Covid 19 thread

[Dieter the Brock]

Redirect Notice

There is no cure for my Demon Sperm

 

[dieterbrock]

Dude
You need to get off the social media.

Hilarious how you are all ranting about suppression as if it's a source for valid news.

I like how you ask what the motive is for "these platforms" like you don't know. Come on man. You know as well as I do what their motivation is. It's fucking money.

Stop tuning in and caring about what those 3 people in silicon valley are doing and maybe you'll be part of the solution instead of letting the hammer come down on your head.

Social media "platforms" have single-handedly killed the arts, the news, civility, politics, just to name a few vital sectors that have come crashing down in the age of social media - industries that once helped us all live the life you now pine for. So to see you claim ignorance over their motives is not only laughable but plain ludicrous.

the worst thing ever to happen to this planet (since I'm not in the same neighborhood or continent) is Grandma and her fucking cellphone.

Stop complaining about bullshit as if your perplexion matters one bit to those freaks .

You know where the information is. Go find it. In the meantime put down the Facebook -- there are better ways to get pics of your grandkids

You're missing his point, where you are actually in agreement.
He isnt on social media for news, but unfortunately, the rest of the world is.

 

[Dieter the Brock]

You're missing his point, where you are actually in agreement.
He isnt on social media for news, but unfortunately, the rest of the world is.

I will reread what he’s saying - maybe I miss it

 

[thirteen28]

First, those doctors don’t represent thousands of others, and there are not thousands and thousands of doctors using it to treat Covid.

Quote where I said "represents". I said there are thousands and thousands of doctors who have promoted the use of HCQ as a treatment. Which has been true for some time:

This Drug Is Voted As the Most Effective Coronavirus Cure Possible By 6,000 Doctors Worldwide

The majority of 6,200 doctors from 30 countries said the malaria drug was the most effective against coronavirus.

www.sciencetimes.com

It was organized by political groups, and had politicians standing by them, and it was broadcast all over political pages and retweeted by politicians to drive a narrative.

We won't have much to argue about if you want to allege that a lot of the narrative is politically driven. I strongly suspect we'll come at it from opposing points of view, but we won't be having that debate in this forum.

And finally, one of the doctors is claiming it’s a cure.

"Cure" or "treatment"? I didn't hear "cure", maybe I missed it, but if so, that's at best inarticulate phrasing. I don't think I've heard any doctors saying it's a "cure" in the scientific sense so much as a "treatment".

And it has been used successfully as a treatment in many cases. The success has been getting the drug administered early after diagnosis (along with zinc), which prevents the virus from replicating. The quoted doctor has over 350 successful cases treating it, and if she way lying it would be easily disprovable.

As for the meta-debate here, the best counter to what one believes to be incorrect or "misinformation" is more information, not suppression. Furthermore, the instant "science" relies on suppression of information instead of vigorous debate, it is no longer science.

Nobody who alleges to believe in science should have any problem with a particular scientific viewpoint being challenged.

 

[thirteen28]

Trump’s New COVID Doctor Says Sex With Demons Makes You Sick

The president is pushing the coronavirus theories of a Houston doctor who also says sexual visitations by demons and alien DNA are at the root of Americans’ common health concerns.

www.thedailybeast.com

Assuming this isn't just some smear operation, all I can ask is ... and??

I mean Tom Cruise and John Travolta believe that Xenu flew a bunch of people across the universe in a Boeing 707 and dumped them into a volcano on earth. Doesn't mean they are wrong with regard to acting in movies.

 

[thirteen28]

I will reread what he’s saying - maybe I miss it

Here's the subtext, Dieter - why are people so goddamn threatened by this information, particularly if they think it is obviously bullshit? For example, if I say something that is obviously bullshit like "Jimmy Garrappolo is a HOF QB", are you as a Rams fan going to feel threatened by that?

Anticipating that others (not you) will seize on the "medical information" aspect of the above, if I say "smoking three packs a day of Marlboro Reds will cause no harm to your cardiovascular system", who is going to feel threatened by that?

Thus, why should anyone feel threatened by information regarding a treatment of a particular virus that has caused a pandemic? It's not as if you can just go out and buy HCQ off of a shelf and take it, it has to be prescribed by a doctor. And if doctors are prescribing it and successfully treating patients with the drug, why is there just a zeal to suppress that information?

