# Early hydroxychloroquine associated with survival **URL:** \ **Category:** The Quarantine Zone\ **Tags:** covid-quarantine\ **Created:** [May 5, 2020, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-hydroxychloroquine-associated-with-survival/853192 "2020-05-05T16:59:15Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Great\_Antibob](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e47c2d/32.png) [@Great\_Antibob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Great_Antibob)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2020, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-hydroxychloroquine-associated-with-survival/853192/41 "2020-05-07T16:03:07Z")
> [@Eva\_Luna](#): > > One would hope that doctors would not prescribe it in situations where its use is unwarranted or dangerous. Doctors are regular people, too. That is, some are prone to dumb and/or panicky behavior. Recall that some of the HCQ shortages were due to some doctors prescribing it for themselves and family, despite no real evidence it was effective at the time. And other doctors, despite knowing it wasn’t likely a game-changer or ineffective, still prescribed to people who merely asked for it. It’s not like getting a medical degree magically makes a person any wiser or circumspect. The degree and training requirements simply weed out some of the worst. The person who graduates last in class in medical school is still a doctor and it’s not like we’re asking for test scores or rankings when we visit. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2020, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-hydroxychloroquine-associated-with-survival/853192/42 "2020-05-07T19:18:24Z")
I’ll leave this to the medical people here. This is what I’ve heard from various sources and combined them in my brain. Tell me where I’m wrong. HCQ is an immunosuppressive. It’s greatly needed in autoimmune diseases such as lupus and arthritis (and malaria that acts like an autoimmune disease). It can have severe side effects and should not be taken lightly. HCQ was looked into as a treatment for the cytokine storms caused by SARS. There is some indication that Covid-19 causes cytokine storms in some patients and HCQ might effective in those cases. The effectiveness in other cases are by no means proven. What did I get wrong and is some of this just speculation? And yes the podiatrists and ophthalmologists that wrote prescriptions for HCQ just in case piss me off. My sister has lupus and actually needs the drug. ---
**Author:** ![Skypist](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skypist/32/169_2.png) [@Skypist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skypist)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2020, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-hydroxychloroquine-associated-with-survival/853192/43 "2020-05-07T19:28:37Z")
New study in an article on the CNN COVID 19 updates page and just posted a few minutes ago shows no benefit from HCQ. > [@](#): > > “From that analysis, there appeared to be no association at all,” Schluger added. “In a sense, we can’t see any association between getting the drug and anything happening to anyone.” It was an observational study of 1376 hospitalized patients in NYC. Of course this study was not for “early” use I don’t think but still interesting. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2020, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-hydroxychloroquine-associated-with-survival/853192/44 "2020-05-07T19:43:29Z")
> [@What\_Exit](#): > > [FDA cautions against use of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine for COVID-19 outside of the hospital setting or a clinical trial due to risk of heart rhythm problems.](https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-safety-and-availability/fda-cautions-against-use-hydroxychloroquine-or-chloroquine-covid-19-outside-hospital-setting-or) > > Threads like this are potentially dangerous. **Moderating** You mean, so people can post counter-evidence to the OP?:dubious: I think we can trust users of this site (well, most of them) to evaluate the evidence. I don’t think discussion of scientific studies needs be shut off just because of the political aspects of this. Colibri QZ Moderator ---
**Author:** ![Iggy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iggy/32/3364_2.png) [@Iggy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Iggy)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2020, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-hydroxychloroquine-associated-with-survival/853192/45 "2020-05-07T20:07:07Z")
> [@Loach](#): > > HCQ was looked into as a treatment for the cytokine storms caused by SARS. > > There is some indication that Covid-19 causes cytokine storms in some patients and HCQ might effective in those cases. > > . Possible antiviral activity hydroxychloroquine was assessed in vitro (in test tube, more or less) on the aftermath of the SARS epidemic. HCQ was found to have antiviral activity against the coronavirus that caused SARS. [https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(06)70361-9/fulltext](https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(06)70361-9/fulltext) The hypothesis is that HCQ interferes with a part of the viral replication process, glycosolation. \ IMHO as someone who is not a doctor but who did, MANY years ago and very briefly, work on vaccine development is that glycosolation interference as a mechanism of action would reasonably account for differing efficacy according to when in the infection cycle it is administered. A drug that substantially reduces viral replication might allow the body more time to produce an effective antibody before being overwhelmed by infection. But giving the same drug late in the infection cycle might not prove as effective as by then a cytokine storm may have already taken hold so that limiting the number of viral particles might not be so important to the clinical course. \ ---
