Didn't need those meta-analyses anyway. Since millions of prior treatments had been safe for decades, the anecdotal reports were sufficient: May 2021, Uttar Pradesh, 97% reduction after five weeks of Ivermectin.
You don't wait for unnecessary meta-analyses during a battlefield crisis. That they did is prima facie evidence of mass murder, as well as some nefarious agenda.
I’ve been screaming for “jungle medicine” (something maybe untested—certainly not peer-reviewed—but that worked) since day one and all we got was junk medicine from pharma-groomed “experts.” I’m pretty well convinced that doing nothing would have had a better outcome.
Anecdotal evidence is improperly and automatically disparaged even though the RCTs are not much better, according to studies. We undervalue reasonable n = 1 clinical experiences, even when there are thousands of them (a solid metastudy), and overvalue RCTs. The big benefit of RCTs is they can be more easily jiggered to benefit Pharma and are not questioned by the paid experts.
buddhi....Did you note in the article in the Hindustani Times, that nothing is stated about ivermectin? Plus, it states 'on the vaccination front, about 7 crore have got their first jab'. (that is 70,000,000 people) . I am wondering if the editorial board fiddled with this? ...or why isn't this article mentioning ivermectin? Where did you receive your news of the '97% reduction after 5 weeks of Ivermectin' in Uttar Pradesh?
Great article and analysis! I wish more (or all) researchers/statisticians would be like you! Our world could be a much better place if we had more Mathews like you.
HCQ worked for me. I took HCQ on the 5th day after an exposure to a sick friend, who died from the bioweapon 3 weeks later.
The tell-tale PERSISTENT, DRY COUGH was the tip-off telling me that i had the bioweapon in me. (I recognized the tell-tale dry dry cough because it seemed EXACTLY like the dry cough which some of my relatives had 7 months prior when the illness ran through their entire household, killing one of them.)
Despite the fact that i took only 1/7 the proper amount of zinc with the HCQ, I credit the HCQ with clearing up my cough within a day. Two days later, I felt perfectly fine after only the first 2 pills of HCQ/Plaquenil 200mg ... no symptoms at all ... cough gone ... no lingering fatigue or anything ... I had no difficulty walking up & down multiple flights of stairs 3 or more times per day ... and i'm in my 60s ...
So, HCQ nipped it in the bud by taking the HCQ **EARLY** ... got to treat it early ... before the damage to the lungs occurs.
I was one of the lucky ones who knew it might be a good idea to obtain a supply of HCQ ahead of needing it ... thanks to the great Dr. Vladimir Zev Zelenko and Dr. Didier Raoult in France who pioneered its use ... and also thanks to President Trump for mentioning HCQ at one of his pressers, after which Dr. Anthony "Gain-of-Function" Mengele FauXi and the Fake News media went bonkers at the mere mention of HCQ ... Mass murderers they are.
...and thanks to Dr. Fareed and Dr. Tyson and so many others.
Thank you for sharing your story. I am happy it worked so well for you and you recovered so fast. Yes, most of those who died could still be alive if they would have received an early treatment protocol (including HCQ). This is an epic crime. And I will make sure that many more people will be informed.
HCQ WAS used in the hospitals early on and it was very effective for most people. Also, Vit D, zinc and Vit C was administered. Patients recovered very quickly until Fauci pulled the plug on HCQ. Things went downhill from there.
"... i took only 1/7 the proper amount of zinc with the HCQ ..."
Dr. Zelenko had suggested "50mg of ELEMENTAL zinc" per day with HCQ. But the key word "elemental" failed to register in my brain at the time.
To attain the proper 50mg of "ELEMENTAL zinc" per day, one can take either:
(1) approx 350mg of zinc GLUCONATE per day (which is a quantity of 7 zinc GLUCONATE 50mg tablets),
or
(2) approx 220mg of zinc SULFATE per day (which is just 1 much-easier-to-swallow capsule of zinc SULFATE 220mg).
So, to sum up:
50mg of "ELEMENTAL" zinc = approx 350mg of zinc GLUCONATE = approx 220mg of zinc SULFATE.
My initial mistake was that I took only **50mg of zinc gluconate per day** (not enough).
I should have taken 7 pills of zinc gluconate 50mg per day, which is 350mg of zinc gluconate, which is equivalent to 50mg of ELEMENTAL zinc.
If the alphabet agencies, Mengele FauXi, Big Harma, et al., were the least bit concerned with saving lives, we would not need to figure out these dosages on our own!
this seems wrong, the amount of zinc listed on a bottle of tablets of zinc is the amount elemental zinc in each tablet - there is no need to multiply that value by some factor depending on whether it is zinc glucanate or zinc sulfate. Just go by what is on the bottle. 7 pills of zinc gluconate at 50 mg per pill is WAY too much - especially if taken long term (typical protocols are 50 mg per day for just one week after exposure to covid, thats just one tablet per day with a bottle labled "50 mg zinc" ). I'll do some research to see what Zelenko recommends long term for zinc.
