by Prof. Michel Chossudovsky
There is an ongoing battle to suppress
Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), a
cheap and effective drug for the treatment of Covid-19.
The campaign against HCQ
is carried out through slanderous political statements, media
smears, not to mention an authoritative peer reviewed "evaluation"
published on May 22 by
The Lancet, which was based on fake figures
and test trials.
The study was allegedly based on data analysis of 96,032 patients
hospitalized with COVID-19 between Dec 20, 2019, and April 14, 2020
from 671 hospitals Worldwide.
The database had been
The objective was to kill the Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ)
cure on behalf
of Big Pharma.
The Lancet article
was retracted, the
media casually blamed "a tiny US based company" named
whose employees included "a sci-fi writer and adult content model"
for spreading "flawed data" (Guardian).
This Chicago based
outfit was accused of having misled both the WHO and national
governments, inciting them to ban HCQ. None of those trial tests
actually took place.
While the blame was
placed on Surgisphere, the unspoken truth (which neither the
scientific community nor the media have acknowledged) is that the
study was coordinated by Harvard professor
Mandeep Mehra under the auspices of Brigham
and Women's Hospital (BWH) which is a partner of the Harvard
When the scam was
revealed, Dr. Mandeep Mehra
who holds the Harvey Distinguished Chair of Medicine at Brigham and
Women's Hospital apologized:
I have always
performed my research in accordance with the highest ethical and
However, we can
never forget the responsibility we have as researchers to
scrupulously ensure that we rely on data sources that adhere to
our high standards.
It is now clear
to me that in my hope to contribute this research during a time
of great need, I did not do enough to ensure that the data
source was appropriate for this use.
For that, and
for all the disruptions - both directly and indirectly -
I am truly sorry...
Mehra, MD, MSC
statement on BWH website)
But that "truly
sorry" note was just the tip of the iceberg. Why...?
Gilead Science's Remdesivir and Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ)
Conducted Simultaneously by Brigham and Women's Hospital (BWH)
The Lancet report
(May 22, 2020) coordinated by Dr. Mandeep Mehra was intended "to
kill" the legitimacy of HCQ as a cure of Covid-19, another important
(related) study was being carried out (concurrently) at BWH
Remdesivir on behalf of Gilead Sciences Inc.
specialist in Infectious
Disease and Associate Professor at
Harvard Medical School was entrusted with coordination of the
clinical trial tests of
the antiviral medication Remdesivir
under Brigham's contract with Gilead Sciences Inc:
Women's Hospital began enrolling patients in two
clinical trials for Gilead's antiviral
The Brigham is one
of multiple clinical trial sites for a
Gilead-initiated study of the drug in 600
participants with moderate coronavirus disease
(COVID-19) and a Gilead-initiated study of 400
participants with severe COVID-19.
results are promising, this could lead to FDA approval, and if
they aren't, it gives us critical information in the fight
against COVID-19 and allows us to move on to other therapies."
While Dr. Mandeep
Mehra was not directly involved in the Gilead Remdesevir BWH
study under the supervision of his colleague Dr. Francisco Marty, he
nonetheless had contacts with Gilead Sciences Inc:
participated in a conference sponsored by Gilead in early April
2020 as part of the Covid-19 debate".
(France Soir, May
What was the intent
of his (failed) study? To undermine the legitimacy of
France Soir, in a report published after The Lancet
evasive answers produced by Dr
Mandeep R. Mehra... professor at Harvard Medical
School, did not produce confidence, fueling doubt instead about
the integrity of this
retrospective study and its results.
June 5, 2020)
Was Dr. Mandeep
Mehra in conflict of interest...?
That is a matter for BWH and the Harvard Medical School to decide upon.
Who are the Main
Anthony Fauci, advisor
Donald Trump, portrayed as
"America's top infectious disease expert" has played a key role in
smearing the HCQ cure which had been approved years earlier by the
CDC as well as providing legitimacy to Gilead's Remdesivir.
Dr. Fauci has been
the head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious
since the Reagan administration. He is known to act as a mouthpiece
for Big Pharma.
Dr. Fauci launched Remdesivir
in late June (see details below). According to Fauci,
Remdesevir is the "corona wonder drug" developed by
Gilead Science Inc.
