Archive for February, 2021

Chronic: The Hidden Cause of the Autoimmune Pandemic & How To Get Healthy Again

https://www.lymedisease.org/excerpt-chronic-phillips-parish/

TOUCHED BY LYME: Read excerpt of “Chronic,” long-awaited book by Phillips and Parish

By Dorothy Kupcha Leland

CDC Lyme Count is Still Too Low

https://www.lymedisease.org/cdc-lyme-disease-cases-undercount/

How Much Does the CDC Undercount Lyme Cases?  It Depends on Where You Live

By Lorraine Johnson, JD, MBA

2/2/2021

The Centers for Diseases Control and Prevention recently compared its annual surveillance Lyme numbers [those that meet the agency’s narrowly defined case definition] to the number of Lyme cases tallied in a major insurance claims data base from 2010 to 2018. Their study concludes that the CDC is still undercounting cases1.

But, if you dig deep into the numbers, you see that the undercounting is much more severe in some areas—namely in southern and western states. This has huge implications for Lyme patients in those regions, making it much harder for them to get properly diagnosed and treated.

Here are my four main take-aways from the study:

  • Undercounting is the rule: The CDC increased its estimate of annual cases of Lyme disease from 300,000 to 476,000, based on insurance claims made. That’s a 58% increase in estimated cases.
  • Not all states are equal: In states the CDC considers low incidence, only 1 in 50 cases is counted, while in high incidence states 1 in 7 is counted.
  • State-based gender bias: In states the CDC considers low incidence, 63% of cases are female.
  • The revised estimate does not affect surveillance cases reported by the CDC, which reporters and physicians rely on. This leaves the public unaware and harms patients by giving their physicians a false sense of complacency that Lyme disease is not a big problem.
CDC undercounting of Lyme disease is more severe in some areas — namely in southern and western states

Misdiagnosis of Lyme disease by geography is a big problem

It’s important that the CDC is acknowledging an extraordinary amount of undercounting and it is also important that they are looking at other big data sources (here insurance claims) to see how far off the mark they are. However, the degree to which the CDC surveillance system undercounts cases is not equally distributed geographically. States that are considered low incidence states are disproportionately undercounted.

Here’s a table comparing the amount of underreporting reflected in the reduced number of surveillance cases compared to insurance claims in the CDC study in high-incidence, neighboring states, and low-incidence states:

How much does the CDC undercount Lyme disease?
Table - CDC undercount of Lyme disease in high-incidence, neighboring states, and low-incidence state

What we see is that the undercount is not equal among the three categories: high-incidence states are undercounted by a factor of 7, neighboring states by a factor of 10, and low-incidence states by a factor of 50. Undercounting cases by a factor of 50 means that for every single case identified, the CDC throws out another 49 cases. Thus, the CDC geographic case restriction impairs accurate counting of cases.

How much does the CDC undercount Lyme cases? It depends on where you live.

Moreover, the percentage of increase in cases reported by the CDC compared to insurance claims data shows the same anomalies among the different categories of states.

Table - Differences Between the CDC and Insurance Database Regarding Lyme Disease Growth Rate Percentages

The CDC surveillance counts place a heavy emphasis on “high incidence” states—which are primarily confined to the East Coast and Midwest as the map below illustrates.

CDC Lyme Disease Incidence Map

Unfortunately, saying that a state is either high or low incidence oversimplifies the complex geographic distribution which is driven by whether the local ecosystem will support and sustain the tick population that carries Lyme disease. In California, for example, there are areas as highly endemic as the east coast. The CDC totally ignores such variation within a single state. This emphasis on high incidence states is not only inaccurate, it also leads to misdiagnosis in other states where clinicians are led to believe the risk is not present. The feedback loop is further distorted because the CDC case report form includes endemicity as a requirement for counting cases, which in turn reflects awareness of risk, physician diagnosis, and counting of future cases. This misleading feedback loop will artificially suppress case counts in areas outside the Northeast and Midwest in perpetuity until it is abandoned.

For years, the Lyme community’s complaints about misdiagnosis by geography have fallen on deaf ears. Although the study increased the number of cases by 58% with the new 476,000 estimate, it also demonstrates how much cases in low incidence states are under-counted compared to high incidence states when different data sources are compared.

So for example, while surveillance data shows 93.2% of cases in high-incidence states, insurance data shows only 80.5%. That’s a 12% difference and it matters. It means that the CDC is undercounting cases in states that it does not characterize as high-incidence. We know this is likely true because another insurance data base study showed many states the CDC considers to be low incidence states to be in the top five states in insurance claims.