Thank you. The high doses did seem like toxic levels. I checked flccc and they used to say “elemental” zinc. Now they just say zinc and list the diff types of zinc. I take 30 mg of “raw zinc” by Vitamin Code. It’s plant based and does not give me nausea.
"this seems wrong, the amount of zinc listed on a bottle of tablets of zinc is the amount elemental zinc in each tablet ..."
I respectfully disagree.
The milligrams printed on the bottle label is not the whole story.
As a starting point for further research, see for example this link, discussing "Total Zinc vs Elemental Zinc" in the third section down [and I quote]:
"... Zinc Citrate is more potent than Zinc Orotate. You can absorb 5mg of zinc elemental from 17mg of Zinc Citrate compared to 32.25 of Zinc Orotate. The zinc that does not get absorbed goes into your body’s waste disposal system."
When the FLCCC or Zelenko say to take 50 mg of zinc per day they are referring to what is labeled on the *front* of the zinc tablet bottle (I'm essentially sure of this). Zelenko and FLCCC have *already* taken into account that zinc is partially adsorbed - and I assume they chose some typical type of zinc to base their recommendation on. So if the zinc you are buying is the same type that the FLCCC and Zelenko are basing their recommendations of 50 mg per day then you are all set. So I agree with you in the respect that if you choose a zinc tablet formulation that is poorly adsorbed by people then you need to boost the dose - but that number isn't a factor of 7. I can only guess that it might be a factor of 2 or 3, but I don't know.
Jeff wrote, "When the FLCCC or Zelenko say to take 50 mg of zinc per day they are referring to what is labeled on the *front* of the zinc tablet bottle (I'm essentially sure of this)."
This link below has 2 photos of a bottle of 100 capsules of Zinc Sulfate heptahydrate equivalent 220mg by Rising Pharmaceuticals (NDC # 68585-008-01).
Photo #1 shows the FRONT of the bottle stating "220mg"
However each 220mg capsule does NOT contain a full 220mg of **elemental zinc** as explained in the fine print under "Supplemental Facts" on the BACK of the bottle.
Photo #2 shows the BACK of the bottle, stating in the fine print [and I quote:]
So, my point here is that one cannot dose merely by what is printed on the FRONT label of the bottle ... one also needs to read the fine print on the BACK of the label ... and one needs I suppose to research not just zinc ... but all of the supplements one may be taking to obtain benefit & to avoid harming oneself.
And, again, what a shame on the FDA, CDC, NIH, Pfizer, NIAID, Moderna and all the other corrupt malfeasors --- is that a word? --- that individuals like Jeffrey D and i have to have this discussion at all ... May they be brought to justice for their crimes!
Okay, I agree, it seems to me that the marketing team of some companies are trying to hype their product with confusing numbers. I checked a few zinc bottles on amazon and some show what you just wrote (which I think is confusing). The other bottles simply stated 50 mg on the front and 50 mg on the back (and thus not confusing and this is the number that FLCCC and Zelenko are saying to look at).
My assumption is that most companies try to make it clear as to how much zinc is supplied by the tablet and even the product you list tries to be clear by saying "Zinc Sulfate Monohydrate Equivalent to 220mg Zinc Sulfate Heptahydrate" 50 mg
And as you write in your message, they put the "50 mg" on the same line.
I found the Zelenko prophylaxis protocol (low and moderate risk patients) and it is just elemental zinc at 25 mg per day. This means you need a bottle of zinc pills that lists 25 mg zinc on the *front* label (the pill manufacturer does the math for you and puts this on the front of the label). There is no need to multiply it by a factor to determine the proper dose. I've read that taking an absorbable form of copper is important (copper oxide is not well adsorbed) when taking zinc because taking zinc will deplete your copper. Any type of "chelated copper" is well absorbed and I take 3 mg copper bisglycinate chelate on most days. I still need to find out how much zinc is good to take but I assume 10 mg to 20 mg per day is a good range. I suppose it depends on a persons diet and genetics.
I’ve been wondering about “elemental” zinc. I’m taking only 30 mg of raw zinc as regular zinc makes me nauseated. How do you deal with nausea from so much zinc sulfate or gluconate?
"... How do you deal with nausea from so much zinc sulfate or gluconate?"
Hi, just to be clear, I do not take a daily zinc supplement -- neither sulfate nor gluconate. The only time i took a zinc supplement in recent years was in combination with HCQ and azithromycin when i got the covid in Nov. 2020. So i don't have your issue of zinc-induced nausea. I can't recall if the zinc made me feel nauseous or not back then ... so i guess it did not make me feel really terrible ... or else i would probably remember having nausea as a side effect.
