Global Empire
Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) is a known antimalarial drug with antiviral and anti-inflammatory properties. It is the less toxic brother of Chloroquine (CQ). It is commonly used as a prophylactic or preventative, starting before one goes into a malaria region, or immediately after malaria infection as an early treatment. HCQ is very safe when used as prescribed and it is a cheap drug which is widely available. It is also used as a medicine for treating autoimmune diseases like rheumatism. HCQ and CQ were also repurposed in relation to SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV. In 2005 CQ was shown to be a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and spread. HCQ has been used all over the world since the beginning of the COVID-19 crisis. It is not intended to be a cure for COVID-19 as many opponents wrongfully claim, but it has been shown to be effective in reducing symptoms of COVID-19 when used in an early stage of the infection and in low doses, usually in combination with zinc, as will be shown later on. Since its effective use HCQ has become a highly politicized topic and the media, especially the western media, are all over it in a very negative sense.
Early treatment
HCQ should be used as preventative or early treatment...

South Korea was hit hard by COVID-19 early in 2020 and Korean medical professionals recommended to use HCQ in the early stage of the infection * Apparently early treatment with HCQ made a difference in the amount of patients ending up in hospital beds and requiring intensive care. Early treatment was also already known from in vitro studies like those of for example Martin J Vincent et al, Manli Wang et al and Xueting Yao et al. From the beginning the recommendation is to use HCQ as a prophylactic or in the early stage of COVID-19 infection, immediately after infection. This is also how HCQ is used as antimalarial. HCQ works by obstructing the novel viral infection from developing into severe illness. It is being used as prophylactic by health care workers all over the world and that would never happen if HCQ had no effect whatsoever.
Low dose
HCQ should be used in low doses...

In 2017 the World Health Organization itself published a peaper in which it warned for HCQ or CQ overdose because it was related to cardiac death because of QT prolongation. That same paper also implies that overdose is defined as a dose higher than is commonly prescribed for treating malaria. Common prescription for preventing malaria is 400mg/week starting two weeks prior to entering malaria region, each week on same day until 4 weeks after leaving malaria region. Prescription for treating malaria immediately after infection is 800mg as initial dose, then 400mg at 6 hr, 24 hr, and 48 hr after initial dose. On top of that, by April 2020 it was clearly mentioned in scientific literature that using high doses of HCQ on patients with comorbidities, like heart disease, and/or severe illness is very dangerous and can possibly even lead to death. This confirms its use as preventative or early treatment and it also means that these drugs should only be prescribed by medical professionals, which a lot of them succesfully did around the world. Later we will see that the high profile UK and WHO studies used a very high dose of HCQ or CQ on severely ill patients with comorbidities which basically amounts to intentional murder because the usage of this drug was widely known.
HCQ should be used together with zinc...

Zinc plays important roles in immunity and viral infection. For many years it has been known that Zinc deficiency is common in the elderly, especially those aged over 75. Zinc deficiency is characterized with impaired immune function. It is also known that older people are most at risk with COVID-19 infection. It is shown that zinc deficiency is prevalent among COVID-19 patients with severe illness resulting in higher development of complications and prolonged hospital stay. Despite this fact the World Health Organization does not promote the use of zinc supplements. HCQ is a zinc ionophore and may derive an anti-cancer and antiviral action from increasing intracellular zinc uptake. But as we'll see, HCQ is also not very popular at the WHO which most likely has to do with financial interests, certainly not with public health.
Studies (March-June 2020)
What can be concluded from the studies so far is that studies which use HCQ in an early stage of COVID-19 are very likely to have positive outcome. This was expected knowing that basically the whole world was using it succesfully. Most positive studies use a low dose of around 400-800mg on first day followed by 200-400mg/day for several days. HCQ doesn't seem to have a positive effect on COVID-19 patients with comorbidities and/or severe illness which confirms that it should be used in an early stage of infection. Also higher doses seem to be ineffective which was already confirmed earlier. The addition of zinc seems beneficial as was already known. However, these positive signs have turned HCQ in a highly politicized topic...
