NIH Pans Hydroxychloroquine, Sets Up Multiple New Media Narratives

The Mid-Day Campaign Update

Yet another highly-predictable outcome. – Late Tuesday, a panel of “experts” – the same kind of “experts” who assured us just a month ago that the Wuhan Virus would kill 2 million Americans – announced their disapproval for hydroxychloroquine in combination with axithromycin as a treatment for the Wuhan Virus.

Here’s an excerpt from an NPR report on the matter:

A panel of experts convened by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases recommends against doctors using a combination of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin for the treatment of COVID-19 patients because of potential toxicities.

“The combination of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin was associated with QTc prolongation in patients with COVID-19,” the panel said.

QTc prolongation increases the risk of sudden cardiac death.

The recommendation against their combined use would seem to fly in the face of comments made by President Trump suggesting the combination might be helpful. On March 21, for example, the president described them in a tweet as having a “real chance to be one of the biggest game changers in the history of medicine.”

[End]

In English, the QTc prolongation means that HCQ can be dangerous for people who suffer from irregular heartbeats, an affliction most common among seniors, who are already vulnerable to the virus. This is in fact a long-known side effect of HCQ.

Note especially the narrative laid out in that last paragraph, which sets up a conflict between President Trump and Dr. Anthony Fauci, whose NIAID is one of 27 institutes and centers under the NIH umbrella. Note also that this NIH panning of HCQ comes despite wildly successful trials in both the U.S. and other countries, as well as several peer-reviewed studies that have shown it to be very effective mainly in combination with zinc, not axithromycin, in treating the Chinese plague. The NIH decision also ignores the fact that many doctors have successfully used HCQ as a prophylactic treatment against the virus.

This decision will now also make many doctors less willing to prescribe HCQ in any combination with other medications for fear of being chastised and perhaps sued for straying from NIH edicts.

Finally, because of information that has come to light that the Wuhan Virus is having a disproportionate impact on blacks, Hispanics and other minorities for a variety of factors, the NIH edict sets up another narrative that will contend  that, by promoting the use of HCQ as a potential game-changer, the Bad Orange Man was being a racist.

As we have pointed out before, there are many billions of dollars at stake here. Because HCQ is cheap and in plentiful supply, there is no real money to be made through it by big Pharma or its beneficiaries at the NIH. A cheap, effective and plentiful treatment for the virus also diminishes the value of any vaccine that comes along, and we would be remiss if we failed to point out the NIH’s long association with and benefit from Bill Gates and the Gates Foundation.

Expect the President to get into heated exchanges with multiple Democrat activists disguised as “reporters” at tonight’s press conference. It’s inevitable.

That is all.

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

12 thoughts on “NIH Pans Hydroxychloroquine, Sets Up Multiple New Media Narratives

  1. phineas gage - April 22, 2020

    And yet you can be sure that Trump will be blamed for deaths rather than Fauci.

    The race angle you point out is a big deal and one that will be hammered heavily by the Dems as they try to herd all the minority voters back onto the plantation.

    Nice picture accompaniment to the post….

  2. brian - April 22, 2020

    So there are lots of covid monitoring sites. There are also numerous sites pondering why Africa has been spared for the most part, from this ‘pandemic’. The death rate is very low. Now it could be argued that its because its sparsely populated, or just hotter and virus’s don’t survive the heat, etc etc.

    BUT… could it also be very limited because of the regular usage and availability of antimalarial drugs like HC??? The WHO’s Africa site states it recommends clhoroquine for malaria P. vivax.

    But needed to state “The ingestion of high doses of these medicines may be associated with adverse or seriously adverse health outcomes.”

    Well it could be said that high doses of water, cheerios and doritos can have adverse effects as well. Of course high dosages can have adverse effects but the statement is designed to dissuade any from considering its benefits. So you should actually die because if you take HC you could suffer adverse effects and die.

    More likely than not these countries in Africa are not experiencing high case loads and deaths is because of widespread anti-malarial drug use. The WHO and marxists needs high body counts so they’ll bury and spin any good news towards the negative. Its about control…

    Only way to over come this… start pushing back.

    1. phineas gage - April 22, 2020

      There has been a lot of speculation about this. One thing that doesn’t fit is that some areas that are endemic for malaria do have high levels of infection (e.g. Southeast Asia). It is fairly low in India, but seems to be growing steadily.

      But there may be a number of variables involved. One study indicates that people with Type O blood are more resistant to infection (these blood cell antigens are on the surface of your other body cells as well, including the epithelial cells infected by the virus).

      1. brian - April 22, 2020

        I hear you as its not a simple issue to evaluate.

        Who and others have been noticing this lack of infections/morbidity in Africa since early March. What is curious is that I haven’t seen anyone talking about HC or Ivermectin being a possible factor in the lowslow infectious rates.

        But yes I agree there is much speculation over the whys. Also not being talked about are the demographics of those that have died or became seriously ill. Demographics tend to give a heads up on the direction towards focused investigation. Which, imo, is why raw numbers are given with little details surrounding covid.

  3. brian - April 22, 2020
  4. phineas gage - April 22, 2020

    This is the super-competent guy that many Dems want to step in as their nominee:

    http://acecomments.mu.nu/?post=386934

  5. Jimmy MacAfee - April 22, 2020

    I’ve seen study after study, flawed or with predetermined outcomes, trying to shoot down “anecdotal evidence,” and it’s not done by Big Pharma, but Pig Pharma. I am suggesting that the NIH study was in some way fatally flawed. Haven’t studied it enough, but I’ve seen enough “gold standard” studies that weren’t worth chicken excrement. A long way from gold.

  6. countmahdrof - April 23, 2020

    Anyone who has ever watched a pharma ad knows that every med comes with warnings such as “Do not take this medication if……..” and “Should only be used as directed by your physician”. So, obviously, a patient with China’s gift would ask their doctor if they’re at risk due to QTc prolongation (or a good doctor would already be aware of the risk and wouldn’t prescribe). Why does everyone insist on treating China’s gift as completely different from the myriad of other viruses we face?

  7. njlamer - April 23, 2020

    More Experts from the Climate change Pandemic group. These experts need an enema of facts. They can’t seem to grasp them entering through their eyes and ears.

    1. Jimmy MacAfee - April 23, 2020

      Well-stated! “An enema of facts!” Great post!

    1. Gregg - April 24, 2020

      This is all getting too depressing – Are we living in the “End Times” If so, I welcome them.

Comments are closed.

Scroll to top
%d bloggers like this: