Why Did Folks Think Hydroxychloroquine Would Be Effective Against SARS?
Commenter and Blogger Prof. Joel Eissenberg
Beginning early in the COVID-19 pandemic, Trump, Fox and the right-wing GOP weaponized the disease to sow doubt about science and responsible behaviors. One of the narratives taking hold was that hydroxychloroquine was a cheap, easy and safe cure that scientists were hiding in order to profit from federal dollars for vaccine research.
But in the fog of Trumpian fake news, it is easy to forget that there was a brief period when the science did suggest that chloroquine could have efficacy against SARS-Cov-2. It turns out that this inference was based on a lab artifact. For the virus to infect cells, it “attaches” to the outside of the cell via the viral spike protein (the proteins decorating the viral capsid, giving coronaviruses their “corona”). The spike protein is cut allowing the viral membranes to fuse with the cell membranes and dumping the viral genome inside the cell.
SARS-CoV-2 differs from SARS-CoV because it efficiently uses TMPRSS2, an enzyme found in high amounts on the outside of respiratory cells, to cut the spike protein. But another cell enzyme, cathepsin L, can also do this cleavage in some cells. Cathepsin L normally inhabits cellular endosomes, which are acidic vesicles. Chloroquine works by neutralizing the acid, which makes cathepsin L much less efficient.
The early promising data for chloroquine in the lab turned out to have used cells that rely exclusively on cathepsins for viral entry. But in a natural infection, SARS-CoV-2 doesn’t use endosomes, so chloroquine is ineffective
An important lesson about science is imbedded in this story. Science isn’t about proof, dogma or political fidelity. Science guided by the weight of evidence, and when the evidence changes, science follows the evidence. It’s not “flip-flopping” or mixed messaging. In the fast-moving science of a pandemic, it is important to follow the data, not the political messaging.
How the coronavirus infects cells — and why Delta is so dangerous (nature.com)
Why? Because they’re gullible morons, and the Moron Whisperer told them so.
If everything that worked in vitro worked that well inside human bodies, if everything that worked in mice worked that well in human beings – any number of unhealthy conditions and ailments and diseases would no longer exist.
For decades there has been promising research on all kinds of things. Some of it may yet produce breakthroughs for any number of things. It just takes time, and data, and medications still get pulled or black boxed after approval because more data changed things.
I just saw something about an old drug that looks effective – in a tiny sample. More trials are going to happen. I hope it turns out to be effective, but it was far far from a cure at that. I also hope that the future “turned out not to work” stuff isn’t all that dangerous either, because you know someone will take it and probably overdose themselves with it.
Jane:
In this application, HCQ is used as an ionophore allowing entry to the cell of zinc, etc. It “supposedly” the zinc which prevents the attachment of Covid virus to the cell RNA preventing Covid replication.
Because ‘Hydroxychloroquine’ is so multisyllabic that
it had a good chance of stopping covid. Probably a
better chance than ‘covfeve’ would have had.
One recalls that bleach (clorox?) and ‘shining
UV lights into the body’ were also suggested,
something like ‘tanning beds’ maybe.
…and if a tanning bed is not available, a spray on tan works just as well.
Ah yes, one also has to wait till the spray on works on the perimeter of your face too unlike president orange face.
Vaguely related?
India Approves First DNA-based Covid Shot
DNA vaccines against COVID-19
(Apparently not the same technology as ‘mRNA’ covid vaccines, like Moderna or Pfizer.)
BTW…
The F.D.A. is aiming to give full approval to Pfizer’s Covid vaccine on Monday
… the first ever clinical trial of a DNA vaccine for the novel coronavirus …