Drug championed by Trump for coronavirus shows no benefit, possible harm in study awaiting validation

[stevenl]

17 hours ago, stevenl said:

Politically biased pushback? The main push is as politically biased as it gets.

It becomes more and more clear the push for it was politically motivated, with the health experts pushing against it.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/24/coronavirus-treatment-leaked-emails-reveal-secret-white-house-chloroquine-plan.html

[heybruce]

3 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

Trump's endorsement shouldn't even enter the equation as to whether or not the drug has potential.  I would contest your claim that anyone pushing it's use is due only to the fact that Trump endorsed it.  It never was to me.  My point still stands that much of the opposition to the drug is solely due to Trumps' endorsement of it.

 

WaveHunter has provided much information questioning the study's legitimacy which, as the topic header confirms, hasn't even been validated yet.  Given these facts one needs only to read the initial comments to this thread for confirmation that the study's findings were accepted at face value without any questioning by most every Trump hater on this site.  There is undeniably a jubilant and victorious air in expressing Trump's 'failure' to many of those comments which, given that the only issue should be a unified response from both Trump haters and supporters to find a cure for one of the most crippling pandemics in recent history, is in my opinion sick beyond words.

Trump should not endorse hyroxychloroquine or any other unproven remedy.  But he did, which is why people are discussing the drug.

 

WaveHunter referred to anecdotal evidence and treatments, but to my knowledge he never provided a link to published studies or evidence. 

 

The key findings of this research are:

 

"An analysis of Veterans Health Administration (VA) data found that 28% of 97 patients given hydroxychloroquine along with standard care died, compared with a death rate of 11% for the 158 patients that did not receive the drug. The death rate was 22% for the 113 patients given hydroxychloroquine plus the antibiotic azithromycin. "

 

Do you challenge these findings?

 

Last, but most important, what credible evidence do you have that hydroxychloroquine is safe and effective in the treatment of Covid 19?  Published results only, please.  Without such evidence the drug should not be promoted.

[heybruce]

3 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

You make my point in my above post splendidly, sirineou.  Trump is merely trying to come up with ideas to help in this fight in which we should all be unified.  He clearly stated that he's not a medical doctor, he doesn't know whether his ideas are feasible nor does he know whether they could be implemented.  He's merely asking doctors that if they thought his ideas have merit then to please check into them.

 

Again, I simply think criticism and ridicule of a man who is only trying to help in an extremely dire situation and is based solely on an uncontrollable hatred for the man is sick.

"Trump is merely trying to come up with ideas..." 

 

Seriously?  His idea, which he put out for all the world, is to inject disinfectants.  Something every adult should know is a bad idea.  The dangers of taking disinfectants internally is the reason why parents are cautioned to keep their cleaning products away from small children.

[RJRS1301]

1 hour ago, heybruce said:

"Trump is merely trying to come up with ideas..." 

 

Seriously?  His idea, which he put out for all the world, is to inject disinfectants.  Something every adult should know is a bad idea.  The dangers of taking disinfectants internally is the reason why parents are cautioned to keep their cleaning products away from small children.

He possibly has never read the label of a disinfectant product, despite his alleged germophobia , he would have had others do those menial tasks all his life I guess.

 

[The Barmbeker]

On 4/23/2020 at 6:38 PM, WaveHunter said:

I trust my doctor as well but any competent doctor expects the patient to make the final decision, based on the doctor's input. It's not the doctor's right or responsibility to make that decision.

 

And yes, there are many people who don't like the idea of vaccines.  I'm not one of them, but it is their right to decide, not anyone else's. 

 

You do realise that we live in a free society, right?

I assume, yoiu are American?

You guys should really rethink your definition of a "free society. when getting people to vaccinate is an infringement on their personal rights and it is totally their freedom of choice to infect a bunch of other people and probably kill them!

 

Go, Freedom!