 

[OldSchool]

Here's the subtext, Dieter - why are people so goddamn threatened by this information, particularly if they think it is obviously bullshit? For example, if I say something that is obviously bullshit like "Jimmy Garrappolo is a HOF QB", are you as a Rams fan going to feel threatened by that?

Anticipating that others (not you) will seize on the "medical information" aspect of the above, if I say "smoking three packs a day of Marlboro Reds will cause no harm to your cardiovascular system", who is going to feel threatened by that?

Thus, why should anyone feel threatened by information regarding a treatment of a particular virus that has caused a pandemic? It's not as if you can just go out and buy HCQ off of a shelf and take it, it has to be prescribed by a doctor. And if doctors are prescribing it and successfully treating patients with the drug, why is there just a zeal to suppress that information?

You have to look at who’s attempting to suppress the info. Is it politicians? How much do they and their parties receive in donations to the drug makers? Is it social media? How much advertising Revenue do they get? Its really easy to see why it’s being suppressed, follow the money.

 

[den-the-coach]

You got it off your chest.
I assume you're done with that, yeah?
We can all (you, me, Loyal) leave that stuff outta this.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sl5dch0hu_s

 

[thirteen28]

You have to look at who’s attempting to suppress the info. Is it politicians? How much do they and their parties receive in donations to the drug makers? Is it social media? How much advertising Revenue do they get? Its really easy to see why it’s being suppressed, follow the money.

Bingo.

And that also means that other considerations are being prioritized over seeing that people get treated and that the pandemic is ended sooner rather than later.

 

[bluecoconuts]

Quote where I said "represents". I said there are thousands and thousands of doctors who have promoted the use of HCQ as a treatment. Which has been true for some time:

An article from April that’s working off old, outdated, and pre-testing isn’t very convincing man. They did studies after this narrative came out and found that it wasn’t effective, which is why recent articles dispute that.

We won't have much to argue about if you want to allege that a lot of the narrative is politically driven. I strongly suspect we'll come at it from opposing points of view, but we won't be having that debate in this forum.

I’m not suggesting anything, I’m saying the event was hosted and paid for by a political group and hosted on political social media corners. That is a fact. I did not state who it was for a reason, people can look that up for themselves. It is public record though. If a political group hosts an event, that should be something people are aware of, because political groups, especially those that are on the more extreme end of the spectrum, rarely do things without a narrative goal in mind. There is no need for debate because what side does what means nothing in this case. The only thing that we need to know is that a political group hosted the event. Simple fact.

"Cure" or "treatment"? I didn't hear "cure", maybe I missed it, but if so, that's at best inarticulate phrasing. I don't think I've heard any doctors saying it's a "cure" in the scientific sense so much as a "treatment".

And it has been used successfully as a treatment in many cases. The success has been getting the drug administered early after diagnosis (along with zinc), which prevents the virus from replicating. The quoted doctor has over 350 successful cases treating it, and if she way lying it would be easily disprovable.

As for the meta-debate here, the best counter to what one believes to be incorrect or "misinformation" is more information, not suppression. Furthermore, the instant "science" relies on suppression of information instead of vigorous debate, it is no longer science.

Nobody who alleges to believe in science should have any problem with a particular scientific viewpoint being challenged.

I believe she says cure, but regardless, even treatment is misinformation. It’s not being used as a treatment because outside of extremely rare circumstances it doesn’t work, and the reverse is that for the majority of those who it wouldn’t work for it increases their risk. A 17 year old cancer surviving girl died when her parents tried to treat her with HCQ. To suggest that people should attempt to turn to that, which is what these videos are doing, is not only a false treatment, it’s actually dangerous. Especially outside of a hospital. Those who have been treated with it have to be constantly monitored by doctors and nurses.

With all that being said, let’s focus on the doctor herself. As you said, if she’s saying a falsehood, that’s easily disproved if someone were to do the work. I don’t have that ability right now, so let’s examine her closer.

This doctor you’re quoting has also gone on record to say that alien DNA is being used in treatments, scientists are making a “vaccine” that makes people reject religion, and most gynecological problems like cysts and endometriosis are actually caused by people having sex with demons and witches in their dreams. She also believes that reptilians run the government. Yes, I know you have attempted to hand wave that away, but this isn’t acting. You cannot say you’re a medical doctor who’s medical opinion should be respected, and then make outrageous medical claims

So I’m gonna have a bit of a hard time taking anything she says without a massive grain of salt here. My degree and experience wouldn’t suddenly give a statement like the moon is made of cheese some actual legitimacy, it would just call into question my research into planetary evolution and predicting planetary habitability based on previous, now dead, regional stars. Totally unrelated, yes, but that’s what happens when you make bullshit statements.

