4 ms·

Based on the debate currently raging over hydroxychloroquine and its uses/effectiveness I can totally imagine the typical Twitter reaction being of rather poor

Based on the debate currently raging over hydroxychloroquine and its uses/effectiveness I can totally imagine the typical Twitter reaction being of rather poor quality.

raducu 6y ago
Is there any scientific consensus/studies showing hydroxycloriquine as effective? As far as I know, the biggest impact right now seem to be: anti-clotting medication, steroids, turning the patient on his belly and avoiding intubation for as long as possible.
- Proziam 6y ago
  As of right now, I believe the general consensus is that it's not effective (or at least not more effective than standard treatment). However, if you went back just a few weeks you'd have seen quite a few credible people claiming it could very well be a gamechanger. It says something that Trump was taking it, because even if you dislike the man it's hard to imagine there is any other human being on the planet with greater access to the world's best doctors and whatever bleeding edge technology could be used. That said, I was really highlighting a recent example of how poor communication is, and how fast opinion can shift.
  - gspr 6y ago
    > As of right now, I believe the general consensus is that it's not effective (or at least not more effective than standard treatment). However, if you went back just a few weeks you'd have seen quite a few credible people claiming it could very well be a gamechanger. I'm sorry, does this address the comment at all? There was indeed, this spring, real scientific debate over the potential efficacy of hydroxychloroquine. But the raging Twitter wars over it did not constitute that debate.
    - Proziam 6y ago
      No need to be sorry! I was asked if there's consensus regarding the effectiveness of HCQ. Currently, there is not. Not long ago, medical professionals were recommending it and there was, at least publicly, a consensus of sorts based on the positive results of early studies. I then pointed out how fast consensus shifted from 'this stuff is awesome' to 'this stuff is stupid' because I believe it's relevant for anyone trying to formulate their own opinion about how solid that consensus really is. The twitter wars and the general terrible communication online is a totally separate topic, and the one I was originally commenting on because /u/gbrown seemed to have a more positive outlook than I do on the subject.
  - raducu 6y ago
    Didn't Trump recommended people drink or inject bleach? Trump is just a narcissist with a God complex, I would by no means listen to him for medical advice.
    - skocznymroczny 6y ago
      No he didn't, you fell victim to the fake news media. During one of the press conferences, he asked some scientist or doctor guy if disinfectants can kill viruses on surface, would it be possible to create an injection that works like a disinfectant cleaning the body. He never said people should do that on their own.
    - gridlockd 6y ago
      > Didn't Trump recommended people drink or inject bleach? No, he didn't, listen to what he actually said. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33QdTOyXz3w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33QdTOyXz3w It's not a claim, it's an arguably stupid question to some guy off-screen. Yet, the title of this video is "President Trump claims injecting people with disinfectant could treat coronavirus". The outlet is the presumably reputable "Telegraph". Trump also never called Nazis "fine people". What actually was said: "...you had very fine people on both sides..." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmaZR8E12bs&feature=youtu.be&t=60 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmaZR8E12bs&feature=youtu.be... "And you had people - and I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists - because they should be condemned totally." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmaZR8E12bs&feature=youtu.be&t=117 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmaZR8E12bs&feature=youtu.be... The job of the media is to fabricate outrage and scandals, because that's how you get attention. Trump doesn't even mind, in fact he is taking advantage of it: https://growth.me/book-summaries/art-of-the-deal/#3-being-bold,-controversial-and-confrontational-will-force-people-to-pay-attention-to-you https://growth.me/book-summaries/art-of-the-deal/#3-being-bo... Remember when he "accidentally" mistook WWI for WWII in some press conference? The headline: "Another dumb thing that Trump said!" However, it's a mistake that anybody - particularly average Joe - could've made. It's not really that negative, in fact it could be endearing to some people. More importantly though, that headline is going to take attention away from actually negative news, such as "over a thousand American Coronavirus deaths occuring every day". So, if you think Trump is really that stupid, maybe you're not really that smart.
  - rsynnott 6y ago
    I mean, he probably has unparalleled access to the world's greatest mechanical and hydrological engineers if he wants it, but still seems noticeably confused about how toilets and dishwashers behave. The issue with Trump isn't that he doesn't have access to expertise; it's that he ignores it.
- Symmetry 6y ago
  The thing is you need people spreading ideas against the consensus because if they're good they might become part of the consensus. The consensus was very much against the public wearing masks in early March and against steroid use until fairly recently.
  - rsynnott 6y ago
    And both of those things are now considered valid approaches due to research establishing that, not because random celebrities promoted them on twitter. Health authorities didn't change recommendations on masks and dexamethasone due to twitter lobbying; they changed them because evidence emerged that they were safe and and least somewhat effective.
rsynnott 6y ago
The issue with hydroxychloroquine is that claims of effectiveness without evidence, particularly as a prophylactic, cause an immediate public danger (particularly given its promotion by certain public figures in an irresponsible manner; see "what have you got to lose?") This isn't purely theoretical; people have self-medicated and died. At any given time there are thousands and thousands of unproven drugs under development or being evaluated for new applications. There are even many possible covid treatments being evaluated without similar controversy, because no-one with a large audience has suggested self-medication. Hopefully the hydroxychloroquine thing is a one-off, and public figures will be more careful in future about public promotion of unapproved drugs. It would be extremely dangerous, and damaging to legitimate scientific investigation, if this sort of thing becomes common.

