Tide is turning for the media-savvy French professor Didier Raoult and his chloroquine, even US President Donald Trump is suddenly barely even mentioning the miracle drug for COVID-19. Maybe this is because the only clinical data supporting the malaria drug chloroquine cure against coronavirus comes from Raoult himself. And only after Raoult denounced controls and other basics of clinical research as unethical. Outside of Raoult’s alternative reality, clinical data from France, Sweden, Brazil and USA already now shows that chloroquine not only does not work against COVID-19, it seems to even kill. Predictably so, since the drug’s side effects are well known.
This is why chloroquine proponents changed their stance and now scream that it is wrong to treat very sick COVID-19 patients with chloroquine. Instead, they insist that the drug must be given very early during infection or even prophylactically, i.e., to healthy and asymptomatic people only. Given the evidence that the coronavirus is apparently lethal for less than 1% of the infected, you can see where this is going. The safest way to successfully heal with witchdoctor magic is to treat those who are not really ill and recover anyway.
But now Raoult seems to have gone completely off the rails. He namely attacked the data integrity expert Elisabeth Bik, on Twitter and in full Trump manner:
Heal the healthy, avoid the sick
The microbiologist Raoult is director of the Institut hospitalo-universitaire en maladies infectieuses de Marseille (IHU Méditerranée Infection) and its URMITE department, which was previously funded by the French research networks CNRS and INSERM. Both withdrew in 2018, after Raoult proved a despotic tyrant who allowed sexual harassment, discrimination and bullying to happen in his institute (read more here). There is also a history of data manipulation, for which Raoult himself was made responsible in 2006. Bik found even more irregularities in his papers, which makes sense: a bullying and totalitarian research environment with a personality cult, where compliance and fear rule, can only produce unreliable or falsified research.
Like these copy-pasted disease-spreading ticks, or these copy-pasted fraud-spreading gel bands, newly discovered at IHU:
P Renesto, P Dehoux, E Gouin, L Touqui, P Cossart, D Raoult Identification and Characterization of a Phospholipase D–Superfamily Gene in Rickettsiae J Infect Dis (2003) doi: 10.1086/379080 Also “lanes two and three show concerning similarities.“
To make the insolence worse, Raoult’s approach was repeatedly criticised by Bik. When Raoult claimed to have cured 80 patients of COVID-19, without a control arm in his study, Bik summed up:
- “At enrollment, 92% of the patients had a “low” score in the National Early Warning Score (NEWS), suggesting they were not very sick.
- The average time between onset of the COVID-19 symptoms and being enrolled in the study was 5 days. This suggests that the patients had already been sick for a while.
- Only 15% of the enrolled patients had a fever. Fever is one of the characteristic symptoms of COVID-19, so people with a positive PCR but no fever are probably only mildly ill, or maybe already recovering.
- Of the 12 patients who had a fever, the mean temperature was 38.6C (101.5 degrees F).
- Only half of the enrolled patients had a lower respiratory tract infection.
- 15% of these patients required oxygen.
- Four patients were asymptomatic.“
Obviously it is easy to cure patients who are not really that sick in the first place. But what about the treatment itself? Problem is, that especially the combination of the immunosuppressive hydroxychloroquine and the antibiotic azithromycine, as promoted by Raoult, has very serious side effects which can lead to death. It should be noted that while Raoult’s IHU hospital in Marseille boasts a very low COVID-19 mortality rate of 1.7% (while refusing to treat the very ill) it is still higher than the estimate for the rest of France which is 0.53% according to this study from Institut Pasteur.
Because of Raoult, chloroquine became standard COVID-19 therapy in many countries worldwide. Including in France. Yet an observational study on 11 patients from Paris (Molina et al 2020) reported already on 30 March “no evidence of rapid antiviral clearance or clinical benefit”:
“At the time of treatment initiation, 10/11 had fever and received nasal oxygen therapy. Within 5 days, one patient died, two were transferred to the ICU. In one patient, hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin were discontinued after 4 days because of a prolongation of the QT interval from 405 ms before treatment to 460 and 470 ms under the combination. Mean through blood concentration of hydroxychloroquine was 678 ng/mL (range: 381–891) at days 3–7 after treatment initiation.
