Twitter assinala e limita o tweet de Trump onde diz estar imune à COVID-19

Tadeu says:

“motivações do Twitter prendem-se com o facto de haver alguns casos de doentes com COVID-19 que recuperaram mas voltaram a ficar infetados.”
As motivações é que ter tido o virus não significa que se fica imune, especialmente no caso do Trump, que necessitou de uma terapia de anticorpos, o que torna bem provável que não tenha adquirido imunidade suficiente.
Para além disso há muitas dúvidas sobre se o Trump já está realmente livre do virus. O comunicado dos médicos, acaba por mencionar resultados de testes que colocam isso em causa, já que ainda não tem testes negativos, apenas dão uma desculpa de que poderá não ser um risco. Tendo em conta os hábitos do Trump, é provável que o médico tenha sido pressionado a escrever o que escreveu

ToFerreira says:

Sinceramente não sei se acredite mais no Dr (leia-se médico/investigador) Trump ou no Dr Twitter.

Frederico Almeida says:

Bom dia

Varios aqui escrevem coisas sem sentido, sem fundamento e sem suporte cientifico.
Todos nós compreendemos que muitas pessoas precisam de sentir que fazem parte de um movimento “fringe” para se sentirem integradas na csociedade, aceites por outros ou simplesmente ter a ideia de fazer parte de algo.

Factos, como sabem nao á nada melhor que factos:

08/10/2020

“*(…) Background

Although several therapeutic agents have been evaluated for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19), no antiviral agents have yet been shown to be efficacious.
Methods

We conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of intravenous remdesivir in adults who were hospitalized with Covid-19 and had evidence of lower respiratory tract infection. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either remdesivir (200 mg loading dose on day 1, followed by 100 mg daily for up to 9 additional days) or placebo for up to 10 days. The primary outcome was the time to recovery, defined by either discharge from the hospital or hospitalization for infection-control purposes only.
Results

A total of 1062 patients underwent randomization (with 541 assigned to remdesivir and 521 to placebo). Those who received remdesivir had a median recovery time of 10 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 9 to 11), as compared with 15 days (95% CI, 13 to 18) among those who received placebo (rate ratio for recovery, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.12 to 1.49; P<0.001, by a log-rank test). In an analysis that used a proportional-odds model with an eight-category ordinal scale, the patients who received remdesivir were found to be more likely than those who received placebo to have clinical improvement at day 15 (odds ratio, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.2 to 1.9, after adjustment for actual disease severity). The Kaplan–Meier estimates of mortality were 6.7% with remdesivir and 11.9% with placebo by day 15 and 11.4% with remdesivir and 15.2% with placebo by day 29 (hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.52 to 1.03). Serious adverse events were reported in 131 of the 532 patients who received remdesivir (24.6%) and in 163 of the 516 patients who received placebo (31.6%).(…)"

"(…) This double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial identified an antiviral therapy as beneficial in the treatment of Covid-19. Our overall findings were consistent with the findings of the preliminary report: a 10-day course of remdesivir was superior to placebo in the treatment of hospitalized patients with Covid-19. Patients who received remdesivir had a shorter time to recovery (the primary end point) than those who received placebo (median, 10 days vs. 15 days; rate ratio for recovery, 1.29 [95% CI, 1.12 to 1.49]) and were more likely to have improvement in the ordinal scale score at day 15 (key secondary end point; odds ratio, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.2 to 1.9). Additional secondary end points supporting these findings include remdesivir treatment resulting in a shorter time to improvement of one and of two ordinal scale categories, a shorter time to discharge or to a sustained National Early Warning Score of 2 or lower, and a shorter length of initial hospital stay (median, 12 days vs. 17 days). All-cause mortality was 11.4% with remdesivir and 15.2% with placebo (hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.52 to 1.03). (…)"

In: ht tps://www.nejm.o rg/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2007764

Portanto quando se afirma que um certo farmaco cura, limpa, elimina ou é eficaz a tratar uma doenca…. convém saber do que se fala, ler e estudar os assuntos.

Ismael Guimarães says:

Por motivos políticos, tem que ficar acessível para que as pessoas não possam, à posterior branquear a coisa. Está visível para quem quiser ler mas está bem escrito, em inglês, que contém informação fraudulenta.