**Author:** ![What\_Exit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/what_exit/32/10652_2.png) [@What\_Exit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_Exit)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2020, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-hydroxychloroquine-associated-with-survival/853192/46 "2020-05-07T20:20:19Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > **Moderating** > > You mean, so people can post counter-evidence to the OP?:dubious: > > I think we can trust users of this site (well, most of them) to evaluate the evidence. I don’t think discussion of scientific studies needs be shut off just because of the political aspects of this. > > Colibri > QZ Moderator I do think blatantly wrong/misleading thread titles are dangerous. We know of problems these reports about hydroxychloroquine have caused. The title comes up in Google searches, etc. It isn’t political, it is dangerous to people that this this was a legit science. ETA: Sorry, should this reply be in another thread? ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2020, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-hydroxychloroquine-associated-with-survival/853192/47 "2020-05-07T20:37:21Z")
> [@What\_Exit](#): > > I do think blatantly wrong/misleading thread titles are dangerous. We know of problems these reports about hydroxychloroquine have caused. The title comes up in Google searches, etc. > > It isn’t political, it is dangerous to people that this this was a legit science. > > ETA: Sorry, should this reply be in another thread? If you have a dispute about a moderator decision, you should take it to ATMB. While the study cited in the OP gives preliminary results, it appears to me to be legit science. I doubt anybody on this board is going to decide to use this treatment based simply on the thread title. And if they read the thread, they will see the counter evidence. I fully realize that this treatment has become a political acid test. But just because it has been pushed inappropriately for political reasons, doesn’t mean discussion of scientific studies about it should be off limits. ---
**Author:** ![nelliebly](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nelliebly/32/5422_2.png) [@nelliebly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nelliebly)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2020, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-hydroxychloroquine-associated-with-survival/853192/48 "2020-05-07T21:56:33Z")
> [@Loach](#): > > I’ll leave this to the medical people here. This is what I’ve heard from various sources and combined them in my brain. Tell me where I’m wrong. > > HCQ is an immunosuppressive. It’s greatly needed in autoimmune diseases such as lupus and arthritis (and malaria that acts like an autoimmune disease). > > It can have severe side effects and should not be taken lightly. > > HCQ was looked into as a treatment for the cytokine storms caused by SARS. > > There is some indication that Covid-19 causes cytokine storms in some patients and HCQ might effective in those cases. > > The effectiveness in other cases are by no means proven. > > What did I get wrong and is some of this just speculation? > > And yes the podiatrists and ophthalmologists that wrote prescriptions for HCQ just in case piss me off. My sister has lupus and actually needs the drug. Just one correction: HCQ is [not an immunosuppressant.](https://www.hopkinslupus.org/lupus-treatment/lupus-medications/antimalarial-drugs/) It modulates the immune system without suppressing it. I was on it for lupus for years, and one reason I liked it was that, unlike the other lupus meds I’d been on, it didn’t suppress my immune system. That meant that when I got a mild infection while on HCQ, it didn’t blow up into a major one, as it had on immunosuppressants. ---
**Author:** ![Ann\_Hedonia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ann_hedonia/32/319_2.png) [@Ann\_Hedonia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ann_Hedonia)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2020, 1:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-hydroxychloroquine-associated-with-survival/853192/49 "2020-05-08T01:05:14Z")
> [@Iggy](#): > > Possible antiviral activity hydroxychloroquine was assessed in vitro (in test tube, more or less) on the aftermath of the SARS epidemic. HCQ was found to have antiviral activity against the coronavirus that caused SARS. > > [https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(06)70361-9/fulltext](https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(06)70361-9/fulltext) > > The hypothesis is that HCQ interferes with a part of the viral replication process, glycosolation. > > \ > IMHO as someone who is not a doctor but who did, MANY years ago and very briefly, work on vaccine development is that glycosolation interference as a mechanism of action would reasonably account for differing efficacy according to when in the infection cycle it is administered. > > A drug that substantially reduces viral replication might allow the body more time to produce an effective antibody before being overwhelmed by infection. But giving the same drug late in the infection cycle might not prove as effective as by then a cytokine storm may have already taken hold so that limiting the number of viral particles might not be so important to the clinical course. > \ Yes, HCQ does have an an anti-viral effect in vitro. But it’s a very weak one, and a patient would have to take a lot of the drug in order to achieve the serum concentrations required to replicate the anti-viral effect. I posted a link to an article upthread that estimated needing a dosage 5x to 17x the dosages used for autoimmune disease in order to be effective as an