As reported in the Wall Street Journal: “North Carolina reported 32 Lyme cases to the CDC in 2016 but in the same year made 88,539 health-care claims for a Lyme diagnosis. California reported 90 cases to the CDC but had 46,820 claims. Texas reported 31 cases to the CDC but had 31,129 claims. All three are considered low incidence states 2”.

We also see this in the differences between MyLymeData geographical distribution of cases compared to the CDC below. The states in blue have a higher number of people enrolled in MyLymeData than are included in total CDC Lyme disease case reports. (In green states, the CDC has more cases.) The differences reflected on the map suggest a broad pattern of underreporting by the CDC of Lyme disease in the South and the West.

Differences between MyLymeData geographical distribution of cases compared to the CDC

If the CDC is going to look at real word data, it should be willing to consider that its preconceived notions of geographical distribution are incorrect and “listen to the data.”

A similar variation in seasonality occurred. A higher proportion from high-incidence states (59%) occurred during the summer compared with diagnoses from neighboring (53%) and low-incidence states (42%). This may reflect the warmer weather in the west and southwest and an extended tick season.

Do more males have Lyme disease than females? It depends.

Distributions by sex also differed across high-incidence, neighboring, and low-incidence states. Male patients accounted for a greater proportion of diagnoses in high-incidence states (50.8%) than in neighboring (41.9%) and low-incidence (36.6%) states. Biodiversity of strains and ticks across different ecosystems may affect males and females differently. But the fact that 63% of cases in low incidence states are female underscores the fact that gender-based assumptions may not accurately reflect the real world data. We do not know.

The CDC’s increased Lyme disease case estimate is important, but not enough.

The increase should be viewed as part of an effort by the CDC to find other ways of tracking Lyme cases because the current surveillance system is essentially broken. The current surveillance system imposes too great a burden on healthcare providers and on the local departments of health. As a result, cases are simply not reported. Streamlining this process by using either automated laboratory results or insurance claims from sources that already exist would dramatically reduce these burdens and hopefully more accurately reflect cases that occur in the real world.

Significantly, the new CDC study concludes that the MarketScan insurance claims data they used “provided a stable source of data for . . . diagnosis. . .that could serve as a resource efficient adjunct to surveillance.”.

The CDC’s increased estimate based on it’s comparison of real world insurance claims data to surveillance data is important. Even this increase widely misses the mark though. MyLymeData tells us that 50% of patient report that their clinician does not accept insurance. Those patients may not be included in the insurance data base.

 
50% of patient report that their clinician does not accept insurance

I am also bothered by the fact that when the geographic real-world data differs from the surveillance data, the CDC assumes that the real world data is wrong—that it’s due to miscoding or misdiagnosis. Why not consider the possibility that the CDC’s surveillance data could be incorrect? That independent data sources may provide us with a look at a larger reality and geographic and gender-based difference that require a deeper examination?

Even with the increased CDC estimate in Lyme disease cases, patients in the south and west will continue to be harmed by delayed and missed diagnosis because of the weight the CDC places on geography in the surveillance case reporting.

Click to tweet

We know that the surveillance data is skewed because it has inherent biases for cases that present with a rash and for cases that are geographically on the East coast or Midwest. Both of these factors play a large role in meeting the requirements of the surveillance case definition. Even with the increased estimate in cases, patients in the south and west will continue to be harmed by delayed and missed diagnosis because of the weight the CDC places on geography in the surveillance case reporting.

It’s good news that the CDC has increased its estimate of the annual number of cases after seeing that they are well below insurance claims cases. It would be better if they overhauled their surveillance case definition so that reporters don’t use these drastically under counted cases in their news articles and physicians are given the tools to promptly diagnose patients.

If you are a patient who is not enrolled in MyLymeData,  please enroll today. If you are a researcher who wants to collaborate with us, please contact me directly.

The MyLymeData Viz Blog is written by Lorraine Johnson, JD, MBA, who is the Chief Executive Officer of LymeDisease.org. You can contact her at lbjohnson@lymedisease.org. On Twitter, follow her @lymepolicywonk.  If you have not signed up for our patient-centered big data project, MyLymeData, please register now.

MyLymeData Lyme Disease Research
About MyLymeData Lyme Disease Research

MyLymeData is one of the largest patient-driven registries in the nation, with over 13,500 patients enrolled. It was created by patients, is run by patients and will address the issues that Lyme disease patients care about. MyLymeData Viz provides the community with results from MyLymeData. If you are enrolled in MyLymeData, we thank you for providing the data that will accelerate the pace of research in Lyme disease. If you are not enrolled, please enroll today.