I do believe in science, I do this every day for a living. That means it takes peer reviewed, studied, testable, repeatable, and provable results to get me to clamp down on a stance, and that stance can always change if the science changes.

You provide things that fit into those criteria and you’ll make a believer out of me.

Putting someone in a white coat before a mic to repeat talking points? Nah, that won’t do it. I can do that, I have a lab coat, and I’m a doctor who works at a research university that is one of the leading Covid research centers in the United S

Stick a microphone in front of me, call me doctor and point out the university I work for and what they do regarding Covid. Nothing is false, but does that mean I’m speaking from a place of knowledge? Of course not, but people would continue to post what Dr. Coconuts said, until someone pointed out that I’m just some asshole with an advanced degree in physics.

Peer reviewed studied, that’s what’ll get me. And so far those studies say ol demon jizz ain’t right.

 

[Ramhusker]

Personally, I don’t agree with the conspiracy theories.

A little more discipline and simply following the science, like most countries around the world have done, and the U.S. would be in much better shape.

Yes, the other countries are using Hydroxy. That's a fact.

 

[Allen2McVay]

I realize this thread can create some angst and trigger emotions that are challenging.

It may help some to take a break for a little harmless fun, and visit the Boobies thread also on Off Topic.

Now, I do request a little discretion and courtesy from anyone who views a lovely blonde on page 78 who is posing in front of a mirror (picture posted by Old School).

As I view this woman to be my future wife, please show some respect. Now, if you will excuse me, I need to figure out what to do about my current wife.

 

[thirteen28]

You get credit for at least being willing to debate the point instead of instantly shutting it down and cutting off the flow of information.

An article from April that’s working off old, outdated, and pre-testing isn’t very convincing man. They did studies after this narrative came out and found that it wasn’t effective, which is why recent articles dispute that.

I could easily, through a search engine, come up with numerous articles at this point - both anecdotal and statistical - showing that many people indeed have been treated successfully for Covid using HCQ. It may not work for everybody and it may not work in every situation (we know it doesn't), but that is not at all the same as the conclusive statement that "it wasn't effective." In fact, it only takes one case of it being effective to disprove that, and the number of cases where it has been effective is far greater than one.

The only study I recall saying it wasn't effective was the Lancet study which had to be retracted after they had to admit their methods were shit and the study was not reproducible.

A 17 year old cancer surviving girl died when her parents tried to treat her with HCQ. To suggest that people should attempt to turn to that, which is what these videos are doing, is not only a false treatment, it’s actually dangerous.

No, it's not. I anticipated this above but you missed it. It's not an OTC drug, it has to be prescribed and administered under a doctor's supervision. A patient can ask for HCQ, but that doesn't mean they'll get it.

There is no harm in a Covid-positive patient asking for it, the doctor can make the decision whether they get it based on the patient's health, medical history, and so on. There are plenty of safeguards in place, and there are plenty of people who have benefited from using HCQ, not just for Covid but for other reasons as well. Adding HCQ to the list of possible remedies, far from being dangerous, is just another piece of information available to those who get a positive diagnosis to explore with medical supervision. If their doctor makes a determination that it is safe for them to use, there is really no reason not to try.

Especially outside of a hospital. Those who have been treated with it have to be constantly monitored by doctors and nurses.

Again, it's a prescription medication. That's kind of the definition of a prescription medication, i.e. monitoring by doctors/nurses. The level of monitoring may vary, but there is always some. And being monitored by doctors and nurses is preferable to being hospitalized or dying.

With all that being said, let’s focus on the doctor herself. As you said, if she’s saying a falsehood, that’s easily disproved if someone were to do the work. I don’t have that ability right now, so let’s examine her closer.

This is just a big red herring. I don't know whether she said those thing or not, but, even if she did and as wacky as they are, they are, they are completely orthogonal to the issue with HCQ. It's just someone yelling "squirrel!!"

