The controversial decision of an Argentine judge, who last week ordered a private hospital in Buenos Aires to treat a covid patient with chlorine dioxide, has caused concern in the country’s medical and scientific community. The 92-year-old infected man died this Monday, a few hours after a neurosurgeon outside the clinic gave him the substance, considered toxic by the world scientific community and not authorized as a medicine by the Argentine health authorities.
The country’s medical and scientific community denounces judicial interference
The Buenos Aires hospital refused to comply with the court order, as a result of the lawsuit filed by the family, and it was finally the private doctor who had prescribed the treatment who administered it, after the same judge authorized him to practice in the center sanitary.
Despite the fact that the patient died, the relatives announced on Tuesday a lawsuit for homicide against the clinic for not obeying the judge, since they consider that the death was not due to chlorine dioxide or the coronavirus, but to an intra-hospital infection and delay in the supply of the substance.
While the hospital maintains that the patient worsened after receiving the product intravenously, the family lawyer, Martín Sarubbi, affirmed that the chlorine dioxide treatment was “effective” and produced “a notable improvement in the patient in terms of the specific condition of the covid; for example, it began to saturate correctly around 98% and the secretions of the covid improved drastically ”.
The hospital says it got worse
The family assures that the patient improved with chlorine dioxide
Not only do specialists advise against chlorine dioxide – with a composition related to bleach – as a treatment against Covid, but they also warn of the damage that its intake can cause to the body.
A total of 45 Argentine medical and scientific societies and social organizations signed a statement on Tuesday in which they expressed their “concern” about “interference by the judiciary in a medical-scientific issue” and repudiated “the actions of those health professionals who encourage these measures and do not measure the damage of their actions ”, referring to the doctor who prescribed the controversial product.
In another statement, the Sociedad Argentina de Terapia Intensiva (SATI) stated that “justice should not force doctors to indicate a product or medication that does not have scientific support and that is not authorized by national and international regulatory entities. , nor endorsed by national and international scientific societies ”. The entity makes it clear that “one of the bases of medical practice is not to harm the patient.”