It's a $1.6 billion
Sciences Inc: History
Gilead Sciences Inc
is a Multibillion dollar bio-pharmaceutical company which is now
involved in developing and marketing Remdesivir.
Gilead has a
long history. It has the backing of major investment
conglomerates including the Vanguard Group and Capital Research
& Management Co, among others.
It has developed ties with the US
Gilead Sciences Inc,
developed Tamiflu (used as a treatment
of seasonal influenza and bird flu).
At the time,
Gilead Sciences Inc was headed by
(1997-2001), who later joined the George W. Bush administration
as Secretary of Defense (2001-2006).
responsible for coordinating the illegal and criminal wars on
Afghanistan (2001) and Iraq (2003).
maintained his links to Gilead Sciences Inc throughout his
tenure as Secretary of Defense (2001-2006). According to
CNN Money (2005):
prospect of a bird flu outbreak... was very good news for
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld [who still owned Gilead
stocks] and other politically connected investors in Gilead
Anthony Fauci has
been in charge of the NIAID since 1984, using his position as "a
go between" the US government and
Rumsfeld's tenure as Secretary of Defense, the budget allocated
to bio-terrorism increased substantially, involving contracts
with Big Pharma including Gilead Sciences Inc.
the money allocated to bio-terrorism in early 2002 would,
our understanding of the biology and pathogenesis of
microbes that can be used in attacks, and the biology of the
microbes' hosts - human beings and their immune systems.
should be more effective vaccines with less toxicity."
In 2008, Dr.
Anthony Fauci was granted the Presidential Medal of Freedom by
George W. Bush,
determined and aggressive efforts to help others live longer
and healthier lives..."
The 2020 Gilead
Sciences Inc. Remdesivir Project
We will be focusing
on key documents (and events).
Initial Release pertaining to NIH-NIAID Remdesivir placebo test
10: The Gilead
Sciences Inc study published in the NEJM on the "Compassionate Use of Remdesivir"
29: NIH Release:
Study on Remdesivir (Report published on May 22 in NEJM)
The BWH-Harvard Study on Hydroxychloroquine coordinated by
Dr. Mandeep Mehra published in The Lancet
May 22, Remdesivir
for the Treatment of Covid-19 - Preliminary Report National
Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National
Institutes of Health, New England Journal of Medicine, (NEJM)
The (fake) Lancet Report (May 22) on HCQ is Retracted.
Fauci announcement. The $1.6 Billion Remdevisir HHS Agreement
with Gilead Sciences Inc
The Gilead Sciences Inc. study published in the NEJM on the
"Compassionate Use of Remdesivir"
A Gilead sponsored
report was published in New
England Journal of Medicine in an article entitled "Compassionate
Use of Remdesivir for Patients with Severe Covid-19".
It was co-authored
by an impressive list of 56 distinguished medical doctors and
scientists, many of whom were recipients of consulting fees from
Gilead Sciences Inc.
Inc. funded the study which included several staff members as
included a total of 61 patients [who] received at least one dose
of remdesivir on or before March 7, 2020; 8 of these patients
were excluded because of missing post-baseline information (7
patients) and an erroneous remdesivir start date (1 patient)...
53 remaining patients included
in this analysis, 40 (75%) received the full 10-day
course of remdesivir, 10 (19%) received 5 to 9 days of
treatment, and 3 (6%) fewer than 5 days of treatment.
The NEJM article
Sciences Inc began accepting requests from clinicians for
compassionate use of remdesivir on January 25, 2020".
From whom, From
According to the
WHO (January 30, 2020) there were 82 cases in 18 countries outside
China of which 5 were in the US, 5 in France and 3 in Canada.
physicians and scientists have
cast doubt on the Compassionate Use of Remdesivir study conducted
by Gilead, focussing on the small size of the trial. Ironically, the
number of patients in the test is less that the number of
co-authors: "53 patients" versus "56 co-authors"
Below we provide
excerpts of scientific statements on the Gilead NEJM project (Science
Media Centre) published immediately following the
release of the NEJM article:
use' is better described as using an unlicensed therapy to treat
a patient because there are no other treatments available.
Research based on this kind of use should be treated with
extreme caution because there is no control group or randomisation, which are some of the hallmarks of good practice
in clinical trials."