anti-viral. Only one study that I’ve heard of, the Brazilian one, used dosages that barely touched the low end of that range and it was discontinued for side effects. I think the danger in all this poorly informed interest in this drug isn’t the risk to any one patient, or group of patients - although I’ve got to admit I find the “What have you got to lose?” mentality a little astounding when used in reference to a disease with a 95% survival rate with best supportive care only. The real danger is not the risk to any one patient, it’s the collective desperation of society as a whole. It will be interesting to find out if the drug has any minor benefit, but I think it’s pretty clear already that it’s not going to be a miracle cure. The danger is that the wholesale misinformation is going to give people an excuse to stop the hard painful stuff ( and the easy painless stuff, too) that we need to be doing for now to keep safe. The danger is that people will stop avoiding large gatherings and taking basic precautions because they think a pill will make them immune really soon. ---
**Author:** ![Ann\_Hedonia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ann_hedonia/32/319_2.png) [@Ann\_Hedonia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ann_Hedonia)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2020, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-hydroxychloroquine-associated-with-survival/853192/50 "2020-05-08T15:41:24Z")
> [@Skypist](#): > > New study in an article on the CNN COVID 19 updates page and just posted a few minutes ago shows no benefit from HCQ. > > It was an observational study of 1376 hospitalized patients in NYC. > > Of course this study was not for “early” use I don’t think but still interesting. Here’s the article on this study, from the New England Journal of Medicine. I urge everyone that’s following this discussion to look at this, and not just for the results. It’s an excellent example of what a properly conducted study looks like. [https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMoa2012410?articleTools=true](https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMoa2012410?articleTools=true) I’d like to point out a couple of things. The study’s CONCLUSION is that HCQ had no effect. But if you look at the raw data, it shows a fatality rate among HCQ patients that’s over double the fatality rate of untreated patients. But the researchers acknowledged that the treated group was, in general, way sicker than the untreated group. And they performed an elaborate set of adjustments based on the age, condition, medication history and insurance of the patients. These adjustments the reduced degree of negative outcome. I wanted to flag this because of the weeks of breathless hyping of positive results derived from poorly conducted studies by people that don’t know what they are talking about. Using the same metrics that they did, I could EASILY look at the results of this study and conclude, loudly and publicly, that this drug is doubling the fatality rate and killing people. I’m sorely tempted to make that argument under the guise of fighting bad science with more bad science but I’m not going to do that. ---
**Author:** ![echoreply](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/echoreply/32/3641_2.png) [@echoreply](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/echoreply)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2020, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-hydroxychloroquine-associated-with-survival/853192/51 "2020-05-08T18:17:53Z")
> [@Ann\_Hedonia](#): > > But the researchers acknowledged that the treated group was, in general, way sicker than the untreated group. And they performed an elaborate set of adjustments based on the age, condition, medication history and insurance of the patients. These adjustments the reduced degree of negative outcome. They are using propensity scores, similar to the VA study which also found hydorxycholroquine was not a useful treatment. This is a standard method of doing experiments when a randomized trial is not possible, and can give reliable results when done well. ---
**Author:** ![Ann\_Hedonia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ann_hedonia/32/319_2.png) [@Ann\_Hedonia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ann_Hedonia)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2020, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-hydroxychloroquine-associated-with-survival/853192/52 "2020-05-22T15:56:22Z")
New reporting is out on a large study of the benefits of the Hydroxychloroquine based treatment regimens. The authors compared data from approximately 15,000 treated patients with data from untreated hospitalized patients. The various protocols seem to be associated with an increased mortality of between 34% and 45%, and an increased risk of heart arrhythmias ranging from 137% and 411% depending on the protocol. > **[Antimalarial drug touted by President Trump is linked to increased risk of...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/05/22/hydroxychloroquine-coronavirus-study/)** > > An analysis of 96,000 patients shows those treated with hydroxychloroquine were also more likely to suffer irregular heart rhythms. > **[RETRACTED: Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for...](https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31180-6/fulltext)** > > We were unable to confirm a benefit of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine, when used > alone or with a macrolide, on in-hospital outcomes for COVID-19. Each of these drug > regimens was associated with decreased in-hospital survival and an increased... “In this large multi-national real world analysis, we did not observe any benefit of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine (when used alone or with a macrolide) on in-hospital outcomes, when initiated early after a diagnosis of COVID-19. Each of the drug regimens of chloroquine of hydroxychloroquine alone or in combination with a macrolide was associated with an increased hazard fir a clinically significant occurrence of ventricular arrhythmias and increased risk of in-hospital death with COVID-19.” Willful ignorance is toxic TL:dr Hydroxychloroquine- More Death, No Benefits ---
