ER Editor: What is now clearly crystallizing is the entire plandemic having been orchestrated around, at minimum, the shutdown of the family doctor’s ability to treat their own patients, especially regarding chloroquine drugs. We published a very illuminating piece on this yesterday from France, which details government action to ensure that a) patients wouldn’t even see their family practitioner during the crisis, and b) those doctors wouldn’t be able to prescribe hydroxychloroquine, a a drug which has been freely available for decades pretty much everywhere. See Covid-19: France Has Deliberately Sidelined Its Family Doctors.
Overcoming Fear: The Way Of the Hippocratic Movement
Libre Penseur (Free Thinker)
This is how, on the occasion of the covid-19 health crisis, a movement of health professionals was born in Italy to put an end to media propaganda – through the corruption of Big Pharma – in order to offer the best treatments to patients in complete independence.
OLIVIER TURQUET for PRESSENZA
On many occasions during the Covid-19 pandemic, the question of possible treatments for the virus was raised and was very controversial.
At the initiative of Mauro Rango, an Italian with a passion for medicine who lives in Rodrigues (Republic of Mauritius), a study group was set up and formalized under the association IppocrateOrg. We are talking about it with Mauro, Maria, Adriana, Nicola and Massimo, founding members.
Mauro, can you summarize what happened?
Mauro: I live in the Republic of Mauritius, on Rodrigues Island, 600 km east of Mauritius, the furthest point of Africa in the Indian Ocean. I have always loved medicine, even though I am not a doctor. When the outbreak of the Covid-19 epidemic started, I started looking for possible therapies with doctor friends, which led me to the combination of azithromycin and hydroxychloroquine.
When the Coronavirus arrived in Italy and the first people started to die, I called my friend Dr. Alberto Palamidese, a pulmonologist, now retired. He confirmed to me (early March) that the target organ of the virus was the lung and that there was interstitial pneumonia similar to Mycoplasma Pneumoniae which, if not treated immediately, resulted in the death of the patient. He told me that in his time, the treatment included high-dose azithromycin cortisone, low molecular weight heparin, and the use of hyperimmune plasma.
During the first ten days of March, I phoned a very dear doctor friend of mine in the prevention department of USL-2 Umbria who told me that they treat all patients at the first symptoms with hydroxychloroquine 400 mg/day x 7 days and azithromycin 500 mg/day x 6 days at home. With the exception of a few very rare hospitalizations, all cases were resolved within a week. Zero deaths (including those in hospital). Zero side effects.
At the same time, I learned that the local health authorities in Mauritius were stockpiling hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin. I made enquiries with the authorities and, when the epidemic arrived, the plan (which would then be announced by the Prime Minister) was as follows: hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, the same dosages as those used in Umbria and, for the most serious cases, hyperimmune plasma.
The same therapy was previously used in South Korea and eradicated the epidemic fairly quickly.
So I discovered that all my research always leads to the same result.
I started writing long e-mails to several newspapers explaining that the therapy existed, while in my home region, Veneto, former compatriots and friends were going to the hospital to die without any therapy, receiving only oxygen. Then the carnage began in Lombardy. I continued to write without anyone listening.
On 17 March, a document from AIFA (Italian Medicines Agency) authorised the off-label use of hydroxychloroquine, but also warned against simultaneous use with azithromycin due to the lengthening of the QT curve and possible cardiac arrest for serious arrhythmias.
The circular of the federation of family doctors then recommends the use of hydroxychloroquine in the home, but few people, especially in northern Italy, use it in combination with azithromycin. Even in many large hospitals, such as Tor Vergata in Rome or Cutugno in Naples, azithromycin and hydroxychloroquine have been used in combination since mid-March.
Then, finally, in mid-April, azithromycin and hydroxychloroquine therapy was considered by the hospitals of Lombardy and Veneto, but still not in a systematic way because many were trying, on the advice of virologists, immunologists and epidemiologists, antiviral treatment which had little effect.
In Piacenza, Professor Cavanna Primario Ospedaliero treated patients at home with hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin without death or side effects.
In Germany, the extensive use of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin and a large amount of hyperimmune plasma kept the mortality rate below 3%. But in great silence, as the Germans know how to do.
I suffered a great deal when I saw my compatriots die, and the anger increased when I saw that the information in the media was occupied by laboratory doctors, experts of all kinds and statisticians and not by clinical doctors, particularly pneumologists, who could have treated the disease. There was total confusion, and no one at the top was in charge of establishing the rules of treatment to be followed both at the territorial and hospital levels. Each region, each hospital, but also each department and each general practitioner followed its own line of therapy.
