4 ms·

I think replying with a sardonic “Wrong.” and then making an unsubstantiated claim made it pretty clear what the pretext of your comment was. But sure...I’ll gi

I think replying with a sardonic “Wrong.” and then making an unsubstantiated claim made it pretty clear what the pretext of your comment was. But sure...I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt. Regardless, no it’s not “safe beyond argument”. Let’s try again. FDA: >”Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine: - should be used for COVID-19 only when patients can be appropriately monitored in the hospital as required by the EUA or are enrolled in a clinical trial with appropriate screening and monitoring. FDA is reviewing the safety of their use when used outside of the setting of hospitalized patients for whom use was authorized. have not been shown to be safe and effective for treating or preventing COVID-19. are being studied in clinical trials for COVID-19, and FDA authorized their temporary use during the COVID-19 pandemic under limited circumstances through the EUA, and not through regular FDA approval. - being used under the EUA when supplied from the Strategic National Stockpile, the national repository of critical medical supplies to be used during public health emergencies. can cause abnormal heart rhythms such as QT interval prolongation can cause dangerously rapid heart rate called ventricular tachycardia. - pose risks that may increase when these medicines are combined with other medicines known to prolong the QT interval, including the antibiotic azithromycin, which is also being used in some COVID-19 patients without FDA approval for this condition. - should be used with caution in Patients who also have other health issues such as heart and kidney disease, who are likely to be at increased risk of these heart problems when receiving these medicines.” >“Be aware that hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine can: - cause QT prolongation - increase the risk of QT prolongation in patients with renal insufficiency or failure - increase insulin levels and insulin action causing increased risk of severe hypoglycemia - cause hemolysis in patients with Glucose-6-Phosphate Dehydrogenase (G6PD) deficiency - interact with other medicines that cause QT prolongation even after discontinuing the medicines due to their long half-lives of approximately 30-60 days” https://www.fda.gov/safety/medical-product-safety-information/hydroxychloroquine-or-chloroquine-covid-19-drug-safety-communication-fda-cautions-against-use https://www.fda.gov/safety/medical-product-safety-informatio...

ping_pong 6y ago
Your reference conflates hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine to try to prove your point. Chloroquiine is a different drug with stronger side effects, which I explicitly mentioned. How about finding information about hydroxychlorquine on its own? This is from the FDA itself: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2007/009768s041lbl.pdf https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2007/00... I suggest you actually try to do some deeper research besides just reading politicized versions of information. First and foremost, educate yourself on the differences between hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine, they are two different chemicals. Just like how "dihydrogen monoxide" and "hydrogen sulfate" are two different chemicals, even though they have the word "hydrogen" in them.
- jointpdf 6y ago
  Ah, so the sources that don’t fit your narrative are “politicized”, yet others (from the same entity) are not? What a convenient pattern of thought. I read the document you linked to, and it outlines the potential risks and side effects of the medication and clearly specified that it should be administered with the supervision of a doctor. This adds evidentiary weight against your original claim that it is “safer than acetaminophen” (which yes, is also dangerous if misused), and you still haven’t provided any evidence whatsoever for that claim. I’ll wait. All drugs have risks and benefits. Some of those risks can be magnified in nonlinear ways based on many potential interactions, which is why people should rely on medical advice from their doctors, and should fully ignore opinions from ping_pong. For some uses, the benefits outweigh the risks. Context matters. Is grapefruit juice safe? It depends. In combination with some medications, it can kill you.
  - ping_pong 6y ago
    You pretty much completely negated whatever point you had, so I'm not sure what your point is now. Every drug has positive and negative side effects. Just because a small percentage of people have adverse side effects doesn't mean that the drug is unsafe, otherwise ALL DRUGS are unsafe by this definition. So if your point is that all drugs, including hydroxychloroquine, are unsafe, then fine, you are correct by this absurd definition. However, to more reasonable people, hydroxychloroquine is safe because the vast majority of people can take it daily for decades without any adverse effects. People with lupus and rheumatoid arthritis take it daily, with most having no adverse effects. It's provably more safe than a drug like Acetominophen. Are there people who suffer adverse effects by taking it? Yes. But it's a small minority of people. And if the only definition of "safe" is that no one ever gets adverse effects, then there is no such chemical that qualifies to be safe, including water. Water in large enough doses will kill people. The reason why I'm saying it's politicized is because the very mention of the drug has become politicized. Look at your reaction and other responses. I never mentioned COVID-19, and you were the one to bring it up. The drug has been caught up in the nonsense with COVID-19 and Trump taking it, but that was never the point. I never mentioned that, all I did was talk about whether or not it's safe, which it is. People like you who know nothing about the drug start echoing talking points from the news because you think you're so much smarter than other people, and yet you don't even read basic information about the drug. If you did, you would speak more educatedly about the drug instead of parrot what you heard on Twitter. If you don't believe what was written by the CDC and the FDA, then that's your right to believe whatever it is that you want. But it's not science, it's religion. You want to believe that hydroxychloroquine is a dangerous drug even against science. Even the research paper that you linked to has been resoundly criticized with science and math. But I guess since you religiously believe what you want to believe, you'll stick with believing that the paper is correct instead of following the science.
lenkite 6y ago
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-05-india-hydroxychloroquine-virus.html https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-05-india-hydroxychloroqu... Observational and case control studies in India showed there were "no major side effects" of taking the drug as a prophylactic, ICMR Director-General Balram Bhargava said. Cases of nausea, vomiting and heart palpitations were noted, he added. Last week, the ICMR—which is leading the government's response to the virus—expanded its advisory for the use of hydroxychloroquine as a preventative measure. The body said all healthcare workers in hospitals and some frontline personnel could now take the drug for up to several weeks under strict medical supervision. "We recommended that for prophylaxis, it should be continued, because there is no harm. Benefit may be there," Bhargava told reporters. Bhargava added that when the ICMR weighed the risks and benefits of the drug, it decided that "we should not deny it to our frontline workers and healthcare workers."
- jointpdf 6y ago
  Cool, good to know (not being sarcastic). This is an example of public health / medical professionals making a rational risk vs. benefit decision and pursuing harm reduction (“for up to several weeks under medical supervision”). AKA, they are practicing medicine, and also collecting valuable experience/data on a potential use of the drug. All good.

