Science Archives – A Vue From Here

Chloroquine and ethics

Image au microscope électronique du SARS-CoV-2 — Electron microscope image of SARS-CoV-2, the virus causing Covid-19 disease—image made by the NIAID under licence Creative Common Attribution 2.0 Generic via Wikimedia Commons.

The following article complements my previous one concerning the COVID-19 pandemic and chloroquine. I suggest you read it first, as it will give you an idea of what the scientific literature says about the action of chloroquine on COVID-19 as of April 7^th, 2020. However, this article did neither address the question of ethics, nor fully address whether the situation could justify not to follow the usual methodology.

Indeed, this objection is regularly raised: “even though it has not been established that hydroxychloroquine can actually be used as a treatment for COVID-19, ultimately the dosage is well known and there is probably not a great risk in administering it to patients.” Moreover, there is a view which seems to have some popularity, stating that, considering the circumstances, clinicians should not take too much care to comply with methodology, as the emergency dictates to be less rigorous with procedures. These two issues are related. To address them, one must both look at the collective experience and assess what is not known.

A PDF version of this article is available. An audio version (with quite a robotic voice) is also available.

A worrying suspicion

On March 25^th, 2020, a study presenting the case of 416 patients with COVID-19 was published¹Shaobo Shi, Mu Qin, Bo Shen, Yuli Cain, Tao Liu, Fan Yang, Wei Gong, Xu Liu, Jinjun Liang, Qinyan Zhao, He Huang, Bo Yang, and Congxin Huang, 2020. ‘Association of cardiac injury with mortality in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in Wuhan, China’, JAMA Cardiology. Doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2020.0950. Among these patients, 19.7 % had cardiac problems. It is not surprising that patients in respiratory distress, one of the complications of COVID-19, have heart problems. However, the study reports a suspicion that these cardiac problems are not a consequence of this respiratory distress, but directly due to the action of the virus. Another compilation of COVID-19 case analysis also supports this suspicion²Elissa Driggin, Mahesh V. Madhavan, Behnood Bikdeli, Taylor Chuich, Justin Laracy, Giuseppe Bondi-Zoccai, Tyler S. Brown, Caroline Der Nigoghossian, David A. Zidar, Jennifer Haythe, Daniel Brodie, Joshua A. Beckman, Ajay J. Kirtane, Gregg W. Stone, Harlan M. Krumholz and Sahil A. Parikh, 2020. ‘Cardiovascular considerations for patients, health care workers, and health systems during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic’, Journal of th American College of Cardiology. Doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2020.03.031.

Notes[+]

Notes
↑1	Shaobo Shi, Mu Qin, Bo Shen, Yuli Cain, Tao Liu, Fan Yang, Wei Gong, Xu Liu, Jinjun Liang, Qinyan Zhao, He Huang, Bo Yang, and Congxin Huang, 2020. ‘Association of cardiac injury with mortality in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in Wuhan, China’, JAMA Cardiology. Doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2020.0950
↑2	Elissa Driggin, Mahesh V. Madhavan, Behnood Bikdeli, Taylor Chuich, Justin Laracy, Giuseppe Bondi-Zoccai, Tyler S. Brown, Caroline Der Nigoghossian, David A. Zidar, Jennifer Haythe, Daniel Brodie, Joshua A. Beckman, Ajay J. Kirtane, Gregg W. Stone, Harlan M. Krumholz and Sahil A. Parikh, 2020. ‘Cardiovascular considerations for patients, health care workers, and health systems during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic’, Journal of th American College of Cardiology. Doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2020.03.031

On Chloroquine

This article is written under rather peculiar circumstances, in fact quite dramatic ones to say the least: after a first case declared on November 17^th, 2019¹Josephine Ma, March 13^th, 2020. ‘Coronavirus: China’s first confirmed Covid-19 case traced back to November 17’, South China Morning Post. Available on-line., a COVID-19 pandemic²World Health Organization (WHO), March 11^th, 2020. WHO Director-General’s opening remarks at the media briefing on COVID-19, WHO. Available on-line. has spread throughout the world. Among several consequences, this pandemic caused the confinement of the French population from March 17^th, 2020 at noon. I wrote the following article in France during this confinement. Actually, the seriousness of the pandemic led a group of scientific mediators do launch a coordinate prevention message on March 14^th, 2020 at 6 p.m. I associated myself to this message.