_________________________
 
 
**Comment**
 
Great points.  The CDC has been assuming incorrectly for a very long time.  

Vaccines Revealed Tonight

https://upvir.al/ref/NU52390065  Register Here

Vaccines Revealed

http://

Finally, it’s almost time to get some sensible, REAL, and honest truth about C0V!D and the “shot”… 

Tonight we peel back the wrapping on the most significant power grab in health — perhaps in the history of the world. 

If you’ve been worried, confused, or even angry, this is for you. 

It’s time for answers, AND WE’VE GOT LOTS OF THEM FOR YOU. 

Rest assured, they start coming out in a big way, starting tomorrow. 

See the details below: 

  • Topic: We’re talking all things C0v!d, masks, misinformation, but especially, Vaccines
  • Date/Time: Starts Tuesday, February 9th at 6 p.m. PST/9 p.m. EST 

You will receive personal viewing links tomorrow as soon as the first episode goes live.

Want your family and friends to join in with you, perhaps have a virtual viewing party? Forward this email along so they can register as well. 

Your free registration gets you answers

With Purpose,

Dr. Patrick Gentempo

TUESDAY, February 9th @ 9 pm EST / 6 pm PST.

You will have 24 hours to view each one of the 9 episodes.

Study Finds ‘No Significant Beneficial Effect’ of Restrictive Lockdowns

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/eci.13484

Abstract
Background and Aims: The most restrictive non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) for controlling
the spread of COVID-19 are mandatory stay-at-home and business closures. Given the consequences
of these policies, it is important to assess their effects. We evaluate the effects on epidemic case
growth of more restrictive NPIs (mrNPIs), above and beyond those of less restrictive NPIs (lrNPIs).
Methods: We first estimate COVID-19 case growth in relation to any NPI implementation in
subnational regions of 10 countries:
  • England
  • France
  • Germany
  • Iran
  • Italy
  • Netherlands
  • Spain
  • South Korea
  • Sweden
  • US

Using first-difference models with fixed effects, we isolate the effects of mrNPIs by subtracting the combined effects of lrNPIs and epidemic dynamics from all NPIs. We use case growth in Sweden and South Korea, two countries that did not implement mandatory stay-at-home and business closures, as comparison countries for the other 8 countries (16 total comparisons).

Results: Implementing any NPIs was associated with significant reductions in case growth in 9 out of
10 study countries, including South Korea and Sweden that implemented only lrNPIs (Spain had a
non-significant effect). After subtracting the epidemic and lrNPI effects, we find no clear, significant
beneficial effect of mrNPIs on case growth in any country. In France, e.g., the effect of mrNPIs was
+7% (95CI -5%-19%) when compared with Sweden, and +13% (-12%-38%) when compared with
South Korea (positive means pro-contagion). The 95% confidence intervals excluded 30% declines in
all 16 comparisons and 15% declines in 11/16 comparisons.
Conclusions: While small benefits cannot be excluded, we do not find significant benefits on case
growth of more restrictive NPIs. Similar reductions in case growth may be achievable with less
restrictive interventions.
_______________________
**Comment**
We can be very thankful Sweden and South Korea stood up to the concerted bullying or there would have been no control group to compare lockdowns to!

NY Doctor Proves Everyone Wrong About Hydroxychloroquine

https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/02/07/hydroxychloroquine-for-covid.aspx  Video with Dr. Zelenko Here

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • As early as March 2020, Dr. Vladimir Zelenko boasted a near-100% success rate treating COVID-19 patients with hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), azithromycin and zinc sulfate for five days
  • Zelenko has now treated 3,000 patients with COVID-19 symptoms and only three high-risk patients have died
  • Misinformation and outright lies were spun about HCQ, including fabricated research, in an apparent effort to suppress and prevent widespread use
  • Early treatment is crucial. During the first five days of SARS-CoV-2 infection, the viral load remains fairly steady. Around Day 5, it exponentially increases, potentially overwhelming your immune system. To prevent complications, treatment needs to begin within the first five days of symptom onset
  • Early treatment is also crucial to prevent “long-haul” symptoms after recovery. None of Zelenko’s patients who started their treatment within the first five days went on to develop long-haul symptoms

Many doctors around the world started using the anti-malaria drug hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) early on in the COVID-19 pandemic. Among them is Dr. Vladimir Zelenko, a practicing physician in a Jewish community in Monroe County, New York.

He garnered national attention in March 2020 when he told radio host Sean Hannity that he’d had a near-100% success rate treating COVID-19 patients with HCQ, azithromycin and zinc sulfate for five days.1 “I’ve seen remarkable results; it really prevents progression of disease, and patients get better,” he said at the time.

