The Coronavirus or SAR Cov2 or COVID-19, depending on what name you prefer, continues to rage on around the world. Chris Martenson of Peak Prosperity calls the virus the “Honey Badger” because of its reputation as being a relentless and downright mean enemy that has very few weaknesses. It just keeps coming and is often underappreciated by many individuals in its relentless spread around the globe.
I first heard of this new SARS ‘like’ virus in December. My first sources that brought this virus onto the radar and sounded that something was amiss were not medical sources but were instead statisticians; guys who were financial ‘number crunchers’ that were telling those listening that the numbers were not adding up, both in the disease statistics and the money markets. I started to pay attention in a cursory fashion.
I started seriously taking notice when, shortly thereafter, a good Facebook friend, who is an ex-navy seal and an individual who analyzes global flash-points as a profession, started raising the alarm. Having been around the world extensively, even in the midst of other outbreaks, he told me that this outbreak had the capability of collapsing financial markets worldwide and basically changing our way of life for the foreseeable future. I admit when he first told me, I acted a bit ambivalent, and then he soberly looked at me and said, ‘you need to have a plan in place, now!”
In January I started telling my family to prepare, hoping that this information was totally wrong. Unfortunately, these sources have proved to be very accurate in their predictions. As a matter of fact, they are predicting very dark times ahead for the U.S. and the world; a perfect storm so to speak, where global supply chains, just in time inventory, and a very real and nasty pandemic, are converging to set the stage for a change in our reality.
I have to admit trying to tell others about approaching calamity was very awkward at first and I did meet with some resistance and even borderline ridicule from some friends but when the first wave of panic hit the U.S. those in my immediate family and even a few of my friends were not caught up when the third stage of truth (acceptance) hit society. When ‘acceptance’ sets in, that is when toilet paper flies off the shelves according to Martenson.
Ambiguity
One thing that has fascinated me since the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak is the ambiguity. Having always had a fascination with psychology, the various personal viewpoints about this virus 
and the public presentation of information regarding this virus is fascinating. I have heard every conceivable conspiracy theory that ranges from the plausible to the outright insane. What is really fascinating is the how various biases and paradigms create extreme barriers to basic truth.
The same ambiguity that surrounds COVID-19 in a general sense, filters down, more specifically, to proposed treatments for this dreaded virus. Again, I have heard a massive amount of speculation, and a massive amount of misinformation.
Although my goal with this article is not to clear up all the speculation, for that feat would be insurmountable, what I can do is clear up a few bits of speculation surrounding Zinc and Chloroquine.
I have been writing about quinine on and off for the last decade in its relation to the quinolone family of antibiotics, more specifically the fluoroquinolones (FQ’s). I have even begun a book about the Dark History of the Fluoroquinolones in which I am documenting the traceable history from quinine’s discovery through the creation of the FQ’s. You can read the first section here.
Enter Chloroquine
When Chinese scientists first started using Chloroquine to fight the COVID-19 virus I started receiving questions and comments from floxed individuals who had justifiable concerns. The sheer amount of opinion and misinformation surrounding Chloroquine was staggering. But before I get to the point of this article, I want to state something right up front:
I am not a fan of any drug that is based on the quinoline pharmacophore. I believe there is something inherently wrong with all the drugs that are based on this substrate. There is a thread of idiosyncratic toxicity that is poorly understood that spreads out like a crack in the foundation and loosely affects all of the drugs based off of this platform.
The Zinc Connection
It has been known for a very long time that Zinc inhibits viral replication. That is why, in the past, that zinc has been used to shorten the duration or stop the onset of viruses like the common cold. It is known that Zinc can block the replication of the coronavirus.
Researchers found that the more Zinc in the cell, the more inhibition in viral replication.
While on the surface it is great that Zinc appears to stop the replication of a viruses, it is not as simple as that.
Zinc has a hard time entering the cell without help.
