Dr. Stella Immanuel Boasts Cure for COVID-19! Dr. Stella Immanuel Takes On The Mainstream Establishment ~ How Does Her Claims Align With the Science?
by Rick Wallace, Ph.D., Psy.D. | Courtesy of The Odyssey Project Journal of Scientific Research
Dr. Stella Immanuel Boasts Cure for COVID-19 ~ A lot has transpired over the past week — no one situation garnered more attention than the viral video interview given by Dr. Stella Immanuel. Dr. Immanuel’s claim that she has successfully treated over 300 patients diagnosed with COVID-19 by using Hydroxicholoquine — a drug initially developed to combat malaria — has been met with an unrelenting resistance. Not only are many dismissing her claims, but they are also leveling remarkable personal assaults. The attempts to discredit her, thereby discrediting her claims, have been nothing short pertinacious.
Of course, since the date the video initially aired, I have been contacted unremittingly and asked to share my position.
Those who have followed me over the years know I don’t jump on trends for the sake of likes and shares on social media. I prefer to take the time to research the topic to either confirm or refute the premise. I have had ample time to investigate the claims absent of the claimant, and I will share my findings with you shortly a little later in this treatise, along with my sources and references.
First, I must address a common occurrence in our society that makes it nearly impossible to evolve and grow. We have a fixation with the messenger that, when accompanied by personal biases, leads us to become highly vitriolic in addressing those who have differing views from ourselves. Put another way; we tend to attack those who carry opposing views to keep from facing the possibility that we may be wrong.
We must reach a point of mental and emotional maturity in which we realize that no matter how educated and informed we believe ourselves to be, we do not know everything. Sometimes, the person who delivers an opposing view will not be someone we like or relate to, but that does not inherently invalidate their claim. We must develop the propensity to look beyond our biases with an open mind. Dr. Immanuel has come under attack because of her spiritual and religious views as a means of discrediting her medical and scientific claims. The truth is that I have personally had physicians that had differing religious views than myself, but it did not diminish their expertise and knowledge in the area in which they were working with me.
I had someone on social media ask why none of Dr. Immanuel’s patients were coming forward to defend her. The following is my response.
“Dee, I am not here to argue whether she is right or not, but I would like to present a premise for better clarity. First, there are multitudinous peer-reviewed studies that date back to 2005 that I have personally reviewed. All of these studies suggest that Hydroxychloroquine works in treating all strains of the coronavirus to some extent. The most recent studies specifically name the COVID-19 strain in their dissertation. These independent studies at least add merit to claim. I am currently writing a paper that I will publish later today on what my research revealed.
As both a senior healthcare provider and the owner of several media platforms, I can tell you that your question does not consider the complexity of what is happening at this point and time. Right now, COVID-19 is a billion-dollar time bomb with added political implications. We are not simply dealing with a health crisis but a battle for money, position, and power. And, the virus is being used to leverage public opinion.
Research what other countries are doing and how they are faring against the pandemic, and then ask yourself why the wealthiest and most powerful country in the world is falling apart behind it.
I would also suggest you read Propaganda by Edward Bernays (considered to be the father of modern PR, and the most studied mind when it comes to managing the opinions of the masses). Also, read Brainwashed by Tom Burrell, one of the most brilliant minds in communications over the last 50-plus years. They both unequivocally state the media can control the thoughts and opinions of the masses. If this were not true, companies would not pay $5 million for a 30-second spot during the Super Bowl.
Big Pharma is involved. Many of the talking heads you hear from have a vested interest in their point of view. If you study them long enough, you will begin to recognize contradictions in their position, depending on what is to gain.
Mainstream does not want Hydroxychloroquine to work because the mainstream wants to present a vaccine (something worth over $100 billion). Honestly, we don’t know how many of Dr. Immanuel’s patients may have gone to a media outlet to speak up and were put on the backburner. We cannot postulate what is going on behind the scenes.
Also, Dr. Immanuel is keenly cognizant that more than 100 prominent homeopathic and naturopathic doctors who spoke out against Big Pharma met mysterious deaths over the summer of 2015 alone. She could be protecting her patients. I would not be surprised if something does not happen to her. If the campaign to discredit her by making her look crazy does not work, it is not beyond reason that she would be in danger of physical harm.
Finally, Dr. Immanuel does not stand alone. There are doctors from all walks of life that have been making this claim associated with Hydroxychloroquine, and their claims have been hushed by mainstream media. The only reason that Dr. Immanuel is getting press Donald Trump tweeted her press conference, and it went viral.
What you are witnessing is far more complicated than some quacky doctor making false claims.”
