Studies Showing Positive Results From Hydroxychloroquine, COVID-19 Wonder Drug


Touted by Trump and vilified by the media, Hydroxychloroquine has had a rough ride, but appears to be coming out on top.

When COVID-19 first began its scourge of the United States, one drug was considered to be the only real chance for those critically ill, Hydroxychloroquine.

First pushed by New York Doctor Vladimir Zelenko in his pre-hospital trio of preventative drugs, the government bought a massive number of the pills, and allowed physicians emergency use for the pandemic.

Yet soon after President Trump took up the call for the medication, the media turned on the life saving drug, calling it “dangerous,” and “controversial.”

At first, multiple scientific study’s appeared to prove that the medication did not help, placing enough pressure that many hospitals stopped providing the medication to their patients, and ongoing studies were terminated.

One of the most impactful studies was published in the Medical Journal “The Lancet,” but was retracted just a few days later after multiple issued were found with the study. But the damage was done, and many had already stopped taking or prescribing the medication.

Over the last few days, multiple studies have been released showing that Hydroxychloroquine had a positive effect, in fact a lifesaving one.

In one of the most recent ones published by the Henry Ford Health System in Detroit Michigan, they wrote “In a large-scale retrospective analysis of 2,541 patients hospitalized between March 10 and May 2, 2020 across the system’s six hospitals, the study found 13% of those treated with hydroxychloroquine alone died compared to 26.4% not treated with hydroxychloroquine.”

“The findings have been highly analyzed and peer-reviewed,” said Dr. Marcus Zervos, division head of Infectious Disease for Henry Ford Health System, who co-authored the study with Henry Ford epidemiologist Dr. Samia Arshad. “We attribute our findings that differ from other studies to early treatment, and part of a combination of interventions that were done in supportive care of patients, including careful cardiac monitoring. Our dosing also differed from other studies not showing a benefit of the drug. And other studies are either not peer reviewed, have limited numbers of patients, different patient populations or other differences from our patients.”

While there is still much study needed before conclusive evidence of the effects are made, there appears to be mounting proof that the drug is indeed a lifesaver.