Case Mallorca Press
Transcript:
SOCIETY |
Juan Antonio Bueno, retired physician resident in Majorca
Wednesday, December 23, 2020
Enlarge
By R.M.
Listen to the news
Born in Denia (Alicante) 83 years ago, Dr. Juan Antonio Bueno Bertomeu studied Medicine at the University of Valencia and later moved to the University of Heidelberg in Germany to specialize in Internal Medicine and Endocrinology, the area in which he has focused most of his professional activity. Retired just over five years ago, when he was 77 years old, he has practiced his profession in Mallorca for more than five decades: first, as a physician in the public health system and, later, opening his own private practice in Palma as a founding member of the Balearic Endocrinology group. Likewise, for several years, between the late 60's and early 70's, he held the position of medical director of Clínica Femenía, contributing to modernize a health care model that needed a quick adaptation to the social reality of an island transformed by the tourist boom. Married to a Mallorcan woman, Margalida Sancho, his childhood sweetheart, for whom he decided at the time to settle permanently on the island, Dr. Bueno will not easily forget last March, when his wife, who had always been in good health, repeatedly presented symptoms that even at that early stage of the pandemic were beginning to be directly attributed to the coronavirus: high fever, cough, fatigue, and what is undoubtedly one of the most characteristic signs of Covid 19: loss of sense of taste and smell. Subsequently, an antibody test confirmed that Margalida had indeed been infected by the virus. Determined to help his spouse, whose health condition was worsening by the minute, Dr. Bueno turned to chlorine dioxide. In this interview, he shares his and Margalida's experience with the readers of mallorcadiario.com.
Doctor, what exactly happened to your wife?
At the end of March, shortly after the declaration of the state of alarm and, therefore, in the first weeks following the irruption of Covid 19, my wife began to feel ill. She had a very high fever, a persistent and violent cough, she had lost her sense of taste and smell, and all day long she felt a devastating fatigue that left her with no strength to do anything. Naturally, I was worried. Margalida is 77 years old and we have been married for more than half a century, so, as everyone can understand, I know her medical history perfectly well. And, in this regard, I must say that she has always been a healthy woman, not prone to develop flu or respiratory pathologies and, moreover, she has never presented episodes of fever. All this background made me even more worried, and since, as I said, at that time the coronavirus was unfortunately already part of our lives, I called one of the telephone numbers provided by the Health Administration to tell them about my wife's case and explain all the details. I also told them that I was a doctor, of course. We agreed to stay in touch and, indeed, they phoned me the next day. They never did so again.
“It will be done”: Yllanes, conclusive on aid to sectors excluded from state funds.
“Margalida's symptoms were worrying: high temperature, cough, loss of taste and smell.... The day after administering chlorine dioxide, her fever dropped to 37 degrees.”
And you decided to look for an alternative?
For me the priority was to help my wife. I think anyone can understand this. She, who never used to be sick, was getting worse every day, with all the symptoms I explained before. Margalida was also perfectly aware of the situation and asked me that if there was a tragic outcome she wanted to die at home, and not in a hospital. She made me promise her. And I did, of course. But, of course, my unwavering purpose was to save his life, and I did, indeed, look for alternatives. One of them was chlorine dioxide. I was already familiar with this product because I had read and heard information about its effects, and when a doctor told me about this possibility I thought it was worth a try. I quickly gave my wife the shots. When I administered the first dose, Margalida had a fever of 40 degrees. By the next morning, the temperature had dropped to 37, and by the afternoon of the same day, to 36. The cough subsided, and, in fact, her pulmonary system seemed to be responding perfectly. Not surprisingly, I auscultated her practically every hour and, beyond some wheezing, which was completely normal because she had developed some allergy episodes in the past, she did not show any worrying signs. Two days after she started taking the chlorine dioxide, Margalida got out of bed and was able to resume practically all her daily activities. She was still a little tired, but the fatigue gradually disappeared and, at the same time, her sense of smell and taste were completely restored.
The growth of contagions in Germany puts Easter in Mallorca in check
There were no adverse or side effects?
None at all. Both Margalida and myself were ingesting the chlorine dioxide for a month, she with the curative protocol and I with the preventive protocol, and we did not suffer any type of associated complication.
