主頁 高登熱話 吃喝玩樂 科技消費 名人專訪 短片
現有會員可[按此]登入。未成為會員可[按此]註冊。
[公司模式 - 關]  [懷舊模式 - 開
[Youtube 預覽 - 關]  [大字型]  [小字型]

您現在聚腳在 時事台內。

有關解封部份帳號之事宜

早前收到各會員反映一些朋友的帳號可能因誤會導致被封,CEO與管理員團隊商討後,重新審核並決定解封部分只輕微觸犯版規、懷疑被駭的帳號。所有可得到解封的帳號(包括登入電郵及備用電郵)將會收到我們發出的通知,如有用戶收到電郵而未能正常重新登入,可以到「聯絡我們」(http://forum8.hkgolden.com/contactus.aspx)提供你用作註冊的電郵地址、後備電郵地址予我們跟進。

香港高登討論區管理員團隊
精選文章
DeerGamer
New App Android IOS
跳至第

發起人
超級突發: 侵侵中左招!!!
255 個回應
死废老
口罩又唔戴


Update下啦,呢個局勢,幾個月前嘅研究已經可以叫做「過時」

However, many studies have meanwhile reported on the safety of a short-term/low-dosage course of HCQ monotherapy [16,44]. Our study provides further support to the claim that this regimen is not associated with increased short-term risk of cardiotoxicity and mortality in the hospital setting and in well-selected COVID-19 patients. Accordingly, as of 17 June 2020, the Federal Agency for Medicines and Health Products had registered in total eight reports of adverse reactions suspected to be associated with HCQ use for the treatment of COVID-19 in Belgium, among which were three cases of cardiac toxicity (all having received concomitant medication), and no reported deaths [45].

In conclusion, in this large nationwide observational study of patients hospitalised with COVID-19, HCQ monotherapy administered at a dosage of 2400 mg over 5 days was independently associated with a significant decrease in mortality compared with patients not treated with HCQ. This impact was observed both in the early and late treatment groups, suggesting that this benefit might be mediated by immunomodulatory properties, a hypothesis worth addressing as evidence of an antiviral activity of HCQ on SARS-CoV-2 appears increasingly inconsistent. Considering the availability and cheapness of HCQ, it seems worth further investigating the clinical effect of an optimised dosage of HCQ and designing add-on studies in ongoing trials to monitor, beyond viral shedding and infectiousness, a relevant set of inflammatory markers during the course of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924857920303423

Sorry to burst your bubble, but it was just an observational study, not a clinical trial.[sosad]
Many treatments that look promising in observational studies may end up providing no benefit, and there have already been multiple RCTs that finds no effect of treating Covid-19 with Hydroxychloroquine.


有感當侵精精靈靈行返出黎話冇事
就係場肺炎同中國玩完既時候[sosad]

http://media.whatscap.com/b8d/607/b8d607ba18b9304be562536a58bade6352727dbb_b.jpg


Update下啦,呢個局勢,幾個月前嘅研究已經可以叫做「過時」

However, many studies have meanwhile reported on the safety of a short-term/low-dosage course of HCQ monotherapy [16,44]. Our study provides further support to the claim that this regimen is not associated with increased short-term risk of cardiotoxicity and mortality in the hospital setting and in well-selected COVID-19 patients. Accordingly, as of 17 June 2020, the Federal Agency for Medicines and Health Products had registered in total eight reports of adverse reactions suspected to be associated with HCQ use for the treatment of COVID-19 in Belgium, among which were three cases of cardiac toxicity (all having received concomitant medication), and no reported deaths [45].

In conclusion, in this large nationwide observational study of patients hospitalised with COVID-19, HCQ monotherapy administered at a dosage of 2400 mg over 5 days was independently associated with a significant decrease in mortality compared with patients not treated with HCQ. This impact was observed both in the early and late treatment groups, suggesting that this benefit might be mediated by immunomodulatory properties, a hypothesis worth addressing as evidence of an antiviral activity of HCQ on SARS-CoV-2 appears increasingly inconsistent. Considering the availability and cheapness of HCQ, it seems worth further investigating the clinical effect of an optimised dosage of HCQ and designing add-on studies in ongoing trials to monitor, beyond viral shedding and infectiousness, a relevant set of inflammatory markers during the course of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924857920303423

Sorry to burst your bubble, but it was just an observational study, not a clinical trial.[sosad]
Many treatments that look promising in observational studies may end up providing no benefit, and there have already been multiple RCTs that findno effect of treating Covid-19 with Hydroxychloroquine.




