Re-Posted from the Canada Free Press By Lee Cary —— Bio and Archives—May 25, 2020

• Dr. Deborah Birx said the CDC math on SARS-CoV-2 deaths was, at least, 25% exaggerated, and no one blinked.
• Remdesivir was eventually judged not only to be a “nothing burger,” but a no-taste vegan patty that didn’t satisfy hunger, as it failed field tests with patients.
• The New England Journal of Medicine delivered a knockout blow to Gilead Sciences’ attempt to breathe life into one of its failed drugs from the past.
• Don’t be surprised when the government scientists push a new candidate offering a symptom-mitigating drug for virus suffers.

The debate surrounding Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ)

The debate of Remdesivir v. HCQ started on, or about, Friday, March 20, when Dr. Fauci stepped to the podium during a virus briefing to correct a favorable comment Trump made about HCQ. Fauci said: “You’ve got to be careful when you say ‘fairly effective’. It (HCQ) was never done in a clinical trial…It was given to individuals and felt that maybe it worked.”

The antiviral properties of these drugs have been studied since 2003

Pandemic, Plandemic, or Both? (Part 4)
Pandemic, Plandemic, or Both? (Part 3)
Pandemic, Plandemic, or Both? (Part 2)
Pandemic, Plandemic, or Both? (Part 1)

The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons(AAPS, founded 1943), is one of several physician groups who engaged the debate. It released a report (April 28) stating:

“To date, the total number of reported patients treated with HCQ, with or without zinc and the widely used antibiotic azithromycin, is 2,333, writes AAPS, in observational data from China, France, South Korea, Algeria, and the U.S. Of these, 2,137 or 91.6 percent improved clinically. There were 63 deaths, all but 11 in a single retrospective report from the Veterans Administration where the patients were severely ill.”

“The antiviral properties of these drugs have been studied since 2003. Particularly when combined with zinc, they hinder viral entry into cells and inhibit replication. They may also prevent overreaction by the immune system, which causes the cytokine storm responsible for much of the damage in severe cases, explains AAPS. HCQ is often very helpful in treating autoimmune diseases such as lupus and rheumatoid arthritis.”

Their report didn’t conform with the approved narrative. At the time, Fauci was touting the positive impact of Remdesivir on SARS-CoV-2 patients. The Gilead Sciences’ drug was, obviously, his drug of choice.

The Center for Infectious disease Research and Policy, a group within the University of Minnesota that addresses public health preparedness and the response to emerging infectious diseases, reported Fauci’s opinion:

“At the White House, Fauci told reporters that the data presented by an independent data and safety monitoring board showed patients on remdesivir recovered in 11 days, compared with 15 days for patients receiving a placebo. Fauci said the data show that the antiviral, which is not yet licensed or approved, ‘has a clear-cut and significant positive effect in diminishing the time to recovery. ‘Although a 31% improvement doesn’t seem like a knockout 100%, it is a very important proof of concept,’ Fauci said. ‘because what it has proven is that a drug can block this virus.’”

Yet, back in August 22, 2005, in an article in Virology Today, a publication of the National Institute of Health where Dr. Fauci heads the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), there appeared a more positive opinion concerning a more toxic form of HCQ:

“Chloroquine is effective in preventing the spread of SARS CoV in cell culture. Favorable inhibition of virus spread was observed when the cells were either treated with chloroquine prior to or after SARS CoV infection. In addition, the indirect immunofluorescence assay described herein represents a simple and rapid method for screening SARS-CoV antiviral compounds.” (HCQ is a less toxic derivative of chloroquine.)

AAPS, representing the HCQ side of the debate, wrote the following to Governor Doug Ducey of Arizona in the context of a long and detailed defense of HCQ:

“To date, the total number of reported patients treated with HCQ, with or without zinc and the widely used antibiotic azithromycin, is 2,333, writes AAPS, in observational data from China, France, South Korea, Algeria, and the U.S. Of these, 2,137 or 91.6 percent improved clinically. There were 63 deaths, all but 11 in a single retrospective report from the Veterans Administration where the patients were severely ill.”

“The antiviral properties of these drugs have been studied since 2003. Particularly when combined with zinc, they hinder viral entry into cells and inhibit replication. They may also prevent overreaction by the immune system, which causes the cytokine storm responsible for much of the damage in severe cases, explains AAPS. HCQ is often very helpful in treating autoimmune diseases such as lupus and rheumatoid arthritis.”