Arema accuses the Govern of “muzzling” the restoration with the prolongation of the shutdown
“My wife and I took the doses for a month, in my case for preventive reasons. Neither of us developed the slightest side effect.”
Did you get sick too?
No, or at least I did not develop any symptoms, but I found it convenient and advisable, for purely preventive reasons, to take this product at the same time as Margalida did. Keep in mind that we are close contacts, we share the same space, and since she had been infected, it was likely that I would follow the same path. We kept taking the doses for the period of a month, as I have already indicated to you, and now, recently, because of the imminence of the Christmas holidays, we have both resumed the administration of the chlorine dioxide, since these dates favor greater social and family contact.
“Getting to peak season with 70 percent vaccinated depends on many external factors.”
In the case of your wife, was she ever tested to confirm Covid 19 infection?
Yes, an antibody test. That was later, when she had overcome the infection. As you know, in the early days of the pandemic, when she was affected by the coronavirus, PCR tests were not yet available. However, at the time she underwent the antibody test, which certified the fact that, indeed, the symptoms Margalida suffered were the direct consequence of a Covid 19 process.
“An antibody test subsequently confirmed that Margalida had been infected by the virus.”
Have you had the opportunity to know, directly or indirectly, other situations analogous to the one your wife experienced, i.e. people with coronavirus who recovered completely and without adverse effects after ingesting clear dioxide?
Yes, I have heard of similar cases. For example, that of a father, a Valencian doctor like me, and already advanced in years, and his son, who were infected almost at the same time. The father did not resort to the chlorine dioxide option. Unfortunately, he could not overcome the process favorably and ended up dying. The son became very ill, but was eventually saved. He did try this product and, as with other patients, did not develop any adverse effects.
As a physician who has been in practice for over fifty years, would you recommend the administration of chlorine dioxide to a patient with coronavirus who asked you for advice?
Look, if someone asks for my opinion, I simply tell them my experience, as I am doing now. It worked for my wife, she recovered completely after having developed very worrying symptoms, and as for me, despite living with a person who was infected by Covid 19, I have not developed signs of the disease at any time, given the fact that I have been ingesting chlorine dioxide for prophylactic purposes. That is my story, and what I can tell. Has my wife been cured by chlorine dioxide? Have I not become ill by this same product? Personally, I am convinced that this is so, but I cannot say more than that, because such a statement, if formulated from an eminently scientific perspective, requires proof and evidence that can only be obtained through research.
“My wife has been cured thanks to chlorine dioxide? I limit myself to telling my experience. It worked for Margalida, she was completely restored”.
In this regard, according to the information you have, are resources being allocated, worldwide, to carry out this type of research?
No. Why? Well, I do not know, nor can I know. I do not know the reasons why research is not being promoted at the international level to confirm or disprove the contribution that chlorine dioxide is able to offer in curing the coronavirus. In a pandemic situation such as the one we have been enduring for many months now, it is incomprehensible to me that this trump card is not being played. Many people are dying, others are becoming seriously ill, and there is growing evidence of the benign effects of the clear dioxide. However, governments are reluctant to take the step of promoting a research project that would shed light on the matter.
In fact, most medical and scientific institutions have taken a clear position against chlorine dioxide as a drug against coronavirus. Are you surprised?
More than anything else, I find it curious. As things stand today, anyone can legally purchase chlorine dioxide to make water drinkable, for example, which is then consumed by that purchaser and his or her family or close circle. However, if that same person states that he or she intends to acquire a batch of this product for use as a medicine, he or she will be told that he or she cannot do so, that it is forbidden, and that he or she may even go to jail. Certainly, the possibilities offered by chlorine dioxide are viewed with a great deal of skepticism by the medical and scientific community, and also by those in power. However, in the history of medicine such attitudes are commonplace.
“Many people are dying or becoming seriously ill because of the pandemic. That is why it is incomprehensible that there is no research on chlorine dioxide.”
What do you mean?
