The basic point is true, but this certainly isn't '100% correct.'
The 'Virology Journal' is not 'the official publication of the NIH,' for one.
Fauci had nothing to do with this paper. There is no reason to believe he ever read it. He's never had anything to do with 'Virology Journal.'
He's head of a division within the NIH, not the whole thing.
Accuracy matters. Making important points that are wrapped in falsehoods are extremely bad form - they discredit and distract from the very important core truth.
I've seen this image a billion times, it's been debunked so many times, it's really bad that it's stickied here.
What im saying is 100% correct is that if there was a therapeutic there could be no eua vaxx. Hence that's why they've suppressed them all. Everything thing I've read since this farce called covid began supports that. Whether fauxci has read whatever paper, idk
That's actually not correct either. Therapeutic's exist for many viruses and EUA is established by:
Each issuance of an EUA requires that FDA conclude that:
it is reasonable to believe that a given product “may be effective” as an emergency countermeasure
the known and potential benefits of authorization outweigh the known and potential risks
no formally approved alternatives are available at the time.
As much as we want to believe that, HCQ wasn't a known alternative to treat Covid as it emerged. This paper is being kind of tongue in cheek, there's no historical data showing HCQ as a coronavirus treatment.
He wants a gold standard study before trying treatment that has worked in the past? There is not time for that when people are dying. Empirical evidence is not the gold standard of medicine, but it is a powerful contributor to medical knowledge.
This is not his first rodeo. In 1987 Fauci banned doctors from treating AIDS patients with Pneumocystic Pneumonia (PCP) with the antibiotic Bactrim. Doctors knew it was effective, cheap and safe for treating PCP.
17,000 people died because of his ban.
The basic point is true, but this certainly isn't '100% correct.'
The 'Virology Journal' is not 'the official publication of the NIH,' for one.
Fauci had nothing to do with this paper. There is no reason to believe he ever read it. He's never had anything to do with 'Virology Journal.'
He's head of a division within the NIH, not the whole thing.
Accuracy matters. Making important points that are wrapped in falsehoods are extremely bad form - they discredit and distract from the very important core truth.
I've seen this image a billion times, it's been debunked so many times, it's really bad that it's stickied here.
What im saying is 100% correct is that if there was a therapeutic there could be no eua vaxx. Hence that's why they've suppressed them all. Everything thing I've read since this farce called covid began supports that. Whether fauxci has read whatever paper, idk
That's actually not correct either. Therapeutic's exist for many viruses and EUA is established by:
Each issuance of an EUA requires that FDA conclude that:
it is reasonable to believe that a given product “may be effective” as an emergency countermeasure
the known and potential benefits of authorization outweigh the known and potential risks
no formally approved alternatives are available at the time.
As much as we want to believe that, HCQ wasn't a known alternative to treat Covid as it emerged. This paper is being kind of tongue in cheek, there's no historical data showing HCQ as a coronavirus treatment.
Fauci knew then and knows now.
He wants a gold standard study before trying treatment that has worked in the past? There is not time for that when people are dying. Empirical evidence is not the gold standard of medicine, but it is a powerful contributor to medical knowledge.
This is not his first rodeo. In 1987 Fauci banned doctors from treating AIDS patients with Pneumocystic Pneumonia (PCP) with the antibiotic Bactrim. Doctors knew it was effective, cheap and safe for treating PCP. 17,000 people died because of his ban.
He's a murderous little prick.
Link me to where it worked in the past.
There is no paper because they are purposely not studying
Of course the core point is truthful and massively important
But it's important, when trying to convey critical information, to be impeccable with every detail