In response, county health officials said Zelenko’s claims were “unsubstantiated” and urged residents to listen to public health officials.2 In this interview, he explains how HCQ works against COVID-19, and discusses the lies spun about the drug to suppress its widespread use. Zelenko had a very active Twitter account and would get millions of views on his tweets, and like many other truth tellers in this crazy pandemic, he was censored and recently removed from Twitter.

“When we have a large population of people that need to be treated, it has to be oral, cheap, safe and effective,” he says. “By the way, this is not new. This information was known in 2005 — even before.

There are papers with [Dr. Anthony] Fauci’s name on it, calling [HCQ] a miracle drug. Fauci called HCQ a vaccine. There’s a paper in which he called it an absolute dream treatment and vaccine. So, it’s conveniently forgotten but that’s what it is. It’s a matter of scientific record.”

What is most impressive to me is that he, through deep research and trial and error in the trenches, determined an incredibly effective protocol, and he did this under enormous personal health challenges. During the spring of last year, he was diagnosed with a type of pulmonary sarcoma that is typically considered terminal, and although improved, he continues to be under treatment for this condition.

Finding Solutions to Avoid a Death Trap

As the SARS-CoV-2 swept through his tight-knit Jewish community, Zelenko was seeing anywhere from 50 to 250 patients per day. At this point, he’s treated more than 3,000 patients with COVID-19-related symptoms. Only one-third of them actually received the triple-drug regimen. The remaining two-thirds were in low-risk categories and did not need drug treatment.

In all, Zelenko has only had 15 patients who ended up requiring hospitalization, four of whom were intubated. All were eventually successfully extubated and recovered. The remaining 11 were admitted for intravenous antibiotics for pneumonia. In all, only three of his high-risk patients died from COVID-19, which puts the mortality rate for this treatment at just 0.3%.

“You cannot ignore that. That’s not even counting the risk stratification patients, which I chose not to treat. In other words, I was able to tell these patients, ‘I know you’re going to be fine. Go home, and you’ll be fine.’ And that has value.

If you include those, the mortality rate is even less. And this has been reproduced. You don’t have to listen to me. You can call it anecdotal all you want, but there are now Harvard professors of virology with 4,000 patient experiences.

Dr. George Fareed, for example, or Dr. Harvey Risch from Yale School of Epidemiology, who has shown that it’s absolutely statistically proven that HCQ used in the prehospital setting is absolutely effective. It’s impossible for it to be a mistake,” he says.

Click here to learn more

Why HCQ?

Zelenko tells the story of how he got started treating COVID-19 patients with HCQ:

“Hospitals were near capacity and all the outpatient services were closed. Half my staff was sick and all of a sudden I had a war zone. I basically started learning triage medicine, trying to save as many people as possible.

At that time, the whole world had been focusing on building respirators and hospital capacity [instead of putting] emphasis on prehospital care. I found that bizarre because that’s never what we do in medicine. We [use] common sense and intervene in the earliest stages.

It’s much easier to fix a small problem than a large problem. For example, someone has cancer, we don’t wait for it to become metastatic disease. We treat as soon as possible. Someone has a small infection. We put the infection out.

If you look at the CDC, they recommend starting the treatment of influenza with antiviral drugs within the first 48 hours, not the week, except when it came to COVID-19. We were told to send patients home, and when they get sicker, send them to the hospital, where there was a good chance they were going to get intubated, especially in March and April.

At that point, in the city, they had mortality rates above 80%. So, it was a death sentence. None of that made sense to me at all. So, I quickly started to brush up on my virology.

I wanted to understand how this virus works and more importantly, what I can do about it. A series on YouTube called MedCram, Episode 34, saved the world. It explains the biology behind how zinc inhibits RNA polymerase, and the fact that zinc can’t get into the cell. So, it needs help.”

Zelenko goes on to describe how he settled on HCQ, a so-called zinc ionophore, meaning it shuttles zinc into the cell. He decided to treat high-risk patients as early as possible, and this turned out to be key. Early treatment really saves lives when it comes to COVID-19. This is not a situation where the wait-and-see strategy is well-advised.

According to Zelenko, during the first five days of SARS-CoV-2 infection, the viral load remains fairly steady. Around Day 5, it exponentially increases, potentially overwhelming the immune system. This also meant he could not afford to wait for test results, which took about five days. By then, most patients would already have progressed too far.

So, if a patient exhibited symptoms, especially if they reported loss of taste or smell as well, he’d start treatment immediately. In hindsight, about 90% of the tests of people experiencing symptoms had a positive test.

