5 ms·

Politically, yes, there was/is a cargo cult. Both for those convinced it's a cure, and the anti-cargo-cult opposing party convinced it's somewhere between usele

Politically, yes, there was/is a cargo cult. Both for those convinced it's a cure, and the anti-cargo-cult opposing party convinced it's somewhere between useless and actively harmful. From a medical practice standpoint, you have a widely-available drug with well-known side effects that can be administered in a medical setting with low risk, and potential life-saving upside. When the research is early but potentially promising, it's not irrational to administer in cases where the side effects should be well-tolerated, even if later research shows no or low benefit. The problem arises from self-administration without medical supervision, or with inadequate medical supervision.

firasd 7y ago
The problem with 'low risk / high upside' is that it can apply to anything. We can try lemonade since it has low risk and high upside. But at some point we have to start wondering if we should all be obsessed with lemonade right? Even when doctors were using HCQ before the politicians and random outsiders picked up on it, there were other drugs in the mix that they were also considering (Lopinavir, Remdesivir, etc). Incidentally Remdesivir trials have also come out lately seeming pretty weak. But there is still nowhere near the level of frenzy around Remdesivir as there has been around HCQ to the extent of advocacy at White House press briefings, international diplomatic incidents... it's beginning to seem like a very strange mass hallucination.
- bluGill 7y ago
  If there is a serious suggestion that lemonade works we should try it in medical settings. So far the only suggestions come from those who point to alternate theories without any science - even a case study. If you get a doctor to try it and it works ill be more interested. Until then it is quacks and I'm not.
- intuitionist 7y ago
  Remdesivir is very difficult and expensive to synthesize, and it’s patented by Gilead. HCQ is dirt cheap and generic. Of course we should be testing anything that shows enough promise and has a well understood safety profile, but it’s obvious why the cheap generic drug working would be better.
ajross 7y ago
> anti-cargo-cult opposing party convinced it's somewhere between useless and actively harmful. Can you name some prominent members of this cult and their statements that match this framing? Serious question. I don't think anyone really matches that description. Pretty much everyone horrified at the cloroquine boosterism was horrified because it was irresponsible and dangerous, not because they had strong feelings about the drug itself.
- massaman_yams 7y ago
  A handful of friends/acquaintances on fb - so, no, sorry. It's clear they're less informed than most, and I've certainly seen plenty of more appropriate responses along the lines of what you describe. To clarify a bit: it's certainly not the position of the opposing party as a whole, but those I saw who were vehemently opposed to it were ideologically motivated.
  - ajross 7y ago
    So... you consider a handful of people in your social media circle rhetorically equivalent to an "opposing party" made up of most of the major media figures on the biggest news channel on TV and the president of the United States?
    - massaman_yams 7y ago
      No. My original comment wasn't worded well, sorry. See my clarification above.

firasd 7y ago

The problem with 'low risk / high upside' is that it can apply to anything. We can try lemonade since it has low risk and high upside. But at some point we have to start wondering if we should all be obsessed with lemonade right? Even when doctors were using HCQ before the politicians and random outsiders picked up on it, there were other drugs in the mix that they were also considering (Lopinavir, Remdesivir, etc). Incidentally Remdesivir trials have also come out lately seeming pretty weak. But there is still nowhere near the level of frenzy around Remdesivir as there has been around HCQ to the extent of advocacy at White House press briefings, international diplomatic incidents... it's beginning to seem like a very strange mass hallucination.

bluGill 7y ago
If there is a serious suggestion that lemonade works we should try it in medical settings. So far the only suggestions come from those who point to alternate theories without any science - even a case study. If you get a doctor to try it and it works ill be more interested. Until then it is quacks and I'm not.
intuitionist 7y ago
Remdesivir is very difficult and expensive to synthesize, and it’s patented by Gilead. HCQ is dirt cheap and generic. Of course we should be testing anything that shows enough promise and has a well understood safety profile, but it’s obvious why the cheap generic drug working would be better.

ajross 7y ago

> anti-cargo-cult opposing party convinced it's somewhere between useless and actively harmful. Can you name some prominent members of this cult and their statements that match this framing? Serious question. I don't think anyone really matches that description. Pretty much everyone horrified at the cloroquine boosterism was horrified because it was irresponsible and dangerous, not because they had strong feelings about the drug itself.

massaman_yams 7y ago
A handful of friends/acquaintances on fb - so, no, sorry. It's clear they're less informed than most, and I've certainly seen plenty of more appropriate responses along the lines of what you describe. To clarify a bit: it's certainly not the position of the opposing party as a whole, but those I saw who were vehemently opposed to it were ideologically motivated.
- ajross 7y ago
  So... you consider a handful of people in your social media circle rhetorically equivalent to an "opposing party" made up of most of the major media figures on the biggest news channel on TV and the president of the United States?
  - massaman_yams 7y ago
    No. My original comment wasn't worded well, sorry. See my clarification above.