Source: Radio Radio

On the 1st of March this year, Dr. Szumski will have been doing this job for 40 years, a career that has not stopped, and indeed, has intensified in the key months of the pandemic, when the general practitioner and mayor of Santa Lucia di Piave (Treviso) Riccardo Szumski continued to pursue his profession of going from house to house to monitor his patients.
A “different” approach to bed and tachipirina; the kind of approach that scientists like Didier Raoult or Doctor Luigi Cavanna have recommended and promoted as the best method to treat Covid.

Despite the important scientific theses in support, and although it has brought important results to Dr. Szumski (0 deaths), it does not seem that the state machine liked this method: for those who, like the doctor interviewed by Fabio Duranti and Francesco Vergovich, preferred staying in contact with the sick, spring-summer 2020 months were subversive, even “outlaw” months those of those who recommended hydroxychloroquine to their borrowers: it is a pity that it was then rehabilitated in December by the State Council.

In short, the rules immediately adopted by the Government in the treatment of the infected do not seem to be so irrefutable, as Szumski argued at ‘A Special Day’. Here is the interview.


“ The visit is fundamental, the patient needs to hear from a person, who is his doctor who visits him, listens to him, makes a diagnosis, and this is what allows him to obtain even the best results. And it doesn’t make him feel alone by continuing to monitor and support him. We always need support, let alone when we are sick and when around there is a cacophony of negative messages that arrive at all times from TV, from the press and from professors that I would like to see them treat people house by house.

It’s not like I wanted to advertise by continuing to treat people at home. I wanted to send a signal to the authorities that something could be done, because the tragedy is that we still have an AIFA and government protocol that says: Tachipirina and wait.
It means to pray. If you believe in something, pray to that and hope it goes well. This is the drama.

We would certainly have done better if there had been a spread of, I don’t call it protocol, but someone’s clinical experience in the field. I did not win the Nobel Prize for Medicine but I went to see what they did in other situations trying to tackle the problem, given that we have always treated pneumonia, it is nothing new that suddenly appeared on the ground .

“Deceased patients? Nobody”

Of those I was able to cure from the start, I have not lost any. Then there is someone who calls you after ten days and is not a patient of yours, but turns to you.
In some cases we have arrived in the conditions in which the patient had overcome the state in which something could be done, but on my patients, treated by me from the beginning, I have no deaths.

Everyone is a different patient. The doctor must follow its evolution, but even to a patient with a cardiological problem and who decompensates one cannot say “take, these are the drugs for heart failure”, that’s not true. You need to monitor it, see how it responds and change something if necessary. You have to be “on the spot”.

“The Ministry does not consider us”

From the Ministry? As mayor, even on related events, I have written many times even in the spring about some related problems. Answers: zero.
They don’t consider us. I would be an institution, I would be part of the Republic, because the Constitution says that municipalities are on a par with all other entities … Not considered.

I’m sorry to say that I was not even considered at a regional level, indeed, I was beaten for saying that I continued to use hydroxychloroquine in July, not caring about the bans. Because the patient must be treated before any other impediment, even risking a moment in the face of constraints that later turned out to be wrong and unfounded, as also later said by the Council of State.
However, I was told by the competent authorities to shut up.

Here there is no war to be made, there is only to bring some considerations that are for everyone’s benefit, which are in the interest of the health facility. It will be in the interest of the health facility if someone treats the sick at home, reduces access to emergency services, reduces hospitalizations and deaths that no one denies.
It’s not like we’ve found the solution, otherwise it would be too simple. There is no antiviral drug that works 100% against this virus.
We have a number of opportunities: some can be used easily, without problems, at home. If this had been a message sent to all doctors, we would have also taken away the excuse from some doctors to say “I’m not coming to visit you, take the tachipirina

Related: HCQ Protocols from America’s Frontline Doctors

In 2003, the effects of chloroquine/HCQ on viral infections were known: an old drug pitted against SARS and HIV

Peer-reviewed hydroxychloroquine study finds 84% fewer hospitalizations among early treated outpatients


Hydroxychloroquine Not Linked to Longer Heart Rhythm Intervals in Rheumatoid Arthritis or Lupus Patients

Hydroxychloroquine: Why western authorities deny it and why they’re wrong

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on whatsapp
On Trend

Latest Stories

Dr. Harvey Risch: Hydroxychloroquine, Ivermectin, and Other Therapeutics Highly Effective in Early COVID Treatment

I’ve railed against this in the media that we are a part of, and the way that the propaganda reacts to this is, “Ignore it. Ignore all of this.” I’m saying this now because the general public has to be the one that gets angry. The general public should be furious at the way people have been treated in the country by suppression of these drugs, by that kind of website that suppresses the ability of doctors to practice medicine.

Read More »

A Judge Stands up to a Hospital: “Step Aside” and Give a Dying Man Ivermectin

The judge’s finest moment may have been when he dashed the most glaring myth about ivermectin—that it is not safe, despite decades of use that shows otherwise. Noting that all drugs have side effects, Judge Fullerton listed ivermectin’s effects from a government website.
“(N)umber one, generally well tolerated; number two, dizziness; number three, pruritus; number four, nausea/diarrhea. These are the side effects for the dosage that’s being asked to be administered,” he said. “The risks of these side effects are so minimal that Mr. Ng’s current situation outweighs that risk by one-hundredfold.”

Read More »