[johnforbes]

Two weeks ago, arguably the most prestigious medical journal in the world came out with a study claiming HCQ didn't work.

Belgium, France, and Italy looked at that and quit authorizing HCQ for sick people.

Fauci went on TV and said, in essence, I told you to be skeptical about HCQ and now we know it won't help with covid.

Scientists dug into the data and found the study littered with flaws, and now the Lancet has retracted its study.

Why did Lancet rush to attack HCQ? It was a legacy drug, and had minimal cardiac risks for 66 years of use for rheumatoid arthritis, lupus, and malaria.

The answer was that Trump suggested it, and Orange Man Bad dictated that HCQ must be attacked.

So now we remain in search of any therapy which does work, and HCQ remains what actually did work around the world on covid (along with Zpack and zinc).

[johnforbes]

Has Fauci gone on TV to say that his earlier remarks about the Lancet study and HCQ were wrong?

He should do that in the interest of intellectual honesty.

So far, he hasn't.

[Clownkicker]

johnny, you calling for "intellectual honesty" right after you posted as true something about Obama that you knew to be a hoax is just laughable.

Kindly go fuck yourself.

[johnforbes]

Good morning!

It is a sparkling summer morning.

June is bustiing out all over and, as Dean Martin said, June may need a new bra.

[elklindo69]

After publication of our Lancet Article,1 several concerns were raised with respect to the veracity of the data and analyses conducted by Surgisphere Corporation and its founder and our co-author, Sapan Desai, in our publication. We launched an independent third-party peer review of Surgisphere with the consent of Sapan Desai to evaluate the origination of the database elements, to confirm the completeness of the database, and to replicate the analyses presented in the paper.

Our independent peer reviewers informed us that Surgisphere would not transfer the full dataset, client contracts, and the full ISO audit report to their servers for analysis as such transfer would violate client agreements and confidentiality requirements. As such, our reviewers were not able to conduct an independent and private peer review and therefore notified us of their withdrawal from the peer-review process.

We always aspire to perform our research in accordance with the highest ethical and professional guidelines. 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. Based on this development, we can no longer vouch for the veracity of the primary data sources. Due to this unfortunate development, the authors request that the paper be retracted.

We all entered this collaboration to contribute in good faith and at a time of great need during the COVID-19 pandemic. We deeply apologise to you, the editors, and the journal readership for any embarrassment or inconvenience that this may have caused.

[johnforbes]

They got caught by all the real scientists who protested.

That is how the retraction transpired.

The Left is so insane that it actually doesn't care whether people with a virus get cured or not -- as long as they can deny Trump any credit for ordering many doses of HCQ.

[elklindo69]

Johnnie you are going apeshit bananas with your nonsensical bullshit, go and take a take a chill pill.

You are not just dropping steaming piles of bullshit....now you have explosive diarrhea and you've gotten it all over the place.

I think your far right wing blogosphere handlers would be proud of you...