口罩又唔戴

係都係個打殘體字既冚家剷死先:o)


Update下啦,呢個局勢,幾個月前嘅研究已經可以叫做「過時」

However, many studies have meanwhile reported on the safety of a short-term/low-dosage course of HCQ monotherapy [16,44]. Our study provides further support to the claim that this regimen is not associated with increased short-term risk of cardiotoxicity and mortality in the hospital setting and in well-selected COVID-19 patients. Accordingly, as of 17 June 2020, the Federal Agency for Medicines and Health Products had registered in total eight reports of adverse reactions suspected to be associated with HCQ use for the treatment of COVID-19 in Belgium, among which were three cases of cardiac toxicity (all having received concomitant medication), and no reported deaths [45].

In conclusion, in this large nationwide observational study of patients hospitalised with COVID-19, HCQ monotherapy administered at a dosage of 2400 mg over 5 days was independently associated with a significant decrease in mortality compared with patients not treated with HCQ. This impact was observed both in the early and late treatment groups, suggesting that this benefit might be mediated by immunomodulatory properties, a hypothesis worth addressing as evidence of an antiviral activity of HCQ on SARS-CoV-2 appears increasingly inconsistent. Considering the availability and cheapness of HCQ, it seems worth further investigating the clinical effect of an optimised dosage of HCQ and designing add-on studies in ongoing trials to monitor, beyond viral shedding and infectiousness, a relevant set of inflammatory markers during the course of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924857920303423

Sorry to burst your bubble, but it was just an observational study, not a clinical trial.[sosad]
Many treatments that look promising in observational studies may end up providing no benefit, and there have already been multiple RCTs that findno effect of treating Covid-19 with Hydroxychloroquine.


高登真係多高手。
咁你睇幾時至可以開返機場,比人去下旅行?


Hope him get well soon.:-( #adore#


trump又贏啦


Update下啦,呢個局勢,幾個月前嘅研究已經可以叫做「過時」

However, many studies have meanwhile reported on the safety of a short-term/low-dosage course of HCQ monotherapy [16,44]. Our study provides further support to the claim that this regimen is not associated with increased short-term risk of cardiotoxicity and mortality in the hospital setting and in well-selected COVID-19 patients. Accordingly, as of 17 June 2020, the Federal Agency for Medicines and Health Products had registered in total eight reports of adverse reactions suspected to be associated with HCQ use for the treatment of COVID-19 in Belgium, among which were three cases of cardiac toxicity (all having received concomitant medication), and no reported deaths [45].

In conclusion, in this large nationwide observational study of patients hospitalised with COVID-19, HCQ monotherapy administered at a dosage of 2400 mg over 5 days was independently associated with a significant decrease in mortality compared with patients not treated with HCQ. This impact was observed both in the early and late treatment groups, suggesting that this benefit might be mediated by immunomodulatory properties, a hypothesis worth addressing as evidence of an antiviral activity of HCQ on SARS-CoV-2 appears increasingly inconsistent. Considering the availability and cheapness of HCQ, it seems worth further investigating the clinical effect of an optimised dosage of HCQ and designing add-on studies in ongoing trials to monitor, beyond viral shedding and infectiousness, a relevant set of inflammatory markers during the course of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924857920303423


稍為有腦嘅人都睇到個研究有問題啦. 比利時到今時今日一共有十二萬幾人中招.死左一萬人左右.
死亡率係8.3%. 整體死亡率都只係8.3%. 但係個研究個死亡率分別係17.7%同27.1%.
即係食左羥氯喹死得重多過平均死亡率, 對比唔食果d重死得勁. 四個死一個都唔止.
咁大問題,你都睇唔出咩. 呢個肯定係取樣問題啦.日本呢d國家, 基本上係採用自然療法,除非病得好嚴重,都唔會用藥,大部份人唔用藥. 八萬幾人中招,先死得千五人,死亡率唔夠3%.
sampling 對統計係最重要,選錯sample,成個結論都無意思. 上班食飯時間,走去中環問人有無失業,梗係好少人失業, 但走去公園調查失業,個失業率梗係高啦,唔失業,除左放假或輪更工作外,梗係無嘢做居多啦.
如果香港做個統計, 治療老人家用某種藥,對比唔用藥果d, 保証用左藥果班老人家,個死亡率都極高。 基本上香港死親都係老柴。
睇呢d論文,要睇埋佢有咩前設先至得㗎. 用個腦去思考下,而唔係人云亦云.