Repeated nasopharyngeal swabs in 10 patients (not done in the patient who died) using a qualitative PCR assay (nucleic acid extraction using Nuclisens Easy Mag®, Biomerieux and amplification with RealStar SARS CoV-2®, Altona), were still positive for SARS-CoV2 RNA in 8/10 patients (80%, 95% confidence interval: 49–94) at days 5 to 6 after treatment initiation.“
Sweden, which initially followed Raoult’s teachings and started to treat COVID-19 patients with chloroquine, swiftly aborted the method when patients developed severe side effects. A retrospective study on 84 patients receiving hydroxychloroquine and azithromycine from New York University (Chorin et al medRxiv 2020) also demonstrated how serious those side effects in COVID-19 patients can be:
“We report the change in the QT interval in 84 adult patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection treated with Hydroxychloroquine/Azithromycin combination. QTc prolonged maximally from baseline between days 3 and 4. in 30% of patients QTc increased by greater than 40ms. In 11% of patients QTc increased to >500 ms, representing high risk group for arrhythmia. The development of acute renal failure but not baseline QTc was a strong predictor of extreme QTc prolongation.”
That study, and a mysterious manuscript from Detroit submitted to NEJM, are discussed by Derek Lowe here.
Above the law?
As it happened, Raoult’s most recent (literally) uncontrolled clinical trials were ethically approved by his own submissive IHU. He even treated 14 year old children with chloroquine as part of his 1000 patients trial (Table 1 here, recruitment age was >12 years old), which is actually quite illegal. In his paper Gautret et al TMID 2020 Raoult admitted that his thousands of patients were kept in the dark about the risks, since none of them received a patient information sheet and an informed consent to sign:
“There is no formal consent to sign in our institution by patients“
IHU’s human guinea pigs were unaware of the experimental nature of the therapy, quite the opposite: because Raoult decreed that the hydroxychloroquine+azithromycine method must work, he retrospectively defined it a “standard treatment“. They believed to be undergoing an established, internationally approved therapy for COVID-19. Even more schizophrenically: all studies which Raoult designed in advance, with the explicit purpose to prove his therapy, were declared “retrospective” to deny the need for an ethics approval. This horrendous ethics breach passed peer review at Elsevier with flying colours. In 1 day.
On 20 April 2020, news came of Raoult being in serious legal trouble with the French authorities because of his human experiments with chloroquine:
“The National Agency for the Safety of Medicines and Health Products (ANSM), which did not authorize the second study on hydroxychloroquine (Plaquenil *, Sanofi) conducted at the institute hospital-university (IHU) in Marseille by Pr Didier Raoult, awaits that the investigators bring objective elements to demonstrate its observational nature, indicated Dominique Martin in an interview with APMnews.”
That was sure something unexpected for Raoult, after the President of France, Emmanuel Macron, has visited his lab just days before and described Raoult as “great scientist”. On 24 April IHU retorted that the study never needed any ethics approval or patient consent, because it was “retrospective”, a hair-raising argument their Italian colleagues routinely used to cover up intentional patient abuse. And anyway, Raoult and his colleagues “deemed it ethically unacceptable to conduct a therapeutic trial“.
Meanwhile, in USA, an NIH Expert Panel, convened by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (directed by US epidemics expert Anthony Fauci), recommended in its COVID-19 guidelines on 21 April 2020:
“Except in the context of a clinical trial, the COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel (the Panel) recommends against the use of the following drugs for the treatment of COVID-19:
– The combination of hydroxychloroquine plus azithromycin (AIII) because of the potential for toxicities.”
Chloroquine is about to become a major embarrassment for everyone. And Raoult is the central figure in this international Il pleut de la merde.