**Author:** ![What\_Exit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/what_exit/32/10652_2.png) [@What\_Exit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_Exit)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2020, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-hydroxychloroquine-associated-with-survival/853192/53 "2020-05-22T17:31:49Z")
> [@Ann\_Hedonia](#): > > … > > Willful ignorance is toxic > > TL:dr Hydroxychloroquine- More Death, No Benefits Thank you for this. Not surprising in the least either. ---
**Author:** ![crowmanyclouds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crowmanyclouds/32/19884_2.png) [@crowmanyclouds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crowmanyclouds)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2020, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-hydroxychloroquine-associated-with-survival/853192/54 "2020-05-22T17:39:35Z")
Of course, it’s simple, they’re not giving the patients enough zinc! 😉 CMC fnord! ---
**Author:** ![Dark\_Sponge](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dark_sponge/32/121_2.png) [@Dark\_Sponge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dark_Sponge)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2020, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-hydroxychloroquine-associated-with-survival/853192/55 "2020-05-22T17:42:53Z")
That’s awful. I can’t blame them for trying _something_ but it actually reduced their survival chances rather than helping them. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2020, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-hydroxychloroquine-associated-with-survival/853192/56 "2020-05-22T18:53:47Z")
> [@Dark\_Sponge](#): > > That’s awful. I can’t blame them for trying _something_ but it actually reduced their survival chances rather than helping them. The awful thing is that so many tried it, when there were other treatments which they could have tried and which were more likely to succeed. The popularity of this one crowded out other options, and gave humanity less useful data to operate on. ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2020, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-hydroxychloroquine-associated-with-survival/853192/57 "2020-05-22T19:04:03Z")
> [@Ann\_Hedonia](#): > > TL:dr Hydroxychloroquine- More Death, No Benefits No. TL: DR is it probably isn’t something you give very ill people since by that time its probably already too late to help them.But might be useful early on. [Politics aside, hydroxychloroquine could (maybe) help fight COVID-19](https://www.sciencenews.org/article/coronavirus-covid-19-politics-hydroxychloroquine-treatment-research) On the Lancet study > [@](#): > > Isn’t there already evidence that hydroxychloroquine doesn’t work against COVID-19? > Yes, and no. Very few rigorous trials of the drug have reported data. Some people were given the drug in studies in which there wasn’t a control group that got placebos, and results from some of those studies have been mixed, with some reporting benefits, others showing no effect, and some indicating that the drugs may even be harmful for some patients.\*\* Even the latest data from the large multinational study in the Lancet combined studies that used the drugs in different doses and in different ways that may not be directly comparable\*\*. > [@](#): > > Bu\*\*t just because the drug didn’t seem to help in late stages of the disease, that doesn’t mean it won’t be effective if given early, perhaps even before people are exposed to the virus, \*\*Avidan says. > > “If you bring on a star player consistently [only] in the last minute of a game and you’re still losing, you might say, ‘This star player is no good,’” Avidan says. “But that’s not a good use of your star player, because most of the outcome is already established at that very late stage.” Bringing a star in early to play the whole game, he says, may produce a much better outcome. And almost as if speaking directly to **Ann Hedonia** > [@](#): > > Because of reports of harm in very sick COVID-19 patients, “people have kind of forgotten about the decades of safety data that we do have in an ambulatory, healthy population,” she says. ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2020, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-hydroxychloroquine-associated-with-survival/853192/58 "2020-05-22T19:32:48Z")
Moreover the fact that this drug has become a target of political polarisation is disastrous. Trumps support and enthusiasm is misplaced. But the opposite reactions, like those of **Ann Hedonia** is just as bad, treating it as if its akin to leeching or giving prayers and incense. Like this. Emphasis supplied. [Politics Around Hydroxychloroquine Hamper Science](https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/05/21/859851682/politics-around-hydroxychloroquine-hamper-science) > [@](#): > > But for some researchers, running such trials is becoming more difficult because of the controversy around the drug. > > Missed opportunity > > Dr. Jon Giles didn’t expect to have any problems drumming up interest in his clinical trial testing if hydroxychloroquine can help prevent COVID-19. > > “We were getting calls all the time from people who were interested,” says Giles, an epidemiologist and rheumatologist at Columbia University. > > For his study, Giles planned to give a short course of the medication to people who were “household contacts” of COVID-19 patients. Like many