ping_pong 6y ago

Your reference conflates hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine to try to prove your point. Chloroquiine is a different drug with stronger side effects, which I explicitly mentioned. How about finding information about hydroxychlorquine on its own? This is from the FDA itself: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2007/009768s041lbl.pdf https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2007/00... I suggest you actually try to do some deeper research besides just reading politicized versions of information. First and foremost, educate yourself on the differences between hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine, they are two different chemicals. Just like how "dihydrogen monoxide" and "hydrogen sulfate" are two different chemicals, even though they have the word "hydrogen" in them.

jointpdf 6y ago
Ah, so the sources that don’t fit your narrative are “politicized”, yet others (from the same entity) are not? What a convenient pattern of thought. I read the document you linked to, and it outlines the potential risks and side effects of the medication and clearly specified that it should be administered with the supervision of a doctor. This adds evidentiary weight against your original claim that it is “safer than acetaminophen” (which yes, is also dangerous if misused), and you still haven’t provided any evidence whatsoever for that claim. I’ll wait. All drugs have risks and benefits. Some of those risks can be magnified in nonlinear ways based on many potential interactions, which is why people should rely on medical advice from their doctors, and should fully ignore opinions from ping_pong. For some uses, the benefits outweigh the risks. Context matters. Is grapefruit juice safe? It depends. In combination with some medications, it can kill you.
- ping_pong 6y ago
  You pretty much completely negated whatever point you had, so I'm not sure what your point is now. Every drug has positive and negative side effects. Just because a small percentage of people have adverse side effects doesn't mean that the drug is unsafe, otherwise ALL DRUGS are unsafe by this definition. So if your point is that all drugs, including hydroxychloroquine, are unsafe, then fine, you are correct by this absurd definition. However, to more reasonable people, hydroxychloroquine is safe because the vast majority of people can take it daily for decades without any adverse effects. People with lupus and rheumatoid arthritis take it daily, with most having no adverse effects. It's provably more safe than a drug like Acetominophen. Are there people who suffer adverse effects by taking it? Yes. But it's a small minority of people. And if the only definition of "safe" is that no one ever gets adverse effects, then there is no such chemical that qualifies to be safe, including water. Water in large enough doses will kill people. The reason why I'm saying it's politicized is because the very mention of the drug has become politicized. Look at your reaction and other responses. I never mentioned COVID-19, and you were the one to bring it up. The drug has been caught up in the nonsense with COVID-19 and Trump taking it, but that was never the point. I never mentioned that, all I did was talk about whether or not it's safe, which it is. People like you who know nothing about the drug start echoing talking points from the news because you think you're so much smarter than other people, and yet you don't even read basic information about the drug. If you did, you would speak more educatedly about the drug instead of parrot what you heard on Twitter. If you don't believe what was written by the CDC and the FDA, then that's your right to believe whatever it is that you want. But it's not science, it's religion. You want to believe that hydroxychloroquine is a dangerous drug even against science. Even the research paper that you linked to has been resoundly criticized with science and math. But I guess since you religiously believe what you want to believe, you'll stick with believing that the paper is correct instead of following the science.

lenkite 6y ago

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-05-india-hydroxychloroquine-virus.html https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-05-india-hydroxychloroqu... Observational and case control studies in India showed there were "no major side effects" of taking the drug as a prophylactic, ICMR Director-General Balram Bhargava said. Cases of nausea, vomiting and heart palpitations were noted, he added. Last week, the ICMR—which is leading the government's response to the virus—expanded its advisory for the use of hydroxychloroquine as a preventative measure. The body said all healthcare workers in hospitals and some frontline personnel could now take the drug for up to several weeks under strict medical supervision. "We recommended that for prophylaxis, it should be continued, because there is no harm. Benefit may be there," Bhargava told reporters. Bhargava added that when the ICMR weighed the risks and benefits of the drug, it decided that "we should not deny it to our frontline workers and healthcare workers."

jointpdf 6y ago
Cool, good to know (not being sarcastic). This is an example of public health / medical professionals making a rational risk vs. benefit decision and pursuing harm reduction (“for up to several weeks under medical supervision”). AKA, they are practicing medicine, and also collecting valuable experience/data on a potential use of the drug. All good.