No wonder that the grand old man, unused to being contradicted or ridiculed, is losing it. The object of Raoult’s public wrath is now Bik whom he describes as “witchhunter”, as well as this study from Veterans Affair hospitals in USA:
Joseph Magagnoli, Siddharth Narendran, Felipe Pereira, Tammy Cummings, James W Hardin, S Scott Sutton, Jayakrishna Ambati Outcomes of hydroxychloroquine usage in United States veterans hospitalized with Covid-19 doi: 10.1101/2020.04.16.20065920
The retrospective controlled clinical study found out that hydroxychloroquine-treated patients had a high risk of death and concluded:
“In this study, we found no evidence that use of hydroxychloroquine, either with or without azithromycin, reduced the risk of mechanical ventilation in patients hospitalized with Covid-19. An association of increased overall mortality was identified in patients treated with hydroxychloroquine alone.”
The study made all the big news, maybe because it was the first one from the US. Raoult (or maybe his personal assistant in charge of social media) tweeted his views:
“The witchhunter @MicrobiomDigest is not attentive to details when she judges that a study is useful to her paranoiac fights!
Control group was treated with azithromycin.
Nearly dying patients with lymphopenia were treated with hydroxychloroquine.
Fraudulent study. Fake news“
When you spend so much time admiring Trump, you start sounding like your idol. After dealing with Bik, Raoult tweeted his criticism about a study by his French colleagues in Paris and their study Mahevas et al medRxiv 2020.
Unlike his own clinical trials, Mahevas et al was really an observational study of 181 French COVID-19 patients treated after Raoult’s method, but with a control group. The paper, published on 14 April, concludes against the use of hydroxychloroquine on COVID-19 hypoxic pneumonia patients and mentions:
“Eight patients receiving HCQ (9.5%) experienced electrocardiogram modifications requiring HCQ discontinuation.“
On 24 April Raoult and his IHU issued another press release or a white paper, where they openly accused their Paris colleagues Mahevas et al of “scientific fraud“, already in the headline. Raoult’s J’accuse partners are IHU group leader Philippe Broiqui and clinic head Matthieu Million. If you naively think such institutional fraud accusations happen in the scientific community at least occasionally: not really. IHU seems to have evolved under Raoult’s leadership into a lunatic asylum for the criminally insane.
Prior to that outpour, Raoult endorsed a bizarre telemedicine (sic!) study by a Brazilian insurance (sic!), which was never published anywhere, not even as preprint. It is only available as document on the file sharing platform Dropbox (sic!):
Bik blogged about that Brazilian “study”, where 636 patients, distance-assessed by telemedicine only, themselves decided which drug to take after they self-diagnosed themselves with COVID-19 (sic!). Afterwards, the study’s authors somehow pulled up the numbers of who died and who went to intensive care, and fabricated p-values which did not fit. Bik then provided an update on 20 April:
“It was announced today that the study described below has been suspended because of ethical violations. As pointed out by Natalia Pasternak and Carlos Orsi and Ricardo Parolin Schnekenberg […], the study had already started before the ethical approval had been obtained. This could be figured out by looking at the disclosed study days in the preprint and the trial registration at the Clinical Trials website.“
But for Raoult, that was a proper scientific clinical trial. Not the one done by his US peers in the Veterans Affairs hospitals, that was a “fraudulent” and “fake news”. What about this other Brazilian study, Silva Borba et al medRxiv 2020, published on 16 April?
“The high dose CQ arm presented more QTc>500ms (25%), and a trend toward higher lethality (17%) than the lower dosage. Fatality rate was 13.5% (95%CI=6.9-23.0%), overlapping with the CI of historical data from similar patients not using CQ (95%CI=14.5-19.2%). In 14 patients with paired samples, respiratory secretion at day 4 was negative in only one patient.”
In this double-blinded phase IIb clinical trial, all patients were treated just as Raoult says, with hydroxychloroquine+azithromycine only, without those evil controls Raoult hates? Chloroquine was applied in two different doses, and the doctors had to halt the high dose arm because the patients were dying from heart failure. Raoult doesn’t talk about that study.
