In the News: Edition 2

Article: Of Fake Scholarship and Academic Integrity
Source: EyeNet
Published: February 20, 2021

As with the first EyeNet opinion piece of 2021, I generally agree with this perspective, this time about genuine representation, about publishing integrity, about the invisible hard work of editors. I agree with it more than meets the eye. Where this opinion piece is relevant to eye care is in its reference to the use of hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19. Eye doctors are familiar with the drug by way of monitoring for adverse effects of retinal toxicity. Hydroxychloroquine (Plaquenil) was originally a drug for malaria, and also has uses in various rheumatologic and dermatologic conditions. Used for these inflammatory and skin-related conditions, hydroxychloroquine is an effective drug. One might even say that the drug design was catered for a specific disease or range of diseases. Because of hydroxychloroquine's popularity, some in the medical community sought its use as a potential treatment for the novel coronavirus. Some even imposed upon this drug the unintended use in pediatrics, which demonstrates the strength of the desire for a cure against COVID-19. Hydroxychloroquine is not FDA-approved for this form of treatment—a fact often repeated, to say the least—though the scientific curiosity and humanistic motivation to pursue this line of therapy were commendable. That being said, transparency of the scientific process was a prudent move on the part of researchers, so as to avoid false advertisement and misrepresentation while testing this therapy. That hydroxychloroquine works exceedingly well for some conditions does not mean it should be coaxed into use for other conditions. Despite hydroxychloroquine's abysmal results as a treatment for COVID-19, we can both—nay, we can all—laugh at the fact that it still appears in the news.