Why are we being told that we must wait for a vaccine to be able to return to normal life when there are effective therapies available now?

To Whom It May Concern,

Media reports give the impression that there are no treatments for COVID-19 when in fact, significant scientific evidence proves there are inexpensive pharmaceutical and natural treatments that are working well to completely heal COVID-19.

Numerous studies show that intravenous vitamin C can completely stop COVID-19, and hospitals in the US and around the world are using it successfully.  Why isn’t the CDC, WHO, and media recommending this no-downside therapy?  Orthomolecular Medicine News Service reported on 29 published studies on Vitamin C as consideration for pneumonia, lung infections, and COVID-19.

Or for those who prefer a pharmaceutical option, there is Chloroquine.  Again, there are a number of studies worldwide showing the effectiveness of Chloroquine:

• Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin as a treatment of COVID-19: results of an open-label non-randomized clinical trial

• Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine as available weapons to fight COVID-19

• Correspondence from Dr. Vladimir Zelenko on Treatment of COVID-19 in New York

• Chloroquine Confirmed Effective as Coronavirus Cure, But Should Be Taken With Caution

The media has been quick to promote Anthony Fauci’s criticism of Chloroquine and question Trump’s declaration that Chloroquine is a promising treatment.  While Trump is certainly distrusted by many Americans, given that Chloroquine is a 70+-year-old medication with generics available, it is unlikely that he or his people will realize any significant financial gain.

Anthony Fauci, who has strong ties to pharmaceutical interests, has said that Chloroquine and other therapies are not effective against COVID-19.  He has gone so far when asked about the country getting back to normal as to say that it will only happen “when you can completely protect the population” with a vaccine and treatment.

The cost to society of treating moderate to severe cases with Chloroquine or Vitamin C which are both available today is minor.  The cost of putting the economy on hold while we wait for a vaccine to be developed, produced and distributed to every citizen is astronomical.  

If a COVID-19 Therapy Doesn’t Benefit a Stock, Does it Even Exist?

A recent headline on the Raymond James financial services website may give some indication as to why we’re not hearing about these treatments.  The March 10 headline read:  If a COVID-19 Therapy Doesn’t Benefit a Stock, Does it Even Exist? The article goes on to say:

Based on emerging data, chloroquine looks to be as promising a therapeutic candidate as any to treat COVID-19, and may turn out to be more effective, scalable, and affordable than … But chloroquine doesn’t directly benefit any stock, like GILD or REGN or ABBV, which is probably why it seems to be getting less attention.  That said, we are not the first to suggest chloroquine could be the solution to COVID-19 (the linked authors go so far as to say “if clinical data confirm the biological results, the novel coronavirus-associated disease will have become one of the simplest and cheapest to treat and prevent among infectious respiratory diseases.”) 

Later, the article states:

If there were a similar report of results in 100 remdesivir-treated patients demonstrating superiority vs. control, we guess it would make the rounds on the Street rapidly and impact GILD shares.  Chloroquine has no obvious associated stock so this is seemingly under-the-radar.

What the Raymond James article fails to mention is that the media is beholden to pharmaceutical interests.  Anyone who has watched the nightly news in recent years has seen that a large percentage of ads are for pharmaceutical products.  Thus, one might question whether we will ever hear of a low-profit treatment in the corporate-sponsored media.

We ask that you investigate this situation.  Thank you.