"Hydroxychloroquine blocks SARS-CoV-2 entry into the endocytic pathway in mammalian cell culture"; this study needs clinical research but in a crisis, with 'precautionary principle', we use it
If a drug has been shown to be prior safe & effective, is available, not harmful, regardless if used for other purposes, with reports of benefit & you have & had nothing available, then you use it
Yet we had many well conducted observational studies that showed strong benefit, so why did the FDA move to block this drug? Was this all to do with Trump? If he said it was no good would we have had HCQ on deck across this pandemic, available? It could have saved tens of thousands of lives.
If there was no alternatives, nothing, it was safe and effective all along, and clinical reports were showing it was highly effective, then why was this drug blocked? Why were the proper studies not done and still, in a crisis, in an emergency, we can mount those studies while we use a therapeutic, empirically, in an emergency, precautionary principle; when there is a threat of harm and nothing is available, you use what suggests works and can work and also is not harmful and not prohibitively expensive etc.; turns out it was blocked and still the NIH and CDC have never, to this date, studied the role of HCQ in COVID…and most studies done were corrupted and designed to fail. Wrong patient group, dose, timing of administration etc. Just pure corruption.
Substack Alexander COVID News evidence-based medicine is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.