Covid-19 laissons les médecins prescrire

News

Christian Perronne, un médecin en colère

 

Dans son livre, le médecin-chef de l’hôpital de Garches s’interroge sur la gestion calamiteuse de la crise du Covid-19 par le gouvernement français. Passant en revue les actions et (surtout) les inactions des uns et des autres, il dénonce « l’union sacrée de incompétence et de l’arrogance ». Si la forme du propos est parfois critiquable, le fond traduit une colère très largement partagée.  

Ce livre ne relève pas de la science. C’est le témoignage d’un praticien qui est très en colère, qui pointe des responsabilités et demande des comptes. L’émotion est présente derrière les mots, comme en témoignent aussi les interventions télévisées de l’auteur ces derniers jours (par exemple ici, où l’on apprend qu’il a perdu un proche dans cette épidémie). De là des excès de langage et quelques raccourcis d’analyse évidents. Mais il serait trop facile de ne s’attacher qu’à la forme et de crier au « populisme médical », pour mieux faire semblant de ne pas voir les enjeux de fond que pose un médecin qui n’est pas le premier venu et dont la colère est très largement partagée, tant dans le corps médical que dans la société française toute entière.

Lire la suite sur Mediapart.fr

Laurent Mucchielli

Sociologue, directeur de recherches au CNRS (Laboratoire Méditerranéen de Sociologie), www.laurent-mucchielli.org France

Les chiffres de la mortalité liée au Covid-19: premier bilan

La dynamique de l’épidémie est étudiée grâce à la date du pic épidémique, du taux d’hospitalisation et de la mortalité à l’hôpital. Le virus s’est diffusé selon une dynamique propre et il ne peut pas être affirmé que le confinement l’aurait freiné. La mortalité à l’hôpital est très différente selon les départements. Ces différences pourraient tenir à l’organisation et à la nature des soins.

Épisode 15

Par Dominique ANDOLFATTO (professeur de science politique, Credespo, Université de Bourgogne Franche-Comté) et Dominique LABBÉ (chercheur associé en science politique, Pacte-CNRS, Université de Grenoble-Alpes).

Une précédente version de cet article a été publiée dans la Revue Politique et Parlementaire le 5 juin 2020.

Les auteurs n’ont reçu aucun financement public ou privé.

—————————————————————————————-

 

L’épidémie de Covid-19 paraît se terminer après avoir connu son « pic » à la mi-avril. On peut en dresser un premier bilan et, à travers celui-ci, tenter d’évaluer la gestion de cette crise par les pouvoirs publics.

En premier lieu, un bilan statistique permet de mesurer l’ampleur de l’épidémie (rapportant celle-ci à d’autres épisodes épidémiques), puis de s’intéresser à sa diffusion, à sa prévalence – son impact dans la population – et à la mortalité à l’hôpital.

En second lieu, ces différents constats conduisent à poser la question essentielle qui émerge alors : comment expliquer les différences de mortalité selon les territoires observés ? Trois analyses en lien avec l’intensité du pic épidémique, la gravité des cas et la date de ce pic apportent la réponse avant d’introduire une dimension comparée et de déboucher sur plusieurs conclusions qui questionnent les politiques publiques de santé en France.

 

Lire la suite sur Mediapart.fr

Laurent Mucchielli

Sociologue, directeur de recherches au CNRS (Laboratoire Méditerranéen de Sociologie), www.laurent-mucchielli.org France

Gestion des masques
Impéritie, mensonges, fiascos et mise en danger d’autrui

With over half a million followers on Twitter, with YouTube videos exceeding a million views, with his face on newspaper front pages, Professor Didier Raoult from the Marseille University Hospital, has become a popular, yet divisive figure in the French public debate. He is a hero for some, but a fraud for others.

Without the depth of the political divisions existing in the United States, there is also a politicization of the debates around Professor Raoult in France, and it did not help for dealing with the COVID-19 crisis. As a result, far from allowing the medical response to the crisis to progress, the public debate turned into a sterile confrontation focusing on personality. But there were also other elements at play, which we analyze in this brief article.