Politicization against HCQ (June 2020)
Since its effective use HCQ has become a highly politicized topic. Highly politicized topics are usually also highly suspicious and controversial. That's because politicization usually happens when government officials and high level power elite involved in powerful organizations have (private or corporate) interests in the topic. The COVID-19 crisis shows that globalist organizations like EU and WHO are trying to gain more "control" over information in the world. Despite its widespread use and effectiveness, the authorities oppose the use of HCQ as a treatment of COVID-19 and regard all information that confirms HCQ's effectiveness — including scientific research, official statements of medical professionals and the fact that HCQ is being used worldwide and effectively since the beginning — as "disinformation".
Fraud against HCQ (June 2020)
In June two studies with very negative results for HCQ were published in well respected scientific papers, The Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM). These papers were later retracted because of fraud. Links to retracted articles: here and here. In an interview one of the perpetrators of the first paper, Sapan Desai, said with data like this, do we even need a randomized controlled trial? * The 2018 World Hospital Congress sponsored by pharma company Novartis stated about him that he is a certified lean six sigma master black belt, and a certified professional in healthcare quality * In an interview by TRT World it seems he reads from a script * The first fraudulent study, which wasn't a randomized controlled trial (RCT) but a computer-generated observational study, resulted in the World Health Organization announcing the halt of the HCQ test for COVID-19 while none of the abundantly available non-fraudulent scientific research papers with positive results for HCQ were ever taken into account. The focus of the mainstream media was largely directed at Sapan Desai who owned the company Surgisphere from which the fraudulent data supposedly came. Much less attention was directed at the main author of this fraud, namely "well-respected" Mandeep R. Mehra, despite the fact that the NEJM fraudulent paper clearly mentions that all the authors reviewed the manuscript and vouch for the accuracy and completeness of the data provided. If one takes a look at the sponsors of for example another paper published by Oxford University, authored by Mandeep R. Mehra and many other "high profile scientists", (see 'Conflicts of interest'), then it becomes obvious that Big Pharma and these kind of researches from "high profile scientists" are basically two sides of the same coin. On top of that there's a certain Jyoti Mehra who is Executive Vice President of Human Resources at Gilead Sciences *, the pharma company that produces the much more expensive Remdesivir, a competitor of HCQ. She is married to Uneek Mehra who is currently Chief Financial Officer at PACT Pharma * after having worked for other pharma companies. It's one happy pharma family. Mandeep Mehra was a participant at an online information session called 'Update on SARS-CoV2 and COVID-19' in Barcelona which was sponsored by Gilead Sciences. In a 2014 paper called 'Right heart failure: Toward a common language' he declared consultancies for Gilead Sciences. Etcetera. It's obvious what's going here. After the fraudulent Lancet paper was retracted WHO reluctantly continued testing HCQ for a little while to no avail. Of course it never was WHO's intention to finish it or to produce objective results. Richard Horton, pictured above, is editor-in-chief of The Lancet and has served in various roles with the World Health Organization. Birds of a feather flock together.
FDA against HCQ (June 2020)
Based on its ongoing analysis of the EUA and emerging scientific data, the FDA determined that chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine are unlikely to be effective in treating COVID-19 for the authorized uses in the EUA. Additionally, in light of ongoing serious cardiac adverse events and other potential serious side effects, the known and potential benefits of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine no longer outweigh the known and potential risks for the authorized use.
source screenshot
On May 27 France banned hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19, after having been used for months. On June 15 the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) revokes the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine in the United States, after having been used for months. On June 16 Britain's drug regulator suspended hydroxychloroquine trial recruitment after having been used for months. So I wonder whether all those months that medical professionals used HCQ and CQ on themselves (as a prophylactic) and on patients (as a treatment) was just a completely useless practice without any positive effect. Impossible. The FDA, which was formed in 1906 with the aim of protecting public health, has close ties with the pharmaceutical industry. The result after more than a century of FDA's existence is that there is a very unhealthy American population plagued by obesity and many other health issues. see also UNhealth.
