Opinion
I’m the virus expert cited by MP Craig Kelly. Vaccines are critical, but he’s not all wrong
The airwaves have been awash with news about COVID-19 and vaccinations, much of it unhelpful. Amid the heat, my name has arisen as the immunologist cited by the Liberal MP Craig Kelly, whose views have been widely derided and, ultimately, shut down by the Prime Minister.
Let me state clearly from the outset: vaccines are critical; they will save lives; we should all get behind them.
Liberal MP Craig Kelly during Question Time this week.Credit:Alex Ellinghausen
Vaccines, however, do have limitations. They need to be paired with effective, safe drug treatment. Two candidates are safe, cheap, available and effective. They are Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine. Yet they are denied to Australians with COVID-19.
I do not know Craig Kelly. There is much he has said that I disagree with, but on the matter of Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, he has been right to raise awareness about these drugs and their potential to be effective in the early treatment of the disease.
Since my name was aired in this matter, I’ve received calls from people offering truly crackpot opinions, some telling me I am right – without knowing what I think – while others have suggested I should leave it to the “experts”.
Concerned by the controversy, the University of Newcastle, where I am an emeritus professor in the School of Biomedical Sciences and Pharmacy, has issued a statement stressing that I am not speaking on its behalf and saying it does not consider me a COVID-19 expert.
These opinions are indeed my own. I am not speaking for the university (although over the years it has often wanted me to). I am, however, an expert and I believe my opinions need some clear air.
The world was little prepared for a pandemic which, in just 12 months, has infected more than 100 million people, with a mortality rate of 2 to 4 per cent. Australia has been fortunate; with our island geography and high-quality public health, we have had only 28,800 cases, with a mortality of 3.1 per cent. There are no promises that we can continue to be the lucky country.
COVID-19, like influenza, infects the airways mucosal compartment. There are useful lessons from influenza, for which vaccines give partial immunity, of short duration, and with a poor response in the elderly. Early evidence suggests similar outcomes are probable with COVID-19 vaccines.
Herd immunity is unlikely. If it occurs it will likely be of short duration, requiring annual vaccination for continued immunity. Vaccines will be at the core of community management, but they are not enough on their own.
Ivermectin(IVM) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) have been used as antimicrobials for half a century with impeccable safety records. They prevent virus assemblage within infected cells and inhibit the inflammatory response. COVID-19 is a two phase disease, with the initial “viral phase” followed by severe life-threatening inflammatory disease requiring hospitalisation. Antivirals only work on the early viral phase (as with shingles, influenza and Herpes infections).
Failed studies of the anti-viral HCQ on hospitalised COVID-19 patients mistakenly led to the drug being categorised as a “failed” therapy. That misunderstanding continues to dominate many “official” sites, despite there being at least 27 clinical studies in early disease – 10 of which were randomised clinical trials – showing a composite level of 63 per cent protection gainst admission to hospital and/or death. Similar data supported use in prevention of infection (as it did for malaria).
IVM came later, and avoided much of the political noise, but again was missed by many authorities. More than 30 studies have led to impressive meta-analyses, most recently by Therese Lawrie, an epidemiologist. Data from 17 studies showing a reduction of death by 83 per cent was so dramatic that she concluded it was now unethical to include untreated patients as controls. Both drugs are used extensively in many countries, with dramatic reductions in COVID-19 deaths.
All studies have faults, but we are faced with an horrific pandemic, with few options for early treatment. It is very easy to sit in comfort, ignore the evidence and pontificate on the unobtainable. Those who champion science-based therapy that saves lives deserve respect, not ridicule. There are too many uninformed “experts”. My question to the nay-sayer is: “Would you give HCQ and/or IVM to your grandmother with early COVID-19 in aged care?”
If it was my grandmother – or, indeed, me – my answer would be yes.
Robert Clancy is an immunologist and emeritus professor at the University of Newcastle’s School of Biomedical Sciences and Pharmacy.