of the ongoing trials, it would be randomized with a control group. > > By the end of April, Giles was ready to start enrolling people. But his team ran into a problem when they started calling potential participants. > > "Pretty much everybody said, ‘Well that’s the drug that’s dangerous to your heart,’ or, ‘I talked to my friends and they said don’t take it,’ or that ‘I saw on TV it’s dangerous,’ " says Giles. > > Just a month earlier, he says demand for the drug was soaring. Some patients with autoimmune conditions couldn’t even get their prescriptions filled, after Trump spoke enthusiastically about the drug. > > \*\*In April, the FDA issued a warning about using the drug for COVID-19 patients without strict medical supervision in a hospital or as part of a clinical trial. The agency had received reports of serious heart-related adverse events and death in patients with COVID-19 receiving hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine. > > But the back-and-forth headlines and the ongoing political wrangling seemed to make people wary of the medication, Giles says, even in the context of a carefully run clinical trial. > > “It became almost impossible to get anyone interested,” says Giles. > > Giles says the committee overseeing his study added a new requirement: that study participants needed to have had an electrocardiogram within the last year. > > As a rheumatologist, Giles knows the medication better than most doctors because he prescribes it to many of his patients. > > “It’s a very, very safe drug; it’s been used for over 75 years,” he says. “When I give someone hydroxychloroquine, I don’t get an ECG or do blood monitoring.” > > Giles was planning to enroll otherwise healthy people and screen out anyone who could be at risk of heart problems. But that new requirement, plus the negative press, made it too difficult to find study subjects. > > He gave up on doing the study. He says it’s a missed opportunity. > > “It’s not unreasonable to think that a short course of this drug might have some protective ability,” he say\*\*s. > > Risks and potential > > The concern over cardiac risk for hospitalized patients is real, says Dr. Mark Poznansky, director of the Vaccine and Immunotherapy Center in the Infectious Disease Division of Massachusetts General Hospital. Even though the drug has been used safely to prevent malaria, he says, “that is very different from using the drug in acutely ill patients with COVID-19.” > > He recently published a review of the evidence for using hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19 that casts doubt on its effectiveness. > > “The data up to date … doesn’t make one entirely optimistic that we are going to find something different in a clinical trial,” he says. > > Poznansky notes a recent study of nearly 1,400 people with moderate to severe COVID-19 found no benefit and concluded that the drug should not be routinely used on patients. > > He says the drug should only be used in the context of clinical trials “or under strict compassionate use, in order to do no harm.” > > Still, Poznansky doesn’t rule out that further well-designed trials could turn up better results. > > ‘The virus doesn’t care about politics’ > > At Henry Ford Health System in Detroit, cardiologist Dr. William O’Neill says enrollment for their clinical trial studying hydroxychloroquine to prevent COVID-19 plummeted in late April. > > “It really caused a huge problem for us,” O’Neill says. “It set us back probably a month.” > > O’Neill attributes the drop in enrollment to the FDA warning and a highly publicized study of over 300 hospitalized veterans with COVID-19. The authors of that study found the drug did not reduce the need for a ventilator and even linked hydroxychloroquine to higher death rates. However, the study wasn’t a rigorous controlled trial and the results weren’t peer-reviewed. > > “That was interpreted as a warning that the drug is dangerous,” says O’Neill. But he says, using it for prevention is a different matter than treating already sick patients. “Everything that we see about hydroxychloroquine suggests that the earlier you use the drug, the more likely it is to be effective.” > > \*\*O’Neill says the fact that President Trump is touting this drug means it now has become a political flashpoint. > > “It has made people absolutely committed to proving him wrong,” he says.\*\* ---
**Author:** ![What\_Exit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/what_exit/32/10652_2.png) [@What\_Exit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_Exit)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2020, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-hydroxychloroquine-associated-with-survival/853192/59 "2020-05-22T19:42:48Z")
Yay sound bites vs. studies. Very convincing wall of words. ---
**Author:** ![Ann\_Hedonia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ann_hedonia/32/319_2.png) [@Ann\_Hedonia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ann_Hedonia)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2020, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-hydroxychloroquine-associated-with-survival/853192/60 "2020-05-22T19:59:20Z")
I’m going to be posting something longer, but I want to make a comment with regards to the comment about the safety data so I doesn’t get lost inside a longer post. The proven safety profile is for the dosages used for rheumatic illnesses. Unfortunately, and this seems to be the catch, the anti-viral effects don’t kick in at that concentration, they require a much higher dosage. The recommended dosages for COVID patients were considerably higher than that for rheumatic diseases. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-hydroxychloroquine-associated-with-survival/853192.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-hydroxychloroquine-associated-with-survival/853192.md?page=4)