Remember Those Studies Linking Hydroxychloroquine to Higher Mortality? They Were Based on Possibly Bogus Data
was based on an expose in The Guardian that debunks the slew of recent stories that cited "scientific" studies purporting to prove that HCQ can kill you--so, for God's sake, don't take it! Remarkably, two of the leading medical journals in the world--The Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine--published articles that were co-authored by the CEO of the very dodgy sounding firm that was behind the "studies". Those journals have been compelled to issue "expressions of concern" (EOC) about what appears to be fake science appearing in their prestigious pages. Writes The Guardian:
A Guardian investigation can reveal the US-based company Surgisphere, whose handful of employees appear to include a science fiction writer and an adult-content model, has provided data for multiple studies on Covid-19 co-authored by its chief executive, but has so far failed to adequately explain its data or methodology.
Data it claims to have legitimately obtained from more than a thousand hospitals worldwide formed the basis of scientific articles that have led to changes in Covid-19 treatment policies in Latin American countries. It was also behind a decision by the WHO and research institutes around the world to halt trials of the controversial drug hydroxychloroquine.
Two of the world’s leading medical journals – the Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine – published studies based on Surgisphere data. The studies were co-authored by the firm’s chief executive, Sapan Desai.
That's some hoax! You'd be hard pressed to make it up, but hoaxes will happen when "scientific" journals don't do the most basic fact checking. The question is, why were those basic checks not done? After all, the whole crusade against HCQ was "absurd on its face," as PJ Media points out:
The notion that hydroxychloroquine was a deadly drug was absurd on its face considering it has been approved by the FDA for over sixty years in treating multiple diseases, meaning its side effects and risk factors have been well documented, and would likely have been accounted for in any legitimate study.
According to the Guardian’s investigation, Surgisphere’s employees “have little or no data or scientific background,” and one employee, whose title appeared to be “science editor” is actually “a science fiction author and fantasy artist.” ... The company’s chief executive [and co-author of those "studies"], Sapan Desai, has also been named in three medical malpractice lawsuits, unrelated to its database.
The war on chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine began almost immediately after Trump touted it as a potential gamechanger in the fight against the disease. ...
Success stories from coronavirus patients who recovered after being treated with the drug have also been widely ignored.
Did I mention a "derangement" syndrome? This is deranged--although we've become almost inured to it by now:
Despite the slew of positive results of the drug, a Democratic state lawmaker in Ohio moaned that Trump should be tried for “crimes against humanity” for touting the drug’s potential.
Reports instead repeatedly cited the aforementioned study as proof the drug was deadly. Following Trump’s revelation that he was taking the drug, Fox News Channel’s Neil Cavuto had an on-air rant claiming “If you are in a risky population here, and you are taking this as a preventative treatment…it will KILL you. I cannot stress enough. This will KILL you.”
But the really serious question is the one posed at the end:
How many people could have been treated with the drug had it not been for this possibly faulty data raising unjust alarm bells about it?
It's almost as if Trump haters don't care how many innocents suffer and even die, if the end justifying their derangement is Trump.