333
Comments (25)
sorted by:
10
iVote 10 points ago +10 / -0

‘Anecdotal’

5
fazzman23 5 points ago +5 / -0

found Dr Fauci

1
Nicktdot 1 point ago +1 / -0

More like Dr Faux-ci

4
_Ghost_Void_ 4 points ago +6 / -2

At this point it's worth pondering if the HCQ is working early well, or we were lied too about the deadlines of the virus.

6
Side-o-Beef_Curtains 6 points ago +6 / -0

Could be both, but after reading it the real game changer is the reduction of virus in the body. Gone in ten days. Where untreated you can shed virus for weeks after recovering. That comes from another study which may or may not be total horse shit so take it with a grain of salt, but the takeaway is that fewer contagious folks running around is helpful

3
CommonSense [S] 3 points ago +3 / -0

Oui, oui!

2
Trumper007 2 points ago +2 / -0

Tres bien, ou et Monsieur le cocksucker Faunci.

7
uvontheterrible 7 points ago +7 / -0

98% cured so far, with another 1.5% still in the hospital, so the ultimate cure rate will probably be higher than 98%.

9
Mother_of_gains 9 points ago +9 / -0

Also appears that all are between 74-95 years old. Mortality rate among that group should be north of 20%.

This is fucking huge

3
DrBJTester 3 points ago +3 / -0

It's kind of a big deal KEK.

3
mdfl 3 points ago +3 / -0

I did a post that the number looks like the death rate for under 75 years was a big fat ZERO. Zero of 973 is not a statistical anomaly Dr. Fauch-head!

https://www.sortiraparis.com/news/in-paris/articles/213842-coronavirus-macron-meets-with-raoult-scientist-latest-study-results/lang/en

We should be sequestering our seniors and getting our assess back to work!

7
hollow_fang 7 points ago +7 / -0

If the success rate is 98%, I think that's high enough to declare it as an effective cure.

That's a higher success rate than most flu vaccines. Much higher.

4
DrBJTester 4 points ago +4 / -0

We need more than one study.

But and it's a big assed Butt and I do not lie. If you see six to ten studies with similar outcomes then yeah it's an effective cure and you could probably add highly effective to that pede.

4
deleted 4 points ago +4 / -0
3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
0
deleted 0 points ago +4 / -4
6
Lamech_Slade 6 points ago +6 / -0

This is in France. Their national death rate is over 10%. So if it only went down to 2% that is a statically significant decrease.

2
deleted 2 points ago +5 / -3
4
Proud_American 4 points ago +4 / -0

Yes. There is no control group so these results are not exactly what we are looking for, but hope is still alive.

Better than nothing I suppose, especially if the at risk rate drops significantly.

4
HughGRection 4 points ago +4 / -0

The article says .5% death rate across all age ranges in the study.

3
Side-o-Beef_Curtains 3 points ago +3 / -0

The general population has a death rate of 1% per year just walking around from accidents, natural causes etc... So .5% is bigly awesome

4
mdfl 4 points ago +4 / -0

.5% of the over 75 crowd, but 0.00% for under 75. The only smoke is the stuff coming from Stelter's ears.

https://www.sortiraparis.com/news/in-paris/articles/213842-coronavirus-macron-meets-with-raoult-scientist-latest-study-results/lang/en

3
DrBJTester 3 points ago +3 / -0

No it means 2% of s group that would have had a near 100% death rate ended up dying. Again and this is the critical part we need to see more studies that reflect these results. One study is not anecdotal but it absolutely needs to be duplicated. that's the foundation of science is that you can duplicate your results.

(Edit for dumbass typo sorry pedes)

1
deleted 1 point ago +4 / -3
4
DrBJTester 4 points ago +4 / -0

Sorry I forked up thanks for making it funny.