Professor Raoult runs a University Hospital Institute that employs more than 700 people and whose research on tropical diseases, infections and viruses is known worldwide. At the end of January, 182 French nationals repatriated from Wuhan (the heart of the epidemic in China) are placed in quarantine near Marseille. Professor Raoult’s team is thus the first in France (and probably in the West) to be able to test people, to study the coronavirus in vitro and then in vivo, to analyze the disease, to treat and monitor patients.

American Journal of Epidemiology: Early Outpatient Treatment of Symptomatic, High-Risk Covid-19 Patients that Should be Ramped-Up Immediately as Key to the Pandemic Crisis

With over half a million followers on Twitter, with YouTube videos exceeding a million views, with his face on newspaper front pages, Professor Didier Raoult from the Marseille University Hospital, has become a popular, yet divisive figure in the French public debate. He is a hero for some, but a fraud for others.

Without the depth of the political divisions existing in the United States, there is also a politicization of the debates around Professor Raoult in France, and it did not help for dealing with the COVID-19 crisis. As a result, far from allowing the medical response to the crisis to progress, the public debate turned into a sterile confrontation focusing on personality. But there were also other elements at play, which we analyze in this brief article.

Professor Raoult runs a University Hospital Institute that employs more than 700 people and whose research on tropical diseases, infections and viruses is known worldwide. At the end of January, 182 French nationals repatriated from Wuhan (the heart of the epidemic in China) are placed in quarantine near Marseille. Professor Raoult’s team is thus the first in France (and probably in the West) to be able to test people, to study the coronavirus in vitro and then in vivo, to analyze the disease, to treat and monitor patients.

Agoravox : “Lynchage organisé de la chloroquine par les médias, basé sur une étude aux données non vérifiées, ni vérifiables”

With over half a million followers on Twitter, with YouTube videos exceeding a million views, with his face on newspaper front pages, Professor Didier Raoult from the Marseille University Hospital, has become a popular, yet divisive figure in the French public debate. He is a hero for some, but a fraud for others.

Without the depth of the political divisions existing in the United States, there is also a politicization of the debates around Professor Raoult in France, and it did not help for dealing with the COVID-19 crisis. As a result, far from allowing the medical response to the crisis to progress, the public debate turned into a sterile confrontation focusing on personality. But there were also other elements at play, which we analyze in this brief article.

Professor Raoult runs a University Hospital Institute that employs more than 700 people and whose research on tropical diseases, infections and viruses is known worldwide. At the end of January, 182 French nationals repatriated from Wuhan (the heart of the epidemic in China) are placed in quarantine near Marseille. Professor Raoult’s team is thus the first in France (and probably in the West) to be able to test people, to study the coronavirus in vitro and then in vivo, to analyze the disease, to treat and monitor patients.

Analyzing France’s Paralysis in its Therapeutic Response to COVID-19: a Sociological Perspective

With over half a million followers on Twitter, with YouTube videos exceeding a million views, with his face on newspaper front pages, Professor Didier Raoult from the Marseille University Hospital, has become a popular, yet divisive figure in the French public debate. He is a hero for some, but a fraud for others.

Without the depth of the political divisions existing in the United States, there is also a politicization of the debates around Professor Raoult in France, and it did not help for dealing with the COVID-19 crisis. As a result, far from allowing the medical response to the crisis to progress, the public debate turned into a sterile confrontation focusing on personality. But there were also other elements at play, which we analyze in this brief article.

Professor Raoult runs a University Hospital Institute that employs more than 700 people and whose research on tropical diseases, infections and viruses is known worldwide. At the end of January, 182 French nationals repatriated from Wuhan (the heart of the epidemic in China) are placed in quarantine near Marseille. Professor Raoult’s team is thus the first in France (and probably in the West) to be able to test people, to study the coronavirus in vitro and then in vivo, to analyze the disease, to treat and monitor patients.

Share This