It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Protocol Saves 98% of COVID Patients, Hidden by Media

page: 1
26

log in

join
share:
+2 more 
posted on May, 31 2020 @ 05:22 AM
link   
"Five critical care physicians have developed a highly effective treatment protocol for COVID-19. When used with more than 100 hospitalized patients, only two died - both in their 80s with advanced chronic conditions. It's a dream come true, but why won't health officials adopt it?

STORY AT-A-GLANCE
Despite the fact that many critical care specialists are using treatment protocols that differ from standard of care, information about natural therapeutics in particular are still being suppressed by the media and is not received by critical care physicians
Five critical care physicians have formed the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Working Group (FLCCC). The group has developed a highly effective treatment protocol known as MATH+
Of the more than 100 hospitalized COVID-19 patients treated with the MATH+ protocol as of mid-April, only two died. Both were in their 80s and had advanced chronic medical conditions
The protocols call for the use of intravenous methylprednisolone, vitamin C and subcutaneous heparin within six hours of admission into the hospital, along with high-flow nasal oxygen. Optional additions include thiamine, zinc and vitamin D
COVID-19 kills by triggering hyperinflammation, hypercoagulation and hypoxia. The MATH+ protocol addresses these three core pathological processes

""Why is success in critical care being ignored?" the Alliance for Natural Health rightly asks.1 The organization claims "much more could be done to save lives" if critical care protocols were to take into account what critical care doctors are finding in practice. A May 14, 2020, article reads, in part:................"

See whole article here:
articles.mercola.com... re&cid=20200529Z1&et_cid=DM547465&et_rid=882306177






posted on May, 31 2020 @ 09:21 AM
link   
A 2% fatality rate can be improved upon. Dr. Raoult has 0.5% at his hospital (IHU Marseille), based on treating over 3000 patients with HCQ + Azithromycin (at least, there are other follow-up treatments involved of which I do not know the details). If you add zinc (+relative amount of copper), vitC+D3, and melatonin (which his team of physicians may or may not have done, patient specific) that could be even better.

Besides, methylprednisolone, is an immunosuppressor (corticosteroid), it suppresses the immune system, potentially creating bigger problems. You're much better off with HCQ, which is much less invasive. Of course, in some cases, corticosteroids like methylprednisolone may be warranted; but it should not be an option prioritized over HCQ as the Eastern Virginia Medical School, who uses the MATH+ protocol, has it (who list HCQ as optional, and ignore its anti-inflammatory effects in relation to the cytokine storm by not mentioning it at all in their "Dampening the Storm" section of the protocol; of course, most people on the pro-HCQ side still seem to think of HCQ as purely an antiviral, and granted, there is where most of its effectiveness in the treatment of Covid-19 comes from, but it also has anti-inflammatory effects in relation to the cytokine storm, which means it's still useful at that stage of the disease, not to mention that you'll still want to protect your healthy cells from viral infection, as well as inhibit viral replication cause that's still going on then a little bit as well).

Any protocol that ignores the great power, effectiveness and usefulness of HCQ+Azithromycin (or potentially Doxycycline, being tested now), is not optimized with the patients interests put first. And as mentioned many times already, zinc optimizes it even further. But the key ingredient, and main power of the earlier mentioned cocktail including vitC+D3 and melatonin, still comes from HCQ. And Quercetin or even Quinine/CQ is an inadequate replacement for it, junior wannabees. HCQ was specificaly designed for increased effectivity and decreased toxicity compared to quinine/CQ (which are more comparable to eachother in terms of toxicity and effectiveness, or should I say usefulness, less toxicity with the same effectiveness is more usefulness as a medicine). Quercetin does things a little different, and compared to HCQ, a bit poor as a zinc ionophore (7:2 ratio in effectiveness). The same counts for quinine/CQ as zinc ionophore compared to HCQ, a bit poor (don't know the ratio). It's the hydroxy-group attached to CQ that allows the molecule to have an easier time getting into cells, which also means it becomes a better zinc ionophore (see video with the mechanism of action in the playlist linked further below to see how the zinc gets into the cell by attaching to the CQ or HCQ, so if the HCQ gets into the cell easier, the zinc goes along with it; zinc in the cell is for inhibiting viral replication in case you didn't know that).

Statistics for IHU Marseille and related treatment of HCQ + Azithromycin:

COVID-19 – IHU

I think Dr. Zelenko with near or even over a 1000 patients treated with HCQ+Azithromycin+zinc has an even lower fatality rate. Sadly he doesn't give any fatality numbers in this video:

Context with Dr. Raoult's statistics:

“Hydroxychloroquine saves a lot of lives” says Dr who has now treated over 3600 COVID-19 patients

Mechanism of action for CQ/HCQ (anti-inflammatory functions in relation to the cytokine storm not discussed, but briefly mentioned in the first video in the playlist above; it's my next object of interest to find some details about, so do share if you find something, anyone; oh wait, it's also mentioned in the video below as the first function with the term "immunomodulatory effects", but not discussed in detail):

edit on 31-5-2020 by whereislogic because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 31 2020 @ 10:42 AM
link   
This is simply the best explanation I have seen to
date.

