Dr. Vladimir Zelenko's Treatment Update from April 24

DR. Zelenko have new study going on, with quite good results...He says it will be published soon in the journals. The study have 1450 patients ,405 were treated with the same three drugs as were in the original report earlyer (hydroxychloroquine (an anti-malaria drug), azithromycin, and zinc sulfate)



Dr. Vladimir Zelenko's Treatment Update from April 24, 2020




A Detailed Coronavirus Treatment Plan from Dr. Vladimir Zelenko



The effectiveness dont look bad to be , Liberal left would disagree thought

a reply to: Kenzo

theyd rather have people die to blame Orange

it works, unless otherwise dying for the most part...may even treat some cancers.

a reply to: BlueJacket


Sadly that look`s true .

It sounds like that combo may have some beneficial results. But, I am more wanting to see the fully certified results to actually start supporting it as an official treatment. The FDA is doing that testing and I feel the preliminary results should be coming in pretty soon.

I am seeing mixed results on the reminisvir research clinical trials.

a reply to: rickymouse

ooh we need Rickymouse's approval first fellows.

oh keyboard certified or what?

originally posted by: puzzled2
a reply to: rickymouse

ooh we need Rickymouse's approval first fellows.

oh keyboard certified or what?

I am just stating I will wait till more evidence to state that I believe they are effective and am glad they have decided to test these things properly. For now it is evident that the Hydroxychloriquine is working for some instances but not in the really bad cases. I think it is good that the FDA let doctors use this off label since this is an emergency situation.

a reply to: Kenzo

the first time I saw this doctor is when he was interviewed by Giuliani, I dont know maybe a month ago or so, he mentioned every step he took and the doses and why, I truly believe in what he said.

originally posted by: Dr UAE
a reply to: Kenzo

the first time I saw this doctor is when he was interviewed by Giuliani, I dont know maybe a month ago or so, he mentioned every step he took and the doses and why, I truly believe in what he said.

To truly vet a treatment the design of the trials is critical. The vast majority of people recover from COVID on their own. It's complicated to determine the proximal cause of an outcome. Just cause you give a patient a treatment --- any treatment --- and they get better, doesn't prove that what you gave them was the cause of their recovery. Everyone wants there to be an effective and safe treatment but it's super important that the treatment absolutely works and is safe.

Back in the 50s-60s there were doctors touting the effectiveness of amygdalin to combat cancer. It;s is found in peach and apricot pits and other plants. Depending on who you listened to the reason it worked was all over the map. Real doctors were behind it but ultimately it was found to not really work. You need due diligence with these kinds of things.

originally posted by: jtma508
To truly vet a treatment the design of the trials is critical.

Depends on what you mean by vet...

Safety is by far the most important factor, and in fact, I submit that it is the only factor that the government should be concerned with. Efficacy questions should be left to Doctors and their Patients to determine - and yes, Patients should be free to choose whatever treatment they want, regardless of what any government beurorat thinks.

Regardless, if something has already been vetted, then your point is irrelevant, and point in fact, the drug in question already has a long history of use, even if not for the condition it is being considered for, so while not without side-effects, these are already known, and treatment protocols established.

The vast majority of people recover from COVID on their own. It's complicated to determine the proximal cause of an outcome.

Yes, but the vast majority of those who go critical serious do not, and these are the ones Dr. Zelenko is treating.

Just cause you give a patient a treatment --- any treatment --- and they get better, doesn't prove that what you gave them was the cause of their recovery.

For one patient... true.

But if you give it to dozens, then hundreds, and continue to get the same results - and most importantly, lives are saved - then does it freaking matter the exact nature of how and why it works?

I have no problem with you or anyone else pursuing it, I just don't agree that it is OK to sit back and allow people to die, just because you want to have the results of hundred-million dollar multi-year long trials before you (or anyone or any government beurorat) 'allows' its use. People should be free to make their own decisions, including what treatments they want to use and what risks they are willing to take.

Everyone wants there to be an effective and safe treatment but it's super important that the treatment absolutely works and is safe.