In order for Zinc to enter the cell in needs the help of something called a “ionophore.” An ionophore is a substance which is able to transport particular ions across a lipid membrane in a cell. In other words it makes the cell wall permeable so that Zinc can enter the cell and inhibit the viral reproduction.
Why Use Chloroquine?
Chloroquine, despite its toxicity, is a Zinc ionophore, in an of itself. The greater the concentration of Chloroquine in the cell, the great 
amount of zinc (as seen in the chart to the right).
Often in drastic situations, when you are faced with a terrible foe, such as the coronavirus, scientists and researchers will look for ‘off the shelf’ treatments that do not have to go through the clinical trial testing. They will often look to older drugs that can be obtained easily to that would provide a novel treatment.
Unfortunately we have seen this type of behavior with researchers and FQ’s in the past. Researchers often make the assumption that because a drug has been around for a long time it has an acceptable toxicity profile. In other words, if it has passed the test of time, it is acceptable for use. In reality, nothing could be further from the truth.
Is Zinc A Treatment?
Like I mentioned earlier, using just Zinc for COVID-19 it is not an easy answer. I do know that, like toilet paper, Zinc has been flying off of the online supplement stores like crazy for the last few weeks. The stockpiling of Zinc seems to have been caused by the same fear that caused many to stockpile toilet paper and can also be traced, in part, to the advice of a veteran pathologist, James Robb, that has circulated social media in recent days.
The following was is the excerpt from the post that caused the flury of Zinc hoarding…
“Stock up now with zinc lozenges. These lozenges have been proven to be effective in blocking coronavirus (and most other viruses) from multiplying in your throat and nasopharynx. Use as directed several times each day when you begin to feel ANY “cold-like” symptoms beginning. It is best to lie down and let the lozenge dissolve in the back of your throat and nasopharynx. Cold-Eeze lozenges is one brand available, but there are other brands available.“
In defending himself Dr. Robb said, “It was my email to my family and close friends ONLY. Someone put it on their Facebook page. It was intended to be a monologue – not a dialogue. I do not use any social media and may have been too naive about what “sharing” means today.“
Dr. Robb went on to clarify, “In my experience as a virologist and pathologist, zinc will inhibit the replication of many viruses, including coronaviruses. I expect COVID-19 [the disease caused by the novel coronavirus] will be inhibited similarly, but I have no direct experimental support for this claim. “
Robb didn’t intend, or predict, reaching a global audience, or triggering a zinc buying spree.
Zinc often needs help getting into the cell in sufficient quantities to inhibit viral replication so loading up on Zinc may not be an easy answer.
I am not a medical doctor, but I do believe that Zinc, in general, is a good supplement for various reasons and I have taken 30mg a day with trace cooper for many years. However, in some, too much Zinc can be toxic and cause unwanted side effects including the leaching of copper from the body or interference with iron absorption.
If I were to attempt to use Zinc as a preventative measure I would consult with a trusted medical expert and be on the lookout for the Signs and Symptoms of Zinc Overdose.
Chloroquine: History Repeating Itself
It is important to note that Chloroquine, after its discovery, was initially ignored for a decade because it was considered too toxic to use in humans. Basically, Chloroquine was “re-discovered” during World War II by the United States because of it was desperate to find a treatment for malaria (source).
It is my belief that nothing changed about the toxicity of Chloroquine. The U.S. Government just ignored Chloroquine’s toxicity to be able to use the drug to combat the scourge of Malaria that the G.I.’s were facing in WWII.
Will Chloroquine be used, or possibly be pushed, in the same manner to fight COVID-19? Only time will tell.
For more information:
To learn more about Chloroquine toxicity or researching medical disorders caused by poisoning by mefloquine, tafenoquine, chloroquine, and related quinoline drugs please visit the Quinism Foundation.
Also see my article “Fluoroquinolones: Their Connection to Older Anti-Malarial Drugs” where I discuss the Chloroquine/FQ connection and also touch on Chemotherapy.
