The Real Reason HCQ Never Got a Chance, 3124

Good afternoon, I’m still reporting on the virus.
First of all, I want to return Dr. Steve (Pa-chen-ik) Pieczenik’s shout out to me on the front end of his latest video Opus 227
https://bit.ly/SR3124Steve
on Trump’s speech at Mount Rushmore. Thank you, Dr. Steve, and I return the favor with respect. Click on the link below:
------
When the sordid history of this virus outbreak is told, and the response to it by American medicine, it will take more than one book to do it because it is so complex and so filled with unbelievable blatant deceit that the future will never believe this came from physicians – or, at least, those associated with physicians.
The fraudulent numbers that are being cooked up to support this fear panic is sooo hard to believe – not to mention the multiplicity of different ways of driving those numbers up would take up an entire book to tell the story.
But the worst part is the money part. I never understood just how much money is at stake in determining which drug will be crowned the king of defeating the COVID-19 panic.
Late last week, a medical journal that reviews the findings of other medical journals – TrialSite News – published a lengthy analysis of the drug Dr. Fauci has successfully promoted as the best drug available to treat COVID-19, while getting the U.S. media to forget about the cheap legacy drug, hydroxychloroquine. Dr. Fauci’s winner is called Remdesivir.
In early January, the big pharma company, Gilead, initiated clinical trails testing remdesivir against COVID-19 because Gilead had records showing that it may be effective against the SARS and MERS virus in animal models.
As the COVID-19 pandemic spun out of control in Feb. to March – thanks in part to China claiming that it could not be spread from human to human when they knew this was not correct – a clinical trial in China testing remdesivir found that it was neither safe nor effective in reducing mortality.
So the question posed is: how can a drug proven to be unsafe and proven to not be effective in preventing your death be on track to become perhaps the most profitable drug in history?
Despite these results, Dr. Anthony Fauci, one of President Trump’s coronavirus experts, began to sing the praises of remdesivir as the future hope for the western world and ignored significant positive findings for its legacy competitor, hydroxychloroquine, and later on another legacy drug, Ivermectin.
However, the Chinese results for remdesivir were so bad that Chinese investigators terminated their clinical trials.
Why? Although patients on remdesivir who had moderate infection - that is, had showed symptoms for 10 days or less - did see some clinical improvement in their outcomes. It reduced the average hospital stay from 15 days to 11 days. Howeverl, adverse side effects were seen in 66% of those receiving remdesivir and so the trials were appropriately halted.
But that didn’t stop the WHO – the World Health Organization. They launched a trial of remdesivir in mid-March. This was just about the time that President Trump acknowledged the very positive results of France’s leading virologist was having using hydroxychloroquine.
But, according to TrialSite News:
“… as soon as Trump promoted the drug, it actually never received its fair chance.”
Lackluster results continued for remdesevir in the U.S. It showed no improvement in mortality rates for COVID-19 patients over placebo, but that didn’t stop Dr. Fauci, the head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID). The only good thing remdesevir supporters could find in the clinical data was that it reduced recovery time from 15 to 11 days, but it still did nothing for mortality.
No matter, the expensive new drug, remdesevir, won Emergency Use Authorization both in the U.S. and the EU, despite the mountain of data accumulating supporting both HCQ and Ivermectin, which in its initial trials in Florida at Broward Health, was shown to be twice as effective as remdesevir, and in subsequent trials as much as 100% effective.
For the first time in history it became clear that one’s choice of medications to promote no longer were based on science - it became almost entirely political.
By April, Gilead, the big pharma company behind remdesevir, donated its first 140,000 treatment courses at no cost. To whom is not clear. On April 3rd, a compassionate use review was underway in Europe. Full approval would follow shortly thereafter.
Despite that, according to TrialSite News:
“As of May, there was absolutely no evidence that remdesivir reduced mortality in patients with COVID-19 in any way….”
But the financial train had already left the station. In the U.S., Remdesivir would fall under Part A of Medicare. Therefore, although the cost of production for Remdesivir ranges around $10 for a course, hospitals were told that if used on COVID-19 patients Medicare would pay, according to TrialSite News:
“For the average severely ill patient required to