Hysteria Collective Questionnable (HCQ): the “Clasico” in numbers!

We are  sorry  for the bug in yesterday’s newsletter, following  a problem of computer connectivity,  which we is repared today.

Dr. Guillaume Zagury, based in Shanghai, a specialist in international public health and health innovations, comments for the Community on a day-to-day basis on the evolution of the epidemic for more than three months, and provides  a first-of-the-art  understanding on its “country and region analysis” and predictable consequences (experiments of SARS in 2003 and Covid-19 in China).

A remarkable multidisciplinary volunteer team allows the realization of this analysis which is intended to be factual and objective (by the way, do not hesitate to join us: mail below):”every success is collective”.”. 

Beyond the volunteer skills, this project was made possible by the support of our citizens’ vision patrons: the Paul Bennetot Foundation (Matmut Foundation under the aegis of the Foundation of the Future), B Square, Tag Advisory, Daxue Consulting, as well as various fellow travelers (Jérôme, Dr. Benoît  Rossignol,Gilles  Langourieux,…)
All our illustrations created  for more than 100 days, will soon be available to you on our website and you can download a large part of them. (www.covidminute.com).

I. COVID 360 “MINUTE”: graphs and maps (80% of the information)


I.1 France – green indicators

D15 of deconfinement, (hospitalizations, resuscitation, deaths): another 1655 patients in resuscitation and 35  deaths

I.2 Vision time: we follow Italy with 10 days lag

Comparative chronological evolution of resuscitation cases France/Italy


I.3 Europe:  2 million C(+) historically and  no second wave  observed  in countries ahead of us


I.4 Epidemic Mapping (reported active cases):

Nearly 100 “Wuhan”  active,:  Latin America is on fire  (young population)

I.5 World: still more than 100,000 cases  reported yesterday and for more than half in the  Americas  (4 South  American countries in the top 6)

II. 360-degree analysis: What’s the minister going to do?  3 questions about the  risque   risk/benefit of the Lancet study.

The results of a very serious international study    (prestigious review, statistical power…)  ,  have just come out,,  and go  à  against the  results observed  by the Marseille team (benefit/risk  ratio  of HCQ –  Azithromycin very  favorable)..

Two questions come to  mind:

-Is the analysis  est-elle   100%  objective?

-Will the Minister  stop his prescription if the therapeutic interest  is not  confirmed?  

Ⅱ. Regarding this specific study,  2  main elements make it possible to express doubts about the conclusion of this model debate:  “Experts versus experts”

II.1 Selection bias:  

Retrospective  evaluation  was conducted on a pre-existing database from  different countries,  designed for the evaluation of cardiovascular procedures and drug therapies. As a result, the starting point of this study is that of heart patients, so people for whom P.R. Raoult does not prescribe his treatment.

Also, key elements are not mentioned: dosage (so toxicity) and exact duration  of  treatment. Thus, for example, the stage of initiation of treatment would be later in HCQ patients with 20% of patients on oxygen (versus 7% in the  controlled group fitted). The protocol used  in  Marseille focuses primarily on the beginnings of contamination.

II.2  Several quality international scientific studies  in favour of the HCQ have  already  been published,  but little relayed.
II.3 The main argument of the article…

…lies in inefficiency and especially in its dangerousness (heart rhythm disorder essentielle). However, it turns out that various recent studies show an absence of excess mortality in HCQ patients.

II.4This type of expert debate is daily in the medical world…

Where the figures can be told many things: by exemple,  the “French  Paradox”(2 glasses/dr of wine would have a cardio-protective effect, not to mention the deleterious appearance of the liver or cancer, etc.), is pushed by the alcohol lobby, in order to justify its consumption.

– The level of evidence is maximum, when a cluster of arguments (biological, clinical, epidemiological…) converge unanimously towards the conclusion… and it  deserves  time (at least more than 3 months!)

– Thus, the pro HCQ (of which we are a part, because in the contextwe had to  a  givethe producta chance”(in medical settings) put forward arguments such as:

epidemiological (which may indeed be questionable on the methodology):

Or biological: At the fundamental level the Lancet had shown the antiviral effect of the molecule as early as 2003:

II.5 This “Lancet” study has  many limitations…

And therefore does not deserve this political-media agitation, because in our opinion, only a multi-centered double-blind prospective essay will conclude the debate.

On the face of it, these studies will probably come from the USA, because in France too few Cs at present, with a context of “conflicts of parishes”. Too bad that France, initially could not do  this test, because we had the means to do so, and we could have “enlightened” the world, one way or another.

