S/o from other post - studies on early intervention

amother

Fri, Sep 03 2021, 2:22 am

challahchallah wrote:

So you’re looking for a study consisting of people who have tested positive but are so early in their infection they’re still asymptomatic? Most people don’t test until they have symptoms and most PCR tests don’t come back for a few days. I think the population of people who have tested positive for active infection and have no respiratory symptoms is small, so I think that would be hard to recruit for, and also of limited utility in the real world where most people don’t find out about infection until symptoms start. Maybe that study exists, I’m not sure. I still think the premise of your question why don’t they run trials on drugs as an early intervention is inherently flawed. They do run those studies, at this point you’re nitpicking details to try to defend your point.

No, that isn’t what I said. I said I am looking for studies that track Covid in subjects from the very earliest stages of the infection. The first signs of infection are typically fever, nausea and dizziness, NOT respiratory problems, as I mentioned in my posts and referenced studies that demonstrate this. I did not say anything about tracking Covid in asymptomatic subjects (though that would not disqualify a subject).

You made statements that are unsubstantiated by science and real-world data. Your comment “ I think the population of people who have tested positive for active infection and have no respiratory symptoms is small” is completely misguided since the data and science demonstrate that respiratory symptoms do not usually present themselves in Covid patients until the second week of the infection, as is proven in a study detailed in this article: https://www.sciencenews.org/ar.....rugs. To quote from there: “With SARS-CoV-2, the severe breathlessness that sends people to the hospital usually doesn’t show up until the second week of infection. That may be how long it takes for the virus to move down into the lungs and start causing damage there…”

You seem to be very sure that being able to conduct a study on subjects with early onset of Covid symptoms would be highly unlikely, because it “would be hard to recruit for” as you stated. Yet the study that got HCQ banned (yes the study SixofWands posted, which I pointed out is fundamentally flawed because the researchers admit in their own study that the majority of the subjects never even tested positive for Covid) - this study involves close to 500 subjects and all of them were given HCQ within the first four days of having symptoms. So, apparently they didn’t have a hard time finding subjects for their study that focused strictly on the very first few days of infection.

So can you please tell me why you say “ the premise of your question why don’t they run trials on drugs as an early intervention is inherently flawed”? How is it inherently flawed?