Prior to confinement, on February 25^th, 2020, the IHU Méditerranée-infection released a video stating that a molecule derived from quinine, being chloroquine, is an effective treatment against COVID-19:

Didier Raoult, 2020. ‘Coronavirus : vers une sortie de crise ?’, IHU Méditerranée-infection.

This was the starting point for a major media coverage of chloroquine and another derivative from quinine, being hydroxychloroquine. Since this media coverage is extremely problematic, I would like to try to give you some clearer insights. The first goal of this article will be to give you some reliable sources, as quite a lot of uninteresting opinions were given, and too few facts. Yet the facts are there. This article will therefore not contain any opinion.

Notes[+]

Notes
↑1	Josephine Ma, March 13^th, 2020. ‘Coronavirus: China’s first confirmed Covid-19 case traced back to November 17’, South China Morning Post. Available on-line.
↑2	World Health Organization (WHO), March 11^th, 2020. WHO Director-General’s opening remarks at the media briefing on COVID-19, WHO. Available on-line.

Did Copernicus really made the (scientific) revolution?

Portrait of Nicolaus Copernicus, exhibited at the Toruń Museum–public domain image, via Wikimedia Commons.

In this blog and elsewhere, you have probably already seen the expression “Copernican revolution”. This expression highlights the fact that Nicolaus Copernicus (1473 – 1543) provoked a major change in perspectives by showing that it is more relevant to consider this is the Earth that is rotating around the Sun rather than the opposite. To this first upheaval echoes Galileo Galilei’s (1564 – 1642) works. The latter, on the basis of Copernicus’ work, among others, has definitively shown that Claudius Ptolemy’s (around 90 AD – about 168) system, published in the Almagest¹Κλαύδιος Πτολεμαῖος, around 150 AD. Μαθηματική σύνταξις. An English translation: Gerald J. Toomer, 1998. Ptolemy’s Almagest, second edition, Princeton University Press, New York, United States of America. Available on-line. and according to which, in agreement with Aristotelian physics, the Earth was motionless in the centre of the World, was wrong.

I have already presented this, with a view from here. As I have indicated before, they were both preceded by Nicole Oresme’s (about 1320 or 1322 – 1382) work. Galileo also used Johannes Kepler’s (1571 – 1630) work, among others. Therefore, I have intentionally used the expression “Copernican revolution,” as well as “epistemic revolution.” But still remains the question I would like to tackle in this article: though this expression is commonly used, is it really relevant to talk about revolution? My purpose is also to lead you, my dear reader, to make some critical analysis of what I am publishing here.

Continue reading Did Copernicus really made the (scientific) revolution?

Notes[+]

Notes
↑1	Κλαύδιος Πτολεμαῖος, around 150 AD. Μαθηματική σύνταξις. An English translation: Gerald J. Toomer, 1998. Ptolemy’s Almagest, second edition, Princeton University Press, New York, United States of America. Available on-line.

Falling bodies: Galileo sets up Aristotle to the fall

Galileo GALILEI — Portrait of Galileo Galilei by Giusto Sustermans in 1636 – image from public domain via Wikimedia Common.

As seen twice with a view from here, works from Nicolaus Copernicus (1473 – 1543), Giordano Bruno (1548 – 1600), Johannes Kepler (1571 – 1630) and Galileo Galilei (1564 – 1642), which have been preceded by those of Nicole Oresme (circa 1320-1322 – 1382), completely challenged the Aristotelian model. In this questioning, Galileo did not settle with astronomy. He also tackled several other fundamental subjects, one of which has a great influence on my areas of research: the fall of bodies.

Continue reading Falling bodies: Galileo sets up Aristotle to the fall

William had a good razor!

Guillaume d’Ockham — William of Ockham, sketch from manuscript *Summa Logicae* (William of Ockham, 1323) – public domain image *via* Wikimedia Commons.

The law of parsimony – sometimes called Ockham’s razor after the English Franciscan monk William of Ockham (circa 1285 – 1347), a pioneer in logic – is a principle common to philosophy and science. In fact, it has been stated before, the oldest occurrence that I have found is due to Aristotle¹Ἀριστοτέλης, Φυσικὴ ἀκρόασις. Available on-line. An English translation by Robin Waterfield: David Bostock (editor), 1999. Physics, Oxford University Press. Available on-line. (384 – 322 BC), who attributes it to Empedocles (circa 490 – about 435 BC). However, Proclus (412 AD – 485) traces it back to Pythagoras (about 580 – about 495 BC)²The only version I know of the work in question is this German edition, which appears to be considered the reference: Manitius, C. (éditor et translator), 1909. Procli Diadochi hypotyposis astronomicarum positionum (Bibliotheca scriptorum Graecorum et Romanorum Teubneriana), Teubner, Leipzig. Reprinted in 1974: Teubner, Stuttgart..