Based on the debate currently raging over hydroxychloroquine and its uses/effectiveness I can totally imagine the typical Twitter reaction being of rather poor quality.

raducu 6y ago

Is there any scientific consensus/studies showing hydroxycloriquine as effective? As far as I know, the biggest impact right now seem to be: anti-clotting medication, steroids, turning the patient on his belly and avoiding intubation for as long as possible.

Proziam 6y ago
As of right now, I believe the general consensus is that it's not effective (or at least not more effective than standard treatment). However, if you went back just a few weeks you'd have seen quite a few credible people claiming it could very well be a gamechanger. It says something that Trump was taking it, because even if you dislike the man it's hard to imagine there is any other human being on the planet with greater access to the world's best doctors and whatever bleeding edge technology could be used. That said, I was really highlighting a recent example of how poor communication is, and how fast opinion can shift.
- gspr 6y ago
  > As of right now, I believe the general consensus is that it's not effective (or at least not more effective than standard treatment). However, if you went back just a few weeks you'd have seen quite a few credible people claiming it could very well be a gamechanger. I'm sorry, does this address the comment at all? There was indeed, this spring, real scientific debate over the potential efficacy of hydroxychloroquine. But the raging Twitter wars over it did not constitute that debate.
  - Proziam 6y ago
    No need to be sorry! I was asked if there's consensus regarding the effectiveness of HCQ. Currently, there is not. Not long ago, medical professionals were recommending it and there was, at least publicly, a consensus of sorts based on the positive results of early studies. I then pointed out how fast consensus shifted from 'this stuff is awesome' to 'this stuff is stupid' because I believe it's relevant for anyone trying to formulate their own opinion about how solid that consensus really is. The twitter wars and the general terrible communication online is a totally separate topic, and the one I was originally commenting on because /u/gbrown seemed to have a more positive outlook than I do on the subject.
- raducu 6y ago
  Didn't Trump recommended people drink or inject bleach? Trump is just a narcissist with a God complex, I would by no means listen to him for medical advice.
  - skocznymroczny 6y ago
    No he didn't, you fell victim to the fake news media. During one of the press conferences, he asked some scientist or doctor guy if disinfectants can kill viruses on surface, would it be possible to create an injection that works like a disinfectant cleaning the body. He never said people should do that on their own.
  - gridlockd 6y ago
    > Didn't Trump recommended people drink or inject bleach? No, he didn't, listen to what he actually said. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33QdTOyXz3w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33QdTOyXz3w It's not a claim, it's an arguably stupid question to some guy off-screen. Yet, the title of this video is "President Trump claims injecting people with disinfectant could treat coronavirus". The outlet is the presumably reputable "Telegraph". Trump also never called Nazis "fine people". What actually was said: "...you had very fine people on both sides..." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmaZR8E12bs&feature=youtu.be&t=60 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmaZR8E12bs&feature=youtu.be... "And you had people - and I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists - because they should be condemned totally." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmaZR8E12bs&feature=youtu.be&t=117 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmaZR8E12bs&feature=youtu.be... The job of the media is to fabricate outrage and scandals, because that's how you get attention. Trump doesn't even mind, in fact he is taking advantage of it: https://growth.me/book-summaries/art-of-the-deal/#3-being-bold,-controversial-and-confrontational-will-force-people-to-pay-attention-to-you https://growth.me/book-summaries/art-of-the-deal/#3-being-bo... Remember when he "accidentally" mistook WWI for WWII in some press conference? The headline: "Another dumb thing that Trump said!" However, it's a mistake that anybody - particularly average Joe - could've made. It's not really that negative, in fact it could be endearing to some people. More importantly though, that headline is going to take attention away from actually negative news, such as "over a thousand American Coronavirus deaths occuring every day". So, if you think Trump is really that stupid, maybe you're not really that smart.
- rsynnott 6y ago
  I mean, he probably has unparalleled access to the world's greatest mechanical and hydrological engineers if he wants it, but still seems noticeably confused about how toilets and dishwashers behave. The issue with Trump isn't that he doesn't have access to expertise; it's that he ignores it.
Symmetry 6y ago
The thing is you need people spreading ideas against the consensus because if they're good they might become part of the consensus. The consensus was very much against the public wearing masks in early March and against steroid use until fairly recently.
- rsynnott 6y ago
  And both of those things are now considered valid approaches due to research establishing that, not because random celebrities promoted them on twitter. Health authorities didn't change recommendations on masks and dexamethasone due to twitter lobbying; they changed them because evidence emerged that they were safe and and least somewhat effective.

rsynnott 6y ago

The issue with hydroxychloroquine is that claims of effectiveness without evidence, particularly as a prophylactic, cause an immediate public danger (particularly given its promotion by certain public figures in an irresponsible manner; see "what have you got to lose?") This isn't purely theoretical; people have self-medicated and died. At any given time there are thousands and thousands of unproven drugs under development or being evaluated for new applications. There are even many possible covid treatments being evaluated without similar controversy, because no-one with a large audience has suggested self-medication. Hopefully the hydroxychloroquine thing is a one-off, and public figures will be more careful in future about public promotion of unapproved drugs. It would be extremely dangerous, and damaging to legitimate scientific investigation, if this sort of thing becomes common.