Press does the 'gotcha' dance over 'Trump-touted' NIH Hydroxychloroquine non-recommendation, flunks basic reporting

For the press, it's quite the "gotcha" dance.

The National Institutes of Health's refusal to recommend the use of the common anti-malarial drug hydroxychloroquine in combination with the antibiotic azithromycin for the treatment of COVID-19, was proof positive according to the "science" that President Trump was wrong about the use of the drug, as well as an incompetent who was touting quack medicine, given that he noted the treatment as promising in one of his tweets.

They've finally got something to pin on him.

Here's a sampler of some of the headlines out there from NPR, CNN, Forbes, The Hill, and the New York Times:

One problem: The headlines are distorted. First, Trump most certainly didn't tout the drug as a proven treatment; he called it a potential treatment with a "real chance" of being a good one and didn't rule out there weren't many.

HYDROXYCHLOROQUINE & AZITHROMYCIN, taken together, have a real chance to be one of the biggest game changers in the history of medicine. The FDA has moved mountains - Thank You! Hopefully they will BOTH (H works better with A, International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents).....— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 21, 2020

He also made several statements in the aftermath to clarify that more testing is needed and he wasn't calling this a panacea.

But that didn't matter to the biased media.

The Times went so far as to try to prove, badly, that the anti-malarial drug he cited was something he had a financial stake in and that he stood to make millions from promoting it. They found a negligible stake in some distant mutual fund holding of his through a trust he does not control and then touted that as proof that Trump was selling snake oil to turn a profit.

I turned on MSNBC (briefly) this morning at 9:40, thinking to myself that it was a good bet they were talking about the NIH “study“ disparaging hydroxychloroquine. Yep! At 10 o’clock, I turned on CNN to see if they were hyperventilating about the same thing. Yep! They even showed a clip of Trump encouraging its use. But then, before going to bed late last night, Fox was doing the same thing, maybe with a little less passion. The NIH, just another part of the swamp, has done it’s deed. Fauci was missing from yesterday‘s press conference for a reason. I wonder if he’ll have anything to say on the subject, today, If he is, indeed, there.

RE: While I understand what you mean I believe they are intent on running it as one trial using information already gathered from overseas as the starting point.

OK, here’s my bottom line question — HOW LONG IS THIS TRIAL GOING TO BE?

Also, while the trials are going on, are Doctors allowed to use their judgment and use this drug combo on an off-the-shelf basis the way some states in the USA are doing? Or are they going to ban its use altogether pending the results of the trial?

doesn't "the patient along with their doctor" create a plurality? I don't believe it would be necessary to create a plurality though since "their" in the context above is used determinitively. Their is also a determiner: their /T͟Her/ Learn to pronounce determiner possesive pronoun: their; possesive pronoun: Their; determiner: Their 1. belonging to or associated with the people or things previously mentioned or easily identified. "her taunts had lost their power to touch him" I don't know, I'm no English major/guru, but I wondered why the [sic] was there as well.

The NIH basically parroted Fauci. We’re not giving our blessing without a series of double-blind studies. Nothing more.

Reporting on this is journalistic malpractice.

There's NO money to be made w/o a series of double-blind studies....

And there's the added benefit of embarrasing President Trump.

But most importantly there is the most important benefit of making the "pandemic" last longer. More people will die, but that's a small price to pay to get rid of the orange man in the White House.

Today's post of the French results shows that:

1. With 2,564,323 confirmed cases, 177,199 died. No HCQ = 6.9% death rate

2. With 3,039 cases treated with HCQ, only 12 have died = 0.4% death rate WITH HCQ treatment

The Presstitues, NIH, Fauxi and a host of other frauds, traitors, murders etc. are not seeing that the French data here shows 6.5% of those infected (6.9%-0.4%) are being killed by what is obviously medical negligence. Not giving a treatment that will save thousands and thousands of lives is simply murder.

I could post several YOUTUBE videos of Doctors here in the US having very positive results with HCQ but that according to Fauxi and his NIH/CDC whores is anecdotal.

Arrest Fauxi and his fellow conspirators who are killing people with their murderous games. With HCQ, it's nothing but a flu event.

FRENCH LINK

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Why is the MSM suddenly in hardcore anti-hydroxychloroquine mode? HCQ destroys the narrative? Very obviously coordinated... 4am talking points much?