Jump to content

Menu

wuhan - coronavirus


gardenmom5

Recommended Posts

37 minutes ago, JennyD said:

 

The thing that was so striking to me in his interview is that right now apparently the key hurdle is regulatory/financial rather than technological.  After the whole antibody test debacle the FDA has been hesitant to approve tests that would be significantly less accurate than the current highly-sensitive PCR tests, and companies are hesitant to scale these things up before approval.   But these tests don't have to be anywhere near as accurate -- if they can catch most people who are currently infectious, that would dramatically alter the course of this pandemic.  

It is so incredibly frustrating to me that this technology is sitting in labs RIGHT NOW.  The lack of urgency is just maddening.  Why are we not throwing absolutely everything possible at solving this problem!  (That's a rhetorical question.)

 

 

I think It would make a huge difference for things like schools opening.

If trying to write or call FDA etc to plead for regulators to allow such tests what are the right terms to use for this type of test? 

 

Is it actually illegal to make such tests without FDA approval? Or could they be made and have a box warning much like masks currently do or supplements, that no statement on the label is FDA approved etc? 

I think if not illegal it might be worth appealing to the companies to go ahead.  I think there might be a lot of people who would be interested without approval.

A separate issue would be whether decisions could be made based on the tests if not approved. Like if a school had such a tester device and test strips, could they use it to send someone home? (Are thermometers FDA approved?) 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Bagels McGruffikin said:

You don’t need to see if it is unbiased, it’s a good compilation of links and quite fair in stating when the evidence is weak or a negative correlation. Everyone has bias. But you asked for the studies and here they all are. Tada.

Yes it’s a good collation of the current studies in one place.

please keep sharing studies you find re hydroxychloroquine.  Sooner or later maybe we will get something really definitive.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

@ElizabethB  would you like to help me try to figure out how much zinc?

zinc is another substance like vitamin D that older people and often also non-white people tend to be deficient in afaik. 

MATH protocol recommends 75-100mg.  Zelenko 25mg or 30mg (I cant recall which).  (Prophylaxis)

 

official upper limit is 40mg daily consistent usage (afaik because 50mg has been shown to deplete copper, causing problems).

 

 

http://orthomolecular.org/nutrients/zinc.html

Goes with quote below - posting is being wonky. 

OTOH  an orthomolecular site says: “Elevated intake of zinc (1-2 gram per day) over an extended period can actually harm your immune system instead of assisting it. Intake of zinc should be kept to under 100 mg per day as larger amounts may result in nausea, diarrhea, dizziness, drowsiness and hallucinations. If you wish to take a zinc supplement, take it at night on an empty stomach, as zinc can interfere with the absorption of other minerals such as copper and iron. In a multi-vitamin situation, make sure that the zinc and iron are nearly in the same amounts. Large intakes of zinc can cause nausea and diarrhea.”  

 

 

 

I will I’ll try to rewatch DrBeen episode on zinc

 

 

 

https://lpi.oregonstate.edu/mic/minerals/zinc

 

 

Eta: also am

looking for actual cases of problems from too much zinc from supplements 

https://www.mayoclinicproceedings.org/article/S0025-6196(11)62239-8/fulltext

 

amount was 850-1000mg per day it seems.   Very high in other words.    I have not yet found descriptions of overdose / toxicity etc cases taking 50mg/day

Also the one in Mayo write up above was from topical acne medicine so it seems it does absorb from skin. 

Edited by Pen
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, square_25 said:

OK, Utah has about a 10% positivity and a 3 million population, which means I estimate 

10*1/10,000*3,000,000  = 3000

daily cases or so, and you have about 4 deaths a day. 

Yep, assuming my estimator is right, you seem to have a much lower IFR. Given the difference in demographics, that wouldn't be super surprising to me. 

Of course, I would not bet money on my estimator always being right, either. It's a very rough guide with some pretty strong assumptions about how exactly the testing is being done. I wouldn't use so many assumptions, except that they seem to be borne out so well by the data. But it's certainly less good on the state level, especially for the smaller states. 

Thank you!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/25/us/kimora-lynum-dies-of-coronavirus/index.html

 

Florida 9 yo - no known source of infection 

 

I know postmortems are hard on family and possibly expose the forensic pathologists to infection, but I hope one will be done on this child to gain understanding of what happened internally.

 I would also like to know her vitamin D level and zinc level. 

Edited by Pen
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, square_25 said:

This person does not in any way seem unbiased. And I have no clue if they are qualified, either.

I’ll see if I can find something that seems actually neutral. I don’t much feel like examining the data myself, but I might have to.

