Source: Le Salon Beige Author: Philippe Carhon

Current values ​​publishes an article by Xavier Bazin, author of the book Big Pharma unmasked! From chloroquine to vaccines, the coronavirus crisis reveals the dark side of our health system in which he explains that governments have focused on the search for vaccines and new molecules, and that old treatments and molecules, unprofitable for the pharmaceutical industries were despised:

“It was Professor Éric Caumes who spat the song last February: “ It was a strategic mistake to bet everything on the vaccine. I think we completely neglected the treatment. ”  This mistake is all the more tragic that many preventive and curative demonstrated high efficacy against Covid-19. Saying this risks surprising, even shocking. But all the scientific evidence is there. Because around the world, teams of doctors and researchers have tested hundreds of ancient molecules. And among them, some have a formidable effectiveness against the Covid-19.

The most spectacular is ivermectin, a banal antiparasitic drug, without the slightest toxicity , whose in vitro  efficacy  was detected in the spring of 2020. Since then, more than twenty randomized studies have been carried out, with breathtaking results. . According to two meta-analyzes carried out recently by independent researchers, ivermectin would reduce mortality by 68 to 75%. We are talking about a number of deaths potentially divided by four.

The other big spectacularly ignored remedy is vitamin D . From May 2020, the Academy of Medicine called for the massive use of vitamin D in the prevention of severe forms of Covid-19. But the ministry of Olivier Véran has not moved a finger, while many studies published in the meantime have confirmed the effectiveness of this vitamin to prevent infections and avoid serious forms.

Olivier Véran made only one “concession” to early treatment. Quite recently, with lip service, the minister admitted that general practitioners could prescribe an antibiotic to patients with Covid-19 to  “prevent pneumonia”However, this is precisely what Professor Raoult recommended from the start, with the antibiotic azithromycin. How many deaths would we have avoided if we had largely followed Professor Raoult’s protocol, based on azithromycin, coupled with hydroxychloroquine?

Because we now know that hydroxychloroquine was indeed effective: this is shown by the overwhelming majority of the hundreds of scientific studies published around the world on this simple and not very toxic molecule. 
So why did you demonize the Raoult protocol and then ignore it? 
Because, like ivermectin and vitamin D, it had the misfortune of being inexpensive (therefore unprofitable for the pharmaceutical industry), and especially of competing with vaccines.

The same mishap happened to a very promising old molecule, identified by the Institut Pasteur in Lille. From the outset, the government did not deign to fund this research (the Institut Pasteur had to count on the generosity of LVMH). Worse, when the Pasteur Institute asked Olivier Véran for authorization to carry out an accelerated clinical trial on this non-toxic and very effective in vitro molecule, his ministry refused him an objection, without the slightest valid reason. And there are still many other effective treatments “forgotten” (…)

Here again, not only have these treatments been ignored, but we have put a spoke in the wheels of those who promote them. 

Imagine that a nasal spray specifically designed to neutralize the coronavirus was to be marketed in France at the beginning of March, but the National Agency for the Safety of Medicines and Health Products (ANSM) prevented it at the last moment .

Isn’t it strange that our “experts” from the ANSM judged that an ordinary nose wash was more risky than experimental vaccines, based on messenger RNA surrounded by nanoparticles (Pfizer, Moderna), or genetically modified adenovirus (AstraZeneca)? (…)

All in all, if the West had shown pragmatism by massively testing old molecules that are immediately available on the market, the damage of the epidemic could have been minimized by summer 2020 .

But Western states are only interested in  one type of treatment  : innovative molecules, under patent, therefore very profitable for pharmaceutical companies. This is how in France, in the spring, we tested Gilead’s remdesivir as a priority, without success . 
Very recently, despite a very low level of proof of effectiveness, the government of Emmanuel Macron authorized another “innovative” treatment (at more than 1,000 euros each, of course), bamlanivimab from the powerful American laboratory Lilly.

Tragically, the authorities “forgot” to massively test already existing molecules, known for a long time, and potentially active against Covid-19. Yet this is what Professor Raoult recommended at the very beginning of the epidemic:  “We must examine potentially active molecules which are immediately available on the market. ”  If the West had followed the recommendation of common sense, the epidemic would have been largely off from last summer, and we would not have had to suffer the deaths and reconfinements autumn-winter 2020-2021 .

It is high time to open our eyes, to hold our governments to account, and to fundamentally reform a system that has been misled by the interests of the all-powerful pharmaceutical industry. ”








Related: How much proof do you want? Hundreds of studies conclude – treat Covid-19 early with hydroxychloroquine!

Houston doctor successfully treated over 20K patients with hydroxychloroquine

The Chloroquine Wars Part XVII – Why the Story About India’s April COVID-19 Spike is All Wrong

This doctor cured 5000 corona patients with hydroxychloroquine

Dr. Peter McCullough blames high COVID death toll on massive censorship of effective early treatment protocols such as hydroxychloroquine & ivermectin

The Chloroquine Wars Part X – A Discussion of the Insanity of the Chloroquine Wars

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on whatsapp
On Trend

Latest Stories

Stark madness to ban ivermectin

Buried in the note is the real reason for making ivermectin inaccessible – the fear that persons taking it ‘may elect not to be vaccinated as part of the national Covid-19 vaccination program’. This is outrageous. When someone is infected with Covid, it is too late to bother with vaccination. They need early treatment. To deny it to coerce them into accepting a vaccine, one of whose side-effects is death, is immoral.

Read More »

Australia’s TGA Bans GPs from Prescribing Ivermectin

Australia’s medicine and therapeutic regulatory, the Therapeutic Good Administration (TGA) recently took the gloves off with Ivermectin, the economical anti-parasitic drug associated with at least 63 completed clinical trials involving SARS-CoV-2, the virus behind COVID-19. Now TGA formally places a national prohibition on off-label prescribing of ivermectin to all general practitioners. A comparable move as to what TGA did with hydroxychloroquine in 2020. Clearly further evidence of tightening encroachment of the critically important doctor-patient treatment relationship allowing consent to medical treatment using off-label medications. Of course, this isn’t occurring in a vacuum—it’s part of an unfolding, integrated and what have the signs of a coordinated and orchestrated government action to stop any and all treatments other than those the government declares acceptable.

Read More »