Factcheck.org Bias Exposed -Failed Attempt To Disprove Hydroxychloroquine As A Potential Cure For COVID-19

Factcheck.org bias exposed

Major social media giants like Facebook, Instagram, Google/YouTube, and Twitter have censored viral video of Doctors’ capitol hill coronavirus press conference.

Fact checking site factcheck.org sided with them with yet one of their most ignorant but lengthy articles providing no tangible counter argument other than their acceptance that “There is no known cure for COVID-19…”

Since most of their lengthy piece of information is describing the attires, names and professions and where the incident happened rather than an effort to disprove the claim we will try to find the attempts where they genuinely tried to disprove the claim from America’s Frontline Doctors and try to make sense of it !

Factcheck.org bias is exposed as their Quick Take Quickly Falls Flat in LOGIC!

A widely shared video, featuring a doctor falsely claiming hydroxychloroquine is a “cure” for COVID-19, ignited an online storm that resulted in the video being pulled by social media platforms. There is no known cure for COVID-19, and current scientific evidence hasn’t found that hydroxychloroquine is an effective treatment.

A Quick Take used as their closing argument by Factcheck.org
If there is no known cure and current evidence is inefficient, on what basis are you disproving the new claim? Click To Tweet

If anyone finds any concrete counter arguments to the claim please comment below so we can have a healthy open conversation to learn what we do not know. We cannot get new information by censoring any opposing observations or claims

But Gold has never worked at the hospital. In fact, the only time she was affiliated in any way with Cedars-Sinai was when she worked on a per-diem basis in a Cedars-Sinai Medical Network urgent care clinic for less than three weeks in 2015, Sally Stewart, a spokeswoman for Cedars-Sinai told FactCheck.org in an email.

Please understand the most deceiving tactics used in their first attempt after 7 red herring statements.

  1. Whether Dr Gold worked at the hospital or not is irrelevant as the claim is made by Dr Immanuel
  2. They said Dr. “Gold is a licensed doctor in California” and yet prefer not to use Dr in front of the name. May be because she is not Dr. Fauci?!
  3. Only a lame website like Fatcheck.org can use the “has never worked” and “she worked on a per-diem basis” in a same statement about the same person about the same place of work ! That’s a great piece of work!
Only a lame website like Fatcheck.org can use the "has never worked" and "she worked on a per-diem basis" in a same statement Click To Tweet

We reached Gabice by phone, but she hung up when we asked if her clinic was treating COVID-19 patients with hydroxychloroquine.


That does not prove any thing. It proves your assumption that we need to believe your statement without knowing what kind of calls were placed and and what kind of language was used after the rest of the Social media has painted them as Villains. May be she realized what a waste of time it is to tell you things that you will write out of context anyways.

It’s worth noting also that the same strip mall in Katy, Texas, that houses the clinic also houses Fire Power Ministries, a Christian ministry run by Immanuel.


Good Job ! Great noticing skills . It’s ok, we know what you are trying to do here. Using un related associations to strengthen your weak argument that has presented no material evidence to prove the Doctor’s claim as invalid thus far.

During a July 28 press briefing, the day after the video went up, Trump questioned why social media platforms had been removing it. “They’re very respected doctors,” the president said.

It should be rather confusing and hard to realize that "They’re very respected doctors". That there are doctors other than Dr. Fauci. We have already noticed your bias in the way you prefer not to address them as Dr. Click To Tweet

In the video, Immanuel repeats the word “cure” a half-dozen times when referring to using hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19, saying it can prevent any COVID-19 deaths.

“Nobody needs to get sick. This virus has a cure,” she says at one point. “It is called hydroxychloroquine, zinc and Zithromax.” (Zithromax is a brand name for the drug azithromycin.)

First of all, there is no known “cure” for COVID-19, as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention points out. And the current scientific evidence doesn’t support the conclusion that hydroxychloroquine is effective in treating the disease, as we’ve explained before.

Since early in the novel coronavirus pandemic, hydroxychloroquine — a drug that is used to treat malaria and other illnesses — has been touted as a potential treatment. Trump has repeatedly cited it, at one point referring to it as a “game changer.”


So, your whole argument is that she claimed hydroxychloroquine as a “cure” and since there is no known cure according to your wisdom, you cannot accept her claim because she is not worthy of making suggestions for cure based on her known data. Only data from particular individuals is worthy to be considered? Is that the final argument?