I believe that another reason for these contradictions and the confusion that has led to catastrophic consequences is that part of the medical community has continued to follow the known path of validating scientific research, which is very time-consuming. This attitude of waiting, in the hope of identifying a drug validated at all levels, has been confronted by another part of the medical community, more accustomed to filtering research results through the lens of personal clinical experience, of having cured patients based on the validation of the “field result”.
The clinical intuition of doctors, validated by obvious results, still seems to find no echo in the current scientific medical community. The clinical experience proven by the healing records of many cases treated without any side effects seems to be less significant than a randomized study.
I would like to recall here the recent retrospective work of the Marseille group, which proved the validity of the protocol with hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin on more than 3,700 Covid-19 patients. (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1477893920302817).
On May 5th, I receive a whatsapp message from a friend in Milan. He tells me about the intervention in a TV program led by F. Fazio of Roberto Burioni, a virologist who is trying to stop the initiative of some doctors using hyperimmune plasma. A huge wave of anger made me write my first whatsapp message on the subject. I sent it to about 40 friends with a request to spread it to friends.
Since that day, my life has changed.
I’ve received thousands of whatsapp messages and thousands of emails. Among the people who contacted me were also many doctors. Many of them had made the same attempts as I had by pointing out that the cure already existed. Immediately a group of serving and retired hospital doctors, local doctors and also nurses was formed to inform everyone about the therapeutic possibilities. But also by thousands of citizens from different professions.
Who’s in the group right now and what do you do?
The group began as a convergence of people with different professional skills and ideas, who found themselves wondering what could be done to find a cure for the coronavirus. The first thing we wanted to do was to review how things were working in practice.
In summary, since the beginning of March in the big hospitals in Rome, Neapolitana, Sardinia and Sicily, but certainly also in other realities that we do not know, hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin therapy has been used as the basic medicine that is still present. Secondly, the different protocols between hospitals and between departments within the same hospital (which shows the total absence of a director). Some added vitamin C, cortisone, heparin, various antivirals and heparin, vitamin A, with the basic nucleus remaining of azithromycin and hydroxychloroquine. In these hospitals, where the protocols contained the above-mentioned drugs, mortality was considerably reduced, even for those over 80 years of age with more pathologies. Meanwhile, however, in the hospitals of Lombardy and Veneto, the number of deaths increased enormously, reaching a record mortality rate of 17% in Lombardy.
My Youtube video on the 30,000 lives that could have been saved, after being viewed 9,000 times, has been deleted. In response to our objection, Youtube responded instantly with a clearly automatic, pre-packaged message indicating that the content was inappropriate.
With this group of doctors, and in dialogue with the coordinator of another group of territorial doctors who had widely used hydroxychloroquine with their patients, we carried out several initiatives, without giving them too much publicity, including :
1. With the help of a cardiologist (Dr. Adriana Privitera) and in order to dismantle the study published by The Lancet (which led to the WHO decision to withdraw hydroxychloroquine from the trials and the suspension by the AIFA of the use of this drug without authorization), I personally sent a letter to The Lancet and the WHO, signed by about eighty Italian doctors. Unlike The Guardian and the 120 scientists (https://zenodo.org/record/3862789#.XvikvV9xfIX) who attacked the study from a methodological point of view, we have shown that the deaths mentioned in the study occurred for two reasons:
a. Inclusion of patients whose disease is too advanced
b. Use of hydroxychloroquine in heart patients (ischemic, decompensated and arrhythmic) who should not have taken it. The study counted these deaths as a direct cause of the effects of the drug in question, and concluded that hydroxychloroquine was ineffective and dangerous, increasing mortality and arrhythmias. These conclusions were shown to be medically and scientifically unreliable.
2. We wrote a letter to the President of the Republic, Mattarella, to explain the absurd position of AIFA asking him to intervene.
We are now committed to helping in establishing the protocols of some South American countries and in researching plasma machines for Somalia.
In addition to doctors, we have involved thousands of people from civil society in a project called IppocrateOrg. The Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/IppocrateOrg/) is already active, while www.ippocrateorg.org will be active very soon. (ER: it is.)
This project has NO political ambition. We have rejected the intrusions of representatives of various political groups. Also, we have kindly refused aid and requests for collaboration from associations affiliated or linked to parties, because we were born as a group of citizens and health professionals whose sole objective is the defence of human health. We want to develop a movement that can give a voice to that part of the medical-scientific community that, in the Coronavirus affair, did not feel represented by the Health Institutions. At the same time, we are committed to opposing all research or communications that aim to weaken access to appropriate medical therapies and that violate the human right to health and well-being.