The French and S. Korean have used Hydroxychloroquine with Zinc (important part) instead of Choloroquine as originally proposed with very high success rate. Use is short term so toxicity risks are low. Current clinical use in the US also show the same results.
However, you aware of other natural Zinc Ionophores such as Quercetin and Luteolin and EGCG (Epigallocatechin Gallate)?
https://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/jf5014633
https://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/jp509752s
Much less risk, and a good way to get Zinc into the cells as a preventative measure and in lieu of hydroxy/chloroquine IMO
There is a trail underway to use Quercetin to treat COVID-19 as it has been shown effective against other RNA viruses:
see on cbc.ca website, a page under the title “As coronavirus spread speeds up, Montreal researchers will trial an anti-viral treatment for COVID-19 in China”
with Guests: Majambu Mbikay, Michel Chretien who used Quercetin against other RNA viruses, Ebola and Zika
As as a person who reads studies constantly, and occasionally participates in a few with regards to FQ toxicity, I am familiar with what makes a good study and what does not. The French study using hydroxychloroquine was pure garbage. The author of the French study has previous credibility problems and this study was factored in such a way to manipulate outcomes. Setting my bias against quinoline anti-malarials aside, I wouldn’t take Plaquenil based off the French study even if you paid me to do it. There are so many armchair ‘experts’ floating around the internet the noise is deafening. I will just keep filtering truth through the mechanisms I have used for years to sift through erroneous FQ data. It has served me well, and will do so again in this situation as well.
Yes, I am aware of several other Zinc Ionophores, however that was not the scope of this article. I have been using quercitin and zinc long before the SARS COV 2 reared it ugly head as part of my normal routine for other health reasons besides antiviral. Anyway, this article was to explain one avenue why the quinoline drugs are semi-effective at damaging the virus. There are other reasons as well, which I will write about. However, I do not endorse the use of quinolines for treatment. Obviously, people are free to follow their desires, however the so called popularity of quinolines to treat SAR COV 2 is based on faulty and flawed data. There are other factors at play that people and the press do not understand. There are credible scientist warning about the use of these drugs, however their voices are getting ‘drowned out.’
What do you think about Ivermectin for floxies?
(GABA & CYT P450)
As a US Army Pilot serving in Vietnam, I took a salmon colored Chloroquine-Primaquine tablet weekly throughout my tour and for an additional 8 weeks after leaving country as a prophylaxis treatment for malaria. The tablet was about the size of a stack of 3 or 4 dimes. A pretty big tablet to swallow. It contained 500mg of Chloroquine and 79mg of Primaquine. I found I had no stomach issues if I took the tablet with a meal, in fact they were distributed via dispensers at the mess halls, Officer, NCO and EM Clubs. I noticed no other side effects. This tablet was issued to all ~5 Million US Military personnel who served in that war during a 10 year period. We were never aware of any of the extreme side effects being reported in some of the covid-19 studies. For instance, a study in Brazil was terminated because 23% of the patients died of cardiac failure. The story indicated that the patients were given dosages of 2000mg/day. This is 10x the dosage doctors in the US and France were successfully using to treat the covid-19 virus. They were reporting a five day treatment of chloroquine 200mg 2/day, 200mg zinc and Azithromycin. I do remember a warning that exceeding the recommended dosage could result in an extreme toxic reaction. It would appear that the Brazil doctors were sabotaging the study? If we had seen 23% toxic deaths, we would have seen 1.1M casualties. Instead we suffered 58,000 KIA. I can’t speak for the effectiveness of chloroquine on the covid-19 virus, but I do believe it is much safer than being reported. I think we can agree that it’s the zinc that is the virus killer here. Chloroquine may be not be the best ionophore for treating covid-19, but it is the only one so far that has any FDA approval. It’s cheap, the cost of the drugs used in the five day treatment is $20.
I am sure you are fully aware that hydroxychloroquine is not chloroquine. If this drug were dangerous millions of Lupus suffers across the world would not be using it on a long term basis.