However, if I came down with covid again, then i would start taking 1 zinc sulfate 220mg capsule per day for 5 or 7 days only (along with a proper dose of HCQ or if ran out of HCQ then I'd substitute quercetin).
But that's just for me. I share my personal perspective for what it may be worth to inform others. But i do not presume to instruct others what they do.
Vitamins/minerals, like pharmaceuticals, have toxicities as well as potential benefits, therefore I (personally) am a bit skeptical of taking (1) drugs and (2) lots of daily vitamin supplements, and that includes zinc. For example, too much zinc can deplete copper.
I don't know if this is relevant to you, but there's a sort of "folk" test for zinc sufficiency. Just search for "zinc taste test". It involves mixing a solution of zinc sulfate and holding it in your mouth for 30 seconds. If you can't taste it, you supposedly have a deficiency. If it tastes bad to extremely unpleasant, you have enough.
The result may have no meaning if you're needing a boost to get through an illness, but the takeaway may be that zinc sulfate, in particular, can cause gastrointestinal unpleasantness. (I don't know if this applies to gluconate) Maybe try a different form of zinc.
My HCQ experience occurred in Nov. 2020 when the early strains and the delta strain were still prevalent in the New York metro area. The milder omicron strain did not take over until a month or two later ... and how lucky we all are now that omicron removed the deadlier early strains and delta strain from circulation by outcompeting them.
As Dr. Malone observed, the omicron mutation (as compared to delta) was like a gift from heaven above.
1) I don't know why you expect more from Harvard. I haven't for years. Whatever isn't being run by China at Harvard is being run by the DNC or little woke wizards thereof.
2) What you're describing is the exact same research/publication corruption that has been going on for at least 30 years to eliminate competition for emerging or expensive pharmaceuticals. "Meta-analysis" has been a shell game for ages. You can make anything say anything, AND get it published.
The machinery for this evil was in place long before COVID.
Also, I was very gratified to see lactoferrin in your friend's lists, and to see it performing quite well. I live in PA Dairy territory and my local Grange office circulated one of the first studies early on. I passed it on to Dr. Huber (who maintains a great stack) for perusal.
Dr. Zev Zelenko (RIP), prescribed HCQ for early Tx of covid to at risk pts with success. Thank you Mathew for this thorough explanation of how the success of early Tx with HCQ was buried, distorted, bastardised. It is painful to read.
This piece chimes nicely with an item I read elsewhere today, referencing the depressing conclusions about "health research" reached by a former BMJ editor, who lamented, “The system encourages fraud, and we have no adequate way to respond. It may be time to move from assuming that research has been honestly conducted and reported to assuming it to be untrustworthy until there is some evidence to the contrary.”
the zelenko protocol in that link shows two protocols, one for low risk patients and one for high risk patients as soon as they start feel sick (and thus the low risk patient protocol has zinc at 50 mg per day for 7 days),
the long term prophylaxis protocol (i.e. for many months before you get sick) is slightly different. Specifically, the zinc would be 25 mg per day (use the value on the front of the label for the zinc tablet bottle).
One more thing. A good friend mentioned the other day, many companies are preferring to take kids straight from high school and instead, provide a company work/training program that matches the company’s ethos.
Looks like Big biz is getting fed up with “university” educated students who graduate unable to string a sentence together or spell, cannot critically think and have no initiative. Is this possibly the future for the job market? If so the universities will be in financial ruins
"There is a lot to unpack here. This is a classic Spaghetti Western: There is the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly, all in one place." Love this! Wouldn't it be fun if everyone just started showing absolute integrity? Like what if people just forgot how to be corrupt like when people can't find the word they are reaching for?
Or you can use EGCg the active ingredient in green tea on Amazon.
When the virus first arrived, before hydroxychloroquine, I slapped together a vaccine in my kitchen with a bunch of interactive ingredients targeting the relevant three-dimensional molecular structures of the virus. The Oak Ridge National Laboratory supercomputer (149 petaflops then, recently upgraded to 1 exaflop) examined covid's structure and published 77 molecular possibilities that might interfere with viral efficacy. Quercetin was in the top five so I stocked up.
Quercetin, HCQ, and EGCg are zinc ionophores transporting the zinc through the cell membrane which zinc has a hard time getting through on its own. It's mainly the zinc that interferes with viral replication, but each ionophore has it's own independent viricidal action.
The current pooled analysis of the various studies for all mortality results (all stages) shows that Quercetin has an efficacy of 59% with HCQ at 21%. These efficacy numbers are based on stand-alone results (I believe), so they'd be much higher if taken with zinc. Since they are safe, take them all and you push efficacy over 100%. You're completely protected against the flu too and might live almost forever.
