The hearing of Professor Didier Raoult before the investigative committee on Covid-19 caused the anger of his colleagues. Decoding. To hear from him
The hearing of Professor Didier Raoult before the investigative committee on Covid-19 caused the anger of his colleagues. Decoding.
Since his hearing before the members of the investigative committee on the coronavirus on June 24 last year, Professor Raoult has provoked the wrath of his colleagues, as well as the AP-HP of the Scientific Council and the High Institute of Health (HAS). Back to the polemic in three acts.
Accusations of Raoult, the trigger
Before the commission, this devoted as much as the controversial defender of hydroxychloroquine discussed the issue of mortality, saying that they relied on the “work” available on the Internet. Professor Marseille questioned the quality of health care in Paris hospitals. “The mortality rate in resuscitation here is 43%. In our country it was 16%,” he said without specifying the exact source of the figures he presented. “Worry took a backseat,” he continued.
Contacted by AFP, Pr Raoult’s entourage returns to corroborate these results which will soon be in the Reva (European Research Network for Artificial Ventilation) registry, as contained in the “AP-HP Crisis Unit Report of 14 April “. In this document, that date is two and a half months, the peak period of the epidemic in France, the percentage of deaths in IC was estimated at 43% according to AP-HP and 41% outside AP-HP.
Your support is essential. Subscribe for $1 support us
The environment of infectious diseases is also invited to the interview at the LCI on June 27 of Pr Eric Caumes, head of the infectious diseases service at the Hospital Pitié Salpêtrière (AP-HP). The mortality rate, “for Paris (…), for patients in the intensive care unit, I confirm, is of the order of 40% unfortunately. But for Marseille, I don’t know,” said the head of the service at the time.
READ ALSO >> Top Pr. Raoult publish huge amounts of studies and get funding
The second point raised by Didier Raoult at the hearing, the case of this patient, an 80-year-old Chinese man, the first death from the coronavirus on French territory. For the infectologist, the Paris establishment in charge of this case was also not up to par. According to the claims, the 80-year-old Chinese patient presented “at the Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital in Paris” was “returned home”, then was “arrived after 7 days” and was “come to die in hospital”.
Finally, Professor Raoult made accusations of a thinly veiled conflict of interest for the scientific council and the high health establishment, which would favor Gilead’s remdesivir against Covid-19, rather than hydroxychloroquine, speaking of the same “obsession with wanting to treat people with”. Before leaving, the infectious disease doctor was briefly part of the Scientific Council established at the beginning of March.
Changes weapon with AP-HP
From these words of the infectious disease specialist, the reactions of many of his colleagues to the baseless accusations are lined up. In a letter addressed to the president of the national assembly, Richard Ferrand, and published on Wednesday, AP-HP director-general Martin Hirsch said that the professor had given “false testimony.”
“It seems important to me (…) that the commission’s work can be based on factually untrue elements, and that all that is required can be provided,” writes the general director of AP-HP. Martin Hirsch claims that these two passages are Pr Didier Raoult’s hearing for the Commission of Inquiry.
READ ALSO >> Fact check: Didier Raoult’s eight counter-truths before the commission of inquiry
In his letter, Martin Hirsch assures us that “we have no data on mortality rates up to 43% in AP-HP resuscitations,” without specifying what that rate is. “On the other hand, there is no published study to date that compares ICU mortality rates, assessed under controlled conditions, between hospitals in Paris and Marseille,” he adds.
Regarding the patient, a Chinese octogenarian, Martin Hirsch claims that “the only 80-year-old Chinese patient who can be mentioned in Pr Didier Raoult was admitted on January 25, 2020 at the European Georges Pompidou Hospital. He was never sent home.” We remind you that this patient was then transferred “to the Bichat Hospital, a national reference center”, where his daughter, who was also ill, was treated before she recovered.
Asked at the end of January on BFMTV, Philippe Juvin, head of the emergency department at the Georges-Pompidou hospital, described in detail the treatment of this patient: “First of all, we kept to the emergency room and were isolated until the next morning. The next morning he started to develop signs of respiratory ominous and we were transferred there to intensive care. The day after that, the diagnosis was made and asked,” he explained at the time.
Reshaping of the scientific council and HAS
After this Thursday, the scientific committee, which sheds light on the government, and the high health administration, in turn, condemned her in letters sent to the national assembly, about defamation” and which fall under “defamation”.
The letter, which is linked to 12 of the 13 members of the scientific council, specifically points to allegations of conflict of interest made by Didier Raoult at the hearing. The members of the Scientific Council accuse the infectious disease specialist of carrying the probability of confusion “between concepts, but different relationships and conflicts of interest” with some form of “intent to deceive”.
They add that “members of the scientific council have drawn up public interest statements by appointment”, and may include possible connections with pharmaceutical companies.
VIDEO >> Didier Raoult: great maintenance very cash
The Scientific Council also emphasizes that “in the absence of a therapy validated at the international level, the Scientific Council did not discuss the use of drugs, and therefore could not perceive a conflict of interest that requires the possible compensation of one or more of its members”.
The High Health Authority also responded to Didier Raoult’s accusations in his regard. “To say in front of the national representative office, vaguely and unsubstantiated, that HAS is in a ‘very serious conflict of interest’ is slander”.
Read our full file
“COVID-19”, the new coronavirus
Covid-19: after the crisis, clothing stores are sounding the alarm LIVE. Parliament’s green light to the exit “organized” public health emergency The coronavirus current is more contagious than the original version, according to the study
“Each person involved in HAS – officers, college members, commission members, experts should declare all the relationships of interest they have had in the last five years, with actors in the world of healthcare,” adds the public. authority, which states that these statements are subject to review by a committee chaired by an independent compliance officer.
Date of update: July 3, 2020, 03:58
Categories: Optical Illusion
Source: newstars.edu.vn