Doomsday cult
Instead, he lets his loyal bootlickers attack his critics. On 14 April 2020, Raoult’s IHU Marseille openly and publicly threatened a clinician Damien Barraud, who has been very critical of their chloroquine “studies” on Twitter and in newspaper interviews. IHU tweeted a demand for Baraud to be stripped of his medical licence and be sacked by his hospital employer in Metz, and announced lawsuits for libel:
As I reported before, the International Society for Microbial Chemotherapy (ISAC), with which Raoult published his initial chloroquine study Gautret et al IJAA 2020, distanced themselves from it, in a public statement from 4 April 2020. ISAC (and then the publisher Elsevier) insist however that the peer review process “did adhere to the industry’s peer review rules.” Which is strange, since it seems the paper was reviewed and sent back for minor revision on the same day it was submitted. The next day, the authors returned a revised version which was immediately accepted.
Raoult’s follow up clinical trial with 80 patients treated with chloroquine and azithromycine and without any control arm (criticised by Bik above) was published in a different Elsevier journal, and accepted the next day after submission. The first author of the new Gautret et al TMID 2020, Philippe Gautret, is incidentally associate editor of that of that journal.
Regardless of the obviously repeatedly rigged peer review process, that wretched first Gautret et al IJAA 2020 paper serves as the ONLY clinical study on which the pharma giant Novartis bases its newly announced phase 3 clinical trial in USA, on 440 patients. Do check the references here.
Not just this. Somehow Raoult’s Marseille buddy Jean-Paul Moatti managed to smuggle an opinion piece into The Lancet promoting chloroquine. The author declared no conflict of interest, despite being the husband of Raoult’s co-director at IHU, Yolande Obadia.
Now Raoult, the 1-hour-peer review man, suddenly has enough of the traditional publishing he constantly games. He tweeted his YouTube video, saying that he prefers to have his studies assessed by “confined people” at his institute than by some external reviewers he cannot control:
In that same video, Raoult is saying things which make less and less sense:
“Maybe I was capable of responding to this situation because I’m part African and part of my ancestry leave me with the idea that we should treat infectious diseases“
The signs that Raoult might be losing his mind are already there. Problem is, having cemented his totalitarian power at IHU, having stifled all dissent years ago and having surrounded himself by loyal yes-sayers only, there is nobody to tell Raoult that he is making an utter arse of himself, in public and even on video.
In that recent preprint, where Raoult claimed to have cured with chloroquine over 1000 patients mildly or barely suffering from COVID-19 (including children), he counted 5 levels of evidence that his method works. The highest level of evidence is Raoult’s own Gautret et al IJAA 2020 paper, plus two studies from China which don’t even fit. Who cares, it will sure pass peer review in one of Elsevier journals Raoult controls. It is all very surreal.
The manuscript lists these key words: “SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19; hydroxychloroquine; azithromycin; ethics; Hippocratic oath“. The last two strongly suggest that there is a kind of religious mass psychosis going on at IHU. These keywords are listed because Raoult firmly believes that it is unethical NOT to treat COVID-19 patients with chloroquine, and every doctor who insists on scientific process and evidence, breaches the Hippocratic oath of not doing harm. Nobody at Marseille laughed or told Raoult to check himself in into an asylum. The entire IHU plays his game like a devout doomsday cult on hallucinogenic drugs.
The “great scientist” believes in his delirium to be actually just like a World War I general, commanding thousands of men to get out the trenches and die for the glory of France.
What next? To be updated, proper randomized controlled clinical trials on chloroquine against COVID-19 are ongoing and might soon deliver results. But Raoult is sure a tough guy who won’t go down without a fight.
This article has been updated several times since it was first published.
Update 2.05.2020
TCM as chloroquine adjuvant?
There seems to be a clear pattern how Raoult evaluates scientific studies. Those which do not fit his general world view, are all flawed or outright fraudulent. Those which seem to support his chloroquine claims are infallible and perfect.
