4 ms·

it is a 70 years old drug with its safety profile well studied.

rscho 7y ago
Yes... well-studied does not mean without drawbacks. Right now on this day, OP is probably more likely to die from chloroquine administration than from the pandemic.
- jamesblonde 7y ago
  I dont think chloroquine has 3% morbidity. And if you are a higher risk individual, the math towards chloroquine improve. By dosing in a controlled ramp-up way, you can better mitigate many known side effects such as psychosis - identify earlier and most cases resolve when treatment is ceased.
  - rscho 7y ago
    3% is as good as a number drawn from a hat at this stage of the epidemic, be it drawn from Nature, Cell or whatever. Also, those 3% assume you are contaminated. You can't compare that to a short-to-medium term run of preventive chloroquine adminstration, which has a rather high incidence of minor side effects. You are statistically comparing oranges to apples. This behaviour increases your risk of hurting yourself by a large margin compared to simply following WHO recommendations.
    - angry_octet 7y ago
      Statistically, population wide chloroquine prophylaxis would probably cause more problems than is warranted by the COVID-19 threat. Even if it works, and isn't just wishful thinking / propaganda.
      - rscho 7y ago
        I agree.
    - jamesblonde 7y ago
      I don't disagree with you, actually. Like I said, if you are in a high risk group, the math changes - but I agree that mass preventive chloroquine adminstration would not be a good idea. However, if there is a large outbreak, shortages of chloroquine or you have to wait days/weeks for your doctor to prescribe chloroquine - that is not a place i personally want to be. On another note, this is a nice thread helping me (and maybe others) inform them about side effects and efficacy of possible treatments.
hexl 7y ago
Bleach has a well studied safety profile too
- blattimwind 7y ago
  Kills cancer, prevents caries
DanBC 7y ago
https://bnf.nice.org.uk/drug/chloroquine.html https://bnf.nice.org.uk/drug/chloroquine.html > Side-effects > Rare or very rare > Cardiomyopathy; hallucination; hepatitis >Frequency not known > Abdominal pain; agranulocytosis; alopecia; anxiety; atrioventricular block; bone marrow disorders; confusion; corneal deposits; depression; diarrhoea; eye disorders; gastrointestinal disorder; headache; hearing impairment; hypoglycaemia; hypotension; insomnia; interstitial lung disease; movement disorders; myopathy; nausea; neuromyopathy; neutropenia; personality change; photosensitivity reaction; psychotic disorder; QT interval prolongation; seizure; severe cutaneous adverse reactions (SCARs); skin reactions; thrombocytopenia; tinnitus; tongue protrusion; vision disorders; vomiting This "frequency not known" is listed alphabetically. There's some potentially fatal things in that list.
- biolurker1 7y ago
  have you tried reading paracetamol leaflet under the frequency not known paragraph?
  - refurb 7y ago
    Billions of people take paracetamol with no issues at all. That's not true about chloroquine.

Yes... well-studied does not mean without drawbacks. Right now on this day, OP is probably more likely to die from chloroquine administration than from the pandemic.

jamesblonde 7y ago
I dont think chloroquine has 3% morbidity. And if you are a higher risk individual, the math towards chloroquine improve. By dosing in a controlled ramp-up way, you can better mitigate many known side effects such as psychosis - identify earlier and most cases resolve when treatment is ceased.
- rscho 7y ago
  3% is as good as a number drawn from a hat at this stage of the epidemic, be it drawn from Nature, Cell or whatever. Also, those 3% assume you are contaminated. You can't compare that to a short-to-medium term run of preventive chloroquine adminstration, which has a rather high incidence of minor side effects. You are statistically comparing oranges to apples. This behaviour increases your risk of hurting yourself by a large margin compared to simply following WHO recommendations.
  - angry_octet 7y ago
    Statistically, population wide chloroquine prophylaxis would probably cause more problems than is warranted by the COVID-19 threat. Even if it works, and isn't just wishful thinking / propaganda.
    - rscho 7y ago
      I agree.
  - jamesblonde 7y ago
    I don't disagree with you, actually. Like I said, if you are in a high risk group, the math changes - but I agree that mass preventive chloroquine adminstration would not be a good idea. However, if there is a large outbreak, shortages of chloroquine or you have to wait days/weeks for your doctor to prescribe chloroquine - that is not a place i personally want to be. On another note, this is a nice thread helping me (and maybe others) inform them about side effects and efficacy of possible treatments.

hexl 7y ago

Bleach has a well studied safety profile too

blattimwind 7y ago
Kills cancer, prevents caries

DanBC 7y ago

https://bnf.nice.org.uk/drug/chloroquine.html https://bnf.nice.org.uk/drug/chloroquine.html > Side-effects > Rare or very rare > Cardiomyopathy; hallucination; hepatitis >Frequency not known > Abdominal pain; agranulocytosis; alopecia; anxiety; atrioventricular block; bone marrow disorders; confusion; corneal deposits; depression; diarrhoea; eye disorders; gastrointestinal disorder; headache; hearing impairment; hypoglycaemia; hypotension; insomnia; interstitial lung disease; movement disorders; myopathy; nausea; neuromyopathy; neutropenia; personality change; photosensitivity reaction; psychotic disorder; QT interval prolongation; seizure; severe cutaneous adverse reactions (SCARs); skin reactions; thrombocytopenia; tinnitus; tongue protrusion; vision disorders; vomiting This "frequency not known" is listed alphabetically. There's some potentially fatal things in that list.

biolurker1 7y ago
have you tried reading paracetamol leaflet under the frequency not known paragraph?
- refurb 7y ago
  Billions of people take paracetamol with no issues at all. That's not true about chloroquine.