The pooled effects numbers are a terrible proxy for efficacy. Remember that physicians like Tyson, Fareed, Zelenko, Raoult, Gessling, McCullough, and on and on...have roughly 94-99% lower case fatality rates than the general public. Too many of the HCQ studies are hospital studies where the treatment is given too late.
Aug 11, 2022·edited Aug 11, 2022Liked by Mathew Crawford
Good point. I also note those efficacy numbers jump around quite a bit depending on which studies comprise the current set as new studies are added. It is also ridiculous to study hydroxychloroquine apart from zinc. The proper treatment protocol is to throw everything including the kitchen sink at this as there are strong treatment synergies. What is obviously needed are real world studies of the various treatment protocols.
2022 meta analysis, nice. Fact: In mid-January 2020, around the time WHO declared no evidence of human to human transmission, France overturned a 43 year over the counter Hydroxychloroquine availability and made it very difficult to obtain, prescription or not. Long before Trump even mentioned the word.
Queensland Australia, April 2020. New prescription rules mean clinicians face a $13000 fine for prescribing hydroxychloroquine as a COVID-19 treatment. Ivermectin also banned. HCQ recently removed from ban.
One other point is that 200 out of 300 trials for HCQ were done in the late stages (inflammation, and inflammo-thrombotic) in of the disease not early in the viral replication phase. The doctors who worked with it successfully always said it was "early treatment only" but were ignored.
Deep stats territory, Matthew, deep stats. Very good read, and so happy someone bothers to get into the cracks and crannies of method and bias. I'm not a stats person. Just not. But I can read, and I'm thrilled. There are many "camps" in the C19/viral investigations. Some are marginal discussions heavily salted with political bias and social convictions bordering on monastic religion. I think it only becomes alive when there are bright people who have vast experience in their field, and considerable life experience altogether. Another camp that has another necessary and equally important role is the clinical evidence group. The men and women who have actually treated thousands of hands-on patients and are trying to educate past idiocy and unexamined protocols. Those who constantly talk cannot listen, those who will not read widely will never see more clearly, and those who listen and look carefully see the signals in the human world and the data.
HCQ as a treatment seems very interesting, but I'm trying to work through what it would mean as a preventative measure. COVID isn't going away, so using a drug to prevent it would seem to be a lifetime commitment, which feels excessive. As a preventative measure, perhaps we would just recommend to the elderly or folks with serious comorbidities?
scientific evidence is tricky. Can't wait until we can simply turn it over the the AI overlords who can run endless simulations on digital recreations of our immune system. Oh, yeah, the bad guys will own the AI and sure enough all evidence will point to the recently patented medicine that just came out.
Eat healthy, take care of yourself, and enjoy the time you got seems the only thing we can do.
For 2.5 years hydroxychloroquine was ignored. And didn't the FDA get the Ivermectin meta-analysis from Tess Lawrie in August 2021 and ignored that?
Isn't mass murder a crime against humanity any more? We need to stop believing the government is above the law.
https://journals.lww.com/americantherapeutics/fulltext/2021/08000/ivermectin_for_prevention_and_treatment_of.7.aspx
Didn't need those meta-analyses anyway. Since millions of prior treatments had been safe for decades, the anecdotal reports were sufficient: May 2021, Uttar Pradesh, 97% reduction after five weeks of Ivermectin.
https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/lucknow-news/33-districts-in-uttar-pradesh-are-now-covid-free-state-govt-101631267966925.html
You don't wait for unnecessary meta-analyses during a battlefield crisis. That they did is prima facie evidence of mass murder, as well as some nefarious agenda.
I’ve been screaming for “jungle medicine” (something maybe untested—certainly not peer-reviewed—but that worked) since day one and all we got was junk medicine from pharma-groomed “experts.” I’m pretty well convinced that doing nothing would have had a better outcome.
Anecdotal evidence is improperly and automatically disparaged even though the RCTs are not much better, according to studies. We undervalue reasonable n = 1 clinical experiences, even when there are thousands of them (a solid metastudy), and overvalue RCTs. The big benefit of RCTs is they can be more easily jiggered to benefit Pharma and are not questioned by the paid experts.
buddhi....Did you note in the article in the Hindustani Times, that nothing is stated about ivermectin? Plus, it states 'on the vaccination front, about 7 crore have got their first jab'. (that is 70,000,000 people) . I am wondering if the editorial board fiddled with this? ...or why isn't this article mentioning ivermectin? Where did you receive your news of the '97% reduction after 5 weeks of Ivermectin' in Uttar Pradesh?
Answers to both questions here:
https://www.thedesertreview.com/opinion/columnists/indias-ivermectin-blackout---part-v-the-secret-revealed/article_9a37d9a8-1fb2-11ec-a94b-47343582647b.html
Thank you! this is what I was looking for.
Great article and analysis! I wish more (or all) researchers/statisticians would be like you! Our world could be a much better place if we had more Mathews like you.