Vaccine race (June-July)
As early as June governments pre-ordered vaccines on a massive scale. It's big business. This confirms the close relationship of government and pharmaceutical industry. One of the pharmaceutical companies involved is AstraZeneca which is closely related to the UK RECOVERY Trial mentioned later. Another aspect worth mentioning is that these COVID-19 vaccines were already on the market, only one year after COVID-19 broke out. Normally the development of a new vaccine takes about 10 to 15 years when done correctly. That's because vaccines face a tougher safety standard than most pharmaceutical products. It's impossible to compress 10 to 15 years into only 1 year while maintaining the same safety level. Therefore these pharma companies have nogotiated non-liability with governments in case these vaccines cause future damage. See also VacciNATION. Yet we hear very little criticism from the scientific community, the doctors, the authorities or the media about this. But they do focus much attention on the possible side effects of HCQ which has an extremely safe antimalarial track record around the world for decades and while any side effects are mainly the result of its wrong use against the safe use guidelines mentioned earlier. High profile trials from the UK and WHO will be mentioned later.
Studies (June-July 2020)
Meanwhile new studies kept confirming what we already knew.
UK RECOVERY Trial (July 2020)
The UK RECOVERY Trial by Peter Horby et al had a neutral to negative outcome. It concludes that hydroxychloroquine was not associated with reductions in 28-day mortality but was associated with an increased length of hospital stay and increased risk of progressing to invasive mechanical ventilation or death. But this paper tested HCQ on severely ill patients in the late stage of COVID-19 while we know from previous research that HCQ is most effective when used in the early stage in order to prevent COVID-19 from developing into severe illness. This study merely confirmed what we already knew, namely that HCQ most likely does not have any meaningful mortality benefit in severely ill patients hospitalised with COVID-19. Simply because it's too late. On top of that, the dose given to patients was very high, against the safe use guidelines mentioned earlier. Already in 2017 it was shown that high doses of antimalarial drugs are related to sudden death, especially in patients with heart disease. On top of that, this research was funded by MRC and NIHR which have a strong relationship with pharmaceutical industry, government and WHO. The WHO quickly concluded that HCQ has no effect and interrupted its Solidarity Trial on July 4 which will also be mentioned later.
Studies (July-August 2020)
Meanwhile new studies keep confirming what we already knew.
Meta-analysis Fiolet et al (August 2020)
In August 2020 Thibault Fiolet et al conclude that Hydroxychloroquine alone was not associated with reduced mortality in hospitalized COVID-19 patients but the combination of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin significantly increased mortality.
It strongly seems to me that, after scanning the referenced papers, this conclusion does not correctly represent the conclusions and content of those referenced papers. Furthermore, I believe that all the scientific research papers, available at that time, with positive outcomes for HCQ, can not simply be waved away as insignificant. Most of the neutral or negative research papers either do not mention the dose or they use a higher dose than in positive studies. But more importantly, those researchers used HCQ in a late stage of COVID-19, on severely ill patients, of which we know from previous studies that it's less effective and possibly dangerous according to the safe use guidelines. On top of that Thibault Fiolet is linked to the World Health Organization * and linked to the World Economic Forum *, powerful organizations run by the power elite and the ultra-rich with a globalist agenda.
Studies (September-October 2020)
Meanwhile more studies kept confirming what we already knew.
WHO SOLIDARITY Trial (October 2020)
The WHO study concludes with a neutral to negative outcome for HCQ. But also this study is plagued by the same criticism as the previous negative studies mentioned. It tests HCQ on severely ill patients with comorbidities and even uses a very high dose on these patients, against the safe use guidelines mentioned earlier. The researchers didn't test HCQ as it was intended to be used according to the many positive studies available. Instead they concluded, after an incomplete study, that HCQ has no effect on COVID-19, without any nuance. Because of WHO's tremendous influence globally this has a very strong effect on the rest of the world. Although this research adds very little to what we already knew about HCQ, it confirms that organizations like WHO and related "high profile" scientists and governments are involved in strong negative bias. More about this later.