I fully endorse it.

However....just as an observation...

Please can we stop following the old bastardised systems.

Its not inflammation that is being stopped by anything we do its the cause of the inflammation that's being stopped by what we do....Nothing is being "cured" but something is being "killed'" the antagonist is being removed....simple simon no need to make up BULL# TO KEEP OUR OLDE oVERLORDS HAPPY....OK.

WE DONT CURE INFLAMMATION....THE BODY CEASES AND DESISTS ONLY WHEN ITS PARAMETERS HAVE BEEN MET wen the antagonist is gone or remediated.

The antagonist is being killed in 2 areas of the body simultaneously....the belly and the blood.....antibiotic for the belly Wormwood for the blood....yes the Synthetic drugs are all based around a Wormwood "core".

This prevents a massive cascade of the antagonist from the belly to the blood .....it is this cascade impact that overwhelms our processes.
edit on 31-5-2020 by one4all because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 31 2020 @ 10:49 AM
link   
Only 2 out of 100 died? So 2%? Last I checked mortality was 1% or so??



posted on May, 31 2020 @ 10:52 AM
link   
a reply to: AlienView

It should be pretty clear by now that many bureaucrats who make these decisions dont want to save lives, and in the areas that would benefit most (like NYC).. the medical establishment has been too busy to ask questions. They just stick to the original protocol.

Of course, it should be noted that the death rate can and will vary depending on regional factors, even if the treatment is the same. These are things like pollution, which will cause both a denser cluster of infections as well as compromise immune systems.

Think bigger picture here though. Theres a reason everything is causing people to be 110% focused on a given topic, using extreme emotions to fuel that focus (fear, anger).



posted on May, 31 2020 @ 11:34 AM
link   
a reply to: Magnivea


The CFR is much higher for patients requiring hospitalization. I think at the start they said it was something like 25%. It may have changed but it's much higher than the general population CFR.



posted on May, 31 2020 @ 11:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Magnivea
That fatality rate you are thinking of is not representative for hospitalized patients. It's based on estimated number of cases of infection. There's a huge difference. There's already a huge difference with the fatality rates based on positively tested cases in most countries with a significant outbreak (which is often above 10% in Europe's hotzone, Italy, Spain, France, Belgium, Netherlands, UK, Sweden, basically all the countries where they handled this crisis really badly, the most horrible health care systems in the world, totally controlled by a Big Pharma with murderous intentions to make the problem as bad as they can get away with without too many people catching on that they're doing it on purpose, influencing treatment protocols to their agenda; granted, some of these countries have padded their numbers with suspected cases, but the fatality rates were already above 10% before they made that adjustment and only counted positively tested cases. And I know for a fact that for the first month at least only hospitalized patients were being tested in the Netherlands, and not even all of those, by then the fatality rate was already above 10%, and the Netherlands is still not counting suspected cases).

Remember, antibody tests are unreliable, therefore, estimated number of cases based on them are unreliable. Also, most of these estimates are based on antibody tests of a relatively small group of people compared to the entire population of a country; one should also check if the group that was tested, resulting in the number that was extrapolated to make estimates for the whole country, was actually representative for the whole country. If only people who think they've experienced Covid-19-like symptoms ask for an antibody test (which is how they are recommended by the media), the chance that they had the disease goes up, which will result in a higher number of positive antibody tests, if you then extrapolate that number for the whole country which would include people who have never experienced any symptoms, you get a completely wrong impression for estimated number of people in the country that were infected (the impresson that more people had to disease than in reality). They'll never tell you that when they're publishing their numbers and estimates to give a false impression (whichever impression they want to give at the time, more people infected than in reality or less).
edit on 31-5-2020 by whereislogic because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 31 2020 @ 11:47 AM
link   
Reporters who tell the truth about Covid-19, like this one from ABC News, get ignored by the majority of their colleagues and the medical community.

Yet according to ABC News, states that lifted the lockdowns early did not experience a surge in coronavirus hospitalizations, deaths, or the percentage of people testing positive.

