Don't use Gilead's remdesivir in hospitalised COVID-19 patients, WHO says

[Brian4Liberty]

Don't use Gilead's remdesivir in hospitalised COVID-19 patients, WHO says

LONDON (Reuters) - Gilead’s remdesivir should not be used for patients hospitalised with COVID-19, regardless of how ill they are, as there is no evidence the drug improves survival or reduces the need for ventilation, a World Health Organization panel said on Friday.

“The ... panel found a lack of evidence that remdesivir improved outcomes that matter to patients,” the guideline said.

“Especially given the costs and resource implications associated with remdesivir ... the panel felt the responsibility should be on demonstrating evidence of efficacy, which is not established by the currently available data,” it added.

The advice is another setback for the drug, which grabbed worldwide attention as a potentially effective treatment for COVID-19 in the summer after early trials showed some promise.

The antiviral, known by the brand name Veklury, is one of only two medicines currently authorised to treat COVID-19 patients across the world. But a large WHO-led trial known as the Solidarity Trial showed last month that it had little or no effect on 28-day mortality or length of hospital stays for COVID-19 patients.
...
More: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-h...-idUSKBN28000Q

[Dr.3D]

If using it doesn't hurt the patient, why not continue to use it just in case it might be helpful?

[Brian4Liberty]

If using it doesn't hurt the patient, why not continue to use it just in case it might be helpful?

Not sure if serious, but it has a lot of drawbacks. It has negative side effects, which is one reason patients must be watched in a hospital while taking it. Studies were stopped several times due to adverse effects. It’s also very expensive.

Remdesivir is a broad-spectrum antiviral originally developed to treat Ebola, but was ineffective. In preclinical work conducted at the University of North Carolina and Vanderbilt University before the pandemic, it had shown promise against a wide range of viruses, including coronaviruses. In Ebola it had been found to be safe but ineffective. But the data acquired in those trials helped move it to more advanced trials in COVID-19.

That being said, about 25% of patients receiving it have severe side effects, including multiple-organ dysfunction syndrome, septic shock, acute kidney injury and low blood pressure. Another 23% demonstrated evidence of liver damage on lab tests.
...
https://www.biospace.com/article/dat...oks-promising/

[AngryCanadian]

Maybe the WHO should investigate whatever or not the new 95% covid vaccine actually work at all. Or if that number is nothing but based on false data.

[Brian4Liberty]

Maybe the WHO should investigate whatever or not the new 95% covid vaccine actually work at all. Or if that number is nothing but based on false data.

In the infamous words of GWB:

“You fooled me, can’t get fooled again”.

[Anti Globalist]

If Democrats cared what the WHO had to say, then they would have agreed with them a couple months back when they said countries need to stop using lock downs as your only defense against the virus.

[Dr.3D]

Not sure if serious, but it has a lot of drawbacks. It has negative side effects, which is one reason patients must be watched in a hospital while taking it. Studies were stopped several times due to adverse effects. It’s also very expensive.

I was serious and not informed. Thank you for letting me know about this.
As for the expense, I thought the government was paying some 38k for each Covid patient anyway. Thought perhaps they might get the monies worth.