Please read the important disclaimer at the following link before proceeding further on this page. The administrator of this forum is not a doctor nor licensed or experienced in any aspect of the health care industry.
https://www.covid-19forum.org/index.php?topic=227.0For years I have told folks how cutting edge I have thought Life Extension Foundation to be, so I was very surprised and disappointed to find their section on hydroxychloroquine was so dated at best, and more like something Dr. Fauci might have written:
https://www.lifeextension.com/protocols/infections/respiratory-immune-support"Hydroxychloroquine
The antimalarial drugs chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine received attention early in the pandemic when anecdotal reports and preclinical evidence suggested these drugs might benefit COVID-19 patients.62,63 However, as evidence continued to accumulate through May and June, enthusiasm waned and concern about side effects and lack of efficacy mounted.
On June 3rd, the first rigorous study testing whether hydroxychloroquine could prevent development of COVID-19 was published in The New England Journal of Medicine. The 821 trial participants were randomly assigned to either hydroxychloroquine or placebo and took their first dose within four days after exposure to someone known to have COVID-19. There was no statistically significant difference in incidence of COVID-19 illness in the two groups.
Did anyone at Life Extension even read the "study"?
https://www.covid-19forum.org/index.php?topic=154.0In addition, among subjects in either group who chose to take vitamin C or zinc supplements after their exposure to someone infected with SARS-CoV-2, there was an increased risk of developing COVID-19 illness.138 Side effects were more common among those who took hydroxychloroquine, but there were no serious adverse reactions reported.135
On June 15th, the U.S. FDA revoked the emergency use authorization (EUA) it had earlier issued for hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine. The agency stated that “The totality of scientific evidence currently available indicate a lack of benefit,” and that “...in light of ongoing serious cardiac adverse events and other potential serious side effects, the known and potential benefits of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine no longer outweigh the known and potential risks for the authorized use.”146
Subsequent trials have also shown that hydroxychloroquine does not provide clinical benefit in the context of COVID-19.200,201"
Which studies? The fraudulent discredited (and then withdrawn) study published in The Lancet that kicked off the lies about hydroxychloroquine.....
https://www.covid-19forum.org/index.php?topic=23.0.....that had a panel larded with people who had financial interests in Gilead?
https://www.covid-19forum.org/index.php?topic=111.0Or the WHO "Solidarity" and UK "Recovery trials that used lethal doses of HCQ? (the latter trial characterized by the world's foremost epidemiologist Dr. Didier Raoult as "
The Marx Brothers do science")
https://www.covid-19forum.org/index.php?topic=105.0LEF suggestion it "Does not provide clinical benefit" is not likely referring to the Henry Ford and Mt. Sinai trials that saw 50% reductions in mortality in even hospitalized patients (which is presumably after the ideal time for anti-virals to be most effective and they didn't use zinc and only combined with Azithromycin on some subjects).
https://www.covid-19forum.org/index.php?topic=120.0Certainly not the Zelenko Protocol trial that is currently under peer review that boasts a 99+% recovery rate in elderly and high-risk patients.
https://www.covid-19forum.org/index.php?topic=53.0Out of 2,200 COVID patients that Dr. Vladimir Zelenko's team saw they only lost 2. One had advanced Leukemia and the other's case was too advanced when he showed up for treatment.
https://www.covid-19forum.org/index.php?topic=18.0Out of 1,061 patients in a peer reviewed trial Dr. Didier Raoult had a 99.5% success rate in recovery.
According to highly esteemed and heavily published (over 300 papers) Yale professor of epidemiology Dr. Harvey Risch: "
Evidence about use of hydroxychloroquine alone - or of hydroxychloroquine+azithromycin in inpatients - is irrelevant concerning efficacy of the pair in
early high-risk outpatient disease. Five studies, including two controlled clinical trials, have demonstrated significant major outpatient treatment efficacy."
https://www.covid-19forum.org/index.php?topic=169.0Let alone the plethora of studies listed here:
https://c19study.com/#early"There are now 53 studies that show positive results of hydroxychloroquine in COVID infections. There are 14 global studies that show neutral or negative results -- and 10 of them were of patients in very late stages of COVID-19, where no antiviral drug can be expected to have much effect. Of the remaining four studies, two come from the same University of Minnesota author. The other two are from the faulty Brazil paper, which should be retracted, and the fake Lancet paper, which was."
https://www.covid-19forum.org/index.php?topic=106.0Simply consider the 72.3% lower death rate of countries with widespread early use of HCQ compared to countries that have lower later use of HCQ:
https://www.covid-19forum.org/index.php?topic=233.0Hundreds of doctors in the U.S. and thousands around the world have enjoyed this kind of success ever since March.
Ensuing correspondence with LEF helped to inspire this letter to politicians and the general public:
https://www.covid-19forum.org/index.php?topic=287.0
