Políticas públicas e substâncias controversas na COVID-19: a construção das recomendações de uso de cloroquina e hidroxicloroquina nos dois primeiros anos da pandemia

Abstract

This study analyzes the processes that enabled the incorporation of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine as public policies for addressing COVID-19 in Brazil, despite the lack of scientific evidence of their efficacy. The research is grounded in Science and Technology Studies and adopts a qualitative approach to documentary analysis, based on a set of documents that includes institutional reports, videos, public statements, and official protocols. Using the ATLAS.ti software, these documents were organized and coded, allowing the identification of discursive strategies that supported the continued use of these substances. In this process, the role of the group Médicos pela Vida (Doctors for Life) stood out, as it played a central role in defending early treatment and mobilizing arguments based on medical authority. The research highlights how discursive practices, institutional alliances, and performances of scientific authority produced a regime of truth that redefined these medications as political symbols, articulating science, morality, and economic interests. The analysis shows that scientific controversy was instrumentalized to keep the possibility of using these drugs open, turning uncertainty into political action. It is argued that the persistence of these substances in official protocols reflects a form of governance based on exception and scientific performance, in which the issuance of guidelines does not rely on evidence, but on affective and symbolic mobilization. The Brazilian case thus illustrates the risks of normalizing political practices that undermine scientific regulation and commitments to public health.