Remember that hydroxychloroquine study from last month that all the blue-checks were linking to as part of the narrative that President Trump was going to kill people with his dangerous rhetoric? Yeah. . .the prestigious Lancet and New England Journal of Medicine are now questioning the data in the studies:
The Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine are today acknowledging serious questions about the data used in studies they published about the potentially damaging effects of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine to coronavirus patients… 1/
— Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) June 3, 2020
2/ Lancet: “We are issuing an Expression of Concern to alert readers to the fact that serious scientific questions have been brought to our attention… important scientific questions have been raised about data” in the paper…
— Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) June 3, 2020
3/ New England Journal of Medicine: “substantive concerns have been raised about the quality of the information in that database. We have asked the authors to provide evidence that the data are reliable.”
— Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) June 3, 2020
And here’s Iowahawk with a helpful summary on why EVERYONE should have questioned this data from the get-go:
For all the people in my TL who spent a week screaming HYDROXYCHLOROQUINE WILL MAKE YOU DIE, icymihttps://t.co/4plMSG3XIm
— David Burge (@iowahawkblog) June 3, 2020
The Cliff Notes: there is a little known medical data analytics company named Surgisphere in Chicago that purportedly gathered 100k cases of COVID patients treated with HQC.
/1
— David Burge (@iowahawkblog) June 3, 2020
Surgisphere is the sole source of the HQC study that appeared in the blue ribbon, peer reviewed medical journal The Lancet. They also provided data another COVID study that appeared in New England Journal of Medicine.
/2
— David Burge (@iowahawkblog) June 3, 2020
Surgisphere claimed to have data sharing agreements with hundreds of hospitals around the US and the world, despite having, it appears, only 5 employees, only one of whom has any medical background.
/3
— David Burge (@iowahawkblog) June 3, 2020
Two of the other employees, according to the Guardian, include a science fiction writer and a male model for hire.
/4
— David Burge (@iowahawkblog) June 3, 2020
How this ragtag Fab Five let's-put-on-an-international-medical-data-gathering-show was able to sign up data sharing contracts with hundreds of hospitals around the world is a bit of a mystery, but I'd be happy to hear the explanation.
/5
— David Burge (@iowahawkblog) June 3, 2020
Apparently, the peer reviewers at The Lancet and NEJM didn't share my curiosity about this, before putting their imprimatur on studies that relied solely on Surgisphere data. You know, that one that proved HQC will make you DIE
/6
— David Burge (@iowahawkblog) June 3, 2020
But don't worry, the Lancet and NEJM are out there busily issuing concerns and checking things and whatnot, now that their peer reviewers have been peer reviewed.
/7
— David Burge (@iowahawkblog) June 3, 2020
Does HQC kill COVID patients? Hell if I know. Does it make COVID patients better? Hell if I know. Will I trust The Lancet or NEJM when they finally issue conclusions on these questions? Hell if I know.
/8
— David Burge (@iowahawkblog) June 3, 2020
Does HQC kill COVID patients? Hell if I know. Does it make COVID patients better? Hell if I know. Will I trust The Lancet or NEJM when they finally issue conclusions on these questions? Hell if I know.
/8
— David Burge (@iowahawkblog) June 3, 2020
***
Join the Conversation
VIP members get the ability to comment on articles.