So now Raoult endorses Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) as a chloroquine adjuvant. Really, he does:
The reference is to a new preprint from Tongji Hospital in Wuhan, China, Yu et al medRxiv 2020. It reports a retrospective analysis of a clinical trial with “568 critically ill patients” with mortalities of 18.8% (9/48) in hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) group and 45.8% (238/520) in no-HCQ group. Astounding, right? Only that the Wuhan authors never mention azythromycine, while Raoult so far insisted HCQ does not help critically ill COVID-19 patients at all.
Now, the preprint by the Tongji cardiologist Wang Daowen and colleagues claims all 568 patients received “baseline treatments [..] of antiviral drugs (Lopinavir and Ritonavir, Entecavir hydrate, or Ribavirin)“. 48 of these allegedly received HCQ. The ethics approval references a clinical trial with Daowen as principal investigator, which however used only one drug: Shuanghuanglian. It is a herbal TCM concoction, the trial had 4 arms with 3 different Shuanghuanglian quantity, plus control arm. A total of 400 patients (as opposed to the preprint’s 568), nobody was treated with HCQ or any other drug mentioned in the preprint.
Unless completely made-up fraud, there is only one way to explain it: For controls, Daowen et al lied about baseline treatment because serious scientists outside of China tend to laugh at TCM. Where the extra 158 patients and the HCQ group came from, is anyone’s guess, unless invented they were borrowed from different trials or hospitals. Raoult says this is good science. Maybe he will replace azythromycine with TCM now?
Update 20.05.2020
Raoult was possibly made to resign his job, he was cited to go to China already this summer. Incidentally, by leaving France and Europe, he would escape any eventual criminal charges for illegal human experimentation.
The French newspaper Entreprendre cited his letter to Robert Lafont, the CEO of this publishing house. The online article was swiftly deleted, but here is a backup. Newspapers were quick to denounce the report as fake news and a prank, Lafort himself played stupid, but I personally am not so sure (although it is likely Raoult was never offered a job in Peking). This was Raoult’s letter, translated:
“Since you have been one of the rare journalists to have exhibited exemplary behaviour during this period, I would like to take this opportunity to reserve for you the first news: my upcoming departure for China (by the end of the summer). I was indeed recruited as Professor by the Peking University (PUHSC), the most renowned medical school in the country, which happens to be very advanced in the field of virology. It became very complicated to undertake research projects in the health sector in France, the sector being plagued by partisan quarrels, sprawling bureaucracy and political correctness. “
Donate!
If you are interested to support my work, you can leave here a small tip of $5. Or several of small tips, just increase the amount as you like (2x=€10; 5x=€25). Your generous patronage of my journalism will be most appreciated!
€5.00
For Better Science 
Pingback: Living in a post-Ingelfinger world or… The HCQ-COVID-19 publication show – The political economy of academic publications
Pingback: Колесо злоключений — p.com
Pingback: El culebrón de la hidroxicloroquina para la COVID-19 - La Ciencia de la Mula Francis
Pingback: Graphene Flagship deploys Stripy Stellacci to fight the Coronavirus – For Better Science
Pingback: 18 Thursday 2020 – Thursday – #95 – COVID Diary BCN
Hi Leonid,
Thanks for the article!
What is the source for saying that URMITE lost its CNRS and INSERM funding in 2018? I tried to google a bit but can’t find this information anywhere.
Regards
Charles
LikeLike
Good point. I think the details should be here: https://www.les-crises.fr/le-professeur-didier-raoult-rebelle-anti-systeme-ou-megalomane-sans-ethique/
LikeLike
I had a look at this article yesterday actually 🙂
I can’t find any mention of INSERM or CNRS withdrawing funding from the IHU or URMITE. The end of section VIII actually suggests that the IHU gets direct funding from the state via the ANR until the end of 2020.
There is a mention that INSERM and CNRS ordered an inquiry into the IHU (following accusations of harassment and mismanagement) but there is no mention of any action taken against the IHU following this inquiry, or following the falsification of results in IHU scientific papers.
