receiving either no supplemental oxygen or a maximum of 4 liters...oxygen

[GoodTaste]

Does " receiving either no supplemental oxygen or a maximum of 4 liters per minute of supplemental oxygen" mean " receiving either no supplemental oxygen or receiving a maximum of 4 liters per minute of supplemental oxygen"?

It seems to be a "receiving no oxygen or receiving very limited oxygen" question. It is not a "neither...nor" equivalent.


========================
Hydroxychloroquine with or without Azithromycin in Mild-to-Moderate Covid-19

BACKGROUND
Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin have been used to treat patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). However, evidence on the safety and efficacy of these therapies is limited.


METHODS
We conducted a multicenter, randomized, open-label, three-group, controlled trial involving hospitalized patients with suspected or confirmed Covid-19 who were receiving either no supplemental oxygen or a maximum of 4 liters per minute of supplemental oxygen. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive standard care, standard care plus hydroxychloroquine at a dose of 400 mg twice daily, or standard care plus hydroxychloroquine at a dose of 400 mg twice daily plus azithromycin at a dose of 500 mg once daily for 7 days. The primary outcome was clinical status at 15 days as assessed with the use of a seven-level ordinal scale (with levels ranging from one to seven and higher scores indicating a worse condition) in the modified intention-to-treat population (patients with a confirmed diagnosis of Covid-19). Safety was also assessed.

CONCLUSIONS
Among patients hospitalized with mild-to-moderate Covid-19, the use of hydroxychloroquine, alone or with azithromycin, did not improve clinical status at 15 days as compared with standard care.

Source: New England Journal of Medicine July 23, 2020
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2019014?query=featured_home

 

[Rover_KE]

Yes.

 

[teechar]

Does "receiving either no supplemental oxygen or a maximum of 4 liters per minute of supplemental oxygen" mean "receiving [STRIKE]either[/STRIKE] no supplemental oxygen or receiving a maximum of 4 liters per minute of supplemental oxygen"?

Yes, it does. Using either is okay with "no".

It seems to [STRIKE]be a[/STRIKE] mean/imply/suggest "receiving no oxygen or receiving very limited oxygen". [STRIKE]question.[/STRIKE]

Right.

It is not a "neither...nor" equivalent.

That structure can be used in that sentence. Try it and post below.

 

[GoodTaste]

That structure can be used in that sentence. Try it and post below.

How?

... receiving neither supplemental oxygen nor exceeding a maximum of 4 liters per minute of supplemental oxygen?

It somehow sounds elusive to me. We need crystal clear meanings, after all.

 

[teechar]

We conducted a multicenter, randomized, open-label, three-group, controlled trial involving hospitalized patients with suspected or confirmed Covid-19 who were receiving neither supplemental oxygen nor a maximum of 4 liters per minute of supplemental oxygen.

Note how I only changed two words in the original.

 

[GoodTaste]

Note how I only changed two words in the original.

The logic is elusive. It seems "(or in case that patients receive oxygen)" is omitted there:

Patients either not receive oxygen at all, (or in case that patients receive oxygen) do not receive a maximum of ... oxygen.

 

[emsr2d2]

"no" doesn't work in both.

The patients in question were receiving either:
1) no supplemental oxygen or
2) a maximum of 4 litres per minute of supplemental oxygen

 

[GoesStation]

"no" doesn't work in both.

The patients in question were receiving either:
1) no supplemental oxygen or
2) a maximum of 4 litres per minute of supplemental oxygen

Medical protocols typically put patients on no oxygen, 4 liters/minute, or a higher rate. This study was limited to the first two groups.

 

[GoodTaste]

"no" doesn't work in both.

The patients in question were receiving either:
1) no supplemental oxygen or
2) a maximum of 4 litres per minute of supplemental oxygen

If so, it is not a typical use and I'm still confused. Consider the example below:

In a town bordering France and Germany, there is a lad who speaks neither French nor German. His neighbors seldom see him out of his door. One day the lad walks out of his house. Some one asks him: "What do you speak?" He replies proudly:"I speak English."

Here, "speaks neither French nor German" means he doesn't speak French and he doesn't speak German either. Because "neither...nor" is defined as "used when you want to say that two or more things are not true."

Now retake a look into "receiving neither supplemental oxygen nor a maximum of 4 liters per minute of supplemental oxygen." It would mean "not receiving supplemental oxygen and not receiving a maximum of 4 liters per minute of supplemental oxygen." Yet the original text of NEJM tells us that the patients do receive the latter.

 

[emsr2d2]

I don't understand the connection you're trying to make here. The example about the boy in that town means that he DOES NOT speak French and he DOES NOT speak German. Therefore the use of "neither/nor" is fine because it refers to two negative thing.

In the original, we are given two things that the patients DID RECEIVE - those things are "no supplemental oxygen" and "4 litres per minute of supplemental oxygen", so "either/or" is correct. Some of them got extra oxygen, some of them didn't.

"Neither/nor" would be possible in the original context if there were two things the patients did not receive. For example, "Patients received neither supplemental oxygen nor antibiotics". That would mean none of the patients received either of those things.

I think you're misunderstanding the words "either no" in the original, and you think that (together) they mean "neither". They don't.

 

[Tdol]

It's not a good comparison. I assume there are people receiving no oxygen, a maximum of 4 litres, and people on more, who are not included in the study.

 

[GoodTaste]

Gosh, it seems that we both are pointing out the other's inconsistency.

I don't understand the connection you're trying to make here. The example about the boy in that town means that he DOES NOT speak French and he DOES NOT speak German. Therefore the use of "neither/nor" is fine because it refers to two negative thing.

In the original, we are given two things that the patients DID RECEIVE - those things are "no supplemental oxygen" and "4 litres per minute of supplemental oxygen", so "either/or" is correct. Some of them got extra oxygen, some of them didn't.

"Neither/nor" would be possible in the original context if there were two things the patients did not receive. For example, "Patients received neither supplemental oxygen nor antibiotics". That would mean none of the patients received either of those things.

I think you're misunderstanding the words "either no" in the original, and you think that (together) they mean "neither". They don't.

Here I completely agree with you except the last two lines.

As I point out in the OP:

It seems to be a "receiving no oxygen or receiving very limited oxygen" question. It is not a "neither...nor" equivalent.

That is, I don't see "either no" as "neither", which is usually collocated with "nor".

It is in #3 post of yours, you say "That structure can be used in that sentence. Try it and post below." (your "that structure" refers to "neither...nor" and you think it can be used there). So I give it a try in #4 post with "How? ... receiving neither supplemental oxygen nor exceeding a maximum of 4 liters per minute of supplemental oxygen?".

And in #5 post of yours, you delete "exceeding", making it into "receiving neither supplemental oxygen nor a maximum of 4 liters per minute of supplemental oxygen."

Thus the problem arises. Because "nor a maximum of 4 liters per minute of supplemental oxygen" contradicts NEJM's idea. And, with my "exceeding" there, it would mean "not receiving more than 4 L/M oxygen", which is consistent with NEJM's idea. But the original expression of NEJM's is better. That is why I say "How? (How to use "neither...nor" there). It appears we can't use that structure there. My try is a failure. And so is your editing ("nor exceeding" into "nor").

 

[Tdol]

Can we check the temperature? The mercury's rising. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6saiUngWbI