HCQ worked for me. I took HCQ on the 5th day after an exposure to a sick friend, who died from the bioweapon 3 weeks later.
The tell-tale PERSISTENT, DRY COUGH was the tip-off telling me that i had the bioweapon in me. (I recognized the tell-tale dry dry cough because it seemed EXACTLY like the dry cough which some of my relatives had 7 months prior when the illness ran through their entire household, killing one of them.)
Despite the fact that i took only 1/7 the proper amount of zinc with the HCQ, I credit the HCQ with clearing up my cough within a day. Two days later, I felt perfectly fine after only the first 2 pills of HCQ/Plaquenil 200mg ... no symptoms at all ... cough gone ... no lingering fatigue or anything ... I had no difficulty walking up & down multiple flights of stairs 3 or more times per day ... and i'm in my 60s ...
So, HCQ nipped it in the bud by taking the HCQ **EARLY** ... got to treat it early ... before the damage to the lungs occurs.
I was one of the lucky ones who knew it might be a good idea to obtain a supply of HCQ ahead of needing it ... thanks to the great Dr. Vladimir Zev Zelenko and Dr. Didier Raoult in France who pioneered its use ... and also thanks to President Trump for mentioning HCQ at one of his pressers, after which Dr. Anthony "Gain-of-Function" Mengele FauXi and the Fake News media went bonkers at the mere mention of HCQ ... Mass murderers they are.
What a world we live in.
...and thanks to Dr. Fareed and Dr. Tyson and so many others.
Thank you for sharing your story. I am happy it worked so well for you and you recovered so fast. Yes, most of those who died could still be alive if they would have received an early treatment protocol (including HCQ). This is an epic crime. And I will make sure that many more people will be informed.
HCQ WAS used in the hospitals early on and it was very effective for most people. Also, Vit D, zinc and Vit C was administered. Patients recovered very quickly until Fauci pulled the plug on HCQ. Things went downhill from there.
"... i took only 1/7 the proper amount of zinc with the HCQ ..."
Dr. Zelenko had suggested "50mg of ELEMENTAL zinc" per day with HCQ. But the key word "elemental" failed to register in my brain at the time.
To attain the proper 50mg of "ELEMENTAL zinc" per day, one can take either:
(1) approx 350mg of zinc GLUCONATE per day (which is a quantity of 7 zinc GLUCONATE 50mg tablets),
or
(2) approx 220mg of zinc SULFATE per day (which is just 1 much-easier-to-swallow capsule of zinc SULFATE 220mg).
So, to sum up:
50mg of "ELEMENTAL" zinc = approx 350mg of zinc GLUCONATE = approx 220mg of zinc SULFATE.
My initial mistake was that I took only **50mg of zinc gluconate per day** (not enough).
I should have taken 7 pills of zinc gluconate 50mg per day, which is 350mg of zinc gluconate, which is equivalent to 50mg of ELEMENTAL zinc.
If the alphabet agencies, Mengele FauXi, Big Harma, et al., were the least bit concerned with saving lives, we would not need to figure out these dosages on our own!
this seems wrong, the amount of zinc listed on a bottle of tablets of zinc is the amount elemental zinc in each tablet - there is no need to multiply that value by some factor depending on whether it is zinc glucanate or zinc sulfate. Just go by what is on the bottle. 7 pills of zinc gluconate at 50 mg per pill is WAY too much - especially if taken long term (typical protocols are 50 mg per day for just one week after exposure to covid, thats just one tablet per day with a bottle labled "50 mg zinc" ). I'll do some research to see what Zelenko recommends long term for zinc.
Thank you. The high doses did seem like toxic levels. I checked flccc and they used to say “elemental” zinc. Now they just say zinc and list the diff types of zinc. I take 30 mg of “raw zinc” by Vitamin Code. It’s plant based and does not give me nausea.
"this seems wrong, the amount of zinc listed on a bottle of tablets of zinc is the amount elemental zinc in each tablet ..."
I respectfully disagree.
The milligrams printed on the bottle label is not the whole story.
As a starting point for further research, see for example this link, discussing "Total Zinc vs Elemental Zinc" in the third section down [and I quote]:
"... Zinc Citrate is more potent than Zinc Orotate. You can absorb 5mg of zinc elemental from 17mg of Zinc Citrate compared to 32.25 of Zinc Orotate. The zinc that does not get absorbed goes into your body’s waste disposal system."
https://www.staywell.co.nz/blog/what-are-elemental-minerals/
P.S. I have no opinion of Staywell Pharmacy pro or con.
