on people?
I think these Tour de France safety protocols can be improved. They are too 2020. I'd get all riders and support staff fit-tested by QNFT to FFP2/3+ RPE. I'd allow autograph signing with riders wearing fitted RPE outdoors. 🧵 reuters.com/sports/cycling…
“Do not get too close to the spectators—social distancing, no selfies, no autographs.” This is archaic stuff. It’s pointless if the RPE is of sufficiently high grade and it is outdoors. If you think FFP2/3s aren’t enough, move them to fit tested P3/P100 elastomerics.
I'd have rules about all training rides having to be done in fit-tested valved FFP2/3s. Considers mandating test-fitted valved FFP2/3s on stages involving pelotons, but there is little research on the impact of valved RPE upon performance. No RPE is needed for time trials.
The feedback to this thread has been overwhelmingly positive but some just wanted to shoot the messenger. A thought. I have never heard of a hospital in AU that purchases earloop respirators for their staff, even though AU (unlike NIOSH) certifies earloop respirators. Why?
This excerpt of an interview with 3M division vice-president Nikki McCullough gives us a hint. Companies that brought earloop respirators like KN95 and KF94s find they have a low fit test pass rate (~8-13%). They end up with a lot of unusable inventory.
Professional fit testers also do not like testing models with large failure rates (87-92%). Like the @H_S_E, they consider it a waste of their time, so discourage institutions from buying earloops. Can you blame fit testers for refusing to test them?