If one has time on their hands today, read this. It is a follow-up by Dr. Gorksi on his SBM post from Monday (that I posted on). There is some repeat of what he (and dx) covered already but he does a very good job expanding on what I was saying about the FDA. Essentially, the "emergency use" is political, not scientific.
https://respectfulinsolence.com/2020/04/01/fda-eua-chloroquine-hydroxychloroquine-covid-19/
It is important to note that the papers we are seeing are not going through the regular peer review process (even papers in NEJM, Lancet). They are expedited to get the information out there, but that means you have to be extra skeptical. Normal turnaround time of several months is not acceptable either in these situations but I suspect many will be retracted in the years to come.
Also remember that physicians, nurses, etc are human. They have biases and get scared like the rest of humanity. I personally know physicians who have written for hydroxychloroquine for themselves or family and although I am profoundly disappointing in their reasoning, I do understand the motivation. I hope it does work but it is important to wait for appropriate evidence, especially with the risks. There are several other treatments currently under trial I think have a higher prior plausibility.
For those interested with some time on hand, this is an excellent book.
https://www.amazon.com/Cognitive-Errors-Diagnostic-Mistakes-Case-Based/dp/3319932233 It is a bit pricey, but reads easily and is very enjoyable. It is a comprehensive guide to how physicians (and the regular public) make cognitive errors and I will be making it a must read for any trainees I oversee. It looks like a textbook but it honestly is not too dense and is very readable. I really wish I would have written it (although Dr. Howard does a far better job than I could).
Burd, I know you liked "Mistakes were made but not by me" so this may be right up your alley.