“There are no data from randomized clinical trials that demonstrate effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine for COVID,” Dr. Neil Schluger, chairman of the department of medicine at New York Medical College School of Medicine, told us in a phone interview. Schluger has studied hydroxychloroquine in relation to COVID-19. “There are now several randomized clinical trials that show that it had no effect.”

“The vast majority of expert opinions … is that hydroxychloroquine has no benefit in COVID illness,” he added.


So you consider Dr Neil Schluger’s data superior over Dr.Immanuel’s. Would it not be better to actually seek and compare the real data they are using to back up a “Cure” or declare “No cure”?

If every new argument other than the FIRST ONE is put down by the Social media and their actions endorsed by these lame articles from Factcheck.org obviously your opinion will be “vast majority”.

Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, also said the drug is “not effective” for treating COVID-19 in a July 28 interview on ABC’s “Good Morning America.”


Finally you are addressing Dr. Fauci with “Dr.” tag! Good for you. Yeah the available data proves no evidence, because you are not letting the new data to be even presented !

In rest of your article you quote previous findings and side with what’s known instead of trying to disprove the claim at face value. Without looking at the data and the patient log of those treated by Dr Immanuel there is no point in siting any number of already known data points.

You cannot ban studies and speeches showing new data and then claim vast majority while censoring the new opinion at the same time.

The video accumulated over 17 million views during the eight hours it was hosted on Facebook, with over 185,000 concurrent viewers. The fact that you conveniently ignored in your lengthily POS (Piece Of Superficial) analysis.

Don't ban content that opposes your current knowledge and claim your findings and data as the vast majority ! It's just lame Click To Tweet

There was one observational study by the Henry Ford Health System, published in the International Journal of Infectious Diseases on July 1, that found hydroxychloroquine was associated with lower mortality for patients hospitalized with COVID-19. But, as we’ve explained before, the study has limitations — and it stands in contrast to multiple randomized controlled trials that have found the drug is not beneficial to hospitalized patients (and two other observational studies).

During the press conference, Immanuel also claimed that a 2005 study “said it works.”

That study — which found that “[c]hloroquine is effective in preventing the spread of SARS-CoV in cell culture” — “is no evidence at all that it’s a cure for COVID,” Schluger said.

“That was a different coronavirus; that was the coronavirus that causes SARS,” he said. Secondly, he said, the study involved cells in test tubes. Potential drugs are evaluated in test tubes, then in animals, before they move into the three phases of clinical human trials, he said — and 90% of drug candidates that make it to human trials fail because they aren’t effective or aren’t safe.

A study in a test tube involving a different virus, Schluger added, is “not how the FDA approves drugs.”


So, your greatest alibi to label this as a bogus claim is your own previous explaination (we all know how your explanation holds by now !) about another such study having limitations?

So, every time there is a new finding that opposes the mainstream narrative, you try to prove it as bogus and then use your previous failed attempts as alibi for your new attempts ?!

Don’t worry we are here to factcheck your POS (Piece Of Superficial) analysis.

May be if you considered their claim and data each time you tried to disprove them we would have known what the vast majority says !

Despite the evidence that hydroxychloroquine isn’t an effective treatment for COVID-19, Immanuel in the video generally dismisses such studies (erroneously suggesting that they only involved “20 people, 40 people”) — and claims she has successfully treated more than 350 patients.


So her dismissal of your study with only 20 -40 people is erroneous and her claim that she treated 350 patients is not valid? Did you make any attempt to get the details of these patients? Just asking Factcheck.org !

He said doctors like Immanuel should submit their evidence for peer-review and “see if it stands up to scrutiny.”

Good ! So let’s do that and hold your horses until then. There is nothing wrong in being transparent and presenting their observations and hypothesis to public

There is no cure, as we said. And the CDC has explained that face masks or coverings could help prevent the spread of the novel coronavirus by containing respiratory droplets created when people cough, sneeze or talk. That’s how the virus is primarily spread and containing fluids is called source control.

Finally one sensible point. Yes ! Face masks stop the spread of virus through droplets from infected persons. And through a drop of common sense we understand what she meant !

Paraphrasing -‘Since there is a cure now, you will no need to wear masks as you wont have it to pass it to others through droplets.‘ But irrespective of how you understand that, it does not contradict her hypothesis about Hydroxychloroquine as a cure. Does it?

Editor’s note: FactCheck.org is one of several organizations working with Facebook to debunk misinformation shared on social media. Our previous stories can be found here.

No wonder you are working with Facebook ! We will cure all your misinformation with Redpill. Click To Tweet

Recommend0 recommendationsPublished in Fake News, Censored, Freedom of Speech

Related Articles


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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.