Analysis of the EAP, page-481

I'll just add that persons of good faith of all political persuasions should be concerned about truth in science. There are many examples of the vulnerability of science going back years.

Two of the most prestigious medical journals in the world areThe Lancet and The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM). Yesterday they both retracted articles dealing with the use of medications in Covid-19. In the case of the former, the article had claimed use of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in C-19 was associated with a higher mortality rate. This was based on a retrospective review of a large multi-national database. Retrospective studies must always be regarded with care, but the significance of the article was that it led to the suspension of some ongoing prospective studies of HCQ over safety concerns...

One can argue the wisdom of the President getting involved in the issue in the early days of C-19 in the US. I can argue both sides. But at the end of the day, we're left with a far more important issue: what IS the truth about HCQ and C-19? Is it safe? No one knows for sure. So the the ONLY way to know is to perhaps sacrifice some lives in a carefully controlled blinded prospective study of HCQ vs placebo. Not a moot point. HCQ appears to be safe after years of use for malaria prophylaxis and inflammatory conditions. But C-19 is "different". The diffuse endotheliitis it can cause may irritate the heart. And the irritated heart may be prone to cardiac arrest when subjected to HCQ... in a small percentage of cases. Small enough that they'll be chalked up to "natural causes" in the outpatients most likely to be using the medication. So the world needs an accurate answer. An "unbiased" answer.

There was a somewhat similar situation with childhood vaccines, also involving The Lancet. In 1998 Dr. Andrew Wakefield had published a study suggesting childhood MMR vaccination was a cause of autism. This was based on preconceived notions and false data. It took the medical world 12 years to debunk the claim;The Lancet retracted the paper finally in 2010. But the damage had been done. Children had suffered. To this day many associate vaccines with autism...even in the elderly! Many lives are lost due to these kinds of shenanigans. Better to save years and sacrifice a few at the beginning to get accurate results.

Then move on to the next thorny issue facing humankind, like C-19 ARDS.