The Synergy of HCQ and Zinc

Zelenko likens HCQ and zinc like a gun and a bullet. HCQ is the gun that shoots the zinc into the cell. Zinc is the silver bullet that kills the virus by inhibiting an enzyme associated with viral replication inside the cell. The antibiotic azithromycin is given to prevent bacterial pneumonia and other secondary bacterial infections that are common in COVID-19.

Today, we have even more information, of course, which means there are more tools available beside HCQ, zinc and antibiotics. Ivermectin, for example, appears very useful, especially for prevention, as do steroids and blood thinners. So, Zelenko will now tweak the treatment of individual patients based on their symptoms.

“It’s not a cookie cutter approach, but what is absolutely the same is that high-risk patients must be treated as soon as possible, within the first five days from onset of symptoms, and they all survive, he says.

The Psychological Operation Against HCQ

Unfortunately, as discussed by Zelenko, there was essentially a “psychological operation” put into place to scare people away from HCQ. A big part of that was turning it into a political issue. From the start, doctors who used the drug were threatened with the loss of their medical license, which is unheard of for a drug with such a long history of safe use.

The U.S. government made matters worse by only issuing emergency use authorization for in-hospital use and not for outpatient settings. Meanwhile, HCQ has been used for about 60 years in people with chronic conditions such as lupus and rheumatoid arthritis.

“So, the hypocrisy, the loss of common sense, the outright indoctrination killed a lot of people,Zelenko says. “The root cause of it is the way we educate people. It used to be that higher education was about teaching critical thought and deductive reasoning, analytical analysis.

Now we indoctrinate people into responding to stimuli like dogs, like automatons, like robots. Common sense no longer matters. That’s my critique of higher education and why I think many physicians fell into the trap. Also, this country was traumatized. Even if a doctor was willing to give it, patients were afraid to take it.”

The biggest reason for the fear was unfortunately due to falsified studies and trials using toxic doses. It’s difficult to not suspect an ulterior motive in light of those facts. As noted by Zelenko, a main component of pandemic response, namely prehospital or outpatient treatment, was suppressed.

The question is why? One obvious reason was that it was a presidential election year, and then-president Trump came out in support of HCQ in March 2020. His announcement sparked immediate backlash from a chronically hostile media. “There were plenty of people willing to use every possible way to vilify the president and to discredit anything that might give him a win,” Zelenko says.

Then, of course, there were financial interests at play. Millions of dollars were being invested into new drugs like remdesivir, for example — a drug that costs more than $3,000 per treatment and is only for in-hospital use.

Hospitals were also paid tens of thousands of dollars more for COVID-19 patients, so there was no lack of incentive to get people into the hospital and keep them there either. Meanwhile, Zelenko’s early outpatient treatment costs about $20.

Fraudulent Studies Fueled Distrust

As for the fraudulent and misleading studies, the first to raise alarm was a VA study in Virginia, which found HCQ didn’t prevent death. However, they only used it on late-stage patients who were already on ventilators. From there, they incorrectly extrapolated that it would not be helpful in earlier stages, which simply isn’t true. Other trials simply used the wrong dosage.

While doctors reporting success with the drug are using standard doses around 200 mg to 400 mg per day for either a few days or maybe a couple of weeks, studies such as the Bill & Melinda Gates-funded3 Recovery Trial used 2,400 mg of hydroxychloroquine during the first 24 hours — three to six times higher than the daily dosage recommended4 — followed by 400 mg every 12 hours for nine more days for a cumulative dose of 9,200 mg over 10 days.

Similarly, the Solidarity Trial,5 led by the World Health Organization, used 2,000 mg on the first day, and a cumulative dose of 8,800 mg over 10 days. These doses are simply too high. More is not necessarily better. Too much, and guess what? You might kill the patient. As noted by Zelenko, these doses are “enough to kill an elephant.”

It’s really unclear as to why these studies used such enormous doses, seeing how the dosages this drug is normally prescribed in, for a range of conditions, never go that high.

“All those studies did was prove that if you poison someone with lethal doses of a drug, they’re going to die,” Zelenko says.

Then there was the famous Lancet study that the World Health Organization used to justify essentially banning HCQ. This study was withdrawn when it was discovered that the data had been completely and utterly fabricated with falsely generated data from a fly-by-night company. It was supposed to be a meta-analysis of about 90,000 patients, which showed HCQ had lethal effects.

Unfortunately, before it was withdrawn, this fake study resulted in the WHO (or to quote Zelenko, the “world homicide organization”) putting a moratorium on the use of HCQ, which didn’t improve public trust in the drug. Even more egregious, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration used that fake paper as one of its justifications for removing the emergency use authorization for HCQ, even though the study had already been retracted.