I agree that it is important that new treatments have some kind of safety trials to determine what level of risk they pose so that people can make intelligent decisions on what treatments they may prefer to try - but that is it. As for efficacy - that should be left to Doctors and patients to determine through actual real world use.

If something is only 10% effective, then that means that 1 in 10 people who may/would have died, would live.

The reality is, this Doctor in NY is claiming 100% effectiveness for hydroxy+zinc. Even if his number of 100% doesn't pan out - it is logical to assume that it's success rate is higher than 10%.

Back in the 50s-60s there were doctors touting the effectiveness of amygdalin to combat cancer. It;s is found in peach and apricot pits and other plants. Depending on who you listened to the reason it worked was all over the map. Real doctors were behind it but ultimately it was found to not really work. You need due diligence with these kinds of things.

I suggest to you that again - you are wrong, because you are thinking in terms of absolutes, and the human body simply doesn't work that way. Maybe it didn't work for everyone, but it apparently worked for some.

a reply to: rickymouse

How was penicillin found and first used? How was washing hands first used as a preventive? how is wearing a mask in so many situation proven effective? Control test or observational results and then Control test to understand why it works?

Is there any history of drugs doing the control test over years being introduced to the population and then being pulled due to killing or harming people that would not have died? Expect there are a few.

Here we have a protocol
where doctor Z gives to his patients and they didn't die,
whereas doctor F didn't give the protocol to his patients and some died?
Can I ask you how much did YOU save by the not wasting the drugs on the patients that lived in doctor F treatment?
How much did YOU lose by giving the drugs to patients in Doctor Z clinic that didn't need them?

Also based on Yelp reviews Which clinic's would you attended ?
Doctor Z 100% survival rates but maybe some cheap drug overcharges or
Doctor F 33% survival rates with no overcharges?

originally posted by: puzzled2
a reply to: rickymouse

How was penicillin found and first used? How was washing hands first used as a preventive? how is wearing a mask in so many situation proven effective? Control test or observational results and then Control test to understand why it works?

Is there any history of drugs doing the control test over years being introduced to the population and then being pulled due to killing or harming people that would not have died? Expect there are a few.

Here we have a protocol
where doctor Z gives to his patients and they didn't die,
whereas doctor F didn't give the protocol to his patients and some died?


Can I ask you how much did YOU save by the not wasting the drugs on the patients that lived in doctor F treatment?
How much did YOU lose by giving the drugs to patients in Doctor Z clinic that didn't need them?

Also based on Yelp reviews Which clinic's would you attended ?
Doctor Z 100% survival rates but maybe some cheap drug overcharges or
Doctor F 33% survival rates with no overcharges?

People who ate brie cheese got over their infections. Alchemists figured out which of the microbes could be used to treat infection in the cheese, all penicillin in the USA is grown from the original culture that was patented, but many people who are allergic to penicillin can eat brie cheese. Evidently the strain they use to make the meds has mutated over the years differently than the natural microbe that is on cheese.

It was discovered at least seven hundred years ago that washing hands stopped infections. That is our first written stuff about that that was found. But they talk about it way back thousands of years ago in non-medical literature, but not so much mention of it in the actual writings of ancient doctors. I suppose everyone knew to wash their hands, why bother writing that down in stone.

I would prefer Mayo Clinic if I had something serious.

a reply to: rickymouse

Glad you can afford the Mayo Clinc - funny hope the private sector of American healthcare don't want the dollar solution but the $1,000 unproven solution is the one to try first.

Here's hoping Private medical foots the bill in all the court cases for failing to provide for those they insured but expect a tax payer bail out anytime soon.

originally posted by: puzzled2
a reply to: rickymouse

Glad you can afford the Mayo Clinc - funny hope the private sector of American healthcare don't want the dollar solution but the $1,000 unproven solution is the one to try first.

Here's hoping Private medical foots the bill in all the court cases for failing to provide for those they insured but expect a tax payer bail out anytime soon.

With Medicare and my retirement part D kicker, it is about the same cost to me as going to the local hospital.