慢慢幻想啦侵粉[sosad]

人地係策略[fuck]


However, many studies have meanwhile reported on the safety of a short-term/low-dosage course of HCQ monotherapy [16,44]. Our study provides further support to the claim that this regimen is not associated with increased short-term risk of cardiotoxicity and mortality in the hospital setting and in well-selected COVID-19 patients. Accordingly, as of 17 June 2020, the Federal Agency for Medicines and Health Products had registered in total eight reports of adverse reactions suspected to be associated with HCQ use for the treatment of COVID-19 in Belgium, among which were three cases of cardiac toxicity (all having received concomitant medication), and no reported deaths [45].

In conclusion, in this large nationwide observational study of patients hospitalised with COVID-19, HCQ monotherapy administered at a dosage of 2400 mg over 5 days was independently associated with a significant decrease in mortality compared with patients not treated with HCQ. This impact was observed both in the early and late treatment groups, suggesting that this benefit might be mediated by immunomodulatory properties, a hypothesis worth addressing as evidence of an antiviral activity of HCQ on SARS-CoV-2 appears increasingly inconsistent. Considering the availability and cheapness of HCQ, it seems worth further investigating the clinical effect of an optimised dosage of HCQ and designing add-on studies in ongoing trials to monitor, beyond viral shedding and infectiousness, a relevant set of inflammatory markers during the course of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924857920303423


稍為有腦嘅人都睇到個研究有問題啦. 比利時到今時今日一共有十二萬幾人中招.死左一萬人左右.
整體死亡率都只係8.3%. 但係個研究個死亡率分別係17.7%同27.1%.
即係食左羥氯喹死得重多過平均死亡率, 對比唔食果d重死得勁. 四個死一個都唔止.
咁大問題,你都睇唔出咩. 呢個肯定係取樣問題啦.日本呢d國家, 基本上係採用自然療法,除非病得好嚴重,都唔會用藥,大部份人唔用藥. 八萬幾人中招,先死得千五人,死亡率唔夠3%.
sampling 對統計係最重要,選錯sample,成個結論都無意思. 上班食飯時間,走去中環問人有無失業,梗係好少人失業, 但走去公園調查失業,個失業率梗係高啦,除左放假或輪更工作外,梗係無嘢做居多啦.
如果香港做個統計, 治療老人家用某種藥,對比唔用藥果d,保証用左藥果班老人家,個死亡率都極高.基本上香港死親都係老柴.
睇呢d論文,要睇埋佢有咩前設先至得㗎. 用個腦去思考下,而唔係人云亦云.


忘記左講一句,你唔識咩叫統計唔緊要,但至少要有個腦去獨立思考. [sosad]


希望侵侵早日康復:~(

天佑義人:~(

醫返好就有抗體 變得強大@_@


Update下啦,呢個局勢,幾個月前嘅研究已經可以叫做「過時」

However, many studies have meanwhile reported on the safety of a short-term/low-dosage course of HCQ monotherapy [16,44]. Our study provides further support to the claim that this regimen is not associated with increased short-term risk of cardiotoxicity and mortality in the hospital setting and in well-selected COVID-19 patients. Accordingly, as of 17 June 2020, the Federal Agency for Medicines and Health Products had registered in total eight reports of adverse reactions suspected to be associated with HCQ use for the treatment of COVID-19 in Belgium, among which were three cases of cardiac toxicity (all having received concomitant medication), and no reported deaths [45].

In conclusion, in this large nationwide observational study of patients hospitalised with COVID-19, HCQ monotherapy administered at a dosage of 2400 mg over 5 days was independently associated with a significant decrease in mortality compared with patients not treated with HCQ. This impact was observed both in the early and late treatment groups, suggesting that this benefit might be mediated by immunomodulatory properties, a hypothesis worth addressing as evidence of an antiviral activity of HCQ on SARS-CoV-2 appears increasingly inconsistent. Considering the availability and cheapness of HCQ, it seems worth further investigating the clinical effect of an optimised dosage of HCQ and designing add-on studies in ongoing trials to monitor, beyond viral shedding and infectiousness, a relevant set of inflammatory markers during the course of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924857920303423

Sorry to burst your bubble, but it was just an observational study, not a clinical trial.[sosad]
Many treatments that look promising in observational studies may end up providing no benefit, and there have already been multiple RCTs that findno effect of treating Covid-19 with Hydroxychloroquine.


高登真係多高手。
咁你睇幾時至可以開返機場,比人去下旅行?

