This forum section regards the
actual science behind COVID treatment and recovery through world leading epidemiologists, virologists, microbiologists, immunologists and vaccinologists and
as proven through the scientific method, over two years of evidence-based practice of the art of medicine, by experienced, competent, compassionate, highly knowledgeable and talented front line treating physicians.
"
Definition of science1a :
knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially
as obtained and tested through scientific method"
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/science"
Definition of scientific method: principles and procedures for
the systematic pursuit of knowledge involving the recognition and formulation of a problem, the
collection of data through observation and experiment, and the
formulation and testing of hypotheses"
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/scientific%20method_______________________________________________
In other words, we won't find science in designed-to-fail "trials" for COVID treatment that include one or two drugs and/or nutraceuticals, when 99+% successful competent clinicians generally use from 5 and even up to 10 or 15 different drugs and nutraceuticals in combination, at different times during the course of treatment, for a
disease that manifests in 3 stages each of which requires different approaches and combinations of therapeutics.
Comparing studies VS 99+% success rates in evidenced-based medical practiceIndeed to expose "trial" participants to disability and death through built-in negligence, when two years of evidence-based medicine has proven they would have otherwise stood a 99+% chance of survival with proper treatment,
is not only unethical but tantamount to homicide.Why does Fauci insist on randomized placebo-controlled study for HCQ?Covid-19 Has Turned Public Health Into a Lethal, Patient-Killing Experimental EndeavorWhat Big Pharma and the government tried to pawn off as science such as Pfizer's vaccine trials would hardly seem so when, according to Robert Kennedy Jr., over the brief six-month trial period only
two people in the placebo group numbering approximately 22,000 and only
one in the similarly sized vaccine group died from COVID. Which it would seem could have just as easily been the
result of an acute vitamin D deficiency in
that single extra death out of 22,000 individuals. Let alone that there was even a
42.8% greater all-cause mortality in Pfizer's vaccine group than the unvaccinated placebo control group.
Which would seem to explain and be consistent with, the skyrocketing all-cause mortality in the year of "
vaccine" rollout.
All-cause mortality skyrockets in 2021 Data from Europe and the U.S. showLife insurance CEO says deaths are up 40% among people ages 18-64Fifth-largest U.S. life insurer reports 163% rise in 2021 death-benefit payouts for working age clientsEven worse, after just 6 months
the vaccine profiteers vaccinated their "control" groups, eliminating the possibility of ever being able to compare the longer term side effects, of their investigational, experimental, leaky, "
vaccines".
At least eliminating the control group would have been the case if it weren't for the
natural control group of all the unvaxxed - that our Big Pharma owned government seems to be obsessed with force-jabbing in its entirety. Could the reason be so that there would be no evidence of healthy immune systems left, to serve as witness against the short and particularly long-term harmful side effects of the toxic jabs? There is good reason that vaccines traditionally require at least 10 years worth of testing and trials before becoming widely accepted. Indeed the FDA's own rules call for a minimum of 2 years, while these toxic COVID jabs were allowed to be pushed after only months.
Fauci on vaxx: "...you find out it takes 12 years for all hell to break loose.."All the while
in actual science, through the art of the practice of medicine, dedicated competent clinicians have enjoyed 99+% success rates in early treatment of elderly and high-risk individuals ever since spring of 2020 when Dr. Vladimir Zelenko, announced on
March 23rd of 2020 that he had treated 500 elderly and high-risk patients, with 0 deaths, 0 intubations and 0 hospitalizations, through what became known as the "Zelenko Protocol".
Others like those affiliated with myfreedoctor.com treated over
150,000 individuals for COVID, with only 4 fatalities, resulting in a 99.99% success rate.
It's important to note that if everyone in the U.S. from the beginning of the pandemic had been encouraged to seek early treatment for COVID through public service announcements,
at the rate of success of MyFreeDoctor.com
our total mortality throughout 2 years of the pandemic would have theoretically been just 27 instead of 1,000,000. Even at the well
below the typical success rate of 99%, of physicians that treat early with multi-drug/nutraceutical protocols,
total mortality could have been 10,000 instead of 1,000,000, or just 5,000 per year.