Regards
Charles
LikeLike
Here you go:
https://marsactu.fr/didier-raoult-inaugure-son-ihu-mediterranee-infection-sur-un-mode-defensif/
LikeLike
Hey, thanks for the follow up and sorry about the late reply I’ve been distracted by work.
I really want this to be true but it seems near impossible to get a reputable source of information to confirm this.
I found another page with a little bit more information than the marsactu article: http://sante-secu-social.npa2009.org/?Mediapart-Chloroquine-pourquoi-le-passe-de-Didier-Raoult-joue-contre-lui
The website itself is not very reliable but the article is a good summary of all the stuff I have read here and there about this:
– Withdrawal of the label (unclear whether this means funding stops) for the units replacing URMITE (MEPHI and VITROME)
– Decision taken after a report from HCERES, pointing to “quantity over quality”, publications in dummy journals created only for that purpose, lack of expertise in epidemiology, etc…
I think that what we really need to find is this damning HCERES report (which should be public). The NPA article says the inquiry for the report started in January 2017 and the sanctions were taken in January 2018. This suggests the report was published at some point in 2017.
However the evaluation reports for MEPHI and VITROME on the HCERES website show nothing out of the ordinary (the tone is neutral for vitrome and rather positive for mephi). These reports are dated from May and June 2017 respectively, so the dates match what we expect. However the content does not 😦
– https://www.hceres.fr/en/rechercher-une-publication/mephi-microbes-evolution-phylogenie-et-infections
– https://www.hceres.fr/fr/rechercher-une-publication/vitrome-vecteurs-infections-tropicales-et-mediterraneenne
The website of the University of Marseille still shows INSERM and CNRS as supervising entities for MEPHI:
https://pharmacie.univ-amu.fr/mephi
But makes no such mention for VITROME:
https://pharmacie.univ-amu.fr/vitrome
Any idea how to find that missing HCERES report?
Charles
LikeLike
Pingback: Buy Professor Seeberger’s Artemi-Tea to survive COVID-19! – For Better Science
Update: You might want to update this article. It’s embarrassing. Dr.’s Zelenko and Raoult just released their studies showing death rates of 0.7% and 0.5%. And The Henry Ford hospital had a reduction of 50%. https://twitter.com/Jonathanbstan/status/1279882753878654977?s=20
LikeLike
Oh thank you. I will delete this article and ask other scientists to retract their clinical trial data also.
LikeLike
You mean, the ones with conflict of interest with Gilead.
By the way, can you tell us how much $ come into your bank account from Gilead in the past 5 years ?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Not Gilead, George Soros. A lot.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Leonid is a member of the illuminati, owns a Pizza joint, and got his start working for Pergamon Press (Robert Maxwell’s company). He and Ghislaine can be seen together in a lot of old photos from the 1990’s, and actually sat together at Chelsea Clinton’s marriage, right behind George Soros. Connect the dots!
LikeLiked by 1 person
https://www.newsweek.com/key-defeating-covid-19-already-exists-we-need-start-using-it-opinion-1519535?fbclid=IwAR3M46N3nsIgYZYhJ8tZI_jVcSISAlcTApId85jYm29Jrt5xfd7iYE4YKRk
LikeLike
Pingback: Hidroxicloroquina: La narrativa de que no funciona es el mayor engaño en la historia reciente de la humanidad – Isaías Game – Periodismo Independiente
Who can I report this website to for publishing false information.
Chloroquine works.
You should hang your head in shame. Thousands of lives could have been saved if it wasn’t for mis-informed websites like this.
LikeLike
Try the White House, Commander-in-Chief of the United States Armed Forces.
LikeLike
Which part is false information?
LikeLike
Pingback: Hydroxychloroquine, the censorship, the French resistance, a handbook for Trump's re-election and the good Germans - Truth About HCQ
How dare you call this eminent Infectious disease specialist a witch doctor??? But yeah let’s listen to Bill Gates !!!
You are garbage for publishing such garbage!! Go ahead go get a vaccine !! Go get micro-particles !!
The idiocy of the politically correct is unbelievable!