Suppression of HCQ Needlessly Killed Tens of Thousands

According to Zelenko, “HCQ is the safest medication in the history of medicine, azithromycin is one of the most common antibiotics used in medicine, and zinc is a mineral that’s well-known and well-tolerated. These drugs were affordable and available to take at home, which was very important. And they worked.”

June 30, 2020, Zelenko and two co-authors published a study,6 showing that treating COVID-19 patients who had confirmed positive test results “as early as possible after symptom onset” with zinc, low dose HCQ and azithromycin reduced odds of hospitalization by 84% and all-cause death by 500% compared to no treatment at all.

Crazy enough, even though Zelenko went to great lengths to share his clinical findings with the White House and the National Institutes of Health, he received no support and was told they had no use for it.

“What’s happened over the last 20 years is that the academic elite and pharmaceutical industry have bred a monopoly on medical truth,” he says.

“They feel only data generated through randomized control trials, pharmaceutical sponsored trials, or those that are coming out of major academic institutions are to be viewed as truth. Anything coming from a frontline country doctor must be anecdotal.

That’s the crime here. And they created artificial barriers that prevented the flow of common sense and lifesaving information. You know which countries did take it seriously? See, this is a disease of affluence because the rich countries could afford the waste of money. The poor countries like Honduras … they had no options.

They couldn’t afford respirators. They didn’t have enough hospital capacity. So, they gravitated towards the cheap generic approaches. And those are the ones that have the best outcomes.”

Zelenko highlights Uganda, which has a population of about 50 million people, yet has recorded just 325 deaths.7I think this was a genocide against the elderly and a crime against humanity,” he says. “There are plenty of people who have blood on their hands, including the media.”

Coordinated Effort to Cause Harm

He also stresses that the pandemic response, including the suppression of HCQ, has clearly been a global coordinated effort.

“You have to ask yourself, who benefits from a destabilized world? Who benefits from chaos on the streets, from anarchy, from financial despair, from psychological trauma? … In some parts of this country, suicide rates are up 600%.

I speak to my colleagues in emergency rooms — the amount of child abuse and spousal abuse they’ve seen is absolutely ridiculous. The amount of collateral damage from preventable illnesses, like heart disease and cancer that are skyrocketing because people are not getting access to routine care.

A lot of people weren’t getting elective surgeries on time. So, there’s been a lot of collateral damage. The shutdown is killing more people than the virus. The virus is not dangerous if you approach it correctly. If you treat it in the right timeframe, it’s no different than a bad flu. You can deal with it. You don’t have to shut down the world.”

The True Agenda Coming Into Plain Sight

Indeed, the world is becoming increasingly black and white and it’s becoming easier and easier to see that global and national systems are not benefiting but, rather, enslaving the population, and how they’re doing it. As noted by Zelenko:

“I see the world now with such clarity … It’s no longer confusing. It’s a binary choice. It’s very clear who’s on what side. And here are the teams: There are those who want to live a life of God, conscious … Our lives have sanctity. They’re priceless and they should be preserved at all costs. And no one has the right to enslave another human being. That’s one approach.

The other is [internment] … an attempt to enslave, psychologically, and even more so physically, the world population. Do you want to know what’s coming? Look at Justin Trudeau statements. Justin Trudeau, the prime minister of Canada, just announced that anyone who tests positive will be quarantined in a government-run facility, until the government deems you safe to return back to society.

That’s [also] what Cuomo wants to do in New York. And I’ll tell you what I think. For what I’m about to say, I’m going to be labeled as a conspiracy theorist. But you know what? I don’t care because, eventually, the truth will come out and history will prove it right.

If you look at the United Nations and the World Economic Forum, they have a plan. They have a 30-year plan, they have 100-year plan. That’s all spelled out in their charter. Just look at it.

So there’s a plan called the 2030 plan. You can go to the World Economic Forum and look at their own words. It’s being run by Klaus Schwab and his group. He wrote a book called ‘The Great Reset.’ That’s where the term comes from.

Now, all the governments are quoting him, like Justin Trudeau, Prince Charles, the Australian prime minister. There’s a myriad of other politicians calling for the great reset. So, what is the great reset? What are they asking for?

No. 1, I mean it’s absolutely ridiculous, but they’re saying, ‘You will own nothing and you will be happy.’ That is their mission. No. 2, America will no longer be a superpower. No. 3, there will be a small group of nations that determine the direction of where the world goes. No. 4, you won’t eat meat except as an occasional treat.

