top of page

Scientific Study—Or Megadose Mass Murder?

BREGGING.COM - Aug 9, 2020 -



By Peter R. Breggin MD and Ginger Ross Breggin


From The New York Times to the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), partisans have been promoting a “scientific study” that supposedly proves that chloroquine, and by association, hydroxychloroquine, are too dangerous to use in treating COVID-19 patients. The study gave such megadoses of chloroquine to such frail and ill patients that many were bound to die of drug toxicity. The ultimate motivation, it seems, was to discredit “Trump’s drug,” even at the cost of human lives.. Meanwhile, in Brazil where the study originated, the researchers are now under investigation as suspects in the deaths of their research subjects. At the very least, their recklessness seems to meet the standard of manslaughter by displaying “extreme, reckless disregard for life.” It may also be an extraordinary example of politically motivated mass murder under the guise of scientific research. Meanwhile, the American medical and media establishment continues unabated to use the study to contradict the use of hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19 patients.


When science becomes politicized, as during the current COVID-19 pandemic, it becomes especially subject to human corruption. Still, we are shocked at the extremes to which scientists in Brazil and media and medical authorities in the US will go to stifle use of hydroxychloroquine.


A Rush to Judgement in Favor of Stopping Hydroxychloroquine


The study we call “Megadose Mass Murder” was released prepublication on-line on April 11, 2020. The partisan New York Times was so happy to thump Trump’s drug that it published a big story in support of it on April 12, 2020, one day after the prepublication report.


The article was then rushed to formal publication on-line on April 24, 2020 by the Journal of the American Medical Association on its JAMA Network Open. The journal of the AMA even gave on-line Continuing Medication Education (CME) credits to doctors who read it.


Simultaneously, on April 24, 2020, the FDA ramped up its attack on hydroxychloroquine, limiting its use to hospitals, in an effort that would eventually tell doctors to stop using it at all.


ABC News Again Uses the Brazil Study Against Trump


The influence of the Brazil study was recently revived on August 8, 2020 when ABC News published “Timeline: Tracking Trump alongside scientific developments on hydroxychloroquine.” The ABC timeline aimed at showing that President Donald Trump’s support of hydroxychloroquine was contrary to “science.” Here is ABC’s description of the murderous study:


April 13: Study in Brazil linking hydroxychloroquine to fatal heart problems makes headlines


A small research trial in Brazil abruptly ends after coronavirus patients taking a higher dose of chloroquine in combination with azithromycin developed irregular heart rates. Within three days of beginning treatment, researchers started noticing heart arrhythmias in patients taking the higher dose of chloroquine. By the sixth day, 11 had died.


Notice that headline on the comment declares that the study linked hydroxychloroquine to fatal heart problems. But the study in fact was about a much older and more dangerous drug, the original malarial drug treatment, chloroquine.


The Size of the Megadose


The Brazil study used enormous repeated doses of chloroquine: 1200 mg daily for 10 days. This dose is so large that the authors could not cite a single other clinical study that approximated this megadose range. To get even close, they had to cite an experimental study involving very ill cancer patients who were also getting cancer drugs and even then the cancer study drug was hydroxychloroquine (1200 mg daily for 28 days) rather than the more dangerous chloroquine.


The authors had to know that they were treading on dangerous territory, risking many deaths. Respected sources, such as all recent editions of the classic Goodman & Gilman’s The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutic (2011, p. 1405), state:


CONTINUAR LENDO:

27 views0 comments
bottom of page