Hydroxychloroquine therapy has found itself in the spotlight of the traditional mainstream press and has given rise to conflicting positions within the WHO, the Research Institutes and the Italian Medicines Agency (AIFA): Can you briefly summarise the history of this diatribe?
DR. ADRIANA PRIVITERA: A little clarity is in order. The use of chloroquine goes back a long way  During the Covid-19 outbreak, China and South Korea used hydroxychloroquine with or without macrolide association (WangM et al. Remdesivir and chloroquine effectively inhibited the new coronavirus CellRes 2020, 4 February ).
Some 20 in vitro studies conducted in China with excellent results recommend its use for the prevention and treatment of ongoing Covid-19 pneumonia. (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32075365/). In March 2020, a study conducted in France on 20 patients showed a lower persistence of the virus, particularly in combination with azithromycin (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32205204/).
Following these studies, the hydroxychloroquine-azithromycin combination was prescribed worldwide, even outside of authorized clinical trials. In Italy, in April, the Italian Federation of Family Doctors (FIMMG) recommended its use in confirmed cases of Covid-19 and in suspected cases, so that many family doctors used the treatment early and were able to avoid hospital admissions.
On 26 February 2020, the UK government added chloroquine to the list of drugs that cannot be exported, given the growing body of evidence of its effectiveness. In March, the AIFA issued a circular authorising the off-label use of hydroxychloroquine, warning against the simultaneous use of azithromycin following several studies demonstrating the danger of serious arrhythmias . 3]
But then the problems began .
In May, Mandeep Mehra and his collaborators published in The Lancet an observational study of 96,032 hospitalized patients on 6 continents taking hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine alone or in combination with macrolides. The study concluded that there was evidence of serious arrhythmias in the treated group compared to the control group, high mortality and no therapeutic benefit of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine alone or in combination with macrolides (https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31180-6).
On this basis, the WHO is terminating investigations and studies on hydroxychloroquine; the AIFA on 29 May, is no longer granting off-label prescribing and is only allowing official trials to continue. This creates a very serious situation because this therapy had been very useful in treating the first phase of the disease.
Fortunately, The Lancet study is being challenged by 120 researchers from around the world who are questioning both its data collection and methodology. The Lancet withdrew the study and the WHO resumed testing of hydroxychloroquine on June 3.
And we, with the signatures of 80 doctors, are writing to The Lancet magazine, highlighting the drug’s scientific merit. Unfortunately, the AIFA is not backing down, maintaining the indication to use hydroxychloroquine to treat covid-19 only for hospital and home clinical trials. The prescription is therefore excluded from reimbursement and, more importantly, the doctor prescribing is personally liable for any side effects of the treatment. A group of doctors is making a legal application to the AIFA to request that hydroxychloroquine be used again for the early treatment of the disease.
Finally, in June, the British trial RECOVERY (www.recoverytrial.net/files/recovery-protocol-v6-0-202005-14.pdf), which used very high doses of the drug, found no difference in mortality between the treated and control groups after one month of treatment. This study is also to be criticized because more than 10,000 patients were recruited in hospitals in the United Kingdom, the dose of hydroxychloroquine is high and patients are treated as a monotherapy, whereas the effect of hydroxychloroquine is associated with that of macrolides, including in serious patients, some of them on ventilators.
As is now well known, hydroxychloroquine is the ideal treatment in the early or intermediate phase of the disease, avoiding its aggravation with known fatal complications. Very useful is the explanation by Bologna’s Prof. Viale on the natural history of the disease and the therapeutic interventions in the different phases (https://youtu.be/mVBfCzDWxPQ).
After RECOVERY, WHO blocked everything again. Let’s not forget that Recovery receives funds from Oxford but also from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
According to the analysis of all the studies, there is to date NO SINGLE STUDY that demonstrates the dangerousness of the drug, when administered with the CORRECT indications. It is therefore legitimate to ask in which direction scientific research is going.
What are you asking of the Italian government and medical institutions?
NICOLA: Italy has entered phase 2 of the epidemic with a reduction in contagion in almost all regions, intensive care services that are being emptied, and a steady decrease in deaths. This has happened, in our opinion, due to three concomitant factors:
1. Containment was observed by citizens in a commendable manner, as well as hygienic-sanitary measures (masks, social distance, hand hygiene, surfaces, etc.).
2. The use of good therapy, even if it is empirical and not systematic, with a wide use in particular of hydroxychloroquine in the initial phase of the infection and heparin as soon as the fatal mechanism of multi-organ thrombosis was discovered, which caused the precipitation of the patients’ clinical state.