The Claim That Hydroxycholoquine Successfully Treats COVID-19
My goal here is not to come to a foregone conclusion about Hydroxychloroquine but to establish whether Dr. Immanuel’s claims about the drug have merit enough to make her a credible contributor to the discussion. The novelty of the COVID-19 strain of the coronavirus makes it vulnerable to evolving data and evidence, which can change outcome projections. However, we should be able to find enough empirical and pragmatic evidence to either dismiss Dr. Immanuel’s claim or to suggest that it, at least, has merit.
Once I began probing for legitimate scientific studies on the use of Hydroxychloroquine, it did not take long for peer-reviewed studies to surface. When evaluating experimental data by way of research and education, it is essential to be aware of the funding sources (predominantly independent or private). There are four types of funding for scientific research, government, private industry, foundations, and professional organizations. Keep in mind that researchers cannot carry out their research without funding, which makes them sensitive to the predisposed ideas and expectations of their benefactors. Independent funding sources don’t have a direct interest in the outcome; their goal is to reach a conclusion, regardless of what it is. Private donors and professional organizations may either benefit or be disadvantaged by the findings. Understanding the funding dynamic is essential because researchers will be aware of what their donors will like and dislike, and their research can be purposely or unwittingly impacted by those biases associated with those likes and dislikes. Allow me to elucidate this point. When your research requires funding, it can be affected by the known desire of the one providing the funding. If you want to continue getting funding, you have to keep the benefactors happy. This dynamic is what distinguishes independent funding from private funding or research projects.
It is time to move on to the discussion of extant data. There is peer-reviewed research dating back as far as 2005. These studies suggest there are significant benefits to using Hydroxychloroquine to treat strains of the coronavirus (Vincent, et al., 2005). I will leave the final assessment as to whether the sources I cite are reputable, but everything cited or referenced here comes from respected sources. The reputability of a source does not mean that findings should not be reviewed and challenged; it just means that the basic protocols of the scientific method of research were followed when these studies were carried out.
The Pathogenesis and Pathology of Human Viral Infections
While my branching the field of psychology into the world of epigenetics (Wallace, 2015) provides me with an increased understanding of micro-physiological phenomena, I have to be honest and admit that it requires expertise in medical microbiology to truly be confident in assessing the long-term health implications of any viral infection. However, I will venture to present a basic premise that hopes brings clarity to some of the confusion behind Dr. Immanuel’s claims. And, my assessment will weigh heavily on the work of epidemiologists and virologists.
Pathogenesis is the process by which an infection culminates into a disease. Pathogenic mechanisms of viral disease include (1) implantation of the virus at the portal of entry, (2) local replication, (3) spread to target organs (disease sites), and (4) spread to sites of shedding of the virus into the environment (Brown, Fons, & Albrecht, 1996).
The pathology of human viral infections refers to the tracing of the virus from its viral structure to its manner of replication unique to the virus. There are also other components, such as histopathology and inflammation. It is generally held that there is no cure for most viral infections. For the sake of expediency, and to reserve time, I will go straight to the point of purpose here. Dr. Immanuel may not have used an acceptable term when describing her work with her patients. She used the word “cure,” which is frowned upon by the medical establishment when referring to viral infections. At least part of this is profit-driven. That which cannot be cured will likely require life-long treatment.
As a general rule, there are no cures for most viruses, including the multiple strains of the coronavirus. Most medical interventions associated with viral infections are treatments, not cures. The goal is to get the symptoms in check and allow the body’s natural immune system to kick in to fight off the disease. These standard protocols operate off the presupposition that the patient has a healthy autoimmune system. Any pre-existing condition that negatively impacts the immune system will exacerbate the negative impact of the virus. This fact is why the elderly and people with pre-existing conditions are at higher risk of death from COVID-19.
It is worth noting that there is no shortage of homeopathic and naturopathic doctors that claim to have cures from most viruses, including HIV and COVID. However, for the sake of argument, let’s operate under the premise that there is no cure for COVID-19. Could Dr. Immanuel still have a valid claim? It would depend on how she is defining the word cure. I would have preferred that she use the word treatment instead of cure. It would have been a more acceptable position and one more difficult to attack. If Dr. Immanuel is claiming that she has taken on patients presenting COVID-19 symptoms and treated them with Hydroxychloroquine and the symptoms disappeared — and all baseline measurements returned to normal with no reoccurrences, then that could be possible.
Again, it is not my position to reach a foregone conclusion that confirms the doctor’s claims. I suspect that she can do that on her own in due time. My concern is to explore whether there are enough extant scientific data and case studies to validate the potential legitimacy of her claim. For me, it is not about whether she is wrong or right, but whether she deserves all of the vitriol and ridicule that she is receiving, especially with so many other doctors making the same claim.