“Additional benefits shown in some studies, AAPS states, is to decrease the number of days when a patient is contagious, reduce the need for ventilators, and shorten the time to clinical recovery.”

“Peer-reviewed studies published from January through April 20, 2020, provide clear and convincing evidence that HCQ may be beneficial in COVID-19, especially when used early, states AAPS. Unfortunately, although it is perfectly legal to prescribe drugs for new indications not on the label, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has said that CQ and HCQ should be used for COVID-19 only in hospitalized patients in the setting of a clinical study if available. Most states are making it difficult for physicians to prescribe or pharmacists to dispense these medications.”

“…Many nations, including Turkey and India, are protecting medical workers and contacts of infected persons prophylactically. According to worldometers.info, deaths per million persons from COVID-19 as of Apr 27 are 167 in the U.S., 33 in Turkey, and 0.6 in India.”

So, HCQ has a proven track record of working. Unfortunately, though, the most serious attention to HCQ came from New York’s Governor Andrew Cuomo, and the governors of Michigan and Nevada. They all banned HCQ use in their states.

Trump shifted the debate on May 18

CNN was one of several sites to break this story—but they couldn’t do it without spinning a bias against HCQ.

“President Donald Trump claimed Monday he is taking daily doses of hydroxychloroquine, a drug he’s long touted as a potential coronavirus cure even as medical experts and the US Food and Drug Administration question its efficacy and warn of potentially harmful side effects.” {snip}

“‘A couple of weeks ago, I started taking it,’ Trump said. He later said he’d been taking it every day for a week and a half. The admission was a dramatic development in Trump’s attempts to promote hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for coronavirus, which began earlier in the outbreak and has been met with resistance from medical professionals. Because the drug is prescribed to treat malaria and other conditions, Trump has cast it as safe and suggested coronavirus patients have little to lose by trying it. But at least one study has shown the drug does not work against Covid-19 and could cause heart problems.”

That last anecdotal comment by CNN sniped HCQ claiming it causes heart attacks. Unproven accusation, as in Fake News.

Much of the media treated Trump’s use of HCQ as breaking news, implying that he’d done something not authorized by his physician. But, back on March 30, National Public Radio had announced that:

“Over the weekend [March 28-29] the Food and Drug Administration granted two malaria drugs ‘emergency use authorization’ for the treatment of COVID-19. The move makes it easier to add the medicines to the strategic stockpile, which can be drawn upon in the current public health emergency. The drugs — chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine — have been identified as potential COVID-19 treatments based on lab tests and small, limited studies in humans.”

How can all this not be seen, so far, as an abysmal failure on the part of the highly-touted, multi-degreed, lab-coated denizens of the halls of big government medical institutions?

Perhaps not all reporters listen to NPR.

On May 14, in a long and detailed National Institute of Health press release entitled “NIH begins clinical trial of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin to treat COVID-19, Study enrolling adults with mild to moderate COVID-19 in the United States,” after tens of thousands of Americans had died from SARS-CoV-2, the NIH department run by Dr. Fauci announced that:

“A clinical trial has begun to evaluate whether the malaria drug hydroxychloroquine, given together with the antibiotic azithromycin, can prevent hospitalization and death from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), part of the National Institutes of Health, is sponsoring the trial, which is being conducted by the NIAID-funded AIDS Clinical Trials Group (ACTG). Teva Pharmaceuticals is donating medications for the study.”

Here was the purpose of the new NIH study that came too late for thousands of virus victims.

“The main objective of the study is to determine whether hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin can prevent hospitalization and death due to COVID-19.”

It’s time to consider the opinion of one of the world’s oldest (founded 1823) and best-known peer-reviewed general medical journals concerning the search for an antiviral drug for SARS-CoD-2.  On April 29, after four months of life with the virus, The Lancet declared that:

“No specific antiviral drug has been proven effective for treatment of patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)”.

So much for all the Remdesivir happy-talk from Fauci and Gilead Sciences.

Here’s a question: How can all this not be seen, so far, as an abysmal failure on the part of the highly-touted, multi-degreed, lab-coated denizens of the halls of big government medical institutions?

In Part 5, the YouTube Thought Police work to suppress dissention from the state-approved science of combating SARS-CoV-2.