Tag Archives: hydroxycholoroquine

Yale Epidemiologist: Hydroxychloroquine Could Save 100,000 Lives If Widely Deployed, by Tyler Durden

It’s time to look at the other side of the ledger: how many people have lockdowns and their attendant business failures and unemployment killed, how many people have face masks made sick, and how many lives would have been saved if hydroxychloroquine, used in conjunction with azithromycin and zinc sulfate, been widely available and administered to early stage Covid-19 sufferers? From Tyler Durden at zerohedge.com:

Yale epidemiology professor Dr. Harvey Risch told Fox News‘s “Ingraham Angle” that he thinks hydroxychloroquine could save 75,000 to 100,000 lives if widely used to treat COVID-19, and that it’s unfortunate that a “propaganda war” has been waged on the commonly prescribed drug which is not based on “medical facts.”

“There are many doctors that I’ve gotten hostile remarks about saying that all the evidence is bad for it and, in fact, that is not true at all,” Risch said on Monday, adding that he believes the drug should be used as a prophylactic for front-line healthcare workers, as has been done in India.

Continue reading→

How a False Hydroxychloroquine Narrative Was Created, by Joseph Mercola

If I get seriously ill from the coronavirus, I want hydroxychloriquine as part of my treatment. From Joseph Mercola at lewrockwell.com:

There’s no shortage of controversies surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, but the controversy over hydroxychloroquine is perhaps one of the most perplexing and frustrating. Doctors and health experts around the world have spoken out both for and against the use of the drug, some reporting spectacular benefits1 while others warn of mortal dangers.2

Game-Changer or Deadly Treatment?

In one international poll3 of 6,227 doctors in 30 countries, 37% rated the antimalaria drug hydroxychloroquine as “the most effective therapy” for COVID-19. The poll was done by Sermo, the world’s largest health care data collection company and social platform for physicians.

In Spain, where the drug was used by 72% of doctors, it was rated “the most effective therapy” by 75% of them. The typical dose used by a majority of doctors was 400 milligrams per day.

French science-prize winning microbiologist and infectious disease expert Didier Raoult, founder and director of the research hospital Institut Hospitalo-Universitaire Méditerranée Infection,4 reported5,6 that a combination of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin, administered immediately upon diagnosis, led to recovery and “virological cure” — nondetection of SARS-CoV-27 in nasal swabs — in 91.7% of patients.

Continue reading→

 

LancetGate: “Scientific Corona Lies” and Big Pharma Corruption. Hydroxychloroquine versus Gilead’s Remdesivir, by Prof Michel Chossudovsky

Exhibit A in the corruption of science, from Michel Chossudovsky at lewrockwell.com:

Introduction

There is an ongoing battle to suppress Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), a cheap and effective drug for the treatment of Covid-19. The campaign against HCQ is carried out through slanderous political statements, media smears, not to mention an authoritative peer reviewed “evaluation”  published on May 22nd by The Lancet, which was based on fake figures and test trials.

The study was allegedly based on data analysis of 96,032 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 between Dec 20, 2019, and April 14, 2020 from 671 hospitals Worldwide. The database had been fabricated. The objective was to kill the Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) cure on behalf of Big Pharma.

While The Lancet article was retracted, the media casually blamed “a tiny US based company” named Surgisphere whose employees included “a sci-fi writer and an adult content model” for spreading “flawed data” (Guardian). This Chicago based outfit was accused of having misled both the WHO and national governments, inciting them to ban HCQ. None of those trial tests actually took place.

Continue reading→

Researchers Retract Botched Anti- Hydroxychloroquine Study Which Was Used To Attack Trump, by Tyler Durden

You can bet that the retraction will get far less press than the original flawed study. From Tyler Durden at zerohedge.com:

The study, published on May 22 in the UK’s prestegious Lancet medical journal, relied on bogus data from a company called Surgisphere, which would not transfer the full dataset for an independent review, and “can no longer vouch for the veracity of the primary data sources.”

While the company that produced the original data, Surgisphere Corp., had signaled that it would cooperate with an independent review, it ultimately reneged and said doing so would violate confidentiality agreements, wrote the study authors. “As such, our reviewers were not able to conduct an independent and private peer review,” the authors said. –Bloomberg

Continue reading→

Hydroxychloroquine, Me, and the Great Divide, by Richard Moss, M.D.