No. 5, there’ll be a global tax on fossil fuels to eradicate the reliance on oil. No. 6, a billion refugees will be displaced [and] we’re going to have to incorporate them and absorb them into our society. These are their stated goals.

Now, how do you take the world’s biggest country, most powerful country, richest country and make it no longer a world superpower? Well, that’s exactly what they’re doing. The economy is in shambles.

You’ve put in a government now that is passing foreign relief aid to China, Russia, Syria, Iran, the Palestinian Authority. They’re sending billions of dollars now to financially support these countries. So, you have to ask yourself, what is going on here?

This all started many years ago, but when Trump went to Davos, in the first few years of his presidency, he said, ‘I’m not part of your globalist agenda. I’m going to put my national interest first.’ That was a poke in the eye of the globalists. That’s the point when George Soros came out and said that Trump is one of the most dangerous people on the planet and he needs to be brought down.

He was dangerous to their agenda. So, what we’re really fighting for is the soul of man. God is testing us, in my opinion. Every person is being asked one simple question, either bow down to God and have the divine presence protect you or you’re going to bow down to Bill Gates … I’m calling for Nuremberg 2.0. These people need to be brought to justice.”

There’s No Rational Justification for COVID-19 Vaccines

Zelenko also shares his views on the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines. He points out that while Gates is pushing COVID-19 vaccines, ostensibly to save lives, he’s on record saying he feels the world population needs to be reduced.

“If someone was a eugenicist and feels that the world population needs to be reduced, why would I take his vaccine for my health?” he asks. “The logical inconsistencies here are absolutely perverse.

I’m so pro-vaccine you can’t imagine. I’ve given tens of thousands of patients vaccinations. I give it to myself and to my children. However, I’m not COVID-19 vaccine positive. And I’ll tell you why: Because the majority of patients under the age of 45 have a near-100% recovery rate with a mild, runny nose from COVID-19. Why would I vaccinate someone with an experimental vaccine? The answer is not for medical reasons.

Another question, why would I give someone a vaccine, even if they are at high risk, if I can give them prophylaxis and/or early prehospital treatment and have a 100% recovery rate? Not for medical reasons.

Another question: Why would I give a vaccine to someone who’s already had COVID-19 and has antibodies? Not for medical reasons. And why would I give a very specific vaccine to someone who is going to be exposed to a ton of different variants and strains and mutations?

I wouldn’t. What I would use is an approach that inhibits RNA replication of RNA viruses, which works for all the strains, including, potentially, influenza. That’s the big dirty secret here.”

It’s Safe to Stop Living in Fear

Zelenko, who was born in a communist country and whose family suffered under communist and fascist rule, is quite sensitive to the signs of these authoritarian regimes. He recounts a story told in the book “The Gulag Archipelago” by Alexander Solzhenitsyn.

Stalin wanted to dig a canal from Moscow to St. Petersburg. The work, done in the middle of winter, led to the death of 400,000 prison workers, as they weren’t given the appropriate clothes or tools. The bodies were thrown into the cement and became a permanent part of the canal.

“No ship ever used the canal because it was too shallow. So, the question was, why was this canal built? And the answer is: So that 400,000 people would die,” Zelenko says.

“I’m not attacking the vaccine. I’m attacking the need for the vaccine. I have not enough information to say it’s good or bad. And I don’t like to guess. But what I can tell you is that I know for a fact that 99.98% of young and healthy people under the age of 45 recover, with no treatment.

I also know for a fact, from my own real-world battle-tested evidence, which has been reproduced now on hundreds of thousands of patients, that if you intervene early, you essentially eliminate hospitalization and death. And, I’ve now treated two waves. I have not seen one patient who’s had COVID-19 in the first wave, get it again …

So, the need for the vaccine doesn’t exist. It’s … been artificially conflated … offering people an artificial false hope solution in order to enslave them to be codependent on government. You know why my approach is so dangerous? Because not only does it treat COVID-19, [but] it treats anxiety. It tells people you don’t need to worry.

My statement to the American people or whoever’s listening is: Return to normal living. You do not need to worry. And by the way, there are nonprescription options … that can replace HCQ if your government or doctor are too stupid or vicious to give it to you. So, you don’t have to rely on them. You can buy over-the-counter things that will save your own life. So, my point is, return back to normal life …

It’s unbelievable the crime that’s been done on the human psyche. I’m screaming to humanity: Don’t be scared! Be cautious. Be smart. Use common sense. But don’t be scared. Return back to life. Reengage in life.”