II.6 For decision-makers:

Seek the guarantee and protection of scientific bodies, to justify decisions taken in the future.

Thanks to Dr. Bachir Athmani and  Carole Gabay for their support.

 ⅡI France – a good dynamic of conference  while remaining vigilant

A regional “space time”   vision is provided by this “comprehensive” table by our data analyst Carole Gabay:

Table”space time”by region

IV Europe – follow-up of the 3 types of countries – no second wave yet observed

V WORLD: 6 million cases  C ()  stated  historical, 340 k deaths (up 5% of fatality) of which about 40% in Europe and 30% in the USA.

With the contribution of Dr. Bachir Athmani, Stéphane and Carole Gabay, companions of the first hour, whom I thank again for the unwavering support of yours.

Beware of certain figures (number of cases, deaths…) that are highly questionable because they vary from country to country (e.g. availability of tests), with measurement biases and therefore major under-reporting in some countries.

 V.1 Prevalence: Prevalence:  2.85M active cases  confirmed for  observation

Vision time:

current prevalence:

  • historical prevalence:  Epidemic growth since 1 January:  nearly  6 million cases reported cumulatively  
g';. Png

Source: John Hopkins University

Geographical vision:

  • Continent: 40% of cases in the USA, 20% in Europe and Latin America, Russia and the Middle East

Geographical vision:  5 homes  currently  – North and South America,  Europe, Middle East, Russia:    iconography in minute analysis

Top 10 countries: full country table  (time/space)  

Top 10 countries

United States 1.14 M (yesterday 1.12 M)

Russia 228k (yesterday 225k)

United Kingdom 200k?

Brazil 191k (yesterday 183k)

France 90k (yesterday 90k)

India 77k (yesterday 73k)

Peru 67k (yesterday 64k)

Italy 57k (yesterday 58k))

Spain 57k (yesterday 56k)

Chile 40k (yesterday 38k)

Netherlands 37k?

UK and NL maintained at their last known prevalence level.

V.2 Impact: still around 100k new cases reported yesterday

Depending on the weather:


By continent: 33% new cases in Latin America, 22% in the USA, 11% in Russia and the Middle East:

By country: cf minute analysis 4 Latin American countries in the top 6

USA 20k (22k yesterday)

Brazil 16k (17k yesterday)

Russia 9k (9k yesterday)

India 7k (7k yesterday)

Peru 4k (4k yesterday)

Chile 4k (4kyesterday)

Mexico 3k (3k yesterday)

England 2k (3k yesterday)

Pakistan, Indonesia, Bangladesh, Singapore, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Qatar, Kuwait, United Arab Emirates,  Belarus,Urquia, Italy, South Africa, Canada, Egypt, Argentina, Colombia: 1 to 2k

V.3 SPACE TIME  TABLE:  3 Country Types (red-yellow-green)

More than 60 iconographies:  tables,graphs,  synth schemas syntheses…., on the site:  www.covidminute.com,in the “Resources” section.

Also, know that the base: COVIDFLOW(accessible on our platform:www.   covidminute.com) giving you all the important elements  for 151 countries as well as  the  American Estates. 


Keep in mind the “3M reflex” (Hands-Masques-Metre) to get

protect and “reflex 4M” (Hands-Masques-Meter-… Minute) for frail people… but above all to protect the most vulnerable.

Confidence and solidarity for this collective struggle

Dr Guillaume ZAGURY

“All success is collective” thanks to:

o The entire “GCMN” (Global Covid Medical Network) “Medical” team: Dr. Bachir Athmani, Dr. Marc Abecassis, Dr. Mohamed  Fadel, Dr.  Emily Kara, Dr. Jean Michel Serfaty, Dr. Ibrahim Souare, Dr. Jonathan Taieb …) that allow this project to exist,

o The entire data analysis and IT team: Carole Gabay (“Data Analysis Expert”), Richard Coffre (exceptional webmaster), Flavien Palero (digital manager), Mathieu Bouquet (for his contribution passée)

o The whole “Communication” team (Flavien Palero, Laetitia, Marie, Alison…): without whom this project would not have been possible.

o All the historical financial patrons (Jérôme, Benjamin Denis and the Consulting Company B Square, Benoit Rossignol, Arnaud Bricout and TAG Advisory and Gilles Langourieux, Sabrina Rocca…) who work for “Citizen Actions”

o We also thank the Paul Benetot Foundation

If you feel like a patron or partner to fund development

computer (all the others have been volunteering for 88 days!), don’t hesitate to contact me (guillaumez888@hotmail.com).

Also, our team, although partly based in Shanghai, will be delighted to welcome you