Australian government experts at

 odds with health department over using hydroxychloroquine to treat coronavirus

The government’s expert panel on disease control has recommended against the use of a controversial anti-malarial drug, hydroxychloroquine, for treating coronavirus, directly contradicting the federal health department, which has told doctors they can prescribe it for patients.

The Australian Health Protection Principal Committee – the peak body that manages health emergencies – said experimental use of medications such as hydroxychloroquine for Covid-19 prevention and treatment was not recommended, and should only be prescribed as part of a clinical trial.

“Appropriate dosage of medications for use in Covid-19 are not yet determined, and there is concern that if used inappropriately, off-label use of medications may cause toxicity and lead to adverse patient outcomes,” the latest AHPPC advice on use of the drugs for Covid-19 says.

“Due to safety concerns, and the unknown effects of prescribing these medications for off-label usage, such as for Covid-19 infection, there are no current recommendations to treat patients with mild to moderate Covid-19 illness.”

But the Department of Health confirmed on Wednesday that as well as being used in clinical trials, the drugs may be given “in a controlled environment in the treatment of severely ill patients in hospital”.

It comes as one of the institutions being supported by the government to run clinical trials of the drug for Covid-19 treatment, the Royal Brisbane Women’s Hospital Foundation, has refused to answer questions from Guardian Australia about the trial and wrongful descriptions of the drug by a professor leading the trial as a “cure”.

After initially agreeing to answer questions, a foundation spokeswoman has not returned emails or responded to calls. The foundation trial has received favourable coverage from Channel Seven. The broadcaster has not responded to questions from Guardian Australia.

Australian virologists and doctors have warned that hydroxychloroquine can cause severe and even life-threatening side-effects, and have cautioned against using it for conditions for which it has not been tested. It is a proven treatment for malaria and for some autoimmune conditions. Studies on its efficacy as a Covid-19 preventative or treatment are mixed. Much of the focus on the drug came after a small French study, which has since been widely disputed and been found to have omitted data containing spurious results. A small study from China found no benefit to chloroquine being given to Covid-19 patients.

Hydroxychloroquine has also caused division within the White House, Axios reported, after the US president, Donald Trump, hyped it as a “game changer” in treating the virus. The White House infectious disease expert warned Trump that evidence for the drug was only anecdotal and far from proven. Meanwhile, a hospital in France has stopped administering the drug to Covid-19 patients owing to cardiac side-effects.

On Saturday Guardian Australia revealed that a delegate of the health minister, Greg Hunt, had exempted hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine, Remdesivir, Lopinavir and Ritonavir from a requirement to be listed on the Australian register of therapeutic goods, which is generally the only way medicine can be lawfully supplied in Australia.

The exemptions specified that the medications “must only be supplied in Australia for the prevention, treatment or alleviation of coronavirus disease (Covid-19) following advice from the Australian government department of health”.

In a press conference on Wednesday Hunt was asked by Guardian Australia whether he was concerned about the drugs being used off-label.

“The AHPPC gave very wise advice on the use of different medicines and they were very clear about the situation about off-label use, but also talked about appropriateness of clinical trials,” he said.

Hunt said clinical trials were “entirely within the appropriate medical conduct”, but declined to offer a view about off-label usage.

“I’ll let medical advisers provide the medical advice, that’s the appropriate balance,” he said.

This is again an argument from doctors that theorizes on issues and not those that actually treat patients and do not want them to die - especially as no real treatment drugs is in existence.   I believe in the circumstances doctors should be the final arbiters as to what to do in serious and potentially deadly situations.   

We know that theorists do not care anything much for actual people - they stick with their theories even when there is no real treatment medicines available at present,  .            

HCQ is 75 years old. The side effect are well know.

Yet despite side effects the drug has been prescribed to hundreds of millions to combat malaria. A moments thought about the matter, far beyond old dense, would settle the issue. if the side effects were so bad AND they couldn't be managed would this drug still be on the market. Obviously the drug would have been withdrawn long, long ago.

We know why these globalist forces want as many deaths as possible. A solution like HCQ must be fought with all they have. A possible 7 trillion dollars is at stake for vaccine makers. They and their front man Dr Fauci cannot allow HCQ get in their way.

Do you know that democrat lawmaker who said President Trump saved her life by his mentioning HCQ was not been shown on the msm outlets apart from Fox! Keep the panic going oaks and lets pin all this on Trump. But its failing once again.

These same anti American jackasses are supporting Trump and WHO against Trump and the American people. Bwahahahahahhahahhahahha

Denny

Thinking again what may happen to you personally in such a case,  Say you are infected by the virus and the doctor told your wife that you are near to death.    He also told her that there is a small chance of saving you if he treats you with hydroxychloroquine tablets  - but he Australian  Government has forbidden its use,    Will you die happily and will your family be happy about the situation?   

No - it never should be the case - doctors are there to save lives - they should decide hat is possible  and what not.   Real people in practical situations  will find this kind of report o ffensive and useless,     

It is disgusting that with people dying and  no proven treatment, a government ‘expert’ panel would trash a possible treatment....a treatment used in France, China and now extensively in the US. And recommend against a drug that has a 65 year record, based on safety considerations.

I took this drug, my kids took this drug on game park visits....the side effects are well known and mild for the vast majority. All I experienced was some vivid dreams....kind of fun really.

Let’s be honest, this is political at the worst possible time. The small Chinese study they referred to was a sample of about 40 patients.....all of whom already had the virus and all of whom survived. So of course it was concluded hcq made no difference....that’s about as smart as concluding on the basis of that study, that nobody dies from the virus.

In the meantime India has put an embargo on all hcq exports at considerable cost. I’ll believe the money over a panel of ‘experts’ any day.

These experts will change course once they have purchased shares in either the manufacturing company or distribution company or both.

Mark my words.

Money always brings out the best in all boards populated by "EXPERTS"

Scum bags ....all of them.

Agree with you there, My family had a similar experience in the early 1950's and  that is why I called the article offensive - I should have rather called it disgusting,    

...not so clevermike you never told us you like playing Russi an Roulette

Not so Brycy.    My baby sister was a bleeder - and treated by a specialist by the name of Dr Rabkin.  She was in critical condition in the Red Cross Hospital in Cape Town when Dr Rabkin told my parents there was a new drug in the USA developed - but not cleared by he SA Board for usage in SA,  so he could not legally use it,    My parents pleaded with him to get it and he promised he would.  He got the drug within 5 days and used it to save her life.  She was in either the Red Cross or Groote Schuur Hospitals for about 6 months a  year and the medical expenses were massive nearly bankrupting my father.   Dr Rankin ended up taking her as his special patient and treated her for free,  

The problem stemmed  from intermarriage within families which in the 1800's  and early 1900's was rampant in the Cape rural areas,   My Great Grandfather on my fathers side married his first cousin and my grandfather and grandmother on my mothers side were second cousins.