Yale Epidemiologist Says Hydroxychloroquine Could Save 100,000 Lives
Who knew that a potential medical treatment could become politicized? In the era of Donald Trump, nothing is beyond the media’s scope, it seems. After Trump expressed optimism in the drug Hydroxycloroquine as a coronavirus treatment, the media quickly mobilized to discredit it (on the sole basis of the person having recommended it being Trump).
By April a massive partisan divide in opinion on the drug had opened up, with more than twice as many Republicans than Democrats saying they’d be willing to try the drug if neccesary.
The Lancet and The New England Journal of Medicine both published highly publicized studies that discredited the efficacy of the drug in fighting coronavirus – which were both retracted not-longafter in June after questions were raised about the research, and both refused to provide the underlying data for an audit.
A month after those retractions, a study from the Henry Ford Health System of 2,541 patients hospitalized from March 10-May 2 across six hospitals found that 13% of those treated with hydroxychloroquine alone died compared to 26.4% treated without it. The study was published today in the International Journal of Infectious Diseases, and notably didn’t received anywhere near as much media coverage as the aforementioned retracted studies.
What would that mean if the drug saw widespread use? According to Fox News:
Dr. Harvey Risch, an epidemiology professor at Yale School of Public Health, said that he thinks hydroxychloroquine could save 75,000 to 100,000 lives if the drug is widely used to treat coronavirus.
“There are many doctors that I’ve gotten hostile remarks about saying that all the evidence is bad for it and, in fact, that is not true at all,” Risch told “Ingraham Angle,” adding that he believes the drug can be used as a “prophylactic” for front-line workers, as other countries like India have done.