Dr. Pando, in the Health & Fitness April 7 gave a broad, sufficiently detailed, and rather reasonable discussion of the “nitty-gritty” of the appropriateness of using some existing drugs to treat COVID-19.
We all make decisions to do things based on some process of judgment after something comes up in our lives. Recently a flurry of interest was stirred up when - from somewhere - two chemicals (hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine and FDA approved but only for malaria treatment) were suggested as possible COVID-19 treatments. Add that President Trump is not only pushing this very hard but, from many other reports, also has a financial stake in companies that make the stuff. Thus one may be inclined to think about how much of his sales pitch is really about making profits.
Another big problem, however, comes from the idea, “Try it, what do you have to lose?” If anyone wants to, they can decide to jump off that line of thinking and go with it. On the other hand, my view is that one would do better to first look a little deeper into the story. Unfortunately it cannot be easily reduced for a letter to the editor. I do, however, invite interested readers to do internet searches on these very recent medical journal titles: “Some Swedish hospitals have stopped using Chloroquine to treat COVID-19 after reports of severe side effects” and “Mayo Clinic cardiologist: ‘Inexcusable’ to ignore hydroxycholine side effects” and “Small Trial Finds No Evidence That Hydroxychloroquine Works Against COVID-19.” A search on the ID string “PMID 32205204” will get a number of links to additional relevant medical journal articles including important cautions against a rush to judgement.
I got all of the above by free open access and free downloads of copies. The abstract, introduction, and discussion parts of all of these articles should be readable by most people. The lay media contain several reports of people being killed by the use (or misuse?) of some of these chemicals, and internet searches will find these. Still more reports say that changes in supply chains for these drugs are already drying up what is needed for existing malaria patients. This has an immediate definite negative outcome for malaria patients. Any possible positive outcomes that can be detected for COVID-19 patients might not be known for some time. Dr. Pando wisely pointed out some of these “unintended consequences” and “problems” in the middle of his Gazette article.
Being scientific about something is about being carefull in what you do and how you think and talk. Science does not usually go from ignorance to knowledge in some single magic step. The history of science tells us that for some problems it can take decades to even centuries. Doing your homework can only help you make a better, wiser decision. Most of the time there are two or more ways to go on many decisions. Advice that says “Nothing ventured, nothing gained” needs to be compared with the counter-advice “Nothing ventured, nothing lost.” Sometimes delaying a decision until more information becomes available is a better way to go, too.
Arthur E. Sowers
Harbeson
-
A letter to the editor expresses a reader's opinion and, as such, is not reflective of the editorial opinions of this newspaper.
To submit a letter to the editor for publishing, send an email to viewpoints@capegazette.com. All letters are considered at the discretion of the newsroom and published as space allows. Due to the large volume of submissions, we cannot acknowledge receipt of each submission. Letters must include a phone number and address for verification. Keep letters to 400 words or fewer. We reserve the right to edit for content or length. Letters should be responsive to issues addressed in the Cape Gazette rather than content from other publications or media. Letters should focus on local issues, not national topics or personalities. Only one letter per author will be published every 30 days regarding a particular topic. Authors may submit a second letter within that time period if it pertains to a different issue. Letters may not be critical of personalities or specific businesses. Criticism of public figures is permissible. Endorsement letters for political candidates are no longer accepted. Letters must be the author’s original work, and may not be generated by artificial intelligence tools. Templates, form letters and letters containing language similar to other submissions will not be published.
