The Corona-virus cure: Early treatment with HydroxyChloroQuine +Zinc + Zithromax. Negative studies all dealt with late stage hospitalized patients.

Without a double blind study of the effectiveness of HCQ + Zn +Zmax the evidence is in. This chart show the difference:

Of these countries France stands out. It did not use the HCQ+  package in the beginning, but after two very positive studies the doctors starting prescribing the early treatment, and since then France show a pronounced decrease in new deaths.

Sweden tried another approach: No lock-down, schools open, restaurants serving, stores open, but large gatherings such as sports and music events stopped, only use personal hygiene and practice social distancing. Sweden is now very close to have achieved “herd immunity”, new cases and death have nearly stopped.

The study shown here lists both positive and negative studies. All negative reports have been with hospitalized patients where the second phase, the “storm” has already set in. At this late stage the HZQ+ treatment may even worsen the situation. For these cases stereoid treatments or Remdesivir may offer the best hope. Early treatment, both as prophylactics early intervention were all positive (over 30 studies) whereas late intervention studies were only 61% positive.

Here is but one of the scholarly papers listing treatment options. It has been out since April 6, so the treatment options have been known for a long time. Meanwhile, our medical professionals are waiting for the double blind study, and in the meantime people are unnecessarily dying by the thousands.

Wake up, America!

Which is more threatening? The attack in Paris, or Climate Change?

Watching with horror the multiple simultaneous Islamic terrorist attacks on innocent civilians in Paris, France, while Paris was under the highest possible alert for terrorist activities, the French President Hollande among the spectators at a soccer match between France and Germany, and the climate control conference COP21 only two weeks away, the words of President Obama still rings in my ears:

“My definition of leadership would be leading on climate change, an international accord that potentially we’ll get in Paris. My definition of leadership is mobilizing the entire world community to make sure that Iran doesn’t get a nuclear weapon.”

Obama is also quite proud of his milestones on climate change, particularly after reaching a “historic” deal with China in 2014.

“The historic climate change announcements that we made last year in Beijing have encouraged other countries to step up, as well, increasing the prospects for a stronger global agreement this year,” Obama said in September during a meeting with Chinese President Xi at the White House. This historic agreement means that China is allowed to emit six times more CO2 than U.S.A. by the year 2030.

According to a well-researched article by Bjorn Lomborg, peer-reviewed, entitled “Impact of Current Climate Proposals” the predictions of how a total success in implementing all climate mediation recommendations, the result will be:

This article investigates the temperature reduction impact of major climate policy proposals implemented by 2030, using the standard MAGICC climate model. Even optimistically assuming that promised emission cuts are maintained throughout the century, the impacts are generally small.

  • The impact of the US Clean Power Plan (USCPP) is a reduction in temperature rise by 0.013°C by 2100.
  • The full US promise for the COP21 climate conference in Paris, its so-called Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (INDC) will reduce temperature rise by 0.031°C.
  • The EU 20-20 policy has an impact of 0.026°C, the EU INDC 0.053°C, and China INDC 0.048°C.
  • All climate policies by the US, China, the EU and the rest of the world, implemented from the early 2000s to 2030 and sustained through the century will likely reduce global temperature rise about 0.17°C in 2100.

These impact estimates are robust to different calibrations of climate sensitivity, carbon cycling and different climate scenarios. Current climate policy promises will do little to stabilize the climate and their impact will be undetectable for many decades.

Of particular interest is the impact of the US Clean Power Plan (USCPP) with its reduction in temperature rise by 0.013°C by 2100.

How much is 0.013 degrees? It is about as much as the adiabatic cooling of the atmosphere occurring between the feet and the head of an average sized person.

For this Obama is killing our Coal mining, while still calling the China climate agreement a success, allowing them to burn over half of the coal in the world.

And this is the most urgent danger facing us today?