Honestly, I can’t help but wonder that if she were not a quintessential Black woman, would backlash by Black people be so obtruding.
What Does the Data Reveal
One of the most impressive studies I reviewed was published a couple of weeks ago. The study suggested that Hydroxychloroquine and Chloroquine when given in highly concentrated doses, can impact viral infection and replication by increasing endosomal and lysosomal pH (Chandler, et al., 2020).
Hydroxychloroquine has been used to successfully treat strains of the coronavirus as far back as 2005, when medical professionals used it to control SARS-CoV effectively (Vincent, et al., 2005). While the COVID-19 strain of the coronavirus is a novel version of the virus, it is not beyond reason that treatment methods that have been successful in treating other strains of the coronavirus may also be effective in treating COVID-19. Despite all of the claims to the contrary, the peer-reviewed data is simply not available. Yes, there are privately funded studies that suggest Hydroxychloroquine is ineffective in treating COVID, but the private donors who funded those studies benefit directly from their findings. That alone creates a conflict of interest and a reason to question the legitimacy of the study based on research bias.
To further make my point, there was a scheduled meeting between Big Pharma (drug companies) and Donald Trump Scheduled for this Tuesday. However, when Trump issued an executive order ordering health officials to release a plan linking medicare payments for certain medicines to lower costs paid abroad, the representatives for Big Pharma called off the meeting. Never think that money is not playing a role in how healthcare issues are reported, funded, and managed.
A study published by the International Journal of Infectious Diseases, revealed its results from a multiple hospital study. Below are the findings and conclusions of the study.
Of 2,541 patients, with a median total hospitalization time of 6 days (IQR: 4–10 days), median age was 64 years (IQR:53–76 years), 51% male, 56% African American, with median time to follow-up of 28.5 days (IQR:3–53). Overall in-hospital mortality was 18.1% (95% CI:16.6%–19.7%); by treatment: hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin, 157/783 (20.1% [95% CI: 17.3%–23.0%]), hydroxychloroquine alone, 162/1202 (13.5% [95% CI: 11.6%–15.5%]), azithromycin alone, 33/147 (22.4% [95% CI: 16.0%–30.1%]), and neither drug, 108/409 (26.4% [95% CI: 22.2%–31.0%]). Primary cause of mortality was respiratory failure (88%); no patient had documented torsades de pointes. From Cox regression modeling, predictors of mortality were age>65 years (HR:2.6 [95% CI:1.9–3.3]), white race (HR:1.7 [95% CI:1.4–2.1]), CKD (HR:1.7 [95%CI:1.4–2.1]), reduced O2 saturation level on admission (HR:1.5 [95%CI:1.1–2.1]), and ventilator use during admission (HR: 2.2 [95%CI:1.4–3.3]). Hydroxychloroquine provided a 66% hazard ratio reduction, and Hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin 71% compared to neither treatment (p < 0.001) (Arshad, Kilgore, Chaudhry, O’Neill, & Zervos, 2020).
Conclusions and relevance
In this multi-hospital assessment, when controlling for COVID-19 risk factors, treatment with Hydroxychloroquine alone and in combination with azithromycin was associated with reduction in COVID-19 associated mortality. Prospective trials are needed to examine this impact.
What is interesting about this study is that it specifically focused on the intervention and treatment of COVID-19. The study concludes that Hydroxychloroquine alone and used in combination with azithromycin worked to reduce the death rate of patients at high risk of death associated with the virus.
I found Dr. Vladimir Zelenko’s story quite intriguing. Dr. Zelenko is an orthodox Jew who went in for an urgent blood clot removal and was subsequently diagnosed with pulmonary artery sarcoma, a rare and aggressive cancer. Rather than undergo the prescribed toxic chemotherapy regimen, Dr. Zelenko opted to try an untested cancer drug that he credits with saving his life. The drug would later be pulled from the market because clinical trials (paid for by Big Pharma) suggested there was no evidence that the drug was effective in treating cancer.
This seemingly unrelated story served as something of a harbinger for what would become the catalyst that drives Dr. Zelenko to champion Hydroxychloroquine as a miracle drug in treating COVID-19. The fact that he has seen the FDA and Big Pharma snatched down a drug that could have helped millions ratifies his commitment to standing up to the government bullies and Big Pharma. I listed the article chronicling Dr. Zelenko’s story so that you could read it for yourselves. Zelenko isn’t just making claims; he is recording data, getting video testimonials from patients. He is also using YouTube as an instrument of propagation.
