Lancet Study Blasting Hydroxychloroquine Based on Scam Data UPDATED

Lancet Study Blasting Hydroxychloroquine Based on Scam Data UPDATED

Lancet Study Blasting Hydroxychloroquine Based on Scam Data UPDATED

As reported in The Guardian, medical journal Lancet’s study that concluded hydroxychloroquine was useless, even possibly dangerous, to treat coronavirus, was based on data provided by US company, Surgisphere. Investigation is revealing it is a fake company with a fraudulent database. Funny, how these kind of errors always seem to be anti-Trump.

On 22 May the Lancet published a blockbuster peer-reviewed study which found the antimalarial drug hydroxychloroquine, which has been promoted by Donald Trump, was associated with a higher mortality rate in Covid-19 patients and increased heart problems. […]

The Lancet study, which listed Desai as one of the co-authors, claimed to have analysed Surgisphere data collected from nearly 15,000 patients with Covid-19, admitted to 1,200 hospitals around the world, who received hydroxychloroquine alone or in combination with antibiotics.

The negative findings made global news and prompted the WHO to halt the hydroxychloroquine arm of its global trials.

Global trial stopped due to this one study. Good news from actual doctors on the frontlines? Pfffff

Sapan Desai is the CEO of Surgisphere and wasn’t just listed as a co-author of the Lancet study, but as co-author of another study – this time in the Social Science Research Network e-library using his own company’s database – that allegedly demonstrated the drug ivermectin reduced the death-rate in coronavirus patients.

Yet, The Guardian has discovered through its own investigations that Surgisphere isn’t just incapable of analyzing the data it claims to have, but the data itself was not collected as claimed. The first red-flag was raised when, within days of the release of the Lancet study, Guardian Australia reported glaring errors in what Surgisphere claimed were data collected from Australian hospitals.

The Guardian has since contacted five hospitals in Melbourne and two in Sydney, whose cooperation would have been essential for the Australian patient numbers in the database to be reached. All denied any role in such a database, and said they had never heard of Surgisphere.

This is serious enough that the Lancet has published an “Expression of Concern” over the study.

How noble of them. When patients who could have been treated with hydroxychloroquine+zinc+zpak die or have serious, lifelong damage from the Peking Pox, I’m sure they’ll be comforted by an expression of concern.

Why did no one at Lancet ever raise one eyebrow over a CEO being credited as a co-author of a study based on his own company’s data? Why was no ostensible scientist connected to this study – that conveniently concluded ORANGEMANBAD’S HYDROXYCHLOROQUINE WILL KILL YA!! – spend even five minutes to check out if Surgisphere was even the company it pretended to be?

The company’s LinkedIn page has fewer than 100 followers and last week listed just six employees. This was changed to three employees as of Wednesday.

The Guardian also found that an employee listed as a science editor is a sci-fi writer and the marketing exec is a porn model. Also the “get in touch” link on the website redirected to a crypto-currency site. Did none of the “peer reviewers” of the Lancet study ever try to contact Surgisphere?

CEO Sapan Desai also appears to have a shady past and his Wikipedia page of extensive claims of multiple doctorates and clinical medical experience has suddenly gone POOF!

Surgisphere also refuses to actually share its data. While boasting of gathering data from 96,000 patients and 1200 hospitals around the world, it refuses to release any source information. Who are these hospitals? How was the information gathered? At least 120 doctors and researchers have come forward to dispute the Lancet study because of serious questions over methodology and transparency.

We’ve been here before, with so-called “peer-reviewed studies” that cannot be replicated. Too much of science has devolved into scientism where many practitioners claim a higher moral authority that shall not be questioned. But scientists are still human beings, subject to the same passions, possessors of the same flaws, as everyone else outside their priesthood. The Lancet study, used to sneer at Trump, is just another example.

Confirmation bias is a heady drug. When it comes to stage-4 TDS, it can be deadly.

UPDATED: Oh, looky – Lancet issues apology, withdraws study.

featured image composite by Darleen Click of standard licensed Adobe Stock images

Written by

  • Scott says:

    Come on Darleen, the left would NEVER cook the books or ignore flaws in someones research, just to advance an agenda…. I mean, they didn’t do it with global warming, er climate change.. ummm, ok, bad example. They haven’t done it with numbers relating to racist incidents like buildings being painted with swastikas, or Tawana Brawley… ok, another bad example… well, they never lied about the origins of slavery by putting all the blame on white people while failing to mention that those white slavers bought the slaves from other blacks in Africa… damn, that one is no good either… Ok, i give up, they’ll obviously lie about / cover up whatever they feel the need to in order to convince the sheeple..

    • GWB says:

      They’d never lie about the harvests failing and the ensuing famine in the Soviet Union just to support the evils of communism…. Dang, another bad example.
      They’d never lie about “assault rifles” and how many people they’ve killed in America…. Ummm. OK, I give up.

  • GWB says:

    As reported in The Guardian
    That was the real shocker in all this.

    these kind of errors always seem to be anti-Trump
    I would disagree a little. It’s broader than that. They’re always anti-freedom. They’ve been around since before Trump.

    that allegedly demonstrated the drug ivermectin reduced the death-rate in coronavirus patients
    AHA! That is what I had been looking for – the motive.

    I’m sure they’ll be comforted by an expression of concern.
    They should sue.

    last week listed just six employees. This was changed to three employees as of Wednesday
    Yeah, that’s credible………

    Surgisphere also refuses to actually share its data.
    And THAT was what tipped a bunch of folks. “Hey, friendly fellow scientist, can we see your data?” “Get bent!” Not the best way to substantiate your claims.

    science has devolved into scientism
    And, when it starts being a religion, it stops being science.

  • Nina says:

    Surgisphere is refusing to share it’s data.

    a. that’s because their “data” was flawed from get go

    b. who else refuses to share data from their model? Why, that would be Neil Ferguson and the Covid 19 model from Imperial College infamy.

    Lancet bears HUGE responsibility for promoting this load of horseshit, as does Surgisphere. For those whose virus conditions worsened because hydroxchlorquine plus Zpack etc was refused due to this “data” …wouldn’t surprise me one bit if lawsuits emerged.

    • GWB says:

      Surgisphere can be hit with fraud charges. I hope they are.
      Not sure about the Lancet. But I hope they are, too.

  • Scott says:

    “a. that’s because their “data” was flawed from get go” If by “flawed”. you mean totally fabricated, I think you’re spot on Nina!

  • DAVE says:

    ANY virus has its own life-cycle within the host population — consider a dandelion: it starts as a little cluster of leaves, sprouts its yellow flower, becomes a puffball of seeds and goes on to become leaves again, the actions of the lawn (aside from overt destruction of the dandelion) affects not this cycle — the same is true for COVID-19. Recent revelations from Italy (crashing viral loads) and Oxford (not enough infectivity to make a vaccine) reveal the whole “pandemic” caper to be a HOAX WE MUST BELIEVE IN lest we question our “science” establishment and call out its incompetent, fraudulent leadership. WAKE UP !!!

  • K-jon says:

    So what reputed agency is going to investigate the Lancet and those who peer reviewed the article prior to publication. This is incompetence at its finest.

  • harleycowboy says:

    Why do all the studies leave out the use of a Zpac? Because it works?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Become a Victory Girl!

Are you interested in writing for Victory Girls? If you’d like to blog about politics and current events from a conservative POV, send us a writing sample here.
Ava Gardner
Instagram did not return a 200.