[The Barmbeker]

6 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

You make my point in my above post splendidly, sirineou.  Trump is merely trying to come up with ideas to help in this fight in which we should all be unified.  He clearly stated that he's not a medical doctor, he doesn't know whether his ideas are feasible nor does he know whether they could be implemented.  He's merely asking doctors that if they thought his ideas have merit then to please check into them.

 

Again, I simply think criticism and ridicule of a man who is only trying to help in an extremely dire situation and is based solely on an uncontrollable hatred for the man is sick.

Then he should discuss it with experts behind closed doors and actually TRY to UNDERSTAND what they are saying!

A ppandemic is not the place to usher brainfarts obn TV!

[AgMech Cowboy]

The truth about the study. Yes, the report is from Fox news. Better to read both sides of the discussion than just the <deleted> news narrative. At least let Fox defend themselves.

 

[WaveHunter]

18 hours ago, frenetic said:

Researchers cut chloroquine study short over safety concerns, citing a ‘primary outcome’ of death"

 

Citing a “primary outcome” of death, researchers cut short a study testing anti-malaria drug chloroquine as a potential treatment for Covid-19 after some patients developed irregular heart rates and nearly two dozen of them died after taking doses of the drug daily.

Scientists say the findings, published Friday in the peer-reviewed Journal of the American Medical Association, should prompt some degree of skepticism from the public toward enthusiastic claims about and perhaps “serve to curb the exuberant use” of the drug, which has been touted by President Donald Trump as a potential “game-changer” in the fight against the coronavirus.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/24/coronavirus-citing-a-primary-outcome-of-death-researchers-cut-chloroquine-study-short-over-safety-concerns.html

You OBVIOUSLY did not even bother to read the study that you are citing!  It draws no such sweeping conclusion that use of HCQ has a primary outcome of death as you allude!

 

Nowhere in the report does the phrase "primary outcome of death" even appear.  The negative outcomes cited in the study involved very high dosing in a subset of the subjects that were older patients with previous cardiac diseases, and in advanced stages of the disease.

 

MORE IMPORTANTLY, You failed to mention the concluding recommendation of the researchers, which was clearly stated in the study:

 

"...To better understand the role of CQ or HCQ in the treatment of COVID-19, we recommend the following next steps: (1) randomized clinical trials evaluating its role as a prophylactic drug and (2) randomized clinical trials evaluating its efficacy against the progression of COVID-19 when administered to patients with mild or moderate disease."

 

Please get your facts straight and stop spreading misinformation and half truths!  The whole debate over HCQ should be purely science-based.  Instead it has turned into a left vs right political battle without any basis in science at all.

 

If you look at the medical literature about the safety of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine before this became a politically biased debate, it is very clear that in over 70 years of use, there is a very low occurrence of any sort of cardio-toxicity in the use of either drug.

 

Want proof of this fact?  Just look at a major report that was released by the World Health Organization in 2017:  The cardiotoxicity of antimalarials

 

 

[WaveHunter]

15 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

It appears to me that those who are against it's use are trying to quickly push through a study for the purpose of producing a banner headline to get their propaganda out.  By the time their study gets debunked the propaganda will have already stuck in the heads of at least a few.  The jury is still out on it's use.  As long as it shows potential it makes no sense to cheer lead it's failure for no other reason than the fact that Trump perceived it's possible feasibility.  Again it boils down to such an intense hatred of the man that it causes people to lose their ability to think rationally and logically.

It's amazing the flood of media reports that are mischaracterizing medical studies, misquoting or cherry picking out-of-context soundbites from scientists, and spreading blatant misinformation just to support their politically biased narratives.

 

It was not until Trump remarked on the possible use of hydroxychloroquine that there was any widespread safety concerns about the drug at all.  In fact chloroquine has been prescribed for over 70 years with a excellent safety record and no significant reports of cardiotoxicity, and for much longer treatment times than those being suggested for Covid-19.

