Live data from Hacker News

Study: No evidence of efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients

medrxiv.org

211–220 of 379 posts

Re: Study: No evidence of efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients

#211

While we're here, "Traditional Chinese Medicine in the Treatment of Patients Infected with 2019-New Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2): A Review and Perspective" ( https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7098036/ ) Hey, it can't hurt and it might help. China has had one of the best recoveries from the pandemic.

Thanks for sharing this, not sure why you're getting downvoted. TCM has its place, Artemisia Annua has been used as an anti-malarial treatment as well for hundreds of years, and again, is cheap, available, and side effects are known. I've had anecdotal experience that it's helpful for milder coronavirus symptoms.

> Thanks for sharing this, not sure why you're getting downvoted.

Because TCM is - charitably - pseudoscience. Many of its remedies involve grinding up endangered animals into concoctions that have no plausible mechanism of treating the thing they're meant to treat.

> I've had anecdotal experience that it's helpful for milder coronavirus symptoms.

I have anecdotal experience that my microsorium musifolium plant has been effective in preventing coronavirus infection in my household. Unfortunately, just like your statement, this doesn't qualify as evidence and shouldn't be used to make public health decisions.

Re: Study: No evidence of efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients

#212
post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I seriously doubt anyone on the planet right now (short of being deranged) wants a treatment not to work. I understand wanting to chastise Trump for being exaggerated and reckless about an unproven treatment, but wanting it not to work? That can't be true.

A proven successful use of this drug would be very inconvenient for multiple media outlets who jumped at the (described as) unfounded claim. It would mean that either (a) the authorities had more information than they did, or that (b) the authorities bet successfully with the same amount of information, which doesn't align with their constant reporting of idiocy.

You are right, but b) has an obvious logical fallacy. It assumes essentially that only intelligent people can win the lottery. Of course, this won't matter for the political discourse.

Re: Study: No evidence of efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients

#213

While we're here, "Traditional Chinese Medicine in the Treatment of Patients Infected with 2019-New Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2): A Review and Perspective" ( https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7098036/ ) Hey, it can't hurt and it might help. China has had one of the best recoveries from the pandemic.

I cannot tell if you are purposefully trolling, or this is sincere.

Regardless, let's wade in…

1. That's not's a study. That's not a metareview. That's a puff piece by people who have a strong, strong self-interest in promoting TCM, because they want to keep their department chairs.

2. Oh heck, I'll just quote the entire last paragraph:

"The safety of TCM in the treatment of emerging coronavirus diseases was not included in the observation on SARS patients. It was reported that some herbs used in TCM contain nephrotoxins and mutagens, while the toxicological features of the most of Chinese herbal medicines remain to be fully understood. Furthermore, herbs used in TCM can mimic, or magnify, or oppose the effect of conventional medicines. Thus, the safety of TCM used in treatment of emerging coronavirus infections should be carefully evaluated. It is particularly important to avoid toxicity or interfere with the efficacy of conventional treatment caused by herb-drug interaction."

So, in conclusion, we don't know if this works, and this stuff may be toxic, and it may have drug interactions, and oh by the way there's no quality control on this so you have no idea what's in the medications.

Might as well recommend acupuncture and getting your chakras aligned, couldn't hurt! (Probably less of a chance it hurting than taking a wild dose of unregulated herbal supplements.)

Re: Study: No evidence of efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients

#214
post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there a source for this claim?

Wikipedia links to two WaPo articles at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydroxychloroquine#Regulatory_... Guardian article - https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/27/vital-drug-peo... . It cites someone from Lupus UK. Their page at http://www.lupusuk.org.uk/uk-azathioprine-supply/ says "we have received reports from a number of people with lupus who have been unable to fulfil their prescription of azathioprine" an…

Is this shortage universal? Have there been shortages before, either universal or local? Is there evidence that this particular local shortage is due specifically to coronavirus demand?

It may be that the answer to these questions is "yes," but that answer seems to be being assumed right now.