Global usage of HCQ

Because of the WHO recommendations HCQ is currently not longer used in large parts of the Anglo-American western world. But it was being used for several months prior to this recommendation, also in the United States. And it is still being used in pretty much the rest of the world. This begs the question whether those months of HCQ usage were a total waste of pharmaceuticals, money and false hope... or not. As shown in previous studies there are a lot of positive outcomes of HCQ use on COVID-19 under certain conditions. It would be highly unlikely that so many medical authorities all over the world were using HCQ if it didn't show any positive effect on COVID-19 patients at all. The conclusions of several high profile studies, by for example UK and WHO, simply excluded known preconditions for effective use of HCQ. And given the fact that this knowledge was widely available (it took me relatively little time and effort to find it out) it is highly suspicious that top scientists of high profile studies do not mention anything about these preconditions at all. This could have only been done by design since all the smart professors involved are certainly not that ignorant. That which should have been tested was, in my opinion, left out intentionally by whoever was in charge of the UK and WHO studies. The highest responsibility is with the World Health Organization whose power elite are in control of worldwide policy.
Studies (October-... 2020)
Meanwhile more studies kept confirming what we already knew.
Hierarchy of evidence
People like for example Thibault Fiolet et al put much emphasis on the selection of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) over regular observational studies. But many independent observational studies from all over the world which come to similar conclusions is, in my opinion, much better than large clinical trials controlled by huge organizations with ties to the pharmaceutical industry and politics. I believe it makes more sense to trust in honest and unbiased science from real life than in the so-called science of "high profile" scientists who are probably pressured and paid too much for delivering the kind of incomplete studies with biased and incomplete conclusions like those of UK and WHO we discussed earlier. True science is unbiased and does not exclude possibilities from its research and conclusions, like these researchers did. The hierarchy of evidence is a nice theoretical standard, but when it is regarded as the holy pinnacle of science, over evidence from real life, then it becomes more like a religion. For the much hailed peer-review process pretty much the same applies. Anyway, in this case the interests and motivations of these "high profile" scientists are clear by now...
Money, money, money
Many medical professionals and scientists of different studies suggest to use HCQ not only because it is effective against COVID-19, but also because it is cheap and widely available. Zinc and vitamin D are also widely available and cheap. The bleak reality is that we live in an extremely materialistic world with extreme levels of inequality and corruption. Medicine in general works by treating symptoms instead of causes and the pharmaceutical industry thrives by profits made of diseases. If HCQ can prevent people with COVID-19 infection from progressing to severe illness when used in the early stage of infection, then who will not profit and who will loose face and credibility? The ultra-rich and power elite in control of the pharmaceutical industry and globalist organizations like WHO.
MSM bias
All mass media owned and controlled by the power elite spread blatant misinformation and extreme negative bias concerning HCQ. So what are the state media? Obviously, they're tools for spreading the propaganda of their owners based on their political and economical interests.
Global conspiracy
I'm also worried that THOSE behind those claims exploit people's fears about the virus, JUST to make money, by selling them VERY expensive soap for example that ALLEGEDLY kills Corona virus germs. This NEEDS to stop.
Great act. This globalist EU puppet really tries hard to look worried. The people in the world should be very worried about THOSE who are selling us VERY expensive vaccines while suppressing COMPLETE research into VERY cheap HCQ which has already been SHOWN to be effective because it has been used ALL around the world for SO long now. The longer these globalist power elite of the WHO and other globalist organizations withhold effective medicines like HCQ and other cheap supplements from the population the more people will unncessarily suffer and even die. What happens in the world today is called intentional mass murder and it happens on a global scale. The suppression of HCQ and Ivermectine are the greatest crimes against humanity we have seen in decades. History is very clear. When very powerful people of very powerful organizations start suppressing information and when they start imposing their "controlled" version of reality on the world, it starts smelling awfully bad like the kind of repulsive authoritarianism that the same kind of hypocrites fanatically criticized China and Russia for in the last decades. Now they embrace and implement these authoritarian practices themselves in the western world. See also Agenda 2030 and Great Reset.