I mean that many doctors and researchers have been treated as crazy at the time for advocating treatments that, after some time, have been shown to be effective. I will tell you a very paradigmatic case, from many years ago, that of a Hungarian gynecologist, Dr. Ignaz Philipp Semmelweis, who was viciously persecuted by his own colleagues because he had the audacity to recommend that before assisting a woman in labor it was necessary for those involved in the operation to wash their hands. Today it may seem hard to believe, but at the time when all this happened, the hygienic measures adopted in childbirth were truly precarious, if not nonexistent. Well, this gynecologist was not only ignored and expelled from the medical association of Vienna, the city where he practiced his profession, but he was diagnosed as insane and ended up locked up in an insane asylum. What do I mean by all this? Well, quite simply, that any progress that has been made in the world of science and medicine has first had to overcome the thick cloak of skepticism, discredit and disrepute.
“Any breakthrough has had to first overcome the cloak of skepticism. Many researchers have been treated as crazy at the time and then, over time, have been proven right.”
And why is that, in your view?
Look, although I am retired, I am still a doctor, and I do not mind recognizing that in our professional group we are accustomed to erring on the side of arrogance. We think we are in possession of the truth. And that is not so. It is necessary to be open to new options and possibilities instead of clinging only to the knowledge acquired in medical school without worrying about evolving, about verifying the viability of new alternatives.
“I am a physician, even though I am retired, and I don't mind admitting that in our profession we tend to err on the side of arrogance. We think we are in possession of the truth.
Anyway, doctor, what would you answer to someone who would oppose your arguments with the argument that the medicinal use of chlorine dioxide has not been scientifically certified and that, therefore, it is not lawful for a physician to advise its administration?
If someone were to say this to me, I would invoke the Helsinki Treaty, which clearly lays the foundations of ethical principles in the practice of medicine. This document states unequivocally that a physician is entitled to resort to any means at his disposal if he thinks or believes that this action will have the possibility of saving his patient's life or curing him of a certain disease. I insist: I am not saying it myself, but it is in the Helsinki Treaty. In this basic text for any physician, whatever his field or specialty, there is no clause stating that any treatment administered by a physician must be supported by research that guarantees its curative effectiveness. No, what it says is that the patient's life is the main priority and that, therefore, if the professional, by virtue of his medical knowledge and clinical experience, considers that a product can be of help to the patient, he can and must administer it.
“The Helsinki Treaty makes it very clear: saving the patient's life is the doctor's first priority, even if he has to resort to treatments whose effectiveness has not been scientifically endorsed.”
Meanwhile, the scientific world as well as governments and society in general are appealing to the imminent arrival of vaccination against Covid 19 to overcome this health crisis. Are you optimistic about the real scope of this vaccine?
It is possible that it will provide a solution to this whole situation. I won't be the one to say otherwise, because I honestly don't know. Maybe the vaccine will work, or maybe, unfortunately, it won't. That will be seen over time. That will be seen in time. However, I will say one thing: we are talking about a type of vaccine that has never been manufactured. Therefore, nobody really knows what the outcome will be, whether or not it will cure the coronavirus, how long the immunity will last, or whether or not adverse side effects will appear. The priority has been speed, and we already have a vaccine in record time, but without reliable evidence of its efficacy and its consequences for human health. From this point on, my reflection is the following: why is it that in the case of the vaccine it does not seem to matter that its effects have not been sufficiently investigated, while in the case of chlorine dioxide, the argument that there is a lack of research is always used? Why don't the entities that scare us or threaten us with this lack of research, which are usually the ones that, in turn, should promote or authorize this research, use their power to do so, knowing, moreover, that chlorine dioxide is a very old product, tremendously cheap and very experienced at the popular level? That said, I hope that the vaccine represents the solution to overcome this complicated situation. We will know in time.
“Why is it that in the case of the new vaccine it seems to make no difference that its effects have not been sufficiently investigated, and, on the other hand, when it comes to chlorine dioxide this argument is used to discredit it?”
One last question, doctor, just out of curiosity: what does chlorine dioxide taste like?
It tastes like water. It is as if one were drinking a glass of tap water, no more, no less. Its taste is not exciting, to be honest, but it is not degradable either. It is neutral, like water. Certainly, on some occasions, a certain taste of chlorine can be appreciated, but it is very slight, barely perceptible. I speak from experience. I have been taking chlorine dioxide, and I am also ingesting this product at this time, and the sensation I have is what I said: it is like drinking water.