Richard, Clinical Therapeutics, University of Oxford.
is critical not to over-interpret this study. Most importantly, it
is impossible to know the outcome for this relatively small group of
patients had they not received remdesivir.
Dr Stephen Griffin,
Associate Professor, School of Medicine, University of Leeds.
research is interesting but doesn't
prove anything at this point: the data are from a small and
uncontrolled study. Simon Maxwell,
Professor of Clinical Pharmacology and Prescribing,
University of Edinburgh.
"The data from this paper are almost uninterpretable. It is very surprising, perhaps even unethical, that
the New England Journal of Medicine has published it.
It would be more appropriate to publish the data on the website of
the pharmaceutical company that has sponsored and written up the
At least Gilead have been
clear that this has not been done in the way that a high quality
scientific paper would be written. Prof Stephen Evans,
Professor of Pharmacoepidemiology, London School of Hygiene &
very hard to draw useful conclusions from uncontrolled studies like
this particularly with a new disease where we really don't know what
to expect and with wide variations in outcomes between places and
One really has to question the ethics of failing to do randomisation -
this study really represents more than anything else, a missed
Finn, Professor of Paediatrics, University of Bristol.
To review the
complete document of Science Media Centre pertaining to expert
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Study on Remdevisir
On April 29th
following the publication of the Gilead Sciences Inc Study in the
NEJM on April 10,
a press release of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) on
Remdevisir was released.
The full document
was published on May 22,
by the NEJM under
for the Treatment of Covid-19 - Preliminary Report (NEJM)
The study had been
initiated on February 21, 2020. The title of the April 29 Press
"Peer-reviewed data shows remdesivir
for COVID-19 improves time to recovery"
It's a government
sponsored report which includes preliminary data from a
randomized trial involving 1063
The results of the
Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial (ACTT) are preliminary,
conducted under the helm of Dr. Fauci's National
Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID):
data and safety monitoring board (DSMB) overseeing the trial met
on April 27 to review data and shared their interim analysis
with the study team.
their review of the data, they
noted that remdesivir was better than placebo from the
perspective of the primary endpoint, time to recovery, a metric
often used in influenza trials.
this study was defined as being well enough for hospital
discharge or returning to normal activity level.
indicate that patients who received remdesivir had a 31% faster
time to recovery than those who received placebo (p<0.001).
the median time to recovery was
11 days for patients treated with remdesivir compared with 15
days for those who received placebo.
suggested a survival benefit, with a mortality rate of 8.0% for
the group receiving remdesivir versus 11.6% for the placebo
In the NIH's
earlier February 21, 2020 report (released at the outset of the
study), the methodology was described as follows:
randomized, controlled clinical trial to evaluate the safety and
efficacy of the investigational antiviral remdesivir in
hospitalized adults diagnosed with coronavirus disease 2019
Numbers - Where?
The February 21 report
confirmed that the first trial participant was,
who was repatriated after being quarantined on the Diamond
Princess cruise ship" that docked in Yokohama (Japanese
people repatriated by the U.S. State Department from the Diamond
Princess cruise ship" were selected as patients for the placebo
Ironically, at the
outset of the study, 58.7% of the "confirmed cases" Worldwide (542
cases out of 924) (outside China), were on the Diamond Cruise
Princess from which the initial trial placebo patients were
Where and When was
the trial test in the 68 selected sites?
That came at a
later date because on February 19th (WHO data), the US had recorded
only 15 positive cases (see Table Below).
"A total of 68
sites ultimately joined the
study - 47 in the United States and 21 in countries in
Europe and Asia." (emphasis added)
In the final May 22
NEJM report entitled Remdesivir
for the Treatment of Covid-19 - Preliminary Report:
There were 60
trial sites and 13 subsites in,
patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either
remdesivir or placebo. Randomization was stratified by study
site and disease severity at enrollment
Post applauded Anthony
Fauci's announcement (April 29):
preliminary results, disclosed at the White House by Anthony S. Fauci, ... fall short of the magic bullet or cure... But with
no approved treatments for
Covid-19,[Lie] Fauci said, it will become the standard
of care for hospitalized patients...
The data shows
that remdisivir has a clear-cut, significant, positive effect in
diminishing the time to recovery," Fauci said.