This principle is not always well understood, as it is sometimes used in a manner denoting a misunderstanding about what it actually means. I propose you to see a brief history of this law before commenting on what it means. This article is therefore one of the series on history of science and popularisation I started with a view from here.

No, I have not yet specified what states this law. This is a barely honest process that aims to create an almost unbearable suspense to make you captive of my prose, so that you will read this whole article. However, do not worry: the explanation comes in a few lines!

Continue reading William had a good razor!

Notes[+]

Notes
↑1	Ἀριστοτέλης, Φυσικὴ ἀκρόασις. Available on-line. An English translation by Robin Waterfield: David Bostock (editor), 1999. Physics, Oxford University Press. Available on-line.
↑2	The only version I know of the work in question is this German edition, which appears to be considered the reference: Manitius, C. (éditor et translator), 1909. Procli Diadochi hypotyposis astronomicarum positionum (Bibliotheca scriptorum Graecorum et Romanorum Teubneriana), Teubner, Leipzig. Reprinted in 1974: Teubner, Stuttgart.

E-Luminesciences: the blog of Jean-Pierre Luminet

Jean-Pierre Luminet is the author of the blog e-Luminesciences. But not only: he is also an astrophysicist, cnrs research director at the Laboratoire d’astrophysique de Marseille, as well as at the Laboratoire Univers et théorie. But not only: he also has scientific popularisation and cultural activities. His blog presents all of these activities. This blog has an English version.

Among his notable works, he is a pioneer in black holes realistic representations. As early as 1979¹Jean-Pierre Luminet, 1979. Image of a Spherical Black Hole with Thin Accretion Disk, Astronomy and Astrophysics, n° 75, pp. 228 – 235. Available on line., he proposed a more realistic and accurate one than the one presented in Interstellar²Christopher Nolan, 2014. Interstellar, Syncopy Films and Lynda Obst Productions.. He also worked on the form – actually, its topology – of the Universe, which led him to introduce the concept of Wraparound Universe³Jean-Pierre Luminet, 2008. The Wraparound Universe, AK Peters Ltd..

Continue reading E-Luminesciences: the blog of Jean-Pierre Luminet

Notes[+]

Notes
↑1	Jean-Pierre Luminet, 1979. Image of a Spherical Black Hole with Thin Accretion Disk, Astronomy and Astrophysics, n° 75, pp. 228 – 235. Available on line.
↑2	Christopher Nolan, 2014. Interstellar, Syncopy Films and Lynda Obst Productions.
↑3	Jean-Pierre Luminet, 2008. The Wraparound Universe, AK Peters Ltd.

Praise the long time

An example of a simulation of an experiment to be done with the LHC – © 1997 – 2015 CERN under licence CC-BY-SA-4.0.

On July 4, 2012, Atlas and cms experiments of the Large Hadron Collider (lhc) announced that they had identified the beh boson. This led to award 2013 Nobel Prize in Physics to François Englert and Peter Higgs. As I write this, LHC experiments are continuing, while it is rising in energy levels. On August 6, 2014, the space probe Rosetta joined comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko, dropping a module called Philae on it, among other experiments. This mission is at present still ongoing.

What is the common point between a particle physics experiment and a space science mission? They are both long time experiments: the first articles theorising the beh boson were published in 1964¹F. Englert and Brout, R., 1964. Broken symmetry and the mass of gauge vector mesons, Physical Review Letters, vol 13, n° 9,‎ pp 321 – 323. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.13.321, available on line. ²P.W. Higgs, 1964. Broken symmetries and the masses of gauge bosons, Physical Review Letters, vol 13, n° 16,‎ pp 508 – 509. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.13.508, available on line. and the design of the lhc began in 1994. Concerning the Rosetta mission, its starting point were in 1984 with the validation of the Horizon 2000 project.

Continue reading Praise the long time

Notes[+]

Notes
↑1	F. Englert and Brout, R., 1964. Broken symmetry and the mass of gauge vector mesons, Physical Review Letters, vol 13, n° 9,‎ pp 321 – 323. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.13.321, available on line.
↑2	P.W. Higgs, 1964. Broken symmetries and the masses of gauge bosons, Physical Review Letters, vol 13, n° 16,‎ pp 508 – 509. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.13.508, available on line.