Concernant l’HCQ et l’IVM, leur réponse est un gros mensonge, ils font comme si n’existaient que les études de Raoult et Recovery ; or il en existe bien d’autres, et l’efficacité de ces 2 molécules en traitement précoce a été largement démontrée par de multiples études aujourd’hui.
https://c19study.com/https://c19ivermectin.com/Concernant le risque d’anticorps facilitants, c’est un risque admis par Ralph Baric (entre autres) :
“There is the potential for ADE, but the bigger problem is probably Th2 immunopathology,” says Ralph Baric […]Baric expresses his concern about what that might mean for use of a COVID-19 vaccine in elderly people. “Of course, the elderly are our most vulnerable population,” he adds.
Experts generally agree that animal experiments and human clinical trials of candidate vaccines for COVID-19, which is caused by the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), should include a careful assessment of possible immune complications before releasing the vaccine to the public. If any of the mechanisms under investigation are indeed involved, they say, the resulting risks are real. “You really have to test a vaccine carefully,” says Marc Lipsitch, an epidemiologist at the Harvard Chan School of Public Health in Boston, MA, “and not just roll it out because people are clamoring for it with an epidemic underway.”
https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/early ... 7.full.pdf
Concernant la "transcriptase inverse", j’aimerais bien qu’Alexandra Henrion-Caude soit confrontée à ceux qui la contredisent sur un plateau télé ; cela permettrait peut-être d’y voir plus clair, et de mieux comprendre si ce risque existe ou pas.