The government's first rigorous
clinical trial of the experimental drug remdesivir
as a coronavirus treatment delivered mixed results to the
medical community Wednesday - but rallied stock markets and
raised hopes that an early weapon to help some patients was at
results, disclosed at the White House by Anthony Fauci, chief of
the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases,
which led the
placebo-controlled trial found that the drug
accelerated the recovery of hospitalized patients but had only a
marginal benefit in the rate of death.
remarks boosted speculation that the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) would seek emergency use authorization that would
permit doctors to prescribe the drug.
In addition to
clinical trials, remdesivir has been given to more than 1,000
patients under compassionate use. [also refers to the Gilead
study published on April 10 in the NEJM]
involving [more than] 1,000
patients at 68 sites in the United States and around the world
(??), offers the first evidence (??) from a large (??),
randomized (??) clinical study of remdesivir's effectiveness
The NIH placebo
test study provided "preliminary results".
While the placebo
trial test was "randomized", the overall selection of patients at
the 68 sites was not fully randomized.
See the full
May 22: The
Fake Lancet Report on Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ)
It is worth noting
the full report of the NIH-NIAID, entitled Remdesivir
for the Treatment of Covid-19 - Preliminary Report was
released on May 22, 2020 in the NEJM, on the same day as the
controversial Lancet report on Hydroxychloroquine.
folllowing its publication, the media went into high gear, smearing
the HCQ cure, while applauding the NIH-NIASD report released on the
the 'only' drug cleared to treat Covid-19,
sped the recovery time of patients with the disease...
"It's a very safe and effective drug," said Eric Topol,
founder and director of the Scripps Research Translational
"We now have a definite first efficacious drug for
Covid-19, which is a major step forward and will be built upon
with other drugs, [and drug] combinations."
When the Lancet HCQ
article by Bingham-Harvard was retracted on June 5, it was too
late, it received minimal media coverage.
Despite the Retraction,
the HCQ cure "had been killed".
June 29: Fauci
Greenlight. The $1.6 Billion Remdesivir Contract with Gilead
Dr. Anthony Fauci
granted the "Greenlight" to Gilead Sciences Inc. on June 29, 2020.
US government NIH-NIAID sponsored report (May 22) entitled Remdesivir
for the Treatment of Covid-19 - Preliminary Report (NEJM) was
used to justify a major agreement with Gilead Sciences Inc.
The Report was
largely funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious
Diseases (NIAID) headed by Dr. Anthony Fauci and the National
Institutes of Health (NIH).
On June 29, based
on the findings of the NIH-NIAID Report published in the NEJM, the
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced on behalf of
the Trump Adminstration
an agreement to secure large supplies of the remdesivir
drug from Gilead Sciences Inc. for the treatment of Covid-19 in America's
private hospitals and clinics.
The earlier Gilead
study based on scanty test results published in the NEJM (April 10),
of 53 cases (and 56 co-authors) was not highlighted. The results of
this study had been questioned by several prominent physicians and
Who will be able to
afford Remdisivir? 500,000 doses of Remdesivir are envisaged at
$3,200 per patient, namely
$1.6 billion (see the
by Elizabeth Woodworth).
The Drug was also
marketing in the European Union, under the brand name
If this contract is
implemented as planned, it represents for Gilead Science Inc. and
the recipient US private hospitals and clinics a colossal amount of
[error in above
title according to HHS: $3200...]
According to The
Trump Administration's HHS Secretary Alex Azar
(June 29, 2020):
"To the extent
possible, we want to ensure that any
American patient who needs remdesivir can get it
Administration is doing everything in our power
to learn more about life-saving therapeutics for
COVID-19 and secure access to these options for
the American people."
versus Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ)
The Lancet study (published on May 22) was intended to
undermine the legitimacy of Hydroxychloroquine as an effective cure
to Covid-19, with a view to sustaining the $1.6 billion agreement
between the HHS and Gilead Sciences Inc. on June 29.
of this agreement rested on the May 22 NIH-NIAID study in the NEJM
which was considered
What Dr. Fauci
failed to acknowledge is that Chloroquine had been "studied" and
tested fifteen years ago by
the CDC as a drug to be used against coronavirus infections
and that Hydroxychloroquine has been used
recently in the treatment of Covid-19 in several countries.
According to the
Virology Journal (2005) "Chloroquine is a potent
inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and spread",
used in the SARS-1 outbreak in 2002.