Re: Study: No evidence of efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients

#215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re overestimating the difficulty of this. But don’t trust me. Go talk to a generics drug manufacturer in India yourself.

So that's why it's so hard to find things like flour or toilet paper right now? Nothing to do with supply chains and manufacturing, just too much regulation? Can't wait until we repeal the 4-ply rule!

I haven’t looked at why flour or toilet paper have shortages and don’t know the primary factors there[1]. I’ve done all I that I care to to inform you.

1: It’s probably the bullwhip effect and hysteresis in the supply chain but that’s speculation on my part.

Re: Study: No evidence of efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients

#216
post #3
post #2

TLDR: French publication, non randomized 181 patients (hospitalized with pneumonia and O2 requirement) with control group (84 with HCQ, 97 without HCQ), no efficacy but adverse effects for some.

All the HQC results other than the heart problems (a known side effect) were slightly better, just not enough so to be statistically significant, I guess.

They are also quite likely correlated. If, by random chance, you have healthier people in one group than the other, it's likely they will have better outcomes in most categories.

Re: Study: No evidence of efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients

#217
post #99

Given the study's small sample size, it seems the only way it would have produced a conclusive result is if the effect size was huge (i.e. miracle cure). The study found some evidence of efficacy, but it was not significant given the sample size. A better headline would say something like: "study finds that HCQ is not a miracle cure for already-hospitalized covid-19 patients".

How much are you willing to pay for "not a miracle cure" on the basis of "eh, it can't hurt"?

Whether it works or not, HCQ is not a costly drug by any means.

Re: Study: No evidence of efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients

#218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re overestimating the difficulty of this. But don’t trust me. Go talk to a generics drug manufacturer in India yourself.

So that's why it's so hard to find things like flour or toilet paper right now? Nothing to do with supply chains and manufacturing, just too much regulation? Can't wait until we repeal the 4-ply rule!

It really lasted about 4 weeks of hoarding before the supply chain caught up. Costco today had those products as far as the eye can see.

Besides, by requiring a prescription you’re negating the ability for people to hoard. And a single pallet of HCQ is enough to treat thousands of people.

I really hope you look into how easy to manufacture and abundant HCQ is. It’s important to combat media scaremongering.

Re: Study: No evidence of efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients

#219
This study is specifically about patients sick enough to be put on oxygen. The top ranked comments don't seem to address that detail.

Some thoughts:

My understanding is this is a powerful alkaloid. My experience has been that similar compounds can help combat inflammation. They also can work to help kill infection at times.

By the time people with Covid19 need oxygen, inflammation doesn't seem to be the primary problem. So I wouldn't think it would be particularly helpful at that point.

Ventilators get prescribed in part on the assumption that inflammation in the lungs is a major impediment to getting sufficient oxygen. Ventilators are failing at a shockingly high rate, with a death rate up around 80% or so. Some doctors are moving away from ventilators because the death rate is so high.

I spoke recently with a researcher who suggested impaired vasodilation was a possible explanation for the reports of low oxygen combined with a surprising lack of pneumonia and inflammation in some cases and that makes a lot of sense to me. The mechanism causing low oxygen does not appear to be the obvious answer of "lung inflammation and pneumonia."

That doesn't mean this drug can't play a meaningful role at some stage. It mostly means it's not the magic bullet solution for advanced cases that they were hoping for.

This in no way surprises me because the things it actually treats do not appear to be the cause of low oxygen in advanced covid19 cases.

Re: Study: No evidence of efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients

#220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it's become an arbitrary political football to separate "left" vs "right"

As insane as that is. And how funny is it (at least to me) that this is only because Trump came down on one side initially. If he had come out saying exactly the opposite, that HCQ was bad and we should be skeptical, everyone hoping it doesn’t work now would be looking for the 10 person studies saying it totally works and defending its use. It’s almost beyond reason how hyper partisan this specific issue is.

This isn't left vs right; it's an unqualified politician vs pretty much all of the scientific community.
Post reply on HN