 

But now the anti-trump media and political pundits are overwhelming the public with outrageous and completely unfounded claims that that chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine are extremely dangerous and can kill you!

 

Want REAL proof of the drug's safety...before all of this unfounded hysteria started?  Just read the 2017 in-depth report released by the World Health Organization entitled: The Cardiotoxicity of Antimalarials

 

The debate about HCQ use as a treatment for Covid-19 should be science-based, not politically motivated.

 

Edited April 25, 2020 by WaveHunter

[sucit]

It is amazing how the treatments Trump approves of tend to kill people instead of cure them. 

 

It just cannot be that difficult to make sensible statements, could it?

[RJRS1301]

17 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

It's amazing the flood of media reports that are mischaracterizing medical studies, misquoting or cherry picking out-of-context soundbites from scientists, and spreading blatant misinformation just to support their politically biased narratives.

 

It was not until Trump remarked on the possible use of hydroxychloroquine that there was any safety concerns about the drug, and in fact chloroquine has been prescribed for over 70 years with a excellent safety record and no significant reports of cardiotoxicity.

 

But now the anti-trump media is overwhelming the public with outrageous and completely unfounded claims that that chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine are extremely dangerous and can kill you!

 

Want REAL proof of the drug's safety...before all of this unfounded hysteria started?  Just read the 2017 in-depth report released by the World Health Organization entitled: The Cardiotoxicity of Antimalarials

 

The debate about HCQ use as a treatment for Covid-19 should be science-based, not politically based.

 

And who turned it Political,??  POTUS did by even mentioning  it in a press briefing. 

Some countries ceased use of the drug in armed services personnel, due to increased suicidal ideation in some using it,enough to cause concern. 

It has been recorded to cause arrhythmia in some patients before covid19

[candide]

18 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

But now the anti-trump media is overwhelming the public with outrageous and completely unfounded claims that that chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine are extremely dangerous and can kill you!

That's a lame attempt at hiding a true scientific controversy behind so-called political bias (for which reason, by the way, support Trump?)

 

Get out of the (trumped) US microcosm and you will find out that the is the same controversy in other countries (I.e. in European countries). No one can claim it's political there, as no country leader is stupid enough to tout an experimental cure.

https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/covid-19-reminder-risk-serious-side-effects-chloroquine-hydroxychloroquine

[WaveHunter]

25 minutes ago, RJRS1301 said:

And who turned it Political,??  POTUS did by even mentioning  it in a press briefing. 

Some countries ceased use of the drug in armed services personnel, due to increased suicidal ideation in some using it,enough to cause concern. 

It has been recorded to cause arrhythmia in some patients before covid19

Well, the WHO seems to have a different opinion than you do.  Link your sources if you're going to make claims such as suicide.  As for cardiac arrhythmia, what's your point?  There is nothing life threatening from an arrhythmia in itself.  You can get one simply by watching an exciting sporting match. 

 

READ THE W.H.O. REPORT! - The Cardiotoxicity of Antimalarials

Edited April 25, 2020 by WaveHunter

[WaveHunter]

16 minutes ago, candide said:

That's a lame attempt at hiding a true scientific controversy behind so-called political bias (for which reason, by the way, support Trump?)

 

Get out of the (trumped) US microcosm and you will find out that the is the same controversy in other countries (I.e. in European countries). No one can claim it's political there, as no country leader is stupid enough to tout an experimental cure.

https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/covid-19-reminder-risk-serious-side-effects-chloroquine-hydroxychloroquine

I'll take the word of WHO scientists on the safety of CQ and HCQ when they did their unbiased and in-depth study of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine BEFORE all of this unfounded hysteria started:  The Cardiotoxicity of Antimalarials

 

And by the way, perhaps you should understand that proponents of HCQ are not looking at it as a cure; but rather as a way to slow down progression of serious complications, for which there are strong indications that it is able to do this in a number of patients in early and mid stages of the disease.

