Monday, November 16, 2020

Early Outpatient Treatment: An Essential Part of a COVID-19 Solution: Senate Hearing 11/19/20

 It seemed to be crickets for HCQ and effective widespread treatment of Covid, but -- very late in the day, a hearing of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs will be held on using this effective, cheap and off-patent medicine to treat coronavirus infections. Not to treat the late, autoimmune stage when the virus is gone, but the early stage, when the disease is an eminently treatable infection.

Here is the hearing video

  • Early Outpatient Treatment: An Essential Part of a COVID-19 Solution
  • Full Committee Hearing

    Location: SD-342, Dirksen Senate Office Building and via Videoconference


    • Peter A. McCullough, M.D., M.P.H.
      Vice Chief of Internal Medicine
      Baylor University Medical Center
    • Harvey Risch, M.D., PH.D.
      Professor of Epidemiology
      Yale University
    • George C. Fareed, M.D.
      Medical Director and Family Medicine Specialist
      Pioneers Medical Center
    • Ashish K. Jha, M.D., M.P.H.
      Dean of the School of Public Health
      Brown University


    Bill said...

    Any critique of the following results?

    Effect of pre-exposure use of hydroxychloroquine on COVID-19 mortality: a population-based cohort study in patients with rheumatoid arthritis or systemic lupus erythematosus using the OpenSAFELY platform said...


    for Skripal, and other poisonings by the prolific British (Anthrax?) see

    A blog on russian/British affaires. this link is extensive over that and subsequent search pages.

    John Helmer is like yourself, extremely well informed and has multiple years experience of all sides in these imbroglios. Better informed than which is equally interesting in larger areas.

    Meryl Nass, M.D. said...

    I follow the site which has compiled all the hydroxychloroquine studies.

    The subject has so much baggage, and some of the researchers are linked to Gilead or have other conflicts of interest, that I think looking at the overall pattern rather than one study is the best way to assess the issue. said...

    Also interesting

    Anonymous said...

    Sen. Peters hid behind a mask and following the democrat party line which is blame President Trump....and I don’t know who the “medical expert” was that chimed in via video conference because that coward didn’t have a name plate up like the the two real doctors that showed up in person. Note the democrats theatrical performance sporting masks in a hearing room that was mostly empty. Is 15 feet apart and a mask really necessary Sen. Peters from Michigan!?

    Anonymous said...

    The Democrat Senator from Michigan and the Educator (Dean of grant funding?) at the hearing went to no science and TDS in “warp speed”. Thank goodness the Republican Senator invited actually doctors to speak about HCQ. Their commentary was informative. Everything the Democrat and college dean said can be read in MSM headlines. FEAR! I thought it comical that democrats put on their usually theatrical performance with masks in an empty room (Democrat) or taking advantage of teleconference (college dean).

    statusquobuster said...

    What was missing from the Senate hearing is this: All three highly esteemed advocates for early home treatment failed to explicitly say that the use of hydroxychloroquine could have saved 70 to 80 percent of the covid deaths in the past and future; this based on a mountain of data from all over the world. The other important feature of the hearing is that all the Democrats intentionally did not deal with the theme of the hearing and just talked about other covid issues, and the one witness chosen by Democrats spoke against using HCQ, but had to admit when questioned that he never had treated a covid patient, unlike the three pro-HCQ witnesses.

    Meryl Nass, M.D. said...

    While I was slow to come to believe the "with Covid" as opposed to "from covid" deaths distinction was important, I do now.

    How many has Covid actually killed? This is not a hard question. Medicare requires every hospital to use electronic medical records and required diagnosis coding systems. The federal government has access to most peoples' medical records almost in real time, due to electronic record-sharing "nonprofits" set up in every state and territory by the federal government to collect this information. These so-called nonprofit, public-private partners are called something different in each state. In Maine it is called Health InfoNet and electronic medical records are sent to it every 24 hours on EVERYBODY. While you are told you can "opt out" of having your medical records shared with other health providers, you CANNOT opt out of having them uploaded into the system.

    This tells you about the system:

    and oddly enough, the first refernce on the website is to an article by Ashish Jha, the doctor who hated HCQ in the Senate hearing. Because, it appears, there really are a limited number of health officials who both have no conscience and can spout bullshit in a rapid fire debate while appearing serious.

    In my state, public health says that almost all deaths were in people over 60. At one point, 61% of those deaths were in nursing homes. Why can't they tell us about the other 39%? Age range? Comorbidities? There is no reason for this informatin to be secret. There is no privacy act after death. No one is being protected. So why can't we be given this information?

    If these people were on death's door, then HCQ would not have saved them.

    The US claims a large number of excess deaths this year. But the UK supposedly has no excess deaths this year, even though their per capita covid deaths are greater than the US'.

    These pieces of information don't make any sense. I am starting to think they were not intended to.