When the FLCCC or Zelenko say to take 50 mg of zinc per day they are referring to what is labeled on the *front* of the zinc tablet bottle (I'm essentially sure of this). Zelenko and FLCCC have *already* taken into account that zinc is partially adsorbed - and I assume they chose some typical type of zinc to base their recommendation on. So if the zinc you are buying is the same type that the FLCCC and Zelenko are basing their recommendations of 50 mg per day then you are all set. So I agree with you in the respect that if you choose a zinc tablet formulation that is poorly adsorbed by people then you need to boost the dose - but that number isn't a factor of 7. I can only guess that it might be a factor of 2 or 3, but I don't know.
Jeff wrote, "When the FLCCC or Zelenko say to take 50 mg of zinc per day they are referring to what is labeled on the *front* of the zinc tablet bottle (I'm essentially sure of this)."
This link below has 2 photos of a bottle of 100 capsules of Zinc Sulfate heptahydrate equivalent 220mg by Rising Pharmaceuticals (NDC # 68585-008-01).
Photo #1 shows the FRONT of the bottle stating "220mg"
However each 220mg capsule does NOT contain a full 220mg of **elemental zinc** as explained in the fine print under "Supplemental Facts" on the BACK of the bottle.
Photo #2 shows the BACK of the bottle, stating in the fine print [and I quote:]
"Serving Size 1 Capsule ... Amount per Capsule ... Zinc (Zinc Sulfate Monohydrate Equivalent to 220mg Zinc Sulfate Heptahydrate) ... 50mg"
Link here to FRONT & BACK photos of bottle:
https://hargravesotc.com/products/zinc-sulfate-220-mg-100-capsules-by-rising
So, my point here is that one cannot dose merely by what is printed on the FRONT label of the bottle ... one also needs to read the fine print on the BACK of the label ... and one needs I suppose to research not just zinc ... but all of the supplements one may be taking to obtain benefit & to avoid harming oneself.
And, again, what a shame on the FDA, CDC, NIH, Pfizer, NIAID, Moderna and all the other corrupt malfeasors --- is that a word? --- that individuals like Jeffrey D and i have to have this discussion at all ... May they be brought to justice for their crimes!
Okay, I agree, it seems to me that the marketing team of some companies are trying to hype their product with confusing numbers. I checked a few zinc bottles on amazon and some show what you just wrote (which I think is confusing). The other bottles simply stated 50 mg on the front and 50 mg on the back (and thus not confusing and this is the number that FLCCC and Zelenko are saying to look at).
My assumption is that most companies try to make it clear as to how much zinc is supplied by the tablet and even the product you list tries to be clear by saying "Zinc Sulfate Monohydrate Equivalent to 220mg Zinc Sulfate Heptahydrate" 50 mg
And as you write in your message, they put the "50 mg" on the same line.
I found the Zelenko prophylaxis protocol (low and moderate risk patients) and it is just elemental zinc at 25 mg per day. This means you need a bottle of zinc pills that lists 25 mg zinc on the *front* label (the pill manufacturer does the math for you and puts this on the front of the label). There is no need to multiply it by a factor to determine the proper dose. I've read that taking an absorbable form of copper is important (copper oxide is not well adsorbed) when taking zinc because taking zinc will deplete your copper. Any type of "chelated copper" is well absorbed and I take 3 mg copper bisglycinate chelate on most days. I still need to find out how much zinc is good to take but I assume 10 mg to 20 mg per day is a good range. I suppose it depends on a persons diet and genetics.
I’ve been wondering about “elemental” zinc. I’m taking only 30 mg of raw zinc as regular zinc makes me nauseated. How do you deal with nausea from so much zinc sulfate or gluconate?
"... How do you deal with nausea from so much zinc sulfate or gluconate?"
Hi, just to be clear, I do not take a daily zinc supplement -- neither sulfate nor gluconate. The only time i took a zinc supplement in recent years was in combination with HCQ and azithromycin when i got the covid in Nov. 2020. So i don't have your issue of zinc-induced nausea. I can't recall if the zinc made me feel nauseous or not back then ... so i guess it did not make me feel really terrible ... or else i would probably remember having nausea as a side effect.
However, if I came down with covid again, then i would start taking 1 zinc sulfate 220mg capsule per day for 5 or 7 days only (along with a proper dose of HCQ or if ran out of HCQ then I'd substitute quercetin).
But that's just for me. I share my personal perspective for what it may be worth to inform others. But i do not presume to instruct others what they do.
Vitamins/minerals, like pharmaceuticals, have toxicities as well as potential benefits, therefore I (personally) am a bit skeptical of taking (1) drugs and (2) lots of daily vitamin supplements, and that includes zinc. For example, too much zinc can deplete copper.
I have that too, just can’t handle the stomach problems it causes.
I don't know if this is relevant to you, but there's a sort of "folk" test for zinc sufficiency. Just search for "zinc taste test". It involves mixing a solution of zinc sulfate and holding it in your mouth for 30 seconds. If you can't taste it, you supposedly have a deficiency. If it tastes bad to extremely unpleasant, you have enough.