Edited April 25, 2020 by WaveHunter

[heybruce]

6 hours ago, WaveHunter said:

I'll take the word of WHO scientists on the safety of CQ and HCQ when they did their unbiased and in-depth study of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine BEFORE all of this unfounded hysteria started:  The Cardiotoxicity of Antimalarials

 

And by the way, perhaps you should understand that proponents of HCQ are not looking at it as a cure; but rather as a way to slow down progression of serious complications, for which there are strong indications that it is able to do this in a number of patients in early and mid stages of the disease.

I'm sure that hydroxychlorquine taken in accordance with doctor's instruction by healthy individuals with the goal of preventing malaria is reasonably safe.  However that is not what the topic is about.

 

Hydroxychlorquine taken early in a Covid 19 infection by those lucky enough to get tested and catch the disease early may have some benefits.  That is worth looking into.  However since most countries are advising people who exhibit mild Covid 19 symptoms to shelter in place rather that go out and get tested, this application is of limited usefulness even if it proves to be effective.

 

Is there any evidence to suggest that this drug is safe and effective in treating those hit hard by Covid 19?  Can you provide sources for your claim that hydroxychlorquine is able to slow down progression of serious complications for those in mid stages of the disease?  Can you also define what you mean by "mid stages"?

Edited April 25, 2020 by heybruce

[heybruce]

12 hours ago, AgMech Cowboy said:

The truth about the study. Yes, the report is from Fox news. Better to read both sides of the discussion than just the <deleted>  news narrative. At least let Fox defend themselves.

 

I would be happy to read both sides of the discussion.  I'm not going to waste time watching a talking head on Fox News.

[candide]

7 hours ago, WaveHunter said:

I'll take the word of WHO scientists on the safety of CQ and HCQ when they did their unbiased and in-depth study of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine BEFORE all of this unfounded hysteria started:  The Cardiotoxicity of Antimalarials

 

And by the way, perhaps you should understand that proponents of HCQ are not looking at it as a cure; but rather as a way to slow down progression of serious complications, for which there are strong indications that it is able to do this in a number of patients in early and mid stages of the disease.

You did not address the point I made (in other countries there is the same controversy and it's not political because no country leader is stupid enough to tout an experimental treatment (if you like it better than "cure").

About your other argument, I guess that a drug which may have relatively acceptable side effects in some circumstances may have different side effect in the case of a different illness and different aggravating conditions.

[RJRS1301]

10 hours ago, WaveHunter said:

Well, the WHO seems to have a different opinion than you do.  Link your sources if you're going to make claims such as suicide.  As for cardiac arrhythmia, what's your point?  There is nothing life threatening from an arrhythmia in itself.  You can get one simply by watching an exciting sporting match. 

 

READ THE W.H.O. REPORT! - The Cardiotoxicity of Antimalarials

I said suicide ideation. get your rebuttal correct 
Do your research, or check out which drugs are no longer prescribed for malaria in some countries and why it is no longer used.

 

True arrhythmia can be benign, it can also if constant and drug induced by ingesting the drug daily can have cumulative effects. Read also the drug contraindications by the manufacturers and research some of the peer reviewed psych research on effects.

To say no effects is untrue and you know it.

   

Edited April 25, 2020 by RJRS1301

[RJRS1301]

10 hours ago, WaveHunter said:

Well, the WHO seems to have a different opinion than you do.  Link your sources if you're going to make claims such as suicide.  As for cardiac arrhythmia, what's your point?  There is nothing life threatening from an arrhythmia in itself.  You can get one simply by watching an exciting sporting match. 

