Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHow coronavirus turned medical research into a free-for-all
Source: The New Statesman
BY SAMUEL HORTI
29 APRIL 2020
What the story of hydroxychloroquine tells us about the dangers of fast-track science, and shows how any piece of research can be made to fit a political narrative.
On 20 March, a group of French scientists claimed to have shown that hydroxychloroquine a drug commonly used for malaria, rheumatoid arthritis and lupus could be used to treat patients with Covid-19. They recommended, based on the results of their study, that doctors give Covid-19 patients the drug in combination with the common antibiotic azithromycin to cure their infection and
curb the spread of Covid-19 in the world.
This trial was fraught with problems. It was an open label trial, meaning patients knew whether they were receiving the treatment or not, and the subjects were not allocated to the two groups randomly, as should happen. The editor-in-chief of the journal that published the research was also one of the papers co-authors, which is highly unusual. The normally lengthy peer-review process, during which experts scrutinise research and assess suitability for publication, took 24 hours. And in February, Didier Raoult, the microbiologist leading the study, had co-authored an article hyping up the potential of the drug before it was clinically tested. The whole thing stinks, says Lawrence Young, a virologist and pro-dean at the University of Warwick.
The results, too, were suspect. The 20 patients who were treated and recorded as having completed the study fared better than other subjects but this group originally had 26 patients. Six dropped out; one left the hospital, another felt too ill to carry on, three were sent to intensive care, and one patient died. In any other year, the study would have been dismissed out of hand.
Three days later, a 61-year-old woman from Arizona noticed that a substance she used to remove parasites from her pet fish contained chloroquine phosphate, the same compound found in anti-malarial drugs. She and her husband, 68, mixed the chemical into their drinks. Within a few hours she was in a critical condition and her husband had died. They had drunk the powerful chemical because, as she later told NBC News from hospital, they were afraid of getting sick from coronavirus.
This trial was fraught with problems. It was an open label trial, meaning patients knew whether they were receiving the treatment or not, and the subjects were not allocated to the two groups randomly, as should happen. The editor-in-chief of the journal that published the research was also one of the papers co-authors, which is highly unusual. The normally lengthy peer-review process, during which experts scrutinise research and assess suitability for publication, took 24 hours. And in February, Didier Raoult, the microbiologist leading the study, had co-authored an article hyping up the potential of the drug before it was clinically tested. The whole thing stinks, says Lawrence Young, a virologist and pro-dean at the University of Warwick.
The results, too, were suspect. The 20 patients who were treated and recorded as having completed the study fared better than other subjects but this group originally had 26 patients. Six dropped out; one left the hospital, another felt too ill to carry on, three were sent to intensive care, and one patient died. In any other year, the study would have been dismissed out of hand.
Three days later, a 61-year-old woman from Arizona noticed that a substance she used to remove parasites from her pet fish contained chloroquine phosphate, the same compound found in anti-malarial drugs. She and her husband, 68, mixed the chemical into their drinks. Within a few hours she was in a critical condition and her husband had died. They had drunk the powerful chemical because, as she later told NBC News from hospital, they were afraid of getting sick from coronavirus.
Read more: https://www.newstatesman.com/science-tech/coronavirus/2020/04/how-coronavirus-turned-medical-research-free-all
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
2 replies, 397 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (3)
ReplyReply to this post
2 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
How coronavirus turned medical research into a free-for-all (Original Post)
Mike 03
Apr 2020
OP
Medical care is precisely the wrong place to go all free market capitalism...
Wounded Bear
Apr 2020
#2
crickets
(25,993 posts)1. K&R for visibility.
Wounded Bear
(58,795 posts)2. Medical care is precisely the wrong place to go all free market capitalism...
Snake oil salesmen are crawling out from under their rocks.