They join other competent clinicians posted in this forum section that have enjoyed 99+% success rates like
Dr. Brian Tyson who has treated over 5,000 mostly elderly and high-risk patients, with 0 deaths among those that showed up for treatment on a timely basis.
Overcoming the COVID-19 Darkness: Two Doctors Successfully Treated 7000 PatientsThen there are Dr Jean Jacques Rajter and his wife Dr. Juliana Cepelowicz Rajter who were
early pioneers in the repurposing of Ivermectin for the highly effective treatment of COVID-19 beginning in April of 2020.
A more recent example is the state of Uttar Pradesh India with
a population of 230 million, that went from a catastrophic 310,783 COVID cases to 11 in just a few months, with no deaths, being rendered essentially COVID free through a door-to-door rapid test and treat program employing ivermectin in a multi-drug/nutraceutical therapy.
That's science!Which is certainly more than enough, but we also have
151 ivermectin COVID studies, 103 peer reviewed, 81 comparing treatment &control as well as
394 HCQ COVID-19 studies, 297 peer reviewed, 326 comparing treatment and control, that show very positive results in spite of how insufficient every such trial for
treatment of such a complex illness must necessarily be.
Comparing studies VS 99+% success rates in evidenced-based medical practiceCompare the actual science of healing patients, with Fauci's anti-science.
Fauci's demands for randomized placebo controlled trials, for generic drugs that have been proven safe for many decades -
that have proven themselves to be 99+% effective against COVID-19 ever since March of 2020 -
constitutes nothing short of a demand for homicide of those in the control group, which if composed of elderly and high-risk patients would suffer a 5-10% mortality rate - even if the control arm was treated by the NIH "standard of care" instead of a placebo.
Fauci's phony "gold standard" demand, would have in actuality been tantamount to Joseph Mengele style Nazi experimentation, just as the negligent and toxic NIH "standard of care" resulted in the vast majority of 1,000,000 dead Americans.
NIH deadly recommendations compared to those of COVID-competent professionalsFauci demanding trials of the safe generic drug hydroxychloroquine that the NIH had established back in 2005 showed great promise in both prevention and treatment of SARS corona viruses. A drug that is taken by millions of Americans every day of the year decade after decade, for Lupus and arthritis, in the same dosage that COVID protocols prescribe over just 7 days.
DEADLY COVER UP: Fauci knew about HCQ in 2005 - nobody needed to dieBut he killed thousands of AIDS sufferers back in 1987 with the same unreasonable demand.
Fauci killed thousands of AIDS sufferers by making the same ridiculous demand back in 1987.How many elderly and high-risk patients would volunteer to be in a blind trial, if they were told in advance that in one arm they would stand a 99.9% chance of survival, while in the other arm suffer a 5-10% mortality rate?
Why does Fauci insist on an unethical, immoral placebo-controlled study for HCQ?Movie
"Doctor's Orders" https://rumble.com/embed/vnxmww/?pub=4 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3600702/"
The ethics of clinical research requires equipoise--a state of genuine uncertainty on the part of the clinical investigator regarding the comparative therapeutic merits of each arm in a trial. Should the investigator discover that one treatment is of superior therapeutic merit, he or she is ethically obliged to offer that treatment."
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12189059/"
The leading ethical position on placebo-controlled clinical trials is that whenever proven effective treatment exists for a given condition, it is unethical to test a new treatment for that condition against placebo. Invoking the principle of clinical equipoise, opponents of placebo-controlled trials in the face of proven effective treatment argue that they (1) violate the therapeutic obligation of physicians to offer optimal medical care and (2) lack both scientific and clinical merit. We contend that both of these arguments are mistaken. Clinical equipoise provides erroneous ethical guidance in the case of placebo-controlled trials, because it ignores the ethically relevant distinction between clinical trials and treatment in the context of clinical medicine and the methodological limitations of active-controlled trials.
Placebo controls are ethically justifiable when they are supported by sound methodological considerations and their use does not expose research participants to excessive risks of harm."