 

READ THE W.H.O. REPORT! - The Cardiotoxicity of Antimalarials

Heart problems like heart failure and abnormal heartbeats have happened in people taking high doses of chloroquine for a long time. Sometimes, these have been deadly. Call your doctor right away if you have a fast or abnormal heartbeat; very bad dizziness or passing out; or shortness of breath, a big weight gain, or swelling in the arms or legs.

https://www.drugs.com/cdi/chloroquine.html

 

Psychiatric side effects of chloroquine seem to be rare, but may manifest
in a wide range of symptoms, such as confusion, disorientation, ideas of persecution, agitation, outbursts of violence, loss
of interest, feeling sad, suicidal ideas and impaired insight. There is also a report of a manic episode with psychotic features
in the course of bipolar disorder, and another case report of persecutory delusions, anxiety, derealisation and visual illusions
triggered by chloroquine.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/318111526_Psychiatric_adverse_effects_of_chloroquine/link/595a5b07aca2728a137ab0a2/download

 

Descriptions of chloroquine intoxication in the literature, commonly characterized as toxic psychosis, are similar to those associated with other quinolines and typically feature insomnia 13,14, mania 15,16, paranoia and persecutory delusions 17, and auditory and visual hallucinations 18. Symptoms of intoxication may resemble those of brief psychotic disorder but are more likely to include prominent visual hallucinations, anxiety, restlessness, agitation, and derealization 19. Suicidality is not uncommon reported 20, and reports of completed suicide 21,22 attest to the potentially life-threatening nature of such intoxication. Other symptoms of intoxication may include impulsivity, over-talkativeness with flight of ideas, unprovoked laughing or crying 20, personality change, grandiosity, depersonalization 6, and delusional misidentification 23.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4498847/

 

Research to your hearts desire, perhaps the hero has feet of clay? and should remain clear of medical musings.'

 

[WaveHunter]

9 hours ago, RJRS1301 said:

I said suicide ideation. get your rebuttal correct 
Do your research, or check out which drugs are no longer prescribed for malaria in some countries and why it is no longer used.

 

True arrhythmia can be benign, it can also if constant and drug induced by ingesting the drug daily can have cumulative effects. Read also the drug contraindications by the manufacturers and research some of the peer reviewed psych research on effects.

To say no effects is untrue and you know it.

   

All of this recent and very unfounded hysteria over HCQ is a little ridiculous.  We're talking about nominal doses for a duration of 5-10 days.  All of this recent hysteria is politically driven, NOT scientifically drive. Get over it!

[Eric Loh]

7 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

All of this recent and very unfounded hysteria over HCQ is a little ridiculous.  We're talking about nominal doses for a duration of 5-10 days.  All of this recent hysteria is politically driven, NOT scientifically drive. Get over it!

You think Dr Fauci has an political agenda too?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/05/coronavirus-fauci-trump-anti-malaria-drug

[WaveHunter]

12 hours ago, candide said:

You did not address the point I made (in other countries there is the same controversy and it's not political because no country leader is stupid enough to tout an experimental treatment (if you like it better than "cure").

About your other argument, I guess that a drug which may have relatively acceptable side effects in some circumstances may have different side effect in the case of a different illness and different aggravating conditions.

Nowhere but in the USA has this become a hysterical debate over safety concerns, and it's being driven by those with political bias.  Naturally some of it spills over to international media.  Most of the international debate has been over efficacy, not safety.

 

Again, if you look at medical literature up until the time that Trump started discussing it, you see absolutely none of these over-hyped concerns about the safety of CQ or HCQ.

 

The report I have mentioned, issued by the World Health Organization in 2017 (before al this hysteria) explored the safety of HCQ and CQ in depth, and NONE of these ridiculous concerns were raised.  Obviously you or anyone else having these knee-jerk reactions have not read it, or you would not be freaking out as you are.

 

 READ THE W.H.O. REPORT! - The Cardiotoxicity of Antimalarials

 

If you continue to ignore this report, you are basically just sticking your head in the sand and relying on unfounded biased hype.

 

I am not disputing that ANY drug, even aspirin, can be toxic or have unwanted side effects, and can be contraindicated for certain people. 