She has claimed to have treated around 350 patients with HCQ, successfully. That's easily verifiable information if someone wants to dig for it, which also means it's easily falsifiable. If she's lying about that, then someone should present the evidence, as that would be a far more effective means of discrediting her than some completely unrelated stuff about wacky statements she has made.

The fact that they are choosing the "wacky statements" route instead of the "direct relevant evidence" route of discrediting her is telling. And it says nothing about the other doctors standing with her that have also claimed to have successfully treated Covid patients with HCQ. What's your answer to them?

 

[thirteen28]

Peer reviewed studied, that’s what’ll get me.

Experts Explain: The case for using hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) to treat Covid-19

Hydroxychloroquine is obviously not a panacea for severe cases of Covid-19. Given early, it helps reduce mortality by about half, compared to those not given the drug.

indianexpress.com

Money quote:

"A study on more than 2,500 patients in six units under the Henry Ford Hospitals group in Detroit, Michigan, USA, peer-reviewed, accepted and ready for publication in the International Journal of Infectious Diseases, has found good evidence that HCQ reduces Covid-19 mortality significantly." (Emphasis added by me).

 

[Ramhusker]

Experts Explain: The case for using hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) to treat Covid-19

Hydroxychloroquine is obviously not a panacea for severe cases of Covid-19. Given early, it helps reduce mortality by about half, compared to those not given the drug.

indianexpress.com

Money quote:

"A study on more than 2,500 patients in six units under the Henry Ford Hospitals group in Detroit, Michigan, USA, peer-reviewed, accepted and ready for publication in the International Journal of Infectious Diseases, has found good evidence that HCQ reduces Covid-19 mortality significantly." (Emphasis added by me).

Ironically, some fella named Fauci wrote a paper on it in 2015 calling it a "cure" for Corona viruses. What boils my blood is there are pharmacies refusing to fill a doctor's script for it for their patients. What the hell is that about? I'm afraid I might become violent at that point.

 

[-X-]

[ARTICLE]

Center for Disease Control Director Robert Redfield testified in a Buck Institute webinar that suicides and drug overdoses have surpassed the death rate for COVID-19. Redfield argued that lockdowns and lack of public schooling constituted a disproportionally negative impact on young peoples’ mental health.

“We’re seeing, sadly, far greater suicides now than we are deaths from COVID. We’re seeing far greater deaths from drug overdose that are above excess that we had as background than we are seeing the deaths from COVID,” he said.

 

[thirteen28]

[ARTICLE]

Center for Disease Control Director Robert Redfield testified in a Buck Institute webinar that suicides and drug overdoses have surpassed the death rate for COVID-19. Redfield argued that lockdowns and lack of public schooling constituted a disproportionally negative impact on young peoples’ mental health.

“We’re seeing, sadly, far greater suicides now than we are deaths from COVID. We’re seeing far greater deaths from drug overdose that are above excess that we had as background than we are seeing the deaths from COVID,” he said.

Yep.

The lockdowns were never just a matter of saving lives vs. costing lives despite being framed that way by many. It was a matter of lives vs. lives. People who die of suicide or drug overdose are just as dead as those that die of Covid, and the former causes are not nearly as discriminating with regard to age and other conditions as the latter.

 

[Dieter the Brock]

Here's the subtext, Dieter - why are people so goddamn threatened by this information, particularly if they think it is obviously bullshit? For example, if I say something that is obviously bullshit like "Jimmy Garrappolo is a HOF QB", are you as a Rams fan going to feel threatened by that?

Anticipating that others (not you) will seize on the "medical information" aspect of the above, if I say "smoking three packs a day of Marlboro Reds will cause no harm to your cardiovascular system", who is going to feel threatened by that?

Thus, why should anyone feel threatened by information regarding a treatment of a particular virus that has caused a pandemic? It's not as if you can just go out and buy HCQ off of a shelf and take it, it has to be prescribed by a doctor. And if doctors are prescribing it and successfully treating patients with the drug, why is there just a zeal to suppress that information?

Thanks for this, but


The HQC argument isn't really what I am commenting on.
My comment is in regards to what you said I needed to ask myself:

You really have to ask yourself why do they (Twitter and Facebook) want to aggressively censor this information and why there has been so much pushback when there are literally thousands of doctors around the world using it and touting it as an effective treatment.

Again, I don't have to ask myself that question because you already know the answer.

We all know why Twitter and Facebook censor HQC info, it's because censoring HQC info is making them cash. Pure and simple.
Just the same way those platforms have always made their money, by controlling the flow of information through their platforms. It's super easy to know this "why."

