4 ms·
> Didier Raoult in his very controversial paper suggested prophylaxis after exposure to the virus. To be fair, Didier Raoult has changed his own claims several
by Yoric 6y ago
> Didier Raoult in his very controversial paper suggested prophylaxis after exposure to the virus.
To be fair, Didier Raoult has changed his own claims several times (including dosage, drug mix and he even switched from chloroquine to hydroxychloroquine – afait, these are different molecules). Including after the studies were started.
This doesn't mean that he's wrong, but at this stage, there are so many red flags that it's hard to take anything he said seriously.
- marvin 6y agoFor the purposes we're discussing here, Raoult et al. are front-line clinicians working to save lives under extreme uncertainty, with every decision scrutinized with the benefit of hindsight. You shouldn't hold them to the same standard as pure research scientists. Research scientists have all the time in the world, clinicians don't. Once again, it's a peacetime army of bureaucrats vs. an unknown enemy that doesn't have the decency to wait for understanding to catch up with reality. Decisions have to be made with an imperfect understanding, in a reality that changes every day. The truth will seem obvious afterwards, but right now it doesn't. Those not on the front lines should keep to their very important job of improving prospects for the future, and keep the judgement out of it.