 

When it comes to prescription drugs like HCQ, a medical doctor should make the determination of whether or not it is safe for a specific patient, and whether the potential benefits outweigh the risks.

 

HCQ MAY be effective at slowing down serious complications associated with Covid-19.  It would be irresponsible not to consider it if the benefits outweigh the risks.  Why not just leave it to a patient's doctor to make that determination?

Edited April 26, 2020 by WaveHunter

[Sheryl]

2 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

Nowhere but in the USA has this become a hysterical debate over safety concerns, and it's being driven those with political bias.  Again I state...if you look at medical literature up until the time that Trump started discussing it, you see absolutely none of these over-hyped concerns about the safety of CQ or HCQ.

 

I am not disputing that ANY drug, even aspirin, can be toxic or have unwanted side effects, and can be contraindicated for certain people. 

 

When it comes to prescription drugs like HCQ, a medical doctor should make the determination of whether or not it is safe for a specific patient, and whether the potential benefits outweigh the risks.

 

HCQ MAY be effective at slowing down serious complications associated with Covid-19.  It would be irresponsible not to consider it if the benefits outweigh the risks.  Why not just leave it to a patient's doctor to make that determination?

 

Nowhere but the US have politicians and unqualified media "talking heads" rushed to advocate for the use of this drug despite lack of evidence.

 

It cannot be determined if the benefits outweigh the risks without clinical trials, that is one of things they are for. First, to ascertain if there are benefits and second to quantify them relative to risks.

 

A number of such trials are underway.

 

It is standard practice in clinical trials to  switch the control arm over to the intervention of a clear benefit is seen. This has so far not happened in a single trial. It is also standard practice to halt the trial altogether if significant adverse effects are encountered. This has already happened in one trial and I strongly suspect will occur in others.

 

Give it a rest. All early indications are that this drug is not likely to pan out. It is definitely not going to prove to be the "game changer" propounded.

[stevenl]

26 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

All of this recent and very unfounded hysteria over HCQ is a little ridiculous.  We're talking about nominal doses for a duration of 5-10 days.  All of this recent hysteria is politically driven, NOT scientifically drive. Get over it!

There is more to the world than the US. And with this a worldwide discussion, it is not politically driven. Unless you think the scientific community worldwide will let themselves get influenced by the US president.

Edited April 26, 2020 by stevenl

[RJRS1301]

38 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

All of this recent and very unfounded hysteria over HCQ is a little ridiculous.  We're talking about nominal doses for a duration of 5-10 days.  All of this recent hysteria is politically driven, NOT scientifically drive. Get over it!

Oh I am glad you know better than peer reviewed research dating back to 2014, not politically driven hysteria, Read with an open mind and not an ideology 

[WaveHunter]

1 minute ago, Sheryl said:

 

Nowhere but the US have politicians and unqualified media "talking heads" rushed to advocate for the use of this drug despite lack of evidence.

 

It cannot be determined if the benefits outweigh the risks without clinical trials, that is one of things they are for. First, to ascertain if there are benefits and second to quantify them relative to risks.

 

A number of such trials are underway.

 

It is standard practice in clinical trials to  switch the control arm over to the intervention of a clear benefit is seen. This has so far not happened in a single trial. It is also standard practice to halt the trial altogether if significant adverse effects are encountered. This has already happened in one trial and I strongly suspect will occur in others.

 

Give it a rest. All early indications are that this drug is not likely to pan out. It is definitely not going to prove to be the "game changer" propounded.

All of this unfounded hysteria is getting ridiculous, and is absolutely being generated by politically biased parties. 

 

Up until Trump showed interest, nobody was talking about the dangers of HCQ or CQ.  CQ has been prescribed for over 70 years and has an excellent safety record.  The WHO published an in-depth study of it in 2017 and no concerns over safety were expressed.