If your question was rhetorical then my apologies
But it looks like you are actually bewildered as to why these "platforms" are manipulating information

The above still holds for how you rephrased the same question below:

why should anyone feel threatened by information regarding the treatment of a particular virus that has caused a pandemic? It's not as if you can just go out and buy HCQ off of a shelf and take it, it has to be prescribed by a doctor. And if doctors are prescribing it and successfully treating patients with the drug, why is there just a zeal to suppress that information?

Your question as to "why does anyone feel threatened by information" isn't the right question to be asking -- I mean nobody at Facebook or Twitter are threatened by information. They are in the business of controlling it and selling it to the highest bidder. They are laughing right now. Any zeal to suppress is motivated by a zeal for cold hard cash.

It's not these freaks who are threatened - like this freak here on his surfboard - they aren't worried about anything you are

 

[thirteen28]

Thanks for this, but


The HQC argument isn't really what I am commenting on.
My comment is in regards to what you said I needed to ask myself:

You really have to ask yourself why do they (Twitter and Facebook) want to aggressively censor this information and why there has been so much pushback when there are literally thousands of doctors around the world using it and touting it as an effective treatment.

Again, I don't have to ask myself that question because you already know the answer.

We all know why Twitter and Facebook censor HQC info, it's because censoring HQC info is making them cash. Pure and simple.
Just the same way those platforms have always made their money, by controlling the flow of information through their platforms. It's super easy to know this "why."

If your question was rhetorical then my apologies
But it looks like you are actually bewildered as to why these "platforms" are manipulating information

The above still holds for how you rephrased the same question below:

why should anyone feel threatened by information regarding the treatment of a particular virus that has caused a pandemic? It's not as if you can just go out and buy HCQ off of a shelf and take it, it has to be prescribed by a doctor. And if doctors are prescribing it and successfully treating patients with the drug, why is there just a zeal to suppress that information?

Your question as to "why does anyone feel threatened by information" isn't the right question to be asking -- I mean nobody at Facebook or Twitter are threatened by information. They are in the business of controlling it and selling it to the highest bidder. They are laughing right now. Any zeal to suppress is motivated by a zeal for cold hard cash.

It's not these freaks who are threatened - like this freak here on his surfboard - they aren't worried about anything you are

View attachment 37813

Well, thanks for your reply, but I would argue they feel threatened that they will lose control of the narrative they want to push and that they have so skillfully controlled for so long and will continue to control unless enough people ask questions regarding the actions that they are taking in this situation.

Either way, it (their motivation) sure as fuck isn't about science, and it sure as fuck isn't about saving lives or ending the pandemic and getting things back to something closer to normal.

It's always fair to ask why entities that have a large amount of control over the flow of information would want to suppress it, rather than see a vigorous debate over it.

 

[bluecoconuts]

I could easily, through a search engine, come up with numerous articles at this point - both anecdotal and statistical - showing that many people indeed have been treated successfully for Covid using HCQ. It may not work for everybody and it may not work in every situation (we know it doesn't), but that is not at all the same as the conclusive statement that "it wasn't effective." In fact, it only takes one case of it being effective to disprove that, and the number of cases where it has been effective is far greater than one.

The only study I recall saying it wasn't effective was the Lancet study which had to be retracted after they had to admit their methods were shit and the study was not reproducible.

So here's gonna be the problem with that, route. I'm not interested at all in what an article is talking about. Articles are written by people who don't know shit about science, and thus very often are misleading what is actually being said. This is a common issue within astrophysics where every new discovery is a crazy cool planet with aliens or alien technology, oh it's a structure that's super big and has to be man made, blah blah blah.. Except that's not what the research paper actually says. I'll get back to this in a moment with another example.

No, it's not. I anticipated this above but you missed it. It's not an OTC drug, it has to be prescribed and administered under a doctor's supervision. A patient can ask for HCQ, but that doesn't mean they'll get it.

There is no harm in a Covid-positive patient asking for it, the doctor can make the decision whether they get it based on the patient's health, medical history, and so on. There are plenty of safeguards in place, and there are plenty of people who have benefited from using HCQ, not just for Covid but for other reasons as well. Adding HCQ to the list of possible remedies, far from being dangerous, is just another piece of information available to those who get a positive diagnosis to explore with medical supervision. If their doctor makes a determination that it is safe for them to use, there is really no reason not to try.

