Subscribe
Notify of
guest

5 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
lee.barnby
lee.barnby
4 years ago

Not only does the lack of scrutiny risk wasting resources but there are also the side effects to consider.

joao.amadera
joao.amadera
4 years ago

Spot-on. If you look for more than 20 outcomes, by chance one of them will give you the results you want…

johntshea2
johntshea2
4 years ago

$4,300 per dose? Hydroxychloroquine costs 63 cents a tablet, actually works, and is being mass-produced and used all over the world. So, the choice is obvious! Remdesivir!
Oh, wait…

By the way, it’s not really an “Ebola drug” since it’s pretty useless against that too.

Dougie Undersub
Dougie Undersub
4 years ago
Reply to  johntshea2

Except it doesn’t work.
https://www.bmj.com/content

Louise Lowry
Louise Lowry
4 years ago

This article is so very useful, I did think reducing treatment time by a few days was not that significant but had not thought that probably the effect on mortality had been deliberately not used. This needs to be explained to WHO and others who in good faith waste public money
I was aware that drug companies did not always behave ethically, sometimes buying up research results that were unfavourable, In the middle of a world wide pandemic I am saddened that this can happen.