> Likely died from heart attacks. The paper does not support this assertion: https://web.archive.org/web/20200413181618/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101

> Likely died from heart attacks. The paper does not support this assertion: https://web.archive.org/web/20200413181618/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.07.20056424v1.full.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20200413181618/https://www.medrx... > Both HCQ and azythro lengthen QT's. The paper does support this assertion. It also says "Several ongoing trials have been addressing the early use of CQ, in which the anti-inflammatory properties could be more helpful. That information is urgently needed." and also " Unfortunately, this study’s randomization, probably due to the low sample size, assigned older patients with heart disease to the high dosage arm." Uh-oh. TL;DR of the paper: if we give as much CQ as the Chinese recommend, people seem to have heart related side effects, so we had to stop treating them with the drug. And if we select older patients with heart disease for the high dosage arm, they tend to experience more side effects.