The result may have no meaning if you're needing a boost to get through an illness, but the takeaway may be that zinc sulfate, in particular, can cause gastrointestinal unpleasantness. (I don't know if this applies to gluconate) Maybe try a different form of zinc.
Also, you could try ginger tea for nausea.
Note:
My HCQ experience occurred in Nov. 2020 when the early strains and the delta strain were still prevalent in the New York metro area. The milder omicron strain did not take over until a month or two later ... and how lucky we all are now that omicron removed the deadlier early strains and delta strain from circulation by outcompeting them.
As Dr. Malone observed, the omicron mutation (as compared to delta) was like a gift from heaven above.
"Despite the fact that i took only 1/7 the proper amount of zinc with the HCQ"
Zinc is only necessary with HCQ if your body is insufficient in zinc.
1) I don't know why you expect more from Harvard. I haven't for years. Whatever isn't being run by China at Harvard is being run by the DNC or little woke wizards thereof.
2) What you're describing is the exact same research/publication corruption that has been going on for at least 30 years to eliminate competition for emerging or expensive pharmaceuticals. "Meta-analysis" has been a shell game for ages. You can make anything say anything, AND get it published.
The machinery for this evil was in place long before COVID.
Also, I was very gratified to see lactoferrin in your friend's lists, and to see it performing quite well. I live in PA Dairy territory and my local Grange office circulated one of the first studies early on. I passed it on to Dr. Huber (who maintains a great stack) for perusal.
In 1937 Harvard School of Public Health w Monsanto & GE decided to coverup PCB cancer connection so it has been a long toxic history.
https://web.archive.org/web/20140904042417/http://www.americaunites.com/the-history-of-pcbs/
Dr. Zev Zelenko (RIP), prescribed HCQ for early Tx of covid to at risk pts with success. Thank you Mathew for this thorough explanation of how the success of early Tx with HCQ was buried, distorted, bastardised. It is painful to read.
https://vladimirzelenkomd.com/treatment-protocol/
Thank you so much for posting the link here.
This piece chimes nicely with an item I read elsewhere today, referencing the depressing conclusions about "health research" reached by a former BMJ editor, who lamented, “The system encourages fraud, and we have no adequate way to respond. It may be time to move from assuming that research has been honestly conducted and reported to assuming it to be untrustworthy until there is some evidence to the contrary.”
https://nakedemperor.substack.com/p/bmj-opinion-from-former-editor-time/comments
the zelenko protocol in that link shows two protocols, one for low risk patients and one for high risk patients as soon as they start feel sick (and thus the low risk patient protocol has zinc at 50 mg per day for 7 days),
the long term prophylaxis protocol (i.e. for many months before you get sick) is slightly different. Specifically, the zinc would be 25 mg per day (use the value on the front of the label for the zinc tablet bottle).
One more thing. A good friend mentioned the other day, many companies are preferring to take kids straight from high school and instead, provide a company work/training program that matches the company’s ethos.
Looks like Big biz is getting fed up with “university” educated students who graduate unable to string a sentence together or spell, cannot critically think and have no initiative. Is this possibly the future for the job market? If so the universities will be in financial ruins
Or workers are extremely hard to find, now. Wages are pushed up out of desperation. It's going to break some business models.
"There is a lot to unpack here. This is a classic Spaghetti Western: There is the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly, all in one place." Love this! Wouldn't it be fun if everyone just started showing absolute integrity? Like what if people just forgot how to be corrupt like when people can't find the word they are reaching for?
You don't really need hydroxychloroquine because Quercetin works as well or probably better, is completely safe, and is much easier to get on Amazon.
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00KNOW1AU/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1
Or you can use EGCg the active ingredient in green tea on Amazon.
When the virus first arrived, before hydroxychloroquine, I slapped together a vaccine in my kitchen with a bunch of interactive ingredients targeting the relevant three-dimensional molecular structures of the virus. The Oak Ridge National Laboratory supercomputer (149 petaflops then, recently upgraded to 1 exaflop) examined covid's structure and published 77 molecular possibilities that might interfere with viral efficacy. Quercetin was in the top five so I stocked up.
Quercetin, HCQ, and EGCg are zinc ionophores transporting the zinc through the cell membrane which zinc has a hard time getting through on its own. It's mainly the zinc that interferes with viral replication, but each ionophore has it's own independent viricidal action.
