Read on Twitter
We’re living in two pandemics:
1. COVID19
2. COVID19 conspiracies
Science can be confusing (even if you are a scientist!) and it doesn’t help that scientific facts about our current situation are matched by targeted misinformation campaigns.
1. COVID19
2. COVID19 conspiracies
Science can be confusing (even if you are a scientist!) and it doesn’t help that scientific facts about our current situation are matched by targeted misinformation campaigns.
Well, I’m a virologist and I’m tired of working two jobs in studying the virus that caused a pandemic of infections and conspiracies.
Today I’m tackling the so-called miracle drug HCQ which has fascinated America for some reason.
Today I’m tackling the so-called miracle drug HCQ which has fascinated America for some reason.
First off, the majority of science is good science, but there is lots of “bad science” out there.
Lots of the HCQ studies are “bad” and press surrounding it has made it even worse.
So let’s go through why HCQ isn’t the miracle cure we all wish it was:
Lots of the HCQ studies are “bad” and press surrounding it has made it even worse.
So let’s go through why HCQ isn’t the miracle cure we all wish it was:
Early on, people raced for a treatment and one group of researchers in France published an article (prior to peer-review) on HCQ. As you can see, it’s now been withdrawn.
There were lots of problems with this study:
1. Low sample size (only 14 people!)
2. Biases in selecting who got treatment
3. Lack of a control group to compare to
These problems make it impossible to actual figure out if the treatment worked or not!
1. Low sample size (only 14 people!)
2. Biases in selecting who got treatment
3. Lack of a control group to compare to
These problems make it impossible to actual figure out if the treatment worked or not!
But this was early on, and the scientific community was hopeful that a drug we have used to treat malaria and lupus could be repurposed!
So we did what scientists do...kept doing experiments!
So we did what scientists do...kept doing experiments!
And these experiments were designed better with more people. Over and over they showed HCQ didn’t work.
One paper summarized 29 studies w/ 5,207 patients
In those treated with HCQ:
Mortality was actually HIGHER!
Adverse events were actually HIGHER! https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32667699/
One paper summarized 29 studies w/ 5,207 patients
In those treated with HCQ:
Mortality was actually HIGHER!
Adverse events were actually HIGHER! https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32667699/
But that didn’t stop the fascination, sensationalization, or the politicization Of this debunked “miracle-cure”
This led to scientists having to keep studying it and knowing more about if it actually worked in some cases. So we did “basic science” work which means studying it in cell and animal models.
WARNING! Success in these models don’t always mean success in treating humans.
WARNING! Success in these models don’t always mean success in treating humans.
We know this too well as researchers. But, some have brought up a paper from 2005 showing chloroquine (not HCQ) was effective in reducing SARS-CoV-1 (again, not SARS-CoV-2) infections IN CELL MODELS.
But, SARS1 is ~78% similar to SARS2. Humans are ~85% similar to mice!
But, SARS1 is ~78% similar to SARS2. Humans are ~85% similar to mice!
But anyway back to this pandemic.
A new paper just came out treating SARS2 infection/COVID in monkeys—a better model for human infections—with HCQ. Here’s a graph from it:
A new paper just came out treating SARS2 infection/COVID in monkeys—a better model for human infections—with HCQ. Here’s a graph from it:
They used HCQ given before infection (magenta), treating early after infection at high dose (green), low dose (red), with azithromycin (blue), treating later after infection (yellow) or not treating at all (black).
They also treated human airway cells. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2558-4
They also treated human airway cells. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2558-4
In summary: no difference between treatment or no treatment.
It didn’t help:
1. Reducing the amount of virus
2. Reducing inflammation
3. Reducing lung damage
In either the human cell models or in the monkeys.
It didn’t help:
1. Reducing the amount of virus
2. Reducing inflammation
3. Reducing lung damage
In either the human cell models or in the monkeys.
So, it doesn’t work. But, a study termed RECOVERY has shown that another old drug, dexamethasone has benefits in helping prevent severe lung damage!
And a new drug, remdesivir may quicken the time to recovery! https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2007764
And a new drug, remdesivir may quicken the time to recovery! https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2007764
Add in convelscent plasma which contains virus-fighting proteins called antibodies, and were improving on our COVID treatments besides just offering supportive care. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2766940
Importantly! The scientific community has called out bad studies that came to the same conclusion. Bad studies are bad studies. They don’t help move science forward and often do lots of harm in public mistrust of science.
But there are still some pushing HCQ. And studies still coming out showing it has “benefits.” But again, lots of these studies are “bad science” because of conflicts of interest, poor study design, or misinterpreted conclusions.
But none of this will stop some people believing in HCQ, just like some people believe in Lizard People, microchipped vaccines, demon sperm, and alien DNA.
And yes, that’s me in the picture below.
And yes, that’s me in the picture below.
