Is the information on chlorine dioxide effectiveness for curing malaria accurate, that it was 100% effective, as described by Dr. Andreas Ludwig Kalcker?

The Red Cross study in question done in Uganda that was later denied by the medical authorities as being worthwhile was in fact accurately portrayed. There was a universal benefit for all who used chlorine dioxide and the mechanism there is common to what it does to help so many other medical conditions including coronavirus infection with COVID-19. By delivering oxygen to the tissues and cells, chlorine dioxide can reverse the injury and make up for the deficit in oxygen availability—that is ultimately what kills people when there is too great a pulmonary compromise or inadequate delivery of oxygen to critical tissues like the brain by the red blood cells in circulation. His thesis, that illness is a consequence of inadequate oxygenation, is broadly correct. There are many such instances. What varies from illness to illness are the causal mechanisms for this dilemma and the regional differences in the tissues experiencing the deficit and needing extra support. But the fact this is a common theme for illnesses of all kinds is a unifying principle and explains why a single substance and its mode of action can have such widespread benefits. It can all be scientifically explained and this makes it a target for the programmed campaign of naysayers to disparage anything new with promise to find fault, to leap to conclusions from assumptions alone, even when there are data available. This is the legacy of mind control manipulation that has held back humanity all through the ages.