The current pooled analysis of the various studies for all mortality results (all stages) shows that Quercetin has an efficacy of 59% with HCQ at 21%. These efficacy numbers are based on stand-alone results (I believe), so they'd be much higher if taken with zinc. Since they are safe, take them all and you push efficacy over 100%. You're completely protected against the flu too and might live almost forever.
https://c19early.com/
https://www.ornl.gov/news/early-research-existing-drug-compounds-supercomputing-could-combat-coronavirus
The pooled effects numbers are a terrible proxy for efficacy. Remember that physicians like Tyson, Fareed, Zelenko, Raoult, Gessling, McCullough, and on and on...have roughly 94-99% lower case fatality rates than the general public. Too many of the HCQ studies are hospital studies where the treatment is given too late.
But yes, I also keep quercetin and EGCg around.
Good point. I also note those efficacy numbers jump around quite a bit depending on which studies comprise the current set as new studies are added. It is also ridiculous to study hydroxychloroquine apart from zinc. The proper treatment protocol is to throw everything including the kitchen sink at this as there are strong treatment synergies. What is obviously needed are real world studies of the various treatment protocols.
If zinc levels are high, there's no need to make zinc part of the protocol.
This is what I have suspected, though bioavailable zinc may be depleted short term by those using HCQ.
The immune system also uses zinc in response to infection, so that depletes zinc as well. Ditto vitamin D (calcifediol).
Props for using ORNL research - these US DOE labs did astounding accurate invaluable work in the very beginning already .. ie how I could state by Jan 26 2020 that the virus was not containable https://web.archive.org/web/20220214005403/https://twitter.com/daniel_bilar/status/1221558149745913859 was based on LANL research https://web.archive.org/web/20200313035917/https://twitter.com/daniel_bilar/status/1237885277479133185
B"H" Thank you for this Mathew. I really really appreciate your expert hand and exposition. I learn a lot from you, in many domains.
If I still taught this type of analysis and (mis-)use, I'd use this post and paper as a very compelling case study (like I did w Doyle 2007 viz the Barabasi 2000 Achilles Heel of the Internet claims, see 2008 lectures 17-19 https://web.archive.org/web/20190111200542/http://cs.wellesley.edu/~cs249B/lecture ; major statistical point condensed in one slide https://imgur.com/a/jjxeKdS )
April 2020 I dedicate this to the late ice9 a world class established scientist, one of the very few who did not betray their integrity & calling https://web.archive.org/web/20220216201441/https://twitter.com/daniel_bilar/status/1245287206366990337
See cardiac arrhythmia risk Fig 3 for doses schematic diagram of the recommendations for ECG) monitoring during HCQ CQ (hydroxy)chloroquine prophylaxis. https://www.heartrhythmjournal.com/article/S1547-5271(20)30634-2/fulltext
DJB July 2020 "4-5 months later we now know that HCQ works when used early, for prophylaxis & in non-lethal doses" https://web.archive.org/web/20200715011618/https://twitter.com/daniel_bilar/status/1283147765959348224
2022 meta analysis, nice. Fact: In mid-January 2020, around the time WHO declared no evidence of human to human transmission, France overturned a 43 year over the counter Hydroxychloroquine availability and made it very difficult to obtain, prescription or not. Long before Trump even mentioned the word.
Queensland Australia, April 2020. New prescription rules mean clinicians face a $13000 fine for prescribing hydroxychloroquine as a COVID-19 treatment. Ivermectin also banned. HCQ recently removed from ban.
One other point is that 200 out of 300 trials for HCQ were done in the late stages (inflammation, and inflammo-thrombotic) in of the disease not early in the viral replication phase. The doctors who worked with it successfully always said it was "early treatment only" but were ignored.
Deep stats territory, Matthew, deep stats. Very good read, and so happy someone bothers to get into the cracks and crannies of method and bias. I'm not a stats person. Just not. But I can read, and I'm thrilled. There are many "camps" in the C19/viral investigations. Some are marginal discussions heavily salted with political bias and social convictions bordering on monastic religion. I think it only becomes alive when there are bright people who have vast experience in their field, and considerable life experience altogether. Another camp that has another necessary and equally important role is the clinical evidence group. The men and women who have actually treated thousands of hands-on patients and are trying to educate past idiocy and unexamined protocols. Those who constantly talk cannot listen, those who will not read widely will never see more clearly, and those who listen and look carefully see the signals in the human world and the data.
Thanks
HCQ as a treatment seems very interesting, but I'm trying to work through what it would mean as a preventative measure. COVID isn't going away, so using a drug to prevent it would seem to be a lifetime commitment, which feels excessive. As a preventative measure, perhaps we would just recommend to the elderly or folks with serious comorbidities?
HCQ is problematic as a long term drug because of retinitis.
scientific evidence is tricky. Can't wait until we can simply turn it over the the AI overlords who can run endless simulations on digital recreations of our immune system. Oh, yeah, the bad guys will own the AI and sure enough all evidence will point to the recently patented medicine that just came out.
Eat healthy, take care of yourself, and enjoy the time you got seems the only thing we can do.
Thank you for breaking everything down, Mathew.