quote:
A DOCUMENT NO LONGER AVAILABLE FROM THE U.S. FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION REGARDING “EMERGENCY USE AUTHORIZATION” OF POTENTIAL COVID-19 TREATMENTS APPEARS TO SUGGEST THAT HYDROXYCHLOROQUINE SATISFIES THE CRITERIA FOR THE CLASSIFICATION, BUT WOULD STAND IN THE WAY OF LUCRATIVE OTHER DRUGS, AND A VACCINE.

The document is strangely deleted from the FDA site now, but this article has a full 8-page copy attached.

quote:
The possible treatment, shunned by the mainstream media and Big Tech, has far-ranging champions from Yale epidemiologists to frontline doctors to President Trump. Despite this support, corroborated by scientific studies, the medical establishment under the auspices of Dr. Anthony Fauci have refused to grant hydroxychloroquine “Emergency Use Authorization” (EUA).

July 29th documents from a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) presentation reveal, however, that the “qualifying criteria” for extending EUA to the drug appear to have been met: it “may be effective” and that “no adequate, approved, and available alternative” exists.

The document makes clear that Emergency Use Authorization cannot be used for more than one drug or therapeutic, and the establishment is potentially therefore saving the EUA pre-emptively for vaccines and remdesivir – patently high-value Big Pharma drugs – instead of hydroxychloroquine.

Dr. Vladimir Zelenko, who authored a study on the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine, outlined the medical establishment’s campaign against the drug on the War Room: Pandemic show.

He emphasized that Dr. Fauci has “lied to the American people” by insisting that authorizing a treatment for COVID-19 rests on “controlled trials to get anything through the FDA.”

“That is not true. That has never been the historical precedent and almost no other medication has ever had to meet those standards,” Dr. Zelenko continued.

He also noted that due to the sheer existence of hydroxychloroquine – a potential treatment – “available drugs like Remdesevir and the vaccine by [the FDA’s] own internal rules cannot get EUA.”

Such a classification would “facilitate the availability and use” of the drug and represents a fast-track alternative to authorizing potential life-saving treatments during public health emergencies such as the ongoing pandemic.

The eight-page presentation entitled “Considerations for FDA Licensure vs. Emergency Use Authorization of COVID-19 Vaccines” posits two additional prerequisites for EUA: “declaration by HHS Secretary of emergency situation leading to serious or life-threatening disease or condition,” which occurred in January, and that the “known and potential benefits of the product outweigh the known and potential risks of the product.”

And what you’re asking for is retarded. Of course there isn’t readily available evidence all over the ether of Big Pharma paying doctors to stymie HCQ. That would defeat the purpose, no?

But can you rationally explain why a drug that’s been used for 50 years to treat malaria and other SARS-related diseases, and has been deemed safe for those ailments, and is being tested and confirmed effective at treating COVID-19 by numerous studies, epidemiologists, and doctors, is being cock-blocked by government entities, told to us by the media it’s dangerous, and censored off social media for merely mentioning it as a possible treatment??

Seriously, who gains from this, and who loses if it becomes THE go to treatment and it turns out overwhelmingly effective in squashing this whole pandemic??

How is it that some “scientists” say it’s bad and some say it’s damn near a cure?

And why is the media and Dems continually saying, “Listen to the scientists”, but ONLY the ones that are on the other side of the fence to Trump’s narrative?

What does Trump have to gain if HCQ is effective?

What does the media and Dems lose if it’s not effective? Should be nothing. So why are they so opposed to a drug that millions of people have safely taken for 50 years?

Why did they push a story about a couple ingesting fish tank cleaner as rationale for HCQ being dangerous? And why do they continue to act like it’s dangerous?

It’s fricking asinine that I can present something like this and still you want to hold the media up as the beacon of credibility simply because there isn’t a smoking gun showing who’s the truth and who’s lying.

But even that wouldn’t matter if it existed. Project Veritas posts video proof of media corruption, bias, lying, and political agenda all the time and you clowns just ignore it. Video proof doesn’t even fix you peoples fricked up beliefs.