It's not hard to get it, which is probably a factor in terms of how that family got their hands on it.

17-year-old girl dies of coronavirus after parents treated her with unapproved drugs

Carsyn Leigh Davis attended a church gathering of 100 kids almost two weeks prior to her death.

www.today.com

I am of the opinion there is great harm in a patient asking a doctor for a specific drug. The American drug economy is a really weird thing, which is why as far as I know, this is the only country that advertises for drugs, and has young hot women in tight skirts pushing brands on doctors to give to their patients. Patients should be treated with medicine as their doctor determines is best of them, not because some jagoff on TV told them about it while some people danced in the background.

Again, it's a prescription medication. That's kind of the definition of a prescription medication, i.e. monitoring by doctors/nurses. The level of monitoring may vary, but there is always some. And being monitored by doctors and nurses is preferable to being hospitalized or dying.

Prescription drug abuse is nothing new.

This is just a big red herring. I don't know whether she said those thing or not, but, even if she did and as wacky as they are, they are, they are completely orthogonal to the issue with HCQ. It's just someone yelling "squirrel!!"

She has claimed to have treated around 350 patients with HCQ, successfully. That's easily verifiable information if someone wants to dig for it, which also means it's easily falsifiable. If she's lying about that, then someone should present the evidence, as that would be a far more effective means of discrediting her than some completely unrelated stuff about wacky statements she has made.

The fact that they are choosing the "wacky statements" route instead of the "direct relevant evidence" route of discrediting her is telling. And it says nothing about the other doctors standing with her that have also claimed to have successfully treated Covid patients with HCQ. What's your answer to them?

I don't find it to be a red herring at all, I don't know how easy it would be to verify her claims regarding treating Covid patients, someone who is a doctor would probably understand if or how doctor patient confidentiality might apply, but I don't know.

Also proving a negative just doesn't work, if there is a burden of proof needed, it would be her needing to show the data and results of the patients she treated, average ages, conditions, etc. Just saying it tells people basically nothing.

Regardless, it's not so much that she made wacky statements, it's that she made wacky medical statements. There's a professor in the math department that is a genuinely weird guy, he just does and said weird things, his brain works differently, and he has literally been known to just disappear for a few days and then return. Everyone agree's he's a weird guy. But he's also a fucking math genius, and thus he has a job and is considered brilliant in his field. Still, super wacky guy. Now, if he started going off about how 2+2=5, then suddenly he's not really being a math genius anymore. That discredits him.

Her saying that she believes Reptilian people are controlling the government? Wacky statement, but whatever. Her saying that alien DNA is being used to make medication? That's now a wacky medical statement and begins to discredit her. The statement that cysts and other actual diseases are the result of demons and ghosts sex or whatever, is a super disqualifying statement to have made in my opinion. There's wacky and there's there's disqualifying.

Experts Explain: The case for using hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) to treat Covid-19

Hydroxychloroquine is obviously not a panacea for severe cases of Covid-19. Given early, it helps reduce mortality by about half, compared to those not given the drug.

indianexpress.com

Money quote:

"A study on more than 2,500 patients in six units under the Henry Ford Hospitals group in Detroit, Michigan, USA, peer-reviewed, accepted and ready for publication in the International Journal of Infectious Diseases, has found good evidence that HCQ reduces Covid-19 mortality significantly." (Emphasis added by me).

So to circle back to the very first bit in my post about how articles are written by people who don't really know what the hell is being said.

DEFINE_ME

This is the journal that the article is referencing.

It's also the same exact journal that I was referencing when I said:

The studies that they are trying to cite don’t even say that, it was only found to reduce the death rate by about half in patients that met a very limited set of conditions while being constantly monitored in a hospital.

The journal itself summarizes what it says:

In this multi-hospital assessment, when controlling for COVID-19 risk factors, treatment with hydroxychloroquine alone and in combination with azithromycin was associated with reduction in COVID-19 associated mortality. Prospective trials are needed to examine this impact.

It's even saying that trials need to be ran before a conclusion can be fully determined.

That's different from how your article is presenting the information. Given that your article comes from The Indian Express, and India is one of the, if not the largest, producer of Hydroxychloroquine, they might have a little skin in the game to paint a rosier picture regarding the use of the drug as a treatment.