Quote:
Originally Posted by I.C.Isles
Just one data point. But I know people that have been on hydrochloroquine for 20 years to boost immune system with no negative results. Somethings need to be monitored to make sure there and no negative effects but it is manageable. Can’t say for certain it is making a difference based on small sample size....but it is certainly not the dangerous drug many in media make it out to be.
Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app |
When we call a drug "dangerous", this does not mean that it hurts most people. It's dangerous to the FDA even if the majority can benefit. Just as an example--Merck's blockbuster drug Vioxx benefitted millions of people, but 3-4%(?) suffered heart problems and a fraction of those died. They paid over $4 billion for selling a "dangerous" drug that showed no problems for 95% of the people who took it. There were millions of patients and thousands of doctors who thought Vioxx was great.
So while it might seem like HCQ is getting a bum rap or being critiqued unfairly, it's really just going through the same brutal approval process as everything else.
For folks who'd like more info, you might want to google "Phase III clinical trials", or "FDA approval process", or "how many drugs fail clinical trials" for more explanation of how and why we hold experimental stuff to high standards and why very promising therapies often fail.