Today's Topics:
1. France, Union Communiste Libertaire UCL - press release:
Chloroquine: when media communication and science go
hand in hand
(fr, it, pt)[machine translation] (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
For the past few days, we have seen media outburst around chloroquine, presented as a miracle remedy by Professor Raoult, and defended by
Les Républicains. ---- Who is Professor Raoult ? ---- First of all, let us remember that Professor Raoult is not the visionary or the
sympathetic guru described in the media. Higher education and research unions have fought hard to denounce the working conditions in the
laboratory he runs, URMITE [1], and the fact that a case of sexual harassment was covered internally [2]. This case ended with the dismissal
of the harassing researcher and the withdrawal of scientific support from the CNRS [3]and INSERM [4]at this laboratory. At no time did the P
rRaoult did not take measures against these serious facts and even joked openly during the inauguration of the new premises of the lab by
proposing " to install a condom distributor [5] " at the entrance. You could say that if he can save us from the epidemic, we are not going
to spit in the soup. But in this case such behavior rarely goes hand in hand with good scientific ethics.
What is chloroquine ?
It is a medicine against malaria, known for a long time, not too expensive (€ 1 per tablet), and produced in large quantities. It is common,
when new diseases appear, to test in the laboratory all the already existing drugs to see if by chance they would not work, this is called
repositioning. However, this drug has many side effects [6]among the most problematic of possible cardiovascular disorders. It should
therefore not be taken without reason, and can be dangerous for people with other diseases.
A very questionable study
At the end of February, a Chinese study shows promising results of chloroquine against Covid-19 in vitro, that is to say in a test tube.
However, just because a product works in vitro does not mean that it will work in vivo, that is, on living things. This does not prevent
Prof. Raoult from releasing a " Endgame " video at the end of February in which he affirms that the war against the epidemic has already
been resolved. It is thus integrated into the Monitoring Scientific Council appointed by Macron, but prefers to be " next to it ". He
spoke out vigorously against confinement, which he described as " middle-aged " [7]", Which is undoubtedly not unrelated to Macron's first
announcement, of Thursday, March 12, to be content to close the schools. Let's say that Macron has found scientific support for his
political decision not to confine to maintain the economy, even if it means exposing the majority of the population. Recall that at this
time other scientists were modeling that the laissez-faire strategy, with a view to achieving group immunity as quickly as possible, could
result in 300,000 to 500,000 deaths [8]. Confinement does not call into question the idea of achieving group immunity but, by spreading the
curves over time, makes it possible to considerably reduce the human toll by limiting the overload of hospitals. In the end, P rRaoult is
conducting an emergency study, under conditions that do not respect scientific ethics at all, in order to make believe that chloroquine
would work on patients. The study was strongly criticized [9]: the most problematic cases treated with chloroquine were removed from the
results (including one death), there were only 20 patients treated, it appeared in a newspaper whose editor is the author of the article,
etc. Inserm thus writes on its site that its " methodological validity is controversial [10] ". The new study published on March 27 seems
to be of the same barrel [11]. Finally, note that it is not a question of chloroquine of vaccine, but only of a drug which alleviates
symptoms. In the meantime, lines of people have formed in front of Dr. Raoult's laboratory to be administered chloroquine. People who were
not sick were likely to have been infected in these queues as a result. And in Africa, chloroquine is also taken by storm [12], reducing
inventory for people you know they need. It was therefore a communication plan that was well orchestrated in the current period of doubt and
anxiety. With consequences, so far relatively limited but which could have been serious if it had led to non-containment for example.
But then what do we do ?
A European study [13]including 3200 patients, including 800 in France, coordinated by Inserm, was launched on March 23, to test 4 molecules.
It is not just chloroquine that inspires hope, but the other drugs have not benefited from a media communication plan. The results will be
known in two weeks. A study has also been launched in the United States [14]. We can recognize an interest in the com plan of Professor
Raoult: it allowed chloroquine to be included in this study. In addition, since Monday March 23, the High Council of Public Health
recommends the use in serious cases [15]. So its use is already possible.
