U.S. Dept. of Veterans Affairs still uses hydroxychloroquine on COVID-19 patients, despite risks of unproven drug

Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2020/05/16/va-still-using-hydroxychloroqu.html


Right, the VA, nursing homes, and probably other organizations with vulnerable patients and deep pockets. I wonder how many in this administration are promoting and profiting from this pandemic? :thinking: I wish we could throw them into the special jail reserved for molesters and people who talk too much on Twitter.


VA says it won’t stop use of unproven drug on vets for now

That’s a weird headline given that it’s less “unproven” and more “shown to be dangerous for use in this situation.”


I was wondering how they were going to get rid of all those pills they bought. Push them on to people least likely to complain about it I guess.


That’s one way to slash the budget of Veterans Affairs.

1 Like

The, uh, the oval office?


This illustrates the problem with allowing Trumpites to make life-or-death decisions. They don’t seem to care too much unless it is their life-or-death.


Trump – through the influence of his position – effectively practicing medicine on a large scale w/o a license.

Yeah, it’s really weird. Where have we seen that before?

1 Like

No surprise here. I mean, you served, thank you very much, and now you’re being serviced. It’s the American way.

This isn’t as big a deal as one might think. There is quite a bit of law that prevents interference between a doctor and patient. Roe v Wade is one of the more famous pieces (though not all that applicable here). But the underlying principle of it all is that doctors and patients make the decisions about treatment. Doctors strongly defend this prerogative.

This doesn’t mean they make the decisions in a vacuum. Insurance may decline to pay for a treatment. And ethic review boards and lawyers can force penalties on doctors for malpractice.

There is also a sort liability the VA is trying to avoid. If they start controlling what is or isn’t done in one situation, they risk being held responsible in all situations. Sort of like the internet safe harbor principle and liability for what users post.

1 Like

Well said Shepard.


“its use was now limited to extenuating circumstances”

That’s reassuring from a safety perspective. Its use is limited to situations that mitigate the culpability of the offender.

Yup. A better headline would be: VA says it has no plans to stop poisoning its patients in order to curry favor with the murderous impeached president.


Primum non nocere

1 Like

I was wondering if maybe they had switched to only giving it to patients who weren’t particularly sick, testing early reports that it sped up healing in not-seriously-ill patients. But it looks like the opposite: “its use was now limited to extenuating circumstances, such as last-ditch efforts to save a coronavirus patient’s life.” That… seems weird to me, but I guess if you think the patient is going to definitely die, something that might cause a fatal heart problem isn’t really a concern if it also might help.

1 Like

If they live Dear Leader looks good.
If they die that’s less Social Security and VA benefits to shell out.

Seems to help improve stats on folks who are too-bad-yet, so long as given with Zinc and zithromax.

Although from what I’ve been reading lately, although there’s been a lot of usage of the drug (in various combinations with other drugs), not very many actual studies have been done about it relative to covid-19, and all the studies that showed benefits for covid-19 patients were extremely problematic in various ways.