IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v367y2025ics0277953625000553.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Populism and medical advocacy: The case of hydroxychloroquine prior the 2020 United States presidential election

Author

Listed:
  • Salgado Ribeiro de Sá, Gabriel

Abstract

Leading up to the 2020 U.S. presidential elections, the scientific consensus on hydroxychloroquine's ineffectiveness in treating COVID-19 was dismissed by Executive branch scientists, who promoted it as both a therapeutic solution and a political tool. This article examines how experimental pharmaceuticals were rationalized even before the pandemic declaration, aligning with medical advocacy groups linked to Donald Trump, who criticized the crisis management capacity of existing health institutions. Framing the emergency as requiring extraordinary measures, White House researchers advocated for executive unilateralism and eventually sought to securitize public health by replacing key health authorities with operational medicine specialists. The most controversial case involved an attempt of planned pharmaceutical intervention aimed at saving lives and restoring public confidence in the administration's pandemic response before the 2020 election. The article draws on confidential documents released by the 2022 House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis.

Suggested Citation

  • Salgado Ribeiro de Sá, Gabriel, 2025. "Populism and medical advocacy: The case of hydroxychloroquine prior the 2020 United States presidential election," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 367(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:367:y:2025:i:c:s0277953625000553
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2025.117726
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953625000553
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2025.117726?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:367:y:2025:i:c:s0277953625000553. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.