What is the latest scientific research? July 23rd they published this study:
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2019014
And now you all have to geek out on the science--haha:
"A total of 667 patients underwent randomization; 504 patients had confirmed Covid-19 and were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. As compared with standard care, the proportional odds of having a higher score on the seven-point ordinal scale at 15 days was not affected by either hydroxychloroquine alone (odds ratio, 1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69 to 2.11; P=1.00) or hydroxychloroquine plus azithromycin (odds ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.57 to 1.73; P=1.00)."
What does it mean? "Among patients hospitalized with mild-to-moderate Covid-19, the use of hydroxychloroquine, alone or with azithromycin, did not improve clinical status at 15 days as compared with standard care."
Now this is an observational study--more research is needed to reach the gold standard of double blind clinical trials. But sorry--it blasts any anecdotal evidence out of the water.
Conclusion?? Hydroxy doesn't do jack. Nothing wrong with taking some zinc though if it makes you feel better...just don't act like it is some super cure the govt is suppressing for political ends (you can feel that way but there isn't any evidence to support it).
But what about the French study of 80 patients (found here:
https://www.mediterranee-infection.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/COVID-IHU-2-1.pdf)? Good question, which shows how the scientific method should work. That paper was pulled bc of the methodology and other research that attempted to replicate found it was rubbish (you can read that here:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0399077X20300858?via%3Dihub). That paper says the same as the latest research cited above: "In summary, despite a reported antiviral activity of chloroquine against COVID-19 in vitro, we found no evidence of a strong antiviral activity or clinical benefit of the combination of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin for the treatment of our hospitalised patients with severe COVID-19. Ongoing randomised clinical trials with hydroxychloroquine should provide a definitive answer regarding the alleged efficacy of this combination and will assess its safety."
You can check out all the existing studies here:
https://www.goodrx.com/blog/coronavirus-medicine-chloroquine-hydroxychloroquine-as-covid19-treatment/#prevention
There are like 50 studies in the pipeline so we will learn more (the current treatment consensus is to use steroids anyway), but the further you move away from the anecdotal the more obvious it is that hydroxy doesn't do anything beyond normal care.
The word 'cure' shouldn't be used here--but it has been used in treatment all over the country (and here I would note that there are actual cases of documented serious heart rhythm problems and other safety issues, including blood and lymph system disorders, kidney injuries, and liver problems and failure in patients, kill children who ingest, eye/vision problems, but it has been used for a long time to treat lupus and malaria).
There is evidence to suggest (and I think more research needs to be done here) that: "Under closer scrutiny, however, the potential for cardiac toxic effects and overall adverse outcomes have been emphasized, especially in persons with underlying coexisting conditions that increase the risk of severe Covid-19. Boulware et al. report frequent mild side effects of hydroxychloroquine, but cardiac toxic effects could not be assessed."
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMe2020388
Meaning that its usage could actually increase risk and doctors would potentially be hurting patients by letting them take it. This is specific to the inflammation present with COVID and those risks above would be the normal risks that someone taking it for lupus would take. So again, got to be careful if you have covid and don't have to be with lupus. That should clear everything up, right?
Also, this thread is incredibly depressing...