The irony of the hydroxychloroquine battle is that if it’s as dangerous or ineffective as it’s now made out to be, those making the claim should be delighted that the man most of them detest— President Trump—is taking it. From Richard Moss, M.D., at americanthinker.com:

I took hydroxychloroquine for two years.  A long time ago as a visiting cancer surgeon in Asia, in Thailand, Nepal, India, and Bangladesh.  From 1987 to 1990.  Malaria is rife there.  I took it for prophylaxis, 400 milligrams once a week for two years.  Never had any trouble.  It was inexpensive and effective.  I started it two weeks before and was supposed to continue it through my stay and four weeks after returning.  But I stopped it after two years.  I was worried about potential side effects of which there are many, as with all drugs right down to Tylenol and aspirin.  These, however, are rare.  At a certain point, I was prepared to take my chances with mosquitoes and plasmodium, and so I stopped.

Chloroquine, the precursor of HCQ, was invented by Bayer in 1934.  Hydroxychloroquine was developed during World War II as a safer, synthetic alternative and approved for medical use in the U.S. in 1955.  The World Health Organization considers it an essential medicine, among the safest and most effective medicines, a staple of any healthcare system.  In 2017, US doctors prescribed it 5 million times, the 128th most commonly prescribed drug in the country.  There have been hundreds of millions of prescriptions worldwide since its inception.  It is one of the cheapest and best drugs in the world and has saved millions of lives.  Doctors also prescribe it for Lupus and Rheumatoid arthritis patients who may consume it for their lifetimes with few or no ill effects.

Continue reading→

 

Malaria drug and zinc, the missing link, by Joseph Berry

Many of the tests of the efficacy of hydroxychloriquine are not combining the drug with zinc, which doctors say is essential for the best results. From Joseph Berry at conservativewoman.co.uk:

MYSTERY surrounds why an anti-malaria drug is not being tested as a Covid-19 treatment in combination with zinc, which doctors say is crucial for efficacy.

As we reported recently, President Trump revealed he was taking hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) alongside zinc after reports that many doctors are doing the same to help ward off Covid-19. 

Criticism of the President rose sharply after a non-randomised study published in the Lancet said that HCQ provided no benefit to hospitalised Covid-19 patients while being linked to increased deaths. 

What the mainstream media did not point out is that the Lancet study failed to test HCQ with zinc. Other experts have found zinc to be vital for efficacy in this context.

Zinc, available as an over-the-counter supplement, has long been seen as an immune-system booster that helps develop immune cells, or antibodies, and can strengthen the body’s response to a virus.

American infectious disease specialist Joseph Rahimian explained that, in relation to Covid-19, zinc ‘does the heavy lifting and is the primary substance attacking the pathogen’. HCQ is said to work as a delivery systemfor zinc in fighting coronavirus.

Ironically, the Lancet study came out at the same time as it was reported that India’s premier health body had expanded use of HCQ as a preventive for key workers following three studies showing positive results. 

Continue reading→

The Hydroxychloroquine Controversy Is a Reminder That Prescription Laws Are a Government Racket, by Nick Hankoff

Most everything the government does is some sort of racket, and it’s always gratifying when someone shines a spotlight on one of them. From Nick Hankoff at mises.org:

After President Trump declared that he uses hydroxychloroquine, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) walked back its advice against the drug and seemingly all others as well. “The decision to take any drug,” the head of the agency said, is “between a patient and their doctor.”

The FDA has had two shining moments during the spread of the coronavirus. At neither time did the agency do something so much as it undid something.

The first moment was March 13, when the FDA dropped its onerous approval process for coronavirus test kits. It was still late to the game, but the move helped save face.

On Tuesday, there wasn’t much left to preserve after the FDA commissioner issued a statement essentially nullifying much of his own bureaucracy’s purpose for existing.

“The decision to take any drug is ultimately a decision between a patient and their doctor,” FDA commissioner Dr. Stephen Hahn said in an emailed statement to various news outlets, including the Hill and CNBC.

This came in response to President Trump’s remarks that same day that he had been taking hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) as a preventative measure against COVID-19 for “a couple weeks.”

“I think people should be allowed to,” Trump said.

The FDA would say that, technically, people are allowed to use HCQ. It’s just not government approved for anything other than malaria, lupus, and rheumatoid arthritis. And although doctors may, and do, prescribe it for “off-label” treatments, a prescription—a government-mandated document that controls public access—is still required.