LikeLike
Look at: https://c19study.com
This june-created anonymous web-site creates fake-science for Raoult: https://www.newsguardtech.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/COVIDAnalysis.pdf
And Raoult uses it :
I Guess that Raoult team created it.
LikeLike
Pingback: The Hydroxychloroquine Conundrum | The Journal
Unbelievable that this pile of trash article is still in the first pages of Google.
Marseille which IHU a very modern infectious disease research center at the forefront of European border with North Africa within AP-HM which is the largest Public Hospital have the lowest Hospital death rate in France per public data.
IHU study over 3,700 patients treated by HCQ+AZT has proven the lowest mortality and it is still working very well. Pr Perronne, another very notorious infectious disease professor is approving this protocol. Many studies have proven the very good results of the combined treatment. The failed studies have proven poor treatment and or treatment provided to severe cases too late.
WHO has reversed the ban on HCQ right after the manipulated data study from the Lancet has been withdrawn, Recovery in the UK has proven it is not toxic even with high dosage.
Check this out:https://c19study.comhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1477893920302817
Pr Raoult is still the first infectious disease author of studies in the world.
You should research facts before writing such garbage on a Professor who has saved hundreds of lives. Stop listening to corrupt doctors.
LikeLike
I fully agree with you that Professor Perronne is very notorious!
LikeLike
C19study is full of Fake stufies. Liés, liés, liés.
Bullshit.
Raoult is an old crazy and stupid egotic fool.
LikeLike
Yes GGL it is a shame that people keep old articles online that have come to be proven so obsolete, uninformed and outright false. Parroting lies about dangers of HCQ even as millions of Americans take it daily over decades, for Lupus and RA, in the same dosage that the Zelenko Protocol prescribes over just 7 days. Particularly egregious now that there are 182 HCQ studies, 118 of them peer reviewed, with 100% of the early outpatient treatment studies demonstrating the efficacy of HCQ in treating COVID-19 in the early outpatient setting. And many or most of those didn’t even include all important zinc, and/or azithromycin or doxycyclene. https://c19study.com/#early
Articles like this continue to literally kill people – toward the benefit of Gilead Sciences, Big Pharma, FDA, etc. – by keeping them in the dark in regard to the life and death importance of early outpatient treatment of COVID-19 with a successful $20 protocol.
https://www.covid-19forum.org/index.php?board=3.0
LikeLike
C19study web-site is entirely made of fake studies built for helping Raoult’s fraudulous claims.
Raoult is a shame.
Raoult deserves jail.
Tony – French engineer ashamed by Raoult’s foolyness.
LikeLike
Pingback: Hydroxychloroquine: het wondermiddel dat niet werkt, of toch wel? | De Kritische Standaard
Pingback: Lactoferrin: tears, spit, snot and COVID-19 – For Better Science
The case brought against Raoult is absurd and the courts will loose. He should collect big time in a defamation lawsuit. Then he should turn around and lobby for the French leaders responsible for the ban on HCQ tried for crimes against humanity, and the genocide of the sick and elderly, since they are directly responsible for the deaths of at least 90% of French citizens that have died completely unnecessary horrific deaths from COVID-19. Eight months into this I have to conclude that genocide is fully intentional. NIH guidelines still suggest doing nothing (not even a zinc supplement) until the sufferer is hospitalized, and then there are only two recommendations – dexamethazone and Remdesivir – the latter of which the WHO just recommended against.https://www.covid-19forum.org/index.php?topic=390.0
Dr. Vladimir Zelenko treated about 800 elderly and high risk patients and in all only lost 2 – one that had advanced leukemia and the other showed up way too late for treatment. Dr. Brian Tyson treated 1,900 COVID positive elderly and high-risk individuals using the Zelenko Protocol with 0 deaths and only one hospitalization of 4 days.https://www.covid-19forum.org/index.php?topic=359.0
As of this morning there are 181 HCQ studies, 117 of them peer reviewed, 100% of them demonstrating the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine and most of them did not even use the complete Zelenko Protocol that includes zinc and Azithromycin or doxycyclene. The author of the article should perhaps get out more.https://www.covid-19forum.org/index.php?board=3.0
Everyone that continues to advance the lies about HCQ are guilty of crimes against humanity. There is a reason dirt-poor sub-Saharan African countries have less than 1% of the COVID deaths we have in the west.https://www.covid-19forum.org/index.php?topic=396.0
The same reason that the largest ghetto in Asia has 5 times the density of New York City, yet only 1/20 of the deaths from COVID as the U.S. average.https://www.covid-19forum.org/index.php?topic=102.0
LikeLike
Instead, read: https://www.lepoint.fr/societe/l-ordre-des-medecins-porte-plainte-contre-didier-raoult-12-11-2020-2400665_23.php
The “Ordre des Médecins”, who monitor doctors in Medecine in France and can remove their authorization to work, has decided to attack Dr Raoult.