Edward Bernays and Tom Burrell are far from being the only ones to illuminate the power of the media to shape public thought.. Malcolm X told us to be aware of the power and influence of the media. He said, “The media’s the most powerful entity on earth. They have the power to make the innocent guilty and to make the guilty innocent.”
“When you control a man’s thinking you do not have to worry about his actions” ~ Carter G. Woodson
“The media, itself an arm of mega-corporate power, feeds the fear industry, so that people are primed like pumps to support wars on rumor, innuendo, legends, and lies. ~ Mumia Abu-Jamal
“The media has enormous power. The media is undergoing huge changes now. It seemed like it’s time to step back and look at how the media shapes our lives and our perceptions of reality.” ~ Thomas Hunt Morgan
“…the media serve the interests of state and corporate power, which are closely interlinked, framing their reporting and analysis in a manner supportive of established privilege and limiting debate and discussion accordingly.” ~Noam Chomsky
Edward Bernays, the father of modern PR, was quoted as saying, “the conscious, intelligent manipulation of the organized opinions and habits of the masses is an important element in a democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our society (Bernays, 1928).”
The examination of Dr. Immanuel should not begin with the legitimacy of her claim, but rather in the establishing of her right to make that claim and demand that it be challenged on its scientific merit — not her appearance, spiritual beliefs, political affiliation nor any other factor. While her claim, itself, awaits confirmation her right to make is explicit.
I only wish we held people from other races to the stringent standards that we hold our own. When you place the claims of Dr. Immanuel in juxtaposition to all of the other doctors who profess to have successfully treated COVID patients with remarkable outcomes, she does not stand out as being more outlandish or ridiculous in her claims. Why has she been met with such vitriol and disdain by her people? I wish that you could see what I see. I see a brilliant mind that is willing to go against the status quo at the risk of all that has come her way. I celebrate her relentless nature and commitment to honor her oath. My challenge to you is that you step back and examine her claims in the light of science and not public opinion. ~ Rick Wallace, Ph.D., Psy.D.
Arshad, S., Kilgore, P., Chaudhry, Z. S., O’Neill, W., & Zervos, M. (2020). FULL LENGTH ARTICLE| VOLUME 97, P396-403, AUGUST 01, 2020. Internal Journal of Infectious Diseases, DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2020.06.099.
Bernays, E. (1928). Propaganda. Brooklyn, NY: IG Publishing.
Brown, S., Fons, M., & Albrecht, T. (1996). Medical Microbiology: Viral Pathogenesis. New York: The Univesity of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston.
Chandler, L. C., Yusuf, I. H., McClements, M. E., Barnard, A. R., MacLaren, R. E., & Xue, K. (2020). Immunomodulatory Effects of Hydroxychloroquine and Cloroquine in Viral Infections and Their Potential Application in Retinal Gene Therapy. National Center for Biotechnology Information, 2020 Hul 14;21(14):E4972. doi: 10.3390/ijms21144972.
Feldman, A. (2020, May 22). Why Dr. Vladimir Zelenko staked his reputation on hydroxychloroquine. Forward, p. 2020.
Fox, M. (2020, July 3). Study finds hydroxychloroquine may have boosted survival, but other researchers have doubts. CNN Health, p. 2020.
Owermohle, S. (2020, July 27). Drugmakers refuse to attend White House meeting after Trump issues executive orders on costs. Politco.
Pathol, J. C. (2005). The Pathology of Human Viral Infections and Associated Conditions. Journal of Clinical Pathology, 2005 Nov; 58(11): 1232.
Relations, M. (2020, July 2). Treatment with Hydroxychloroquine Cut Death Rate Significantly in COVID-19 Patients, Henry Ford Health System Study Shows. Henry Ford Health Systems.
Vincent, M. J., Bergeron, E., Benjannet, S., Erickson, B. R., Rollin, P. E., Ksiazek, T. G., . . . Nichols, S. T. (2005). Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and spread. BMC Virology Journal, doi: 10.1186/1743-422X-2-69.
Wallace, R. (2015). Epigenetics in Psychology: The Genetic Intergenerational Transmission of Trauma in African Americans. The Odyssey Project Journal of Psychological Research.
Wallace, R. (2016). African American Trauma: More than Meets the Eye! The Odyssey Project Journal of Scientific Research.
Wallace, R. (2017). Born in Captivity: Psychopathology as a Legacy of Slavery. Houston: Odyssey Media Group & Publishing House.
Wallace, R., & Wallace, D. (2010). Gene Expression and Its Discontents: The Social Production of Chronic Disease. New York: Springer.
 (Owermohle, 2020)
 (Feldman, 2020)