The history of REMDESIVIR

January 23, 2022
ChesterView says:


The history of remdesivir alone, recounted in detail in “The Real Anthony Fauci”, should be enough to send him to the Big House for the rest of his already too long life. This is a drug that:

a) was developed by the NIAID and CDC, at a not inconsiderable cost, for Zika and Ebola but was dropped from those trials due to its toxicity;

b) resurrected by Fauci when he saw a chance to repurpose it for Covid;

c) in Covid trials, it showed no effect on mortality, which was the original end point of the trials, but since it (very arguably) showed some slight reduction in length of hospital stay, the end point of the trial was – in midstream !! – changed to … wait for it … shortened hospital stays;

d) seeing that very slight (and dubious) reduction in hospital stays, Fauci abruptly ended the trials after only a short period and granted it EUA status, citing the justification that to withhold an effective medication in the middle of an epidemic would not be ethical. (Spoiler alert: he does this a lot.)

e) made this medication standard of care for hospitals in the treatment of Covid across the country at roughly $3,000 per course of treatment. When a medication is standard of care at least two things happen: 1) it is eligible for insurance reimbursement, and 2) medical professionals can be sued for malpractice if it is not administered.

Of course, its use is a scandal. Why? Here is why:

1) it is an antiviral medication but can only be administered in a hospital setting since it must be given intravenously. By the time someone is in the hospital they are past the viral stage of the disease and are well in the cytokine / inflammation phase. It could not be better designed to fail.

2) it is highly toxic, causing serious organ damage, particularly to kidneys. If covid does not kill you, the odds are that remdesivir will do the job. Cutting the trials short obscured the toxic effects of continued use of the medication.

3) remember that all the while there were very good indications that HCQ and ivermectin, which could be administered at home when the viral stage of the disease was present, were safe and effective. Of course, if either was approved then remdesivir could not be used, so Fauci’s lack of interest, even sub rosa sabotage, of those two medications is fully understandable.

These are just the highlights of this sordid story. The full accounting as laid out in the book is even more damning.

The use of remdesivir is so embarrassingly scandalous that even the WHO recommends against it as a Covid treatment.