Why is a section of influential pharmaceutical community against a drug, which promises to provide, in the language of Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS), an “inexpensive” treatment to the rampaging Coronavirus? This is truly bizarre how the World Health Organisation (WHO) led by a clutch of medical influencers including the eminent medical journal, The Lancet, which gave legitimacy to dodgy studies has been used to ban use/trial of an affordable medicine, which would have saved millions of lives.
What was ignored were the success stories emanating from Dharavi, Mumbai, Baroda and many other parts of the world. Why did not the Indian government, which produces bulk of the Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) confront this treacherous lobby and the world that the drug worked when it was given at the right time. Is it fear of the legacy countries that control the protocol for identifying the virus and establishing the protocol or are we firmly under the thumb of the Western lobby?
“How can we trust the established authorities or prestigious journals when, in this perilous time, trials of an available, inexpensive, long-established drug appear to be designed to fail, while risking the lives of their subjects through deliberate or negligent drug overdoses”, said AAPS in a damning statement.
If indeed the French microbiologist’s prophecy proves to be correct that the world would come around to his treatment, then there is need for a global investigation about why an inexpensive drug was prevented from being used in the virus struck world
In a scandal of gargantuan proportions, World Health Organisation (WHO) has restrained the global medical community to use Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) on the basis of studies that have been done in a criminally cavalier fashion. The purpose of these studies is just one- HCQ be trashed!
Was the motive to spread to scare that there was no treatment for this pandemic or to drive people to go for an expensive vaccine and benefit the pharma companies?
After the US President Donald Trump chose to give precedence to the finding of French microbiologist, Dr. Dideir Raoult, who tested Hydroxychloroquine and Azithromycin and found good results, what happened? Raoult is a rockstar microbiologist who has been credited with discovering 500 human borne bacteria and naming at least 100, and he has deep understanding — more than anyone in this business — what will really work in squelching the Covid19 virus, what is his analysis?
His prescription followed by Donald Trump’s acceptance as the cure of the virus gave a bizarre political turn to this issue. India, which is the largest manufacturer of HCQ engaged in its own version of drug diplomacy, exported millions of tablets all over the the world. HCQ, which is a well-adjusted drug as it is used to fight malaria, rheumatoid arthritis and lupus, was zeroed upon as the drug of choice, both for prophylactic use as well as for treatment after Dr Raoult found that it had proved similarly effective in fighting other tricky viruses.
Interestingly, nearly all the objective studies into HCQ showed encouraging results in terms of lower mortality amongst its users- including health care workers in India, China, South Korea and even in the US.
His methods were scoffed at, but he had the intellectual arrogance to tell his legion of detractors and the skeptical world that they would eventually come around to agreeing with his line of treatment.
Not just his detractors, but all those pharma companies and votaries of the vaccines that hoped to earn big profits from the pandemic, used their considerable resources and arsenal to trash HCQ and prove that its consumption had dangerous implications on a patient and increased mortality.
All kinds of studies were wheeled out that ‘corroborated’ this view that HCQ was useless and secondly, it increased mortality. Three studies that became the basis for WHO dropping the solidarity trial undertaken by the world body to ascertain the efficacy of existing medicines — all showed manipulation of data, obfuscation and desperation to get rid of that line of treatment.
All pretty much the stuff that any cop would be keen to wrap his head around a manifestly criminal conspiracy.
First was The Lancet fiasco. From literally nowhere a study was conjured up by some dodgy researchers, one of them being a science fiction writer, to show that HCQ was bad for the heart. Is it?
The data of 90,000 patients turned out to be fake, but The Lancet, which is the gold standard of publishing in medicine, bizarrely chose to give space to the paper without doing any due diligence. No one asked who convinced The Lancet editors to carry the study that came literally from nowhere whose sole purpose was to destroy the credibility of HCQ. Who pushed the article and lent credibility to the pre-paper? Who organized funds to the author of the paper as well as the agency Surgisphere that was meant to collect and organize the data?
There was an interesting study from Geneva where the researchers were able to show that mortality rates went up when HCQ was withdrawn from the users and they came down after it was restored.
WHO pulled the trigger on the anti-malarial drug from Solidarity Trial as if they were waiting for The Lancet article. So credible is the publication that within no time the message around the world was that HCQ was a useless drug.
When researchers dug deeper, they found howlers in The Lancet report, including inflated data from countries that had far fewer patients than shown by the study. There are many claims that were made without substance including increased mortality and heart issues. Bewildered users of HCQ wondered why it was considered so dangerous when they had been blissfully consuming it for so long to cure osteoarthritis or lupus with no side effects. After this exposure by discerning researchers, WHO quickly restored HCQ presence in the solidarity trial — but that also proved short-lived.
In the first week of June, the regulator instructed the institution engaged in the recovery trial to un-blind its findings. In a matter of a day, the findings were declared and they were different from those of The Lancet.
The recovery trial showed that the HCQ did not increase the mortality rate, but was generally useless.
A French publication France Soir interviewed the head of the UK recovery trial, Martin Landray, to understand the protocol followed in terms of the dosage of the drug and the age and affliction profile of the patients. To their horror they learnt that doctors had given a dosage of 2400 mg – four times more than the usually prescribed dose in any Recovery Trial.
A caution by India’s ICMR about the high dosage and how it was skewing the trial against the drug was ignored. It also seemed to appear that the head of the recovery trial mistook the Hydroxychloroquine with another drug used for controlling amoebasis. Another scientist associated with this study, Peter Horby, according to FranceSoir, is associated with Gileads Remdesivir, which is pushed by WHO as the emergency drug is being black-marketed in Mumbai. Interestingly, Remdesivir has not been subjected to similar scrutiny as HCQ even when it has been found efficacious for prophylactic use. Interestingly, both the venerated Professors are from Oxford University, which is in advance stage of putting together a vaccine against the Coronavirus.
To repeat, the recovery trial had not only used the wrong dose, but also assumed HCQ to be a medicine for other ailments.
What a joke, but it did not faze the WHO again to cancel HCQ in any further trials or be prescribed as drug.
Interestingly, nearly all the objective studies showed the HCQ had shown encouraging results in terms of lower mortality amongst its users in India amongst Health Care workers and even amongst China, South Korea. There was an interesting study from Geneva where the researchers were able to show that mortality rates went up when HCQ was withdrawn from the users and they came down after it was restored.
Why is a section of influential pharma community against a drug, which promises to provide, in the language of Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS), an “inexpensive” treatment to the rampaging Coronavirus
India that has seen the medicine proving useful in fighting the virus at a time when there was little clarity about how the pandemic had to be fought, has found little support in the west.
More recently a study from Henry Ford Health System study conducted on 2541 patients between March 10-May 2, 2020, saw mortality cut down by 50 percent in patients that were not heart patients.
The success in Dharavi slums or Baroda has been dismissed by advocacy groups that also contributed in spreading fear about the pandemic and denying any possibility that the Corona virus can be reined in without the vaccine. India, which sent HCQ to 155 countries, must worry that it’s recommendation for treating the virus is not taken so seriously. While US President Donald Trump stuck his neck out for HCQ, Indian PM Narendra Modi has not taken a stand on this, despite the mountain of evidence generated in India in favor of the drug. He still has an opportunity to announce the treatment for common men for this virus and save a large mass of people that are staring at getting infected from this virus in rural areas.
If indeed the French microbiologist’s prophecy proves to be correct that the world would come around his treatment, then there need to be global investigation about why an inexpensive drug was prevented from being used in the virus struck world? Is it only because US President Donald Trump lent his unscientific weight behind it and he is facing a tough Presidential election or is there more to it?