Research Study

Yes, 4,000 is a decent n size

Can you link the study?

Yes, 6000 is a lot, but you also have to consider other confounders: age, gender, co-morbidities, controlled or convenience study, if this is studying meds were other meds given?

If you are studying the effect of say, atorvastatin to prevent CAD, but you study 6000 teenagers for 6 months it doesn't say much. 

Was the study peer-reviewed? A lot of studies out there are pre-published and haven't been scrutinized by content experts. 

15 hours ago, nursej22 said:

Can you link the study?

Yes, 6000 is a lot, but you also have to consider other confounders: age, gender, co-morbidities, controlled or convenience study, if this is studying meds were other meds given?

If you are studying the effect of say, atorvastatin to prevent CAD, but you study 6000 teenagers for 6 months it doesn't say much. 

Was the study peer-reviewed? A lot of studies out there are pre-published and haven't been scrutinized by content experts. 

It's from a youtu.be video titled, "Peter McCullough, MD testifies to Texas Senate HHS Committee". About 6 minutes in, he talks about a huge trial that showed Colchicine is the best anti-inflammatory to use to treat COVID. He doesn't name the study. 

He doesn't back up his statements. 

Oh, that guy. I tried to  watch him on a video in the past. Yeah, he seems like a lot of hot air. 

According to this link from Medscape (I don't know if you need to join to read it, but its free), indicate no significant effect from colchicine. and A common side effect is severe diarrhea. 

https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/957921

The anti-inflammatory agents colchicine and icosapent ethyl (Vascepa; Amarin) failed to provide substantial benefits in separate randomized COVID-19 trials.

Both were reported at the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Congress 2021.

The results are consistent with those from the massive RECOVERY trial, which earlier this year stopped enrollment in the colchicine arm for lack of efficacy in patients hospitalized with COVID-19, and COLCORONA, which missed its primary endpoint using colchicine among nonhospitalized adults with COVID-19.

As a nurse, it's hard for me to evaluate his credibility.  

What do his peers think of his conclusions?

What do experts in the field think of his conclusions?

Ha, ha, another story has popped up on Medscape. 

Apparently Baylor Scott & White Health, the largest nonprofit health system in Texas, has filed a restraining order against McCullough after he refused to live up to an agreement to stop claiming association with them. https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/958916?uac=77509FJ&faf=1&sso=true&impID=3651926&src=WNL_infoc_210920_MSCPEDIT_Baylor_McC

 Since the Baylor suit, the Texas A&M College of Medicine, and the Texas Christian University (TCU) and University of North Texas Health Science Center (UNTHSC) School of Medicine have both removed McCullough from their faculties."  

In interviews, McCullough promotes the use of zinc, hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, doxycycline, favipiravir, prednisone, and ivermectin as COVID-19 treatments — based on an outpatient treatment algorithm published in August 2020 in The American Journal of Medicine. The cardiologist was the lead author of that paper, which proposed treating people with COVID-like symptoms whether or not they had confirmed infection.

McCullough and his colleagues published a follow-up paper that added colchicine to the mix in Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine. McCullough is editor-in-chief of the journal, but this was not noted in the disclosures.

Similarly, McCullough has not disclosed in his COVID-19 publications or any interviews that he has received consulting fees from a host of pharmaceutical manufacturers that produce COVID-19 drugs and vaccines, including AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals. According to CMS' Open Payments database, McCullough was paid about $300,000 annually by drug companies from 2014 to 2019, mostly for consulting on cardiovascular and diabetes medications. His payments dropped to $169,406.06 in 2020.

On 9/20/2021 at 6:03 PM, hherrn said:

As a nurse, it's hard for me to evaluate his credibility.  

What do his peers think of his conclusions?

What do experts in the field think of his conclusions?

I have family members who make this point, saying that a nurse has no business evaluating a doctor! In their mind, since some of his peers agree with him, that proves that he is right. 

The fact that experts in the field disagree with him has no merit in their eyes.

I pointed out that his statement could not be true, that "there is no rational for ever giving the vaccine to an recovered patient" because "People who develop COVID have a complete and durable immunity. You can't vaccinate on top of it and make it better." Since we know that people can get COVID a second time - or a third time - saying that this is impossible just doesn't make sense.

That shifted the conversation back to how masks don't do any good, in their studied opinion. And I took that as a hint to just stop for a while.

There is none so blind as those who will not see.