HCQ Mechanisms of Action and Alternatives

Over-the-counter alternatives to HCQ include EGCG (green tea extract) and quercetin, both of which are zinc ionophores and therefore work much like HCQ does. Quercetin works best when taken in conjunction with vitamin C, however, as the vitamin C helps activate it. Zelenko recommends taking 1,000 milligrams of vitamin C with it.

Now, HCQ does have other mechanisms of action beside being a zinc ionophore, so it’s a better choice, but if you simply cannot get it, EGCG or quercetin are viable stand-ins. Additional benefits of HCQ include:

  • Inhibiting viral entry into the cytoplasm, in part by changing the pH
  • Inhibiting cytokine storms through anti-inflammatory properties
  • Stabilizing red blood cells, which improves oxygenation

“Since it has four different mechanisms of action, it’s a very effective drug, and it has a half-life of 50 days in plasma,” Zelenko says. “But if you can’t get it, you can’t get it. So, I’ll take quercetin or EGCG.”

The caveat here is you must implement this treatment within the right timeframe. It can be helpful to recognize we are in essence dealing with two diseases, or stages of disease, here.

First, there’s the viral infection, and second, there’s the immune over-response that leads to the release of inflammatory cytokines and agents that can cause blood clots. The key is to prevent the progression from the first stage to the second.

Prescription Help Is Available

Like many others who have dared run the gauntlet that is HCQ promotion, Zelenko has been attacked from several angles. His character has been assassinated in the press, his medical credentials questioned and threatened, and his online presence silenced.

“I had had zero media experience before March 2020. I am of a quiet doctor who was taking care of his patients, living a serene life. All of a sudden, this all exploded on me …

I was on Twitter, getting 10 million impressions per tweet. They shut me down last month for platform manipulation. I’m not even sure what that means. So, I had to develop my own website. It’s free and has my protocols in 20 different languages.”

To learn more about Zelenko’s protocol, be sure to visit his website, vladimirzelenkomd.com. There, you’ll find protocols not only for early treatment but also prophylaxis, along with studies that document the rationale for each of the treatment components and patient testimonials.

His website also includes access to telemedicine via “Speak With an MD,” which can overnight your medication. “So, if you live in a state that’s tyrannical, you can have a consultation with Dr. Fields,” Zelenko says. “I had to develop this because there were patients around the country who didn’t have access [to HCQ].”

HCQ should be available to most people in the U.S. at this point, but you do need a prescription, and some doctors are still unwilling or resistant to prescribe it. Other times, pharmacies can create roadblocks. “It may take some diligence but none of my patients goes without the medication written for them,” he says.

Early Treatment Prevents ‘Long Haul’ Side Effects

In closing, it’s worth noting that when you treat early, your risk of developing long-term side effects, commonly referred to as “long-haulers,” is virtually nil. Not a single one of Zelenko’s patients who received treatment within the first five days of symptom onset went on to develop long-haul symptoms afterward.

“I had patients that were long-haulers, but they came to me after that window, and they were already advanced in the inflammatory process. At that point, the cytokine storm had already taken hold. They had developed blood clots, some of them had pulmonary infarct, or strokes actually.

Others developed ARDS or catastrophic lung damage and pneumonias, and others just are not themselves. I don’t know how to describe it, but it ate away part of their souls. They’re not the same people. There’s depression, there’s lack of energy. There’s a psychological impact as well.

So, it’s not that I don’t deal with long-haulers, I do. But the way to prevent the long-hauler syndrome is to intervene within the first five days, with appropriate antiviral medication in high-risk patients. That is 100% successful,” he says.

The Light of Truth Will Prevail

Zelenko refers to the COVID-19 pandemic and everything surrounding it as an information war, a propaganda war, and his primary objective and agenda in this war is to educate and speak truth.

“There’s a lot of false narrative being pumped into the heads of people, to create fear,he says. “In the Psalms of David, it says, ‘With crooked people, you have to deal crookedly.’ It also says you should learn from a thief.

So, I learned from the enemy, and I use their tactics to counter them. The main tactic is to spread truth. By the way, it’s no longer dependent on me. I have second and third and fourth generation leaders that have taken on the mission and are really spreading the knowledge worldwide.

It’s unstoppable. They could try to slow it down, and they are. But the truth will come out. The truth is coming out. And when the truth will be revealed, the people that try to obstruct it and use lies to slaughter, will be destroyed by it, God willing.

I am now more optimistic than I’ve ever been, simply because there’s no more confusion. Life was very confusing. You didn’t know what was good, what was bad. Now, it’s very clear. There’s much more bad, that’s true. But I know where it is. I know where the enemy is. And I know where the good is. And a little light pushes away a lot of darkness.”

+ Sources and References