It had the endorsement of the
HCQ is not only
effective, it is "inexpensive" when compared to Remdesivir, at an
"$3120 for a US Patient with private insurance"...
Below are excerpts
of an interview of Harvard's Professor Mehra (who undertook the May
22 Lancet study) with France Soir published immediately
following the publication of the Lancet report (prior to its
Dr. Mandeep Mehra (MM):
In our study, it is fairly obvious that
the lack of benefit
and the risk of toxicity observed for hydroxychloroquine are fairly
reliable. [referring to the May 22 Lancet study]
Do you have the data for
MM: Yes, we have
the data, but the number of patients is too small for us to be able
to conclude in one way or another.
FS: As you know,
in France, there is a pros and cons battle over hydroxychloroquine
which has turned into a public health issue even involving the
financial lobbying of pharmaceutical companies. Why not measure the
effect of one against the other to put an end to all speculation?...
MM: In fact, there
is no rational basis for testing Remdesivir versus
On the one hand,
Remdesivir has shown
that there is no risk of mortality and that there is a reduction in
On the other hand, for hydroxychloroquine it is the
it has never been shown any advantage and most
studies are small or inconclusive. In addition, our study shows that
there are harmful effects.
It would therefore
be difficult and probably unethical to compare a drug with
demonstrated harmfulness to a drug with at least a glimmer of hope.
FS: You said that
there is no basis for testing or comparing Remdesivir with
hydroxychloroquine, do you think you have done everything to
conclude that hydroxychloroquine is dangerous?
All we are saying
is that once you have been infected (5 to 7 days after) to the point
of having to be hospitalized with a severe viral load,
the use of hydroxychloroquine
and its derivative is not effective.
The damage from the
virus is already there and the situation is beyond repair.
With this treatment [HCQ] it
can generate more complications
FS: Mandeep Mehra
declared that he had no conflict of interest with the laboratories
and that this study was financed from the endowment funds of the
He participated in
a conference sponsored by Gilead in early April 2020 as part of the
France Soir, translated by the author, May 23, 2020
In Annex below, see the
followup article by France Soir published after the scam surrounding
the data base of Dr. Mehra's Lancet report was revealed.
Corruption to the 'nth Degree' involving Dr. Anthony Fauci, "The
Boston Connection" and Gilead Sciences Inc.
Sciences Inc. Remdesivir study (50+ authors) was published in
the New England Journal of Medicine (April 10, 2020).
It was followed
by the NIH-NIAID Remdesivir
for the Treatment of Covid-19 - Preliminary Report on
May 22, 2020 in the NEJM. And on that same day, May 22, the
"fake report" on Hydroxychloroquine by BWH-Harvard Dr. Mehra
was published by The Lancet.
School and the BWH bear responsibility for having hosted and
financed the fake Lancet report on HCQ coordinated by Dr.
conflict of interest?
BWH was simultaneously involved in a study
on Remdesivir in contract with Gilead Sciences, Inc...
Lancet report coordinated by Harvard's Dr. Mehra was retracted,
it nonetheless served the interests of Gilead Sciences Inc.
It is important
that an independent scientific and medical assessment be
undertaken, respectively of the Gilead Sciences Inc New England
Journal of Medicine (NEMJ) peer reviewed study (April 10, 2020)
as well as the NIH-NIAID study also published in the NEJM (May
by France Soir
concerning the Lancet Report was revealed in early June.
Soir in a subsequent article (June 5, 2020) points
to the Boston Connection:
La connexion de Boston,
namely the insidious relationship between Gilead Sciences Inc. and
Professor Mehra, Harvard Medical School as well as the two related
Boston based hospitals involved.
below - to access the complete text
click here - translation from French
by France Soir)
evasive answers produced by Dr Mandeep R. Mehra, a physician
specializing in cardiovascular surgery and professor at Harvard
Medical School, did not produce confidence, fueling doubt
instead about the integrity of this retrospective study and its
the reported information that
Dr. Mehra had attended a
conference sponsored by Gilead - producer of remdesivir, a drug
in direct competition with hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) - early in
April called for further investigation
It is important
to keep in mind that Dr. Mandeep Mehra has a practice at the
Brigham and Women's Hospital (BWH) in Boston.
relied on the shared medical records of 8,910 patients in 169
hospitals around the world, also by Surgisphere.