Rob, I will forgive the fact that you are dealing in a unique community and making broad statements about something that you are not familiar with (quinolones). Whether or not hydroxychloroquine is toxic to Lupus sufferers is irrelevant. It is connected chemically to fluoroquinolones (fact) that have harmed many people (fact) and there have been cross reactions between the families of drugs (fact). I could cite countless article and references, but I doubt that I would sway your prejudice. It is kinda like wandering into a firefighters convention and asking them if they know how to put out fires! Oh by the way, research the history of chloroquine and the changes to the quinoline pharmacophore that resulted in hydroxychloroquine, which I do acknowledge is less toxic than chloroquine. Then come back and interact with me, a little less snarky. That way we can at least debate on the same level and I won’t have to delete your statements.
Dave, like you have said before, comments from individuals like Rob serve as ‘learning moments.’ I have always been amazed how many people on the internet, who hold opposing views, are not very gracious when they attempt to ‘enlighten’ others in areas they obviously know nothing about. The old adage, open mouth and insert foot, would apply here. You did an admirable job of handing him his a$$ on a platter. He probably doesn’t even know the context of the website, but everyone is an expert now a days. Rob. and old teacher used to tell me, “context, context, context!”
I would like to know why you considèr Dr Raoult ‘s studies and results as garbage.
The initial study (singular) was literally torn apart by researchers I personally know and have worked with here in the U.S. These researchers are credible and have no ‘dog in the race’ so to speak, so they have no reason for bias. They found skewing of results, problems with author credibility on previous studies, bias, and on and on. In other words, there was enough doubt on several issues to not take the study seriously. I have since heard that there were newer studies that were more credible coming out of France but I have not been presented with the data. I have have no doubt that Chloroquine & Hydroxychloroquine are somewhat effective against COVID-19 on two fronts when given early enough and given with Zinc. They act as a zinc ionosphores and they also, I believe, inhibit binding to the CD147 receptor. They key is that have to be given early. However, those who have had toxic reactions to fluoroquinolones have a confounding factor and because of that I did not want floxies to base their decisions on sketchy results. All my comments and opinions are biased through that lens.
Is there any chance that money/ profit has a role in this equation? Especially when the same people or organizations who fund many of these studies, or fund the Dr.’s who discredit other studies, are the same people who stand to gain or lose from the results. Now I’m not a Dr. nor do I read every study published but I do understand how corruption and greed plays a role in everything and when billions can be made there’s no Dr. or study that’s going to get in the way. There was so much money to be made off of this Covid 19 virus that there was no way possible for something like Hydroxychloroquine and Zinc or Ivermectin or anything else we already had that may have been safer and worked better to be the answer to Covid 19.
To answer your question yes. But let’s keep it in context of this website. The fluoroquinolones are poster children for pharmaceutical greed. Everything from the W.H.O. , C.D.C., F.D.A. and downward is dripping with pharmaceutical influence, both tacit and outright. There are very few peer reviewed papers that are credible and don’t involve some sort of pharmaceutical influenced bias. I personally believe Ivermectin is much better and safer treatment for COVID, and if we used the protocol that certain on-the-ground doctors have developed, we, as a society, would not need this controversial vaccine for this virus. Despite this, and in context with this website, hydroxychloroquine is a quinoline which is a cousin, on the pharmaceutical evolutionary tree, to the fluoroquinolones. Due to the fact that years of anecdotal evidence has shown us that a certain percentage of those who have had adverse events to FQ’s also have a adverse or cumulative toxic response to the quinolines (antimalarials). Because of this I will never recommend HCQ’s use in the floxed population. Also I realize that many take HCQ without problems. So, my negative impression of HCQ, is always tempered by that viewpoint, regardless of big pharma’s push to demonize HCQ.
Is there a reason why my comment I left was removed?
It wasn’t. It was waiting in a que to be approved. All posts are subject to approval to prevent spam and unrelated posts.