There is also an attack against Raoult by the “Société de pathologie infectieuse de langue française”, group of Medecine doctors doing same job as Raoult and upset of all bad and wrong things done and said by Raoult.
Raoult shows possible mental disorder. Or stupidity. Selfish egotic persona.
LikeLike
So it seems you are indicating that Big Pharma is as powerful in France as it is in the U.S. Does Gilead peddle their useless Remdesivir/Veklury in the U.K. as well?
Ivermectin has at least the efficacy of HCQ, but it isn’t being allowed the light of day either, because it’s another $20 drug that has been shown to be 100% effective and it even has pretty fair efficacy in later hospitalized cases.
https://www.covid-19forum.org/index.php?topic=461.0
Since you judge one of the world’s leading microbiologists and infectious disease specialists to be stupid, I’d like to inquire as to what your own personal plan is, if you or an elderly loved one should get knocked down by COVID-19?
LikeLike
Brian,
You are continuously providing links to the http://www.covid-19forum.org .
This “forum” has FOUR members only !
And the “admin” has posted 529 posts out of 534 posts !!
And the signature of “admin” is: “Hundreds of thousands of Americans died needlessly from COVID-19 because Fauci’s NIH prompted FDA to remove emergency use authorization from hydroxychloroquine – in conjunction with Google’s censorship of truth – precluding COVID patients from receiving ZINC+HCQ+AZ on a timely outpatient basis.”
This is NOT a forum! It is a TOOL for HCQ and Raoult !!
Raoult is NOT one of the world’s leading microbiologists and infectious disease specialist. He is now an old man who hates mathematics, statistics, and proof methodologies ; because he does not understand them ; because his first education is not about science, but about literature. Raoult is not a scientific. He signed 3500 papers which he did nearly nothing to build them. And most of these papers are of no help for improving the health of patients. This guy is nuts. For all his lies, and because several people in the world died due to his advertisements to his false COVID-19 treatment, he deserves jail.
And you act as one of his fools.
LikeLiked by 1 person
So you start by avoiding the question you were asked, because the last thing you likely ever want to do, is actually engage in an exchange. In this case because I imagine your “plan” is likely just to plug your elderly loved ones into the hospital and watch them drown in their own lung fluids. Followed by getting stuck with a bill for ~ $73,300.
https://www.covidtreatmentoptions.com/
Next, you attack the messenger instead of responding to the message. Never a good, but always a desperate, look.
I uploaded the forum to categorize and organize information I collected over many months and was having trouble remembering which friends I sent what to. Now I can just send links. I quickly populated the forum with items I had bookmarked over months which is why “admin” is responsible for a near unanimity of the threads. Needless to say the forum was shadow banned by Facebook and cast out into outer darkness by Google shortly after it was uploaded.
And then there’s all of the points in the original post that you of course had to ignore because, after all, how can you explain Dr. Zev Zelenko’s 99.75% success rate over 800 elderly and high-risk patients or Dr. Brian Tyson treating 1,900 COVID positive elderly and high-risk individuals using the Zelenko Protocol with 0 deaths and only one hospitalization of 4 days. https://www.covid-19forum.org/index.php?topic=359.0
LikeLike