3. The climatic conditions of the hot season, which seem to be favourable to limit the contagion of this class of respiratory viruses.
In view of the above, in order not to run the risk of compromising the results obtained so far, we ask the Italian Government, but also the Regions, to inform the population about the therapy that will be implemented after the ban on the use of hydroxychloroquine, until yesterday the winning weapon of the initial therapy. The loss of its use, in fact, to date, suggests that it was decided to leave patients completely uncovered from the point of view of inflammation, leaving the only action of the antiviral to the difficult task of preventing the ensuing cytokinic storm. We also ask what type of antiviral molecule will be used, and the cost of a complete treatment of the Covid patient, in order to assess whether there is a correct and acceptable cost/benefit ratio. If the epidemic resumes in Italy, what will be the intervention strategy in the territory?
In the absence of the use of hydroxychloroquine as a drug of first immediate use in the territory, there will inevitably be a greater influx of patients in serious conditions to the health facilities: a script already seen and terrifying, especially in the RSA! (nursing homes)
MARIA: I would like a serious and independent experimentation of Hydroxychloroquine to resume, which clearly, like all drugs, must be used wisely and with the precautions that Adriana has already exposed in full, giving everyone correct and true information on statistical data and possible therapies.
Furthermore, I think it is important for us all to stop and think about the responsibilities of those who have managed the epidemic at the government level, the ISS (the Health Service), the AIFA and the Regions, particularly Lombardy, by re-reading the whole process of information flows, reviewing the sequence of events from a general profile that includes the environment, prevention, awareness and citizens’ freedom. In short, a broad vision that links the whole process as a whole.
I would like to emphasise, with data and a timetable, that if the correct therapies had been implemented from the very first stage and throughout the territory, as well as prophylactic measures, with particular attention to the protection of health workers, the carnage and national locking of the economic crisis would have been avoided. Not to mention the massacre of our elderly in old people’s homes!
Now that the epidemic is almost over, the need for mass influenza vaccination is being declared, to the advantage of pharmaceutical companies, while the correlation between influenza vaccination and the severity of Covid-19 is becoming increasingly evident (https://www.facebook.com/Articolo71/photos/a.109803843911684/175394604019274/?type=3&theater).
In addition, we would like to know what scientific evidence justifies influenza vaccination of children aged six months to six years. Please tell us!
We were projected into a surreal dimension where, next to the real danger of the virus, nobody knew anything; famous virologists and politicians pretended to know, plunging the country into anguish and panic, with serious harm to children, the elderly, the disabled and the mentally ill.
Health care should be of good quality and free everywhere in the world: the Covid-19 report has shown how far we are from this goal. In your opinion, what is the role of the big pharmaceutical companies in this area and what should we do as citizens?
MASSIMO: Big Pharma’s influence distorts the real relevance of pathologies and their respective treatments, sometimes substantially altering public information.
To overcome this important problem, those invited to speak in public should be required to declare any links with companies in the sector.
The Covid 2019 pandemic has shown that doctors in the field can find effective (and sustainable!) answers long before researchers can verify their validity. The real strength lies in the ability to freely and rapidly exchange experiences and results. We believe that the clinic should regain the value and dignity taken away from it by very expensive research.
Big Pharma’s research exploits the COVID case by investing billions of dollars and then offering very expensive or non-existent drugs, when we already have a set of drugs that have shown great efficacy in both the early stages of the disease (hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, heparin) and the more advanced stages (hyperimmune plasma).
The very large philanthropic funds in the medical field should be managed exclusively and transparently by independent government bodies in order to avoid a harmful mix of economic interests, advertising information and health needs.
MARIA: Thank you Olivier for the question “what should we do as citizens” because it shifts the focus on all of us, on our ability to understand and act, without delegating the reading of reality to experts, or presumed experts. I believe it is a responsibility that we must assume in order to begin to reflect again on what has happened, critically and creatively. We can, as citizens and as doctors, rediscover together the wisdom that is deeply innate in human beings to feel and coordinate knowledge in a way that is useful for the emergence of truth, not understood dogmatically and statically, but as a continuous becoming that reveals itself to those who observe reality without prejudice, without censorship and without interests to maintain.
Without the restoration of the critical spirit and freedom of expression of doctors, I fear that we will once again find ourselves in a dramatic situation in the face of another virus or in the face of the climatic and environmental emergency which is already putting us at a disadvantage at all levels.
MAURO: After the publication of the Marseille study, mentioned above, we wonder how many doctors have experimented with the hydroxychloroquine-azithromycin protocol in their clinical practice in Italy, and we invite them to join our research to conduct a retrospective epidemiological study of treated cases together.