Did Fauci’s organization, the National Institutes of Health, approve HCQ to fight coronaviruses in 2005?
From our research, we found that The Virology Journal, which is an officially recognized publication of Dr. Fauci’s National Institutes of Health, did, in fact, publish the THIS ARTICLE on August 22, 2005. The title of the piece is, shockingly, “Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and spread.”
We were also blown away when we found this in the article itself: “Chloroquine has strong antiviral effects on SARS-CoV infection of primate cells. These inhibitory effects are observed when the cells are treated with the drug either before or after exposure to the virus, suggesting both prophylactic and therapeutic advantage.”
As most already know, The COVID-19 virus is classified as a coronavirus. It has the label of SARS-CoV-2. And though it’s certainly not identical to SARS-CoV-1, it is relatively closely related genetically. In fact, SARS-CoV-2 shares a substantial 79% of its genome with its viral predecessor. Both viruses also use the same host cell receptor, which is why many believe these factors make HCQ a viable treatment option.
However, the Virology Journal should not be mistaken with the Journal of Virology. The two terms have been used interchangeably in media reports all over the web, but they’re actually two different publications. We’ve also seen it widely reported that the article touts HCQ as a cure. But from our review, “cure” is not mentioned or implied at any point in the study. Instead the report indicates prevention and treatment. Additionally, many reports have stated that Fauci’s organization itself approved the use of the drug, but that’s not true either. The NIH hosts and supports literally thousands of journals, the aforementioned being two of those.
The High Points
- The article and study, and HCQ research ARE real.
- Fauci was not personally involved in the 2005 HCQ publication.
- The NIH supports many journals, and the Virology Journal is one of those.
- While the data was published and is backed by Fauci’s NIH, he himself did not provide endorsement for the findings.
- Out of hundreds of thousands of articles in tens of thousands of journals, it’s perfectly reasonable to assume Fauci was unaware of this specific study when this whole ‘rona’ mess popped off. However, it’s also reasonable to assume that he was expediently MADE aware of the findings, and their publication in the NIH archive of journals, early on as well. Given the resources available to his team, it’s plausible that he’s known about the findings and the publication for some time.
So, the truth is:
-Yes, the HCQ findings are there.
-Yes, The study is real.
-No, Fauci did not participate in the study in any way.
-No, there is no overt indication that he was/is actively repressing or covering up the research (though, we do concede if one were trying to cover something up, there likely wouldn’t be any public information confirming such a plan, as others have suggested).
-Yes, the findings and article are arguably still sticking points in the current and ongoing HCQ debate, as they vehemently support The Frontline Doctors‘ claims in full.
So, there you have it. If we uncover more information pertaining to this particular subject, we’ll update this article in full.