Skip to main content

COVID-19 and Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine: First, Do No Harm

Image
By

In a recent post, I presented why I believe that the fragmentary and anecdotal medical evidence supporting the use of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19 does not justify its use. Certainly, if I become infected with the coronavirus, I would be reluctant to accept a recommendation to take either of these 2 medications, based on what is currently known.

Ordinary people, especially when they or loved ones are afflicted with a disease, will readily accept unproven remedies, especially when conventional medicine has no effective treatment.  We all understand this.  But the lack of a treatment, in my view, does not justify abandoning our usual standards that physicians rely upon when we make treatment recommendations.  
Shouldn't Physicians Weigh the Risks and Benefits?
Here are some reasons why I object to coronavirus patients taking chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19.   The principles outlined below certainly extend beyond the coronavirus issue.
  • The medical profession should not be prescribing treatments that have no reasonable evidence of efficacy.  Patients should have confidence that our therapeutic recommendations are based on sound science, professional experience and sound judgment.
  • Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine efficacy against COVID-19, like any treatment, should be tested in well-designed clinical trials.
  • Clinical trials may have difficulty recruiting a sufficient number of patients if coronavirus patients are opting instead to take the medicines being tested on their own outside of a trial.  A clinical trial’s conclusions are more reliable when it contains more patients.
  • It may be true that chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine worsen the condition of COVID-19 patients.  Medicines do not always behave predictably.   Should we be condoning the use of medicines when we have no proof of either benefit or harm?   The safety record of the 2 medicines being discussed here with regard to their established medical indications may not be true for coronavirus patients, particularly when higher dosing is being advised. This is why scientific study of medicines is absolutely necessary. 
  • Prescribing medicines irresponsibly consumes resources that should have been devoted to more worthy endeavors. 
Consider who is publicly promoting chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine use for COVID-19.  Are they our public health experts or politicians and administrative officials?   Whom would you trust more for medical advice? 



Labels:

Comments

  1. Old CorpsMay 3, 2020 at 5:23 PM

    I read your post. Every word of it. And to be clear, I am not a Dr and do not work in the medical field. I have only my personal experience to go on. Frankly, I see no reason to trust either the Dr or the politician. Neither have my best interests at heart; both are interested in me only for what I can contribute to their bottom line - I have a great deal of experience proving that to my satisfaction. Remember the best Dr. of the day, bleed Washington to death - it was the proven protocol of the day.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why Most Doctors Choose Employment

By
Increasingly, physicians today are employed and most of them willingly so.  The advantages of this employment model, which I will highlight below, appeal to the current and emerging generations of physicians and medical professionals.  In addition, the alternatives to direct employment are scarce, although they do exist.  Private practice gastroenterology practices in Cleveland, for example, are increasingly rare sightings.  Another practice model is gaining ground rapidly on the medical landscape.   Private equity (PE) firms have   been purchasing medical practices who are in need of capital and management oversight.   PE can provide services efficiently as they may be serving multiple practices and have economies of scale.   While these physicians technically have authority over all medical decisions, the PE partners can exert behavioral influences on physicians which can be ethically problematic. For example, if the PE folks reduce non-medical overhead, this may very directly affe
44 comments
Read more

Should Doctors Wear White Coats?

By
Many professions can be easily identified by their uniforms or state of dress. Consider how easy it is for us to identify a policeman, a judge, a baseball player, a housekeeper, a chef, or a soldier.  There must be a reason why so many professions require a uniform.  Presumably, it is to create team spirit among colleagues and to communicate a message to the clientele.  It certainly doesn’t enhance professional performance.  For instance, do we think if a judge ditches the robe and is wearing jeans and a T-shirt, that he or she cannot issue sage rulings?  If members of a baseball team showed up dressed in comfortable street clothes, would they commit more errors or achieve fewer hits?  The medical profession for most of its existence has had its own uniform.   Male doctors donned a shirt and tie and all doctors wore the iconic white coat.   The stated reason was that this created an aura of professionalism that inspired confidence in patients and their families.   Indeed, even today
36 comments
Read more

Electronic Medical Records vs Physicians: Not a Fair Fight!

By
Each work day, I enter the chamber of horrors also known as the electronic medical record (EMR).  I’ve endured several versions of this torture over the years, monstrosities that were designed more to appeal to the needs of billers and coders than physicians. Make sense? I will admit that my current EMR, called Epic, is more physician-friendly than prior competitors, but it remains a formidable adversary.  And it’s not a fair fight.  You might be a great chess player, but odds are that you will not vanquish a computer adversary armed with artificial intelligence. I have a competitive advantage over many other physician contestants in the battle of Man vs Machine.   I can type well and can do so while maintaining eye contact with the patient.   You must think I am a magician or a savant.   While this may be true, the birth of my advanced digital skills started decades ago.   (As an aside, digital competence is essential for gastroenterologists.) During college, I worked as a secretary
6 comments
Read more