The Hungarian Academy of Sciences says it is inadmissible for the national drug authority to substitute criminal charges for scientific arguments

"Following press reports regarding the low efficacy of favipiravir, the NIPN [Hungary's National Institute of Pharmacy and Nutritional Health] has filed charges, citing the offense of scaremongering. The exact content of the charges is not known. If the drug authority is making accusations of "scaremongering" regarding scientists who have made statements in the press, its action is unfounded and inadmissible on the basis of the content of the articles published thus far"

– reads a joint resolution by the Board of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (HAS) and leading experts.

The public declaration comes after the NIPN announced last Monday that it was taking legal action against scaremongering due to several newspaper articles that questioned the efficacy of favipiravir against Covid-19. According to the NIPN, the articles in question could impede the success of the fight against the pandemic by undermining confidence in pharmaceuticals. However, the drug authority has yet to indicate exactly which articles it was referring to, though it is possible to infer which ones with a high degree of certainty based on context.

Further, the drug authority didn't even disclose which statements it found misleading in the articles, which featured interviews with renowned scientists, nor on what basis it considers the drug – which is widely used in Hungary – to be outside the realm of debate. In fact, the scientific evidence on favipiravir is conflicting. There is still no really strong evidence that its use against Covid-19 has been effective, while even those arguing for its benefits acknowledge that clearly more effective alternatives are now available.

The NIPN's action has received much attention because it is unprecedented for a state agency to respond to scientifically based, expert opinions – or the newspaper articles presenting them – with criminal charges. The charges were met with outrage and perplexity by many in the scientific community, several of whom stressed that even if the authority is absolutely right on the specific technical matter, it is unacceptable to substitute threats of criminal sanctions for arguments in a scientific debate.

Its effectiveness is in fact quite limited

The issue seems to have caused quite a stir in the scientific community, as the President of the HAS convened a meeting with the Academy's senior officials and members, as well as experts on the subject, which resulted in a joint resolution. The efficacy of favipiravir itself is also touched upon in the document:

"According to several scientifically verified reports, early treatment with favipiravir reduced the viral load in infected people, thus accelerating their recovery. However, by the end of 2021, several studies had been published showing that in trials with larger numbers of patients, favipiravir treatment did not prove to be sufficiently effective," the resolution reads.

"The scientific literature suggests that the antiviral efficacy of favipiravir is limited and depends on the starting time and duration of treatment and the dose used. This has led many experts to call for the replacement of favipiravir treatment with new antiviral agents."

"New alternatives for home antiviral treatment include molnupiravir and Paxlovid, which, based on published trial results, are more effective at lower doses than favipiravir. Once they become available in Hungary, they should replace favipiravir in at-home antiviral treatment. For this reason, along with ensuring the availability of these pharmaceuticals in Hungary, there will be a need to modify therapeutic protocols."

Scientists can count on the Academy's protection

"It is in the nature of science to doubt, to debate, which – especially when investigating a new, unexplored phenomenon – should not be inhibited, but must be given a proper setting and framework. The Hungarian Academy of Sciences is ready to do this and asks for the cooperation of the scientific community, the NIPN, and governmental agencies. The reassuring settlement of the debate on favipiravir at a single scientific meeting proves that the Academy, as the nation's advisor, is uniquely suited to this task", the resolution underscores.

"The Academy feels strongly that public authorities should not institute legal proceedings against scientists for expressing their professional opinions to the press."

"A scientist or researcher who participates in scientific debates within the framework of and in cooperation with the Academy according to the rules of scientific reasoning, who takes into account the principles related to the various kinds of expression, the diverse legal and ethical standards, as well as the relevant decisions of the elected leaders and committees of the Academy, and who continues to do so in their work, can count on the Academy's protection if they are attacked because of their scientific opinion," the resolution reads.

The signatories of the resolution: Tamás Freund, President of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, György Kosztolányi, Anna Erdei, Veronika Ádám, Gábor L. Kovács, Gábor B. Makara, György Miklós Keserű, Péter Sótonyi, Balázs Sarkadi, Tamás Ferenci and Ferenc Oberfrank.