Funding for the
study was "Supported by the William Harvey Chair in
Cardiovascular Medicine at Brigham and Women's Hospital. The
development and maintenance of the collaborative surgical
outcomes database was funded by Surgisphere."
published on May 22 sought to evaluate the efficacy or otherwise
of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, alone or in combination
with a macrolide antibiotic...
therefore noteworthy that within 3 weeks, 2 large observational
retrospective studies on large populations
- 96,032 and 8,910 patients - spread around the world were
published in two different journals by Dr. Mehra, Dr. Desai and
other co-authors using the database of Surgisphere, Dr. Desai's
practising physicians and surgeons seem to have an exceptional
working capacity associated with the gift of ubiquity.
The date of May
22 is also noteworthy because on the very same day, the date of
the publication in The Lancet of the highly accusatory study
against HCQ, another study was published in the New
England Journal of Medicine concerning the results of a
clinical trial of... remdesivir.
conclusion of this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled
was superior to placebo in shortening the time to recovery
in adults hospitalized with Covid-19 and evidence of lower
respiratory tract infection."
the same day, May 22nd, one study demeaned HCQ
in one journal while another claimed evidence of
attenuation on some patients through remdesivir in
It should be
noted that one of the main co-authors, Elizabeth "Libby"
Hohmann, represents one of the participating hospitals, the
Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, also affiliated with
Harvard Medical School, as is the Brigham and Women's Hospital
in Boston, where Dr. Mandeep Mehra practices.
investigation, we discovered that the first 3 major clinical
trials on Gilead's remdesivir were conducted by these two
continues to circle the globe with scientists following on its
trail, Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH)
and Brigham and Women's Hospital (BWH) are
leading the search for effective treatment.
Both hospitals are conducting clinical trials of remdesivir."
joined what the National Institute of Health (NIH) describe as
clinical trial in the United States of an
experimental treatment for COVID-19, sponsored by the National
Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, part of NIH.
is currently the only hospital in New England to participate in
this trial, according to a list of sites shared by the hospital.
a gigantic undertaking, with patients registered in some 50
sites across the country, getting better.
"The NIH trial,
which can be adapted to evaluate other treatments, aims to
determine whether the drug relieves the respiratory problems and
other symptoms of COVID-19, helping patients leave hospital
As a reminder,
the NIAID/NIH is led by Antony Fauci, a staunch opponent of HCQ.
Brigham, two additional trials initiated by Gilead, the
drug developer, will determine whether it alleviates symptoms in
patients with moderate to severe illness over five- and ten-days
These trials will also be randomized, but not
placebo controlled, and will include 1,000 patients at sites
Those patients, noted Francisco Marty, MD,
Brigham physician and study co-investigator, will likely be
recruited at an unsettlingly rapid clip.
As a result,
the first major clinical trials on remdesivir launched on March
20, whose results are highly important for Gilead, are being led
by the MGH and BWH in Boston, precisely where Dr. Mehra, the
main author of the May 22 HCQ trial, is practicing.
world! Coincidence, again, probably...
Dr. Marty at
BWH expected to have results two months later. Indeed, in recent
days, several US media outlets have reported Gilead's
announcements of positive results from the remdesivir clinical
trials in Boston:
results from a new study published Wednesday on remdesivir for
the treatment of patients with COVID-19."
Brigham and Dr.
Francisco Marty worked on this study, and he says the results
show that there is no major difference between treating a
patient with a five-day versus a 10-day regimen.
Announces Results of Phase 3 Remdesivir Trial in Patients with
shows that the 5-day treatment of remdesivir resulted in significantly
greater clinical improvement compared to treatment with
the standard of care alone
The data come
on top of the body of evidence from previous studies demonstrating
the benefits of remdesivir in hospitalized patients with
"We now have
three randomized controlled trials demonstrating that remdesivir
improved clinical outcomes by several different measures,"
Gilead plans to submit the complete data for publication
in a peer-reviewed journal in the coming weeks.
announced by Gilead a few days after the May 22 publication of
the study in the Lancet demolishing HCQ, a study whose main
author is Dr. Mehra, are probably again a 'coincidence'...
many 'coincidences' adds up to 'coincidences'? Really...?