Read on Twitter
Thread on Chloroquine & its historic use against viruses.
For those who are not familiar, in vitro means outside the body i.e. in a lab setting, as opposed to in vivo, which is in the human body (or other living organism).
For those who are not familiar, in vitro means outside the body i.e. in a lab setting, as opposed to in vivo, which is in the human body (or other living organism).
IN VITRO, chloroquine reportedly possesses antiviral activity against rabies, polio, HIV, hepatitis A & C, influenza A & B, Chikungunya, Dengue, Zika, Lassa, Hendra and Nipah viruses, Crimean–Congo hemorrhagic fever virus, Ebola virus etc.
Let& #39;s examine a few.
Let& #39;s examine a few.
1. Ebola: "While Chloroquine inhibited virus replication in vitro, in mouse & hamster models, treatment did not improve survival. Chloroquine is not a promising treatment for Ebola. Efforts should be directed toward other drug classes." https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4451918/">https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/artic...
":Chloroquine inhibited Ebola virus replication in vitro but failed to protect against infection and disease in the in vivo guinea pig model." https://www.microbiologyresearch.org/content/journal/jgv/10.1099/jgv.0.000309;jsessionid=W6d_tuALVJJZy8g4IIm55Hzt.mbslive-10-240-10-147">https://www.microbiologyresearch.org/content/j...
Worked IN VITRO, did not show results in the real world.
Worked IN VITRO, did not show results in the real world.
2. Zika: "Chloroquine, an Endocytosis Blocking Agent, Inhibits Zika Virus Infection in Different Cell Models." https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4915/8/12/322
This">https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4915... too did not show practical promise in treatment of Zika in the real world.
This">https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4915... too did not show practical promise in treatment of Zika in the real world.
3. Inlfuenza H1N1: "Chloroquine demonstrates an inhibitory effect against the replication of human influenza A virus H1N1 & H3N2, in vitro:" https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1481635/">https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/artic...
“Although chloroquine shows in-vitro activity against influenza, it does not prevent acquisition of influenza or affect the clinical disease course.” https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21550310
Again,">https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21... it had no utility in treating/preventing Influenza.
Again,">https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21... it had no utility in treating/preventing Influenza.
Data re: treatment of #COVID19 is also very controversial and mixed. Obviously, HCQ/AZT is NOT a magical cure. That we know. Does it have ANY effect in changing disease course? I wish we had some preliminary data (even observational) come out to answer this question ASAP.
Two reasons:
1. All medications have side effects. Although HCQ/AZT are generally well tolerated, almost half of patients on them will have some mild SEs.
2. If this combo is ineffective, we should drop the media frenzy & focus our energies elsewhere to find a real cure.
1. All medications have side effects. Although HCQ/AZT are generally well tolerated, almost half of patients on them will have some mild SEs.
2. If this combo is ineffective, we should drop the media frenzy & focus our energies elsewhere to find a real cure.
I remain very skeptical. As a believer in science and proponent of evidence-based medicine, I do not believe there is enough for me to jump on the HCQ/AZT bandwagon. I understand some want to cling on to "hope."
I hope there is science to support this hope (or refute it) soon.
I hope there is science to support this hope (or refute it) soon.
For those who say "but a French study showed benefit in human patients of #COVID19." Here: https://knowledgepandemicm.wixsite.com/mysite/post/hydroxychloroquine-and-azithromycin-for-the-treatment-of-covid-19">https://knowledgepandemicm.wixsite.com/mysite/po...