Is there a plot around chloroquine ?
The P Dr. Raoult is in open conflict with Yves Levy, former CEO of Inserm and husband of Agnes Buzyn. Some do not need more either to see a
plot, sometimes against a backdrop of anti-Semitic hints, or to take up the cause for Raoult. This is the case of Trump, who considers
chloroquine as a "gift from heaven" [16], which led to a man in Arizona dying after ingesting chloroquine phosphate, originally intended for
cleaning his aquarium. But it is also the case, for example, of Mélenchon, who judges that "Didier Raoult is too unloved by beautiful people
to not arouse interest" [17]. Here we find the old adage "the enemies of my enemies are my friends". However, Mélenchon quickly forgot that
Professor Raoult was very much supported by Macron, who "ordered that we listen" to scientists [18]. The episode cannot be reduced to a
conflict of egos. The bottom of the problem is the validity of past scientific studies (that of Raoult) and those to come.
What to conclude from it ?
We will be entitled to other episodes of this type. Researchers, private or public labs, will present themselves as the saviors of humanity.
There is no money at stake with chloroquine, just an issue of notoriety. But we can be sure that, in the coming months, private labs will
present us with very promising results on molecules, in order to raise money or raise their price on the stock market. And politicians are
sure to rush into these polemics to position themselves on the chessboard, or to justify political decisions under the guise of " science
neutrality " So we need to educate ourselves, understand the issues, not let some supreme saviors, whether politicians or scientists, decide
for us. As for chloroquine, we will know within a week whether it is effective or not, based on a real scientific study. From here, it is
already used for the most severe cases.
Libertarian Communist Union, March 30, 2020
Libertarian alternative n ° 304 (April 2020) is open access
Click to download
Validate
[1] Research Unit on Emerging Infectious and Tropical Diseases
[2] Implication of the CGT in the defense of the staff of a Marseille laboratory , CGT-SNTRS on November 20, 2017
[3] National Center for Scientific Research
[4] National Institute of Health and Medical Research
[5] Didier Raoult inaugurates his IHU Méditerranée Infection in a defensive mode , by Benoît Gilles for Marsactu on March 28, 2018
[6] Coronavirus: what are the side effects of chloroquine ? , by Paul Turban for RTL on March 23, 2020
[7] France: " I no longer participate in the Scientific Council gathered around E. Macron "(Didier Raoult) , by i24NEWS on March 26, 2020
[8] Coronavirus: group immunity, a risky bet , by Hervé Morin and Sandrine Cabut for Le Monde March 16, 2020
[9] Chloroquine: the Raoult protocol , by Nicolas Martin on France Culture on March 24, 2020
[10] " Fake news " and disinformation around the SARS-CoV2 coronavirus , by ISERM on March 23, 2020
[11] Coronavirus and hydroxychloroquine: Professor Raoult publishes a new study, immediately criticized , by Le Monde with AFP on March 28, 2020
[12]Rush . Against Covid-19, chloroquine taken by storm in Africa , by Anna Sylvestre-Treiner for Courrier international on March 23, 2020
[13] Launch of a European clinical trial against Covid-19 , by ISERM on March 22, 2020
[14] Chloroquine and Covid-19, where are we ? , By charentelibre.fr March 29, 2020
[15] Covid-19: Hydroxychloroquine authorized in the hospital for the treatment of severe forms only , by Irene Lacamp for Sciences etvenir
March 24, 2020
[16] Coronavirus: chloroquine, a " gift from heaven ", according to Donald Trump , by the LCI editorial team on March 24, 2020
[17] Jean-Luc Mélenchon defends Professor Didier Raoult, against " beautiful people " , by Jeanne Bulant with AFP on BFMTV on March 27, 2020
[18] Emmanuel Macron, " confused ", called Didier Raoult: what they said to each other on the phone , by Lana Muller for Here is March 26,
2020
https://www.unioncommunistelibertaire.org/?Chloroquine-quand-communication-mediatique-et-sciences-font-mauvais-menage
------------------------------
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten