Malaria drug fails to prevent COVID-19 in a rigorous study


The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2020 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

Login to comment

Researchers have wasted so much time in testing this drug, just because of one not so smart person, it is criminal.

If the same effort could have been put into other drugs, more lives could have been saved.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Always thought it was a possible treatment if a person caught the disease, it wasn't ever pushed as a preventative drug.

Donald Trump took the drug to prove that it doesn't have the side effects as some people have made it out as.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

@ Andrew Crisp

It is a pity that Donald Trump did not also drink bleach to prove that it doesn't have the side-effects as some people have made it out as.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

There are some big caveats: The study enrolled people through the Internet and social media, relying on them to report their own symptoms rather than having them tracked in a formal way by doctors. Participants were not all tested for the coronavirus but were diagnosed as COVID-19 cases based on symptoms in many cases. And not all took their medicines as directed.

Ah, yes, LOL. A very rigorous, definite study then, that answers everything. And overrides the opinions of health authorities in Turkey, Costa Rica, Algeria, Belgium, Barein, Morocco and India, all of which report positive results from the combination of hydroxychloroquite + Zinc.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

In addition to the above, if this "rigorous" study encouraged people to self-medicate with hydroxychloroquine, it was clearly irresponsible and/or illegal. Even for the well-established treatment, this drug was always taken on prescription.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

I think it was worth testing. We need to test, test and test. It's just too bad that it did not work. That's the way find things that work and things that don't work.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I think it was worth testing. We need to test, test and test. It's just too bad that it did not work. That's the way find things that work and things that don't work.

You're right.

Unfortunately, Trump politicized this specific drug. In the early days, he was trying to pretend coronavirus was nothing to worry about, as he didn't want the economy to be disrupted, as that was his claim to fame for re-election. So he pushed that even if there was a coronavirus, this drug was going to be the solution, even though this was not anything the scientists had come to any kind of conclusion upon.

Once the issue was politicized, an inordinate amount of resources was focused on proving that this drug worked (for the political interests of Trump) or that it didn't (for political interests of his opponents). Rather than giving this drug the ordinate amount of resources that this drug deserved, based on it's actual apparent efficacy, rather than the political benefit of it's success/failure.

Because this drug was politicized, resources were focused on proving whether or not it worked, that could have been better spent on examining all drugs in a scientific and logical - rather than political - manner.

It's another example of Trump's failed response to the coronavirus. In the interest of his re-election, he pushed an unproved drug in order to create a false sense of security, which lead to an inefficient delegation of resources to deal with the pandemic at hand.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites