The hazard ration reduction fails to take the other treatments given into account in this study. If you give the patients in the HCQ arm steroids, the study below shows it WILL reduce mortality. That poisons the conclusions of the study. In addition, because the treatment group was 20x the size of the "placebo" (no treatment) group, the hazard ratio calculations are not reliable. The no treatment group was too small.
And see this:
https://www.statnews.com/2020/07/08...uses-attention-and-the-fda-may-pay-the-price/, stating, "The study that sparked the latest controversy was anything but randomized. Not only was it not randomized, outside experts noted, but
patients who received hydroxychloroquine were also more likely to get steroids, which appear to help very sick patients with Covid-19. That is likely to have influenced the central finding of the Henry Ford study: that death rates were 50% lower among patients in hospitals treated with hydroxychloroquine."
In addition, the Henry Ford study results excluded more than 10% of the cohort because they were still in the hospital. Why were they still in the hospital? Because they were very sick but had not (yet) died? You cannot cut off a study and exclude the remaining "bad outcomes" before they occur and come to a valid conclusion.
Here are the two studies:
Remdesivir:
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2007764
Dexamethasone:
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.06.22.20137273v1
In addition, every gold standard completed study on the effectiveness of HCQ has shown no difference between it and placebo. No gold standard study of HCQ has yet to be published or prepublished showing any efficacy for treatment or prevention. So, you can "absolutely incorrect" me all you want, but clinically and scientifically HCQ does not work according to all known credible science.