In recent years Hydroxychloroquine has garnered controversy for its potential use as a treatment for Covid-19, with opposing sides of the political aisle adopting a pro or anti stance on the drug. It is important, however, to strip hydroxychloroquine of its new political connotations, examine the empirical evidence of its potential as a Covid-19 treatment, and recognize the failure of science communicators to properly characterize this drug.
Hydroxychloroquine has been used since the 1940s as an anti-malaria drug and as an rheumatoid arthritis drug since 1955, with its most common side effects being gastrointestinal disruption and skin irritation. Its potential to treat Covid-19 comes from its ability to reduce the immune system’s inflammatory response without downregulating the immune response needed to combat a virus. It also has been shown to inhibit the uptake of viral materials by host cells and inhibit a virus’ ability to function properly, by disrupting its ability to add carbohydrates to proteins and by inhibiting viral enzymes.
When testing the effects of the medication on patients with Covid-19 the results reflected its known anti-viral properties. In a study with over 100 patients infected with Covid-19, it was found that patients had better lung imaging, less severe pneumonia symptoms, and a shortened infection period when given hydroxychloroquine. It was also found in another study that patients had a 70% decrease in Covid-19 viral load after 6 days of hydroxychloroquine administration, compared to patients that were not given hydroxychloroquine. The study also found a 100% decrease in viral load when both hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin was administered in conjunction for 6 days.
These results show that hydroxychloroquine is neither an ineffective medicine nor is it a coronavirus cure-all. In reality, it is a medication that has been shown to aid patients’ recovery from Covid-19, when managed by healthcare professionals. As scientists, we must not only ensure the rigor of our research but also make a deliberate effort to properly communicate our findings to the public. The politicization of hydroxychloroquine and political pundits either dismissing its uses or exaggerating its effectiveness, is evidence that pollical actors are not the best science communicators. In a time of increasing political polarization, scientists must make a new effort to directly communicate to the public. Scientists must also separate their credibility from science communicators who are both unknowledgeable about the scientific literature and communicate scientific information with a bias.
Source
Sinha, N., & Balayla, G. (2020). Hydroxychloroquine and COVID-19. Postgraduate medical journal, 96(1139), 550–555. https://doi.org/10.1136/postgradmedj-2020-137785
No comments:
Post a Comment