What does it matter, beyond the legal consequences, whether a prescription is written for HCQ or not? In Trump’s case, the president merely requested HCQ from his doctor. It wasn’t even recommended to him. Suppose no prescription were required and HCQ were over the counter. Might Trump or anyone else consult their physician or a pharmacist anyway?

Continue reading

The Campaign Against HCQ—Part II, by Paul Craig Roberts

A cheap, effective remedy against Covid-19 would destroy the whole sub rosa rationale for this farce: universal vaccinations that would pave the way for universal surveillance and a medical social credit score type of system. From Paul Craig Roberts at paulcraigroberts.com:

Part I

A few years ago the British medical journal, The Lancet, published a paper touting the safety of HCQ.  But this was before HCQ with zinc was found effective if used earlier enough against Covid-19.  Covid-19 turned HCQ’s effectiveness into a big problem for Big Pharma’s big profits.

The solution was another study by medical professionals some of whom have ties to Big Pharma and none of whom, apparently, are involved in the treatment of Covid patients.  The study lumps together people in different stages of the disease and undergoing different treatments. It touts its large sample, but many of the patients in the sample received treatment too late after the virus had reached their heart and other vital organs.  Most likely the people who died from heart failure died as a result of the virus, not from HCQ.

To be effective treatment has to stop the virus early. Waiting until the patient must be hospitalized has given the virus too much of a head start. Every doctor, and there are many, who reports success with the HCQ treatment stresses early treatment.  President Trump used a two-week treatment with HCQ as a prophylactic as he was constantly coming into contact with people who tested positive for the virus.  Many medical professionals who are treating Covid patients also use HCQ as a prophylactic.

The Lancet study was a rush job as it was essential for Big Pharma to prevent the spread of the HCQ treatment and awareness of its safety and effectiveness. The study’s authors completed the data collection around the middle of April and the study was published on May 22.  As soon as it appeared, it was used to close down the World Health Organization’s clinical  trial of hydoxychloroquine in coronavirus patients citing safety concerns. Most likely, the trial was aborted in order to  prevent an official agency from finding out that HCQ worked.

Continue reading

The Only Thing Morbidly Obese in D.C. is the Government, by Tom Luongo

The federal government could lose 80 percent of its body fat to the benefit of the productive people who are being squashed by it. From Tom Luongo at tomluongo.me:

So House Speaker Nancy Pelosi continues to prove the observation as true that the “Left Can’t Meme” by going on TV to decry President Trump prophylactic use of hydroxychloroquine and zinc to fend off COVID-19 by calling him “morbidly obese.”

 

What’s so sad about this exchange isn’t the obviously awkward set up by Anderson Cooper, the unctuous virtue signaling by Pelosi or the pathetic pandering to her base it is that Pelosi gets everything exactly wrong.

If Trump is morbidly obese, which would be a co-factor in falling to COVID-19, wouldn’t it make sense then for him TO be taking whatever precautions he and his doctors deemed helpful?

I guess Nancy would know all about morbid obesity because that’s the only kind of legislation she’s capable of sponsoring.

Her latest legislative fiasco was a new $3 trillion stimulus bill with precious little ‘stimulus’ in it whic was rejected by members of her own caucus (because truly who at this point could be stimulated to anything other than nausea by Pelosi).

Continue reading→

 

Is Big Pharma behind the great war on hydroxychloroquine? by Monica Showalter

Say it isn’t so. Surely large corporations wouldn’t use the power of government to stifle a cheaper and more effective product. From Monica Showalter at americanthinker.com:

When President Trump brought up hydroxychloroquine as a promising potential treatment for COVID-19, a huge upsurge of negative political publicity followed from it.  It was strange stuff, because up until then, the treatment, which had been safely used to treat malaria, lupus, and arthritis, had been seeing promising results for COVID-19, too.  Yet the condemnations from all sides poured for weeks.  It wasn’t just the political establishment blasting it; it seemed to be the medical establishment, too.  That raises questions as to whether financial interests might be involved here.

It started with the press engaging in its customary contrarianism against Trump when he called the treatment “promising.”  The logic was simple: If Trump liked it, then it had to be bad.

How’s this for a slanted headline and report from NPR, which ran on April 10?

COVID-19 Patients Given Unproven Drug In Texas Nursing Home In ‘Disconcerting’ Move

Continue reading→