“JUST IN: [ABC News] looked at 21 states that eased restrictions May 4 or earlier & found no major increase in hospitalizations, deaths or % of people testing positive in any of them. [SC, MT, GA, MS, SD, AR, CO, ID, IA, ND, OK, TN, TX, UT, WY, KS, FL, IN, MO, NE, OH] via [Ariel Mitropoulos],” ABC News lead medical reporter Eric Strauss tweeted.
Source: pjmedia.com...



posted on May, 31 2020 @ 01:36 PM
link   
a reply to: AlienView

The reason why they would suppress natural, non-pharmaceutical cures is simple. Such cures don’t get the powerful pharmacy companies any profits.



edit on 31-5-2020 by Willtell because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 31 2020 @ 11:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Willtell

Methylprednisolone, the main ingredient in the MATH+ protocol, is not a "natural, non-pharmaceutical" cure. It's a synthetic (designer) drug. It's rather invasive as an immunosuppressor but it does do the trick (of dampening the cytokine storm). There are other less invasive options though, such as preventing the cytokine storm altogether with early treatment (outpatient, before they get to the hospital) with HCQ + Azithromycin + zinc + copper + vitC+D3 (+ melatonin, optional).

But it's pretty decent as part of a hospital protocol (but then again, if these patients have never been given HCQ, it's advisable to try that first to see if that's enough, in the outpatient setting it's almost always enough with the combination of substances earlier mentioned). Methylprednisolone is a way to take the treatment to the next level (in terms of taking more drastic measures to prevent further damage from the cytokine storm, should be determined on a patient by patient basis, not a rigorous protocol that people feel the need to follow to the letter, regardless of patient specifics, or whether or not the patient has already had HCQ + quality care, including those substances I mentioned).

Of course, quinine, the natural version of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), is a natural product. But not nearly as effective as HCQ (which has been specifically designed to decrease toxicity and increase its effectiveness to get into cells, where it can do the most good). 'All natural' is definitely not the best option in treating Covid-19, more drastic measures are definitely warranted given the effects and progress of this disease (what it does to patients over time compared to how well HCQ + quality care works, and how negligible the risks and toxicity of HCQ or HCQ + Azithromycin are; that is, under conditions of "quality care", not "horrible care", the latter which you can use to make any drug look bad or dangerous/harmful).
edit on 1-6-2020 by whereislogic because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 1 2020 @ 12:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
Reporters who tell the truth about Covid-19, like this one from ABC News, get ignored by the majority of their colleagues and the medical community.

Yet according to ABC News, states that lifted the lockdowns early did not experience a surge in coronavirus hospitalizations, deaths, or the percentage of people testing positive.

“JUST IN: [ABC News] looked at 21 states that eased restrictions May 4 or earlier & found no major increase in hospitalizations, deaths or % of people testing positive in any of them. [SC, MT, GA, MS, SD, AR, CO, ID, IA, ND, OK, TN, TX, UT, WY, KS, FL, IN, MO, NE, OH] via [Ariel Mitropoulos],” ABC News lead medical reporter Eric Strauss tweeted.
Source: pjmedia.com...

I live in Idaho and I can tell you getting current numbers is like pulling hens teeth. I am a few miles from the reservation where they now have community spread, but NONE of those numbers are appearing in the official CDC count.
We're being told that there is a backlog of work, along with computer issues that is keeping the info from reaching the CDC in a timely number, as is the case with some other states.
It's been said that if you list 'probable Covid' on the death certificate, it doesn't have to be reported to the CDC since no testing is done to confirm, but increases funding they can receive, I have no idea if that is true, but I do know it's been extremely hard to get a test.
The Feds are investigating one nursing home with a high death rate because they refused to test a patient with all the symptoms, even though the family repeatedly begged them to. Sadly, she died of Covid.
At this point in time, I have zero confidence in anything the 'experts' are saying. They fudged the numbers to lock us down; now they're fudging the numbers to open everything up again.
Now we have rioting all over the country, and I have to ask 'who does all of this benefit the most?'. A clue might be looking at how many red states versus how many blue states are rioting.



posted on Jun, 8 2020 @ 09:16 AM
link   
The MATH+ protocol is missing the most vital component of any good treatment for Covid-19:

- HCQ as the first and foremost line of defense

Gosh, what a coincidence (see elaboration before what I'm hinting at; or the NYC nurse in a video I've linked many times already).

The MATH+ protocol is not max. quality care, Dr. Ban-style. If a random nurse gets it, why can't physicians impressed with the MATH+ protocol or those who wrote it?

If you want to get an idea why HCQ should be the first and foremost line of defense, think about which substances have been proven/established to do all these functions and just as efficiently (remember, HCQ has been specifically designed to be less toxic and more effective at getting into cells, lysosomes and endosomes compared to CQ and quinine; like those 2 substances, it gravitates towards the lungs, kidneys and either stomach or liver, exactly the areas under attack by corona, the virus, and Covid-19, the disease):

Quercetin doesn't increase pH level. Does quercetin gravitate towards the lungs or kidneys? I don't know. It's certainly not as well researched or tested on Covid-19 patients and recorded as case studies and its effects observed by doctors treating Covid-19 patients. No reliable clinical trials either. HCQ is quite a bit further along in terms of research into it in relation to Covid-19 as well as proven highly effectiveness (not just a little bit effective, it's huge).


edit on 8-6-2020 by whereislogic because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
26

log in

join