Yes. Please point to the proper medical research studies which show that hydroxy based treatment is a preventative or treatment for COVID-19. I listed all the papers that show hydroxy based therapy is not effective through multiple threads. At this point anyone pushing hydroxy as a treatment or preventative for COVID-19 is pushing junk science — no different than pushing chicken feathers and demon sperm as medicine.
The steroid dexamethasone has been shown to improve COVID-19 outcomes; it is now widely used. There are many articles and studies showing that dexamethasone is effective in the treatment of COVID-19. Is it a "golden bullet"? No. But it is part of a treatment regime proven to improve results. Somehow the doctors at Henry Ford magically forgot to mention that they were giving their patients dexamethasone in their research report. The dexamethasone was providing the improved results. Hydroxychloroquine was merely a placebo - providing no benefical treatment effect. Seeing that the leaders of Henry Ford are Trump donors and are still pushing their nonsense --- the rest of the mainstream medical community can only shake their heads in wonderment of their flawed assertions.
https://swprs.org/on-the-treatment-of-covid-19/ Swiss Policy Research on treating Covid Treatment protocol Zinc (50mg to 100mg per day)º Hydroxychloroquine (400mg per day)* Quercetin (500mg to 1000mg per day)º Bromhexine (50mg to 100mg per day)º Azithromycin (up to 500mg per day)* Heparin (usual dosage)*
Even France which had the clown Dr. Raoult pushing hydroxychloroquine as a miracle cure for COVID -- has banned hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19. France Bans Hydroxychloroquine To Treat Covid-19 https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexle...xychloroquine-to-treat-covid-19/#478cfea321ab The French government has banned the prescription of hydroxychloroquine to treat symptoms of Covid-19 due to serious concerns over health risks. Many wonder if it’s the end of the road for the wonder drug, initially championed by France in March. In March, hydroxychloroquine was touted as a wonder cure The battle to use the drug in France has been waging for the past two months. In March, a French professor, Didier Raoult, based at the IHU, the Institute of Infectious Diseases in Marseille, published results suggesting he had been successfully treating patients with symptoms of Covid-19 with hydroxychloroquine. Raoult has been using the anti-malarial drug (also used to treat lupus sufferers) combined with an antibacterial drug, azithromycin, because of its antiviral effects. The findings were widely condemned across the medical profession because the drug causes heart irregularities, leading many to believe that doctors might prescribe it to patients without due care, leading to far worse health problems. Critics claimed that the study simply showed anecdotal evidence–for example, the study only contained a small sample size and it lacked a control group, so many of the patients may have simply improved without taking the drug. n March/April, hydroxychloroquine was increasingly prescribed Regardless, the study found supporters in President Trump, who tweeted his support for hydroxychloroquine, stockpiled 29 million doses and announced that he was himself taking the drug. A high profile visit by President Emmanuel Macron to visit Raoult in Marseille suggested the government was taking it seriously and the drug was included in many trials around the world. In France, a study of the 466 million prescriptions written in France since the pandemic began, showed a spike of 7,000%. Normally, 50 prescriptions are written for hydroxychloroquine in Marseille every day, but by the last week in March, 10,000 people had been given the drug that week alone. Across France, 5,000 prescriptions were written for the drug in just one day. In May, a negative turn for hydroxychloroquine By the end of May, a Lancet observational study (not a clinical trial) of 15,000 patients treated with hydroxychloroquine between December and April suggested that not only was the death rate higher for people taking the drug, but that heart rhythm problems are more than five times greater. Professor Raoult denounced the Lancet study as “bogus”. The European Medicines Agency warned that not only was there no conclusive evidence that the drug worked, but that it also caused fatal heart problems in some patients. Such safety concerns over the drug duly prompted the WHO to suspend current trials. The French health minister Olivier Véran asked the French High Council for Public Health (HCSP) to look into the drug to see if any recommendations should be changed. After they reported that the drug shouldn’t be given, except in clinical trials, the French government revoked the right for hospitals to use hydroxychloroquine, even to patients who were gravely ill. Le Monde announced Wednesday that the The Medicines Agency (ANSM) had also "initiated" the procedure to suspend clinical trials “as a precaution” which evaluated the role of hydroxychloroquine in patients with Covid-19.
Are you kidding us? “... even to patients who were gravely ill? The point of chloroquine is preventative or early treatment, before the virus has already reached peak loads. Again, the Choroquine treatment regimen is to reduce or prevent the virus from replicating. What is the point of trying to prevent replication if it has already reached peak loads in a gravely ill patient? in addition, the later stages of the disease are often the result of opportunistic bacteria or one of the adverse results of the patient’s immune system response.
Let me state it again very clearly - Hydroxychloroquine based therapy is not effective as a preventative or treatment for COVID-19.
Except it's not just Fauci, its the FDA, its the HHS Czar Assistant Secretary for Health Adm. Brett Giroir used an interview on Sunday to swat down the anti-malaria drug as a viable countermeasure for Covid-19. In an interview with Chuck Todd for NBC’s Meet the Press, Giroir was asked if it’s “a danger to public health” that Trump repeatedly pushed hydroxychloroquine throughout the last week. Giroir answered by saying the drug looked like a promising solution “at first,” but further studies have shown that it does not provide substantial benefits in treating the coronavirus. https://www.mediaite.com/tv/covid-t...trumps-promotional-binge-i-cant-recommend-it/
How do you explain the conflicts of interests involved in the negative studies? How do you explain the mechanism of action Choroquine and a zinc derivative have on preventing replication? How do you explain the treating doctors in the US who vouch for its effectiveness? How do you explain a history of US medical profession favoring more proitable treatments over less profitable treatments? I will follow up with additional information, supportive or not, when I receive it. Edit: Add: How do you explain the study that came to a negative conclusion but used a different methodology?
There are no mainstream medical studies showing any of the claims you cited above -- these claims are only being put forward by individuals who have made other wild claims as well. It is not mainstream medical science.