我都想知[banghead]
利申:文科仔乜都唔識



口罩又唔戴

係都個打殘體字既冚家剷死先:o)

搞乜咁多錯字[banghead]


[quote]
稍為有腦嘅人都睇到個研究有問題啦. 比利時到今時今日一共有十二萬幾人中招.死左一萬人左右.
整體死亡率都只係8.3%. 但係個研究個死亡率分別係17.7%同27.1%.
即係食左羥氯喹死得重多過平均死亡率, 對比唔食果d重死得勁. 四個死一個都唔止.
咁大問題,你都睇唔出咩. 呢個肯定係取樣問題啦.日本呢d國家, 基本上係採用自然療法,除非病得好嚴重,都唔會用藥,大部份人唔用藥. 八萬幾人中招,先死得千五人,死亡率唔夠3%.
sampling 對統計係最重要,選錯sample,成個結論都無意思. 上班食飯時間,走去中環問人有無失業,梗係好少人失業, 但走去公園調查失業,個失業率梗係高啦,除左放假或輪更工作外,梗係無嘢做居多啦.
如果香港做個統計, 治療老人家用某種藥,對比唔用藥果d,保証用左藥果班老人家,個死亡率都極高.基本上香港死親都係老柴.
睇呢d論文,要睇埋佢有咩前設先至得㗎. 用個腦去思考下,而唔係人云亦云.


忘記左講一句,你唔識咩叫統計唔緊要,但至少要有個腦去獨立思考. [sosad]

#adore#


開返盤


Most Popular Bets

Entertainment
Donald Trump
US Presidential Election 2020
2.5

Entertainment
Joe Biden
US Presidential Election 2020
1.57

Horse Racing
Be Proud
Newcastle 20:30
4

Horse Racing
Golden Valour
Dundalk 20:15
10

International Racing Europe
Wonderful Tonight
Longchamp Saturday 14:15
6.5


https://projects.economist.com/us-2020-forecast/president

Joe Biden
Democrat
around 9 in 10
or 90%
better than 19 in 20
or 98%
223-421

Donald Trump
Republican
around 1 in 10
or 10%
less than 1 in 20
or 2%

117-315


侵呢條Seven Head尋日就知Hope Hicks中咗招, 今日依然要去NJ籌款
條Seven Head唔死都無用, 不過, 我就唔希望佢死, 益咗佢有國葬.
最好佢好翻, 輸咗之後等坐監啦:D

放心,好得返實連任,你啲班左膠賤種擔心下支那登有無中武漢肺炎好過啦

見到啲侵粉真係好笑, 完全唔了解風向
今日, 參議院投票反對最高法院個ACA lawsuite, Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) , Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) 居然支持. 如果唔係勢危, 呢兩個人係無可能支持. 侵依家係Iowa都有危機.
禮拜二辯論之後, Biden破曬單日籌款紀錄, 1個鐘就$3.8M.
今日前Montana共和黨州長出來支持Biden, 連以前因為公開批評Biden及Obama政府而被炒嘅4星上將Stanley McChrystal都出來支持Biden
德州州長為打壓投票,要將德州所有郡1日內將投票箱改為每郡1個, 我有個cousin住Houston, 嗰邊Harris county有4.7百萬人口, 近1800平方英哩, 由以往12個投票箱改做1個. 如果唔係佢認為TX好大機會紅變藍, 佢唔會夠膽做到咁狼死囉.

有瘋骨加持實掂啦 #yup#
我最信瘋骨嘅 #yup#

有瘋骨加持
侵侵死硬#yup#


有冇人知,上次2016選舉,瘋骨支持阿婆定阿侵??

16年到依家, 我一直都係反侵
大選我一向投3rd party, 上次一樣, 我唔多like Hillary, 但唔會against佢
以為我係燈神真係搞笑, 因為我甚少預測


死就一定唔會死
睇下可唔可以快速好返, 跑返選舉
唔係就好蝕


唔通真係拜登嬴#cn#


侵呢條Seven Head尋日就知Hope Hicks中咗招, 今日依然要去NJ籌款
條Seven Head唔死都無用, 不過, 我就唔希望佢死, 益咗佢有國葬.
最好佢好翻, 輸咗之後等坐監啦:D

放心,好得返實連任,你啲班左膠賤種擔心下支那登有無中武漢肺炎好過啦

見到啲侵粉真係好笑, 完全唔了解風向
今日, 參議院投票反對最高法院個ACA lawsuite, Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) , Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) 居然支持. 如果唔係勢危, 呢兩個人係無可能支持. 侵依家係Iowa都有危機.
禮拜二辯論之後, Biden破曬單日籌款紀錄, 1個鐘就$3.8M.
今日前Montana共和黨州長出來支持Biden, 連以前因為公開批評Biden及Obama政府而被炒嘅4星上將Stanley McChrystal都出來支持Biden
德州州長為打壓投票,要將德州所有郡1日內將投票箱改為每郡1個, 我有個cousin住Houston, 嗰邊Harris county有4.7百萬人口, 近1800平方英哩, 由以往12個投票箱改做1個. 如果唔係佢認為TX好大機會紅變藍, 佢唔會夠膽做到咁狼死囉.

有瘋骨加持實掂啦 #yup#
我最信瘋骨嘅 #yup#

有瘋骨加持
侵侵死硬#yup#


有冇人知,上次2016選舉,瘋骨支持阿婆定阿侵??

16年到依家, 我一直都係反侵
大選我一向投3rd party, 上次一樣, 我唔多like Hillary, 但唔會against佢
以為我係燈神真係搞笑, 因為我甚少預測

#yup# #yup# #yup# #yup#


https://projects.economist.com/us-2020-forecast/president

Joe Biden
Democrat
around 9 in 10
or 90%
better than 19 in 20
or 98%
223-421

Donald Trump
Republican
around 1 in 10
or 10%
less than 1 in 20
or 2%

117-315

傻豬豬
好多莊家淆到唔敢再開返盤
你估吓係咩原因 #hehe# #hehe# #hehe#


Update下啦,呢個局勢,幾個月前嘅研究已經可以叫做「過時」



In conclusion, in this large nationwide observational study of patients hospitalised with COVID-19, HCQ monotherapy administered at a dosage of 2400 mg over 5 days was independently associated with a significant decrease in mortality compared with patients not treated with HCQ. This impact was observed both in the early and late treatment groups, suggesting that this benefit might be mediated by immunomodulatory properties, a hypothesis worth addressing as evidence of an antiviral activity of HCQ on SARS-CoV-2 appears increasingly inconsistent. Considering the availability and cheapness of HCQ, it seems worth further investigating the clinical effect of an optimised dosage of HCQ and designing add-on studies in ongoing trials to monitor, beyond viral shedding and infectiousness, a relevant set of inflammatory markers during the course of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924857920303423

Sorry to burst your bubble, but it was just an observational study, not a clinical trial.[sosad]
Many treatments that look promising in observational studies may end up providing no benefit, and there have already been multiple RCTs that findno effect of treating Covid-19 with Hydroxychloroquine.


好多人無常識, 唔知道臨床測試係要有對照, 一組食藥,一組食placebo或唔用藥. 測試的人係隨機分組。 咁先至可以睇到d藥有無效, 巴西個臨床測試號稱全球最全面的測試。
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa2019014
人地個方法係“multicenter, randomized, open-label, three-group, controlled trial involving hospitalized patients with suspected or confirmed Covid-19” 隨機在臨床測試好重要。 如果單單係觀察,根本同瞎子摸象無分別,摸到耳就話似大扇,摸到腳就話似碌柱。 完全無意思。
稍為有常識的人都會知道羥氯喹會影響心血管。 心血管有事,通常都唔會對covid-19患者用羥氯喹。 有長期病患的covid-19感染者個死亡率都會偏高。 所以好可能係呢個原因導致觀察嘅結果唔用羥氯喹的個死亡率咁高。
做人要有基本分析能力,見到一個情況,要自己去用腦去諗下。 如果食左羥氯喹個死亡率重高過整體死亡率, 咁重食黎做咩。 好明顯呢個係sampling有問題啦。 極端情況隨時係因為食左羥氯喹,引致心律有問題,因而瓜向左走向右走埋添。covid-19整唔死個病人,而食藥整向左走向右走死左個病人。
做人千祈唔好人云亦云,要有獨立思考。 [sosad]


:~(


跳至第



  快速回覆 - 輸入以下項目

本討論區現只接受會員張貼文章,本站會員請先登入。非會員人仕,您可以按此加入為新會員,費用全免,並可享用其他會員服務。


上次光臨時間: 27/11/2020 9:30
今天貼文總數: 472 | 累積文章數目: 6,775,990

聯絡我們 | 服務條款 | 私隱政策 | 廣告查詢 | 職位空缺
Copyright © 2020 HKGolden.com. All Rights Reserved.