 

In short, there is nothing inherently dangerous with these drugs, and there is no reason at all that they should not be considered as a possible treatment for COVID-19.  Responsible advocates are not claiming it may be a cure, only that it seems possible that it can slow down the progression of serious complications.

 

What exactly is the danger of a low-dose, short duration prescription by a physician?  If there are no contraindications like existing cardiac history, there is no significant danger in a 5-10 day use of the drug.  The risks do not outweigh the potential benefits.

 

Most of the recent “HCQ shows no benefit” studies appears more an intentional narrative being pushed by biased parties than properly conducted clinical studies. 

 

For example, the recent Veterans Administration study is being criticized left and right for all of its' flaws.  Even doctors and scientists who are in opposition to HCQ treatment for Covid-19 are characterizing the report as "poor science" 

 

Finally, one of the first truly scientific studies is about to be conducted by Novartis.  Why not just hold your judgement until we finally get a true controlled, double-blind study of a genuinely randomized group of subjects that determines efficacy, instead of making such declarative statements as you are making?

 

 

[WaveHunter]

39 minutes ago, stevenl said:

There is more to the world than the US. And with this a worldwide discussion, it is not politically driven. Unless you think the scientific community worldwide will let themselves get influenced by the US president.

Look, if someone yells "fire" everyone responds.  All the hoopla generated by US media is heard around the world and has an effect. 

 

The world wide discussion and debate by "responsible" doctors and scientists has more to do with possible efficacy for Covid-19, not safety of the drug in general. 

 

If there was any widespread safety concern for the drug, it would have been addressed in the 2017 report from the WHO.  CQ and HCQ were explored IN-DEPTH, and it was deemed to be safe if prescribed by a physician to someone without contraindications. 

 

I mean, Chloroquine has been safely prescribed for over 70 years, and Hydroxychloroquine was developed as an even safer alternative.  As prescribed by a physician who knows the medical history history of his/her patient, there is no inherent danger.

Edited April 26, 2020 by WaveHunter

[Sheryl]

Holding judgement is exactly what I am advocating.

 

"nothing inherently dangerous" in these drugs is absolutely untrue, both as regards these and almost all drugs. It is highly irresponsible to portray these drugs that way.

 

"What exactly is the danger of a low-dose, short duration prescription by a physician?"

 - death from cardiac arrest. And it has happened to COVID patients.

- severe bone marrow depression.

- convulsions, psychosis

and other serious side effects. Not in everyone, obviously. Not even in most people. But it happens.

 

Safety in people with malaria (who tend to be young and usually have no concurrent cardiopulmonary disease ) cannot be generalized to COVID patients who by definition do have such impairment.  And even in malaria patients, serious adverse effects can and do sometimes occur. But with malaria (certain types, and in certain parts of the world only), the drug is curative. In COVID no indication this is the case, to put it mildly. So far trials have not shown anything that would warrant switching the control arm over to it.

[Sheryl]

10 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

 As prescribed by a physician who knows the medical history history of his/her patient, there is no inherent danger.

 

Absolutely untrue of this and virtually every prescription drug.

 

Risks are certainly less if prescribed by a competent physician to a patient whose medical history is known but they are never nil.

 

And when the drug is being used for off-label purposes the risks are always higher. Cannot generalize from people with one disease to patients with a completely different one, and generally different demographic traits to boot. .

 

[Eric Loh]

16 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

Up until Trump showed interest, nobody was talking about the dangers of HCQ or CQ.  CQ has been prescribed for over 70 years and has an excellent safety record.  The WHO published an in-depth study of it in 2017 and no concerns over safety were expressed.

Scientists are coming out to correct the danger of the drug after Trump’s unwarranted non medical recommendation. He has caused people to decide on self medication and endangering themselves. He should just kept his trap shut and allow his scientists to give medical advise. 

https://theintercept.com/2020/03/24/trump-hyped-chloroquine-cure-covid-19-man-arizona-took-died/