"In patients with gunshot wounds to the legs, tourniquets applied in the hospital not only didn't help outcomes compared to no tourniquet - they were associated with more deaths."

This is why Raoult Didier called the flawed VA propaganda study of hydroxychloroquine MISCONDUCT.

Now - let me blow everybody's mind even further. Science is [supposedly] protected against "self-deception" and confirmation bias / refutation bias by double-blind, peer review, etc.

PROBLEM: none of this is designed to work against DECEPTION by those who CONTROL science.

Socialists like the CCP and DNC understand that media control + science organization control allows science control. Apply pressure in the right places and the output of science can be enhanced or diminished, inverted or skewed.

We just began a LABORATORY DEMO of this effect.

Hydroxychloroquine is a REAL TIME DEMO of how politics + media change the SCIENCE we perceive. Most of us missed the action by not spotting this effect with the AGW hoax, and we barely caught it when the scam morphed to "climate change".

But HCQ? OH, WE HAVE THEM NOW.

First, why my "uniformly biased" view of HCQ favors all dogs in this fight.

(1) I already had COVID, (2) LOVE quinine history, (3) LOVE old drugs, (4) LOVE the new "-avir" class drugs, (5) LOVE vaccines [although I'm having some doubts lately].

LOGICAL THINKING

HCQ operates by a known antiviral mechanism. Remdesivir operates by a known antiviral mechanism. Vaccines for viruses operate by a known antiviral mechanism. Logical thinking, starting there, puts ALL of these "on the table", several steps AHEAD of "mystery mechanism" drugs.

This is an example of THEORETICAL TENABILITY. It is perfectly valid to be BIASED TOWARD THE EXPLAINABLE. This is how the PROS do science. Just like COPS. Just like inspectors. I don't care what some TV scientist says, with their DNC talking points. Explainability matters.

However, OBSERVATIONS matter MORE. It's how science learns. And when the OBSERVATIONS match the EXPLANATION, then you very likely have something worthwhile in BOTH.

THAT is Raoult Didier's first HCQ study w/ a mere 6 patients showing 6/6 better and w/ 2 day virus crash.

Note that this result seems different from a PRIOR study of HCQ + zinc done by South Koreans. Those results were positive, but not as good as Didier's study using HCQ and azithromycin (AZM).

And - very important point - we need to look at WHY these studies used these drugs.

HCQ + zinc is meant to target VERY DIRECTLY the known antiviral mechanism of "zinc ionophore plus zinc".

But Didier did something different.

HCQ + AZM is meant to target "virus plus absolutely any other microbial cause of pneumonia". It assumes "there's enough zinc present".

Zelenko's 1st insight was to combine these 2 studies, saying "let's make sure there's plenty of zinc", thus using the "trifecta" of HCQ/AZM/Zn.

But his bigger 2nd insight was this. The Zn-based antiviral mechanism stops virus replication to stop lung damage.

EARLIER IS BETTER.