That graph is completely meaningless since (1) there is no actual basis for that person's assessment of which countries are "using HCQ" and which aren't and (2) "CFR" is entirely dependent on the level of testing, which varies dramatically from country to country. For example, that graph implies that Chile and Peru are doing awesome because they use HCQ when in fact their per capita death rates are among the highest in the world — they are both higher than France, which this chart shows as being the worst of the worst in the "no HCQ" category. And they're implying that HCQ is the reason S Korea has a low fatality rate, not universal masking and intensive contact tracing???  It's pure propaganda.

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

10 hours ago, square_25 said:

Yes, agreed on both counts. Quick, at home testing would make a huge difference, as would testing that isn’t unpleasant.

Yup. My 3 yr old has fever, headache, some diarrhea. But I'm not taking her to get tested if she continues to get better. She JUST got over her fear of anyone in a lab coat. No way. I figure if any of the adults get sick, they can get tested. 

  • Like 1
  • Sad 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://fortune.com/2020/07/27/herd-immunity-coronavirus-covid-sweden/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
 

fortune article on herd immunity and the economy.  And this is considered to be a right / centre source from what I can see.

The only thing I’m picking with it is that it doesn’t mention the possibility that herd immunity may kick in at a lower percentage as a couple of people think.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, square_25 said:

An article about surface transmission, or lack thereof:

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/07/scourge-hygiene-theater/614599

Not a scientific source, clearly, but for its worth it matches my impression. And I thought that was a good point about the South Korea call center cluster.

Yeah, well I am glad I didn't waste my time and energy dealing with packages, etc.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Ausmumof3 said:

https://fortune.com/2020/07/27/herd-immunity-coronavirus-covid-sweden/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
 

fortune article on herd immunity and the economy.  And this is considered to be a right / centre source from what I can see.

The only thing I’m picking with it is that it doesn’t mention the possibility that herd immunity may kick in at a lower percentage as a couple of people think.  

The belief that 50% of the population have some magical immunity to Covid, so we only need 20% to get sick to reach herd immunity, has no basis in science. One of the articles most frequently cited as proof of this "theory" was self-published by a couple of engineers with zero background in medicine or epidemiology. It is based on the assumption that since only 20% of passengers on a certain cruise ship tested positive, then that population must have reached herd immunity (because there cannot possibly be any other explanation for why it did not spread further); therefore at least 50% of people on that ship must have been naturally immune to it, and this can be extrapolated to the entire US population. I put this "article" in the same category as one from the Hoover Institute showing mathematically that the US would not have more than 500 deaths —  which was later "updated" to 5000 deaths. The fact that someone can write an equation doesn't mean that any of their underlying assumptions about virology or immunology or epidemiology have any basis in fact. 

  • Like 5
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Corraleno said:

The belief that 50% of the population have some magical immunity to Covid, so we only need 20% to get sick to reach herd immunity, has no basis in science. One of the articles most frequently cited as proof of this "theory" was self-published by a couple of engineers with zero background in medicine or epidemiology. It is based on the assumption that since only 20% of passengers on a certain cruise ship tested positive, then that population must have reached herd immunity (because there cannot possibly be any other explanation for why it did not spread further); therefore at least 50% of people on that ship must have been naturally immune to it, and this can be extrapolated to the entire US population. I put this "article" in the same category as one from the Hoover Institute showing mathematically that the US would not have more than 500 deaths —  which was later "updated" to 5000 deaths. The fact that someone can write an equation doesn't mean that any of their underlying assumptions about virology or immunology or epidemiology have any basis in fact. 

I don’t “believe” it per se but there is this recent study that shows some level of t-cell reaction even in blood sample from pre covid days.  They don’t know if that provides immunity or even potentially makes things worse.  But it’s possible.  In other words I’m not relying on it but I don’t want to be dogmatic about needing 70pc infection for herd immunity if we aren’t sure.  I still think aiming for herd immunity is a ridiculous idea I just want to be as factually precise as we can when we talk about it.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/05/t-cells-found-covid-19-patients-bode-well-long-term-immunity

Edited by Ausmumof3
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, square_25 said:

Yeah, I saw this as well. I do think there's a decent chance that half the population is already resistant, given this data. What I would REALLY like to know is whether people with this T-cell immunity are the ones who are asymptomatic and whether they can spread it? It's possible that explains the widely varying courses of disease to some extent. 

The latest study showed asymptomatic people have the same viral load as symptomatic ones I think 

It’s a retrospective analysis and not yet peer reviewed.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Ausmumof3 said:

I don’t “believe” it per se but there is this recent study that shows some level of t-cell reaction even in blood sample from pre covid days.  They don’t know if that provides immunity or even potentially makes things worse.  But it’s possible.  In other words I’m not relying on it but I don’t want to be dogmatic about needing 70pc infection for herd immunity if we aren’t sure.  I still think aiming for herd immunity is a ridiculous idea I just want to be as factually precise as we can when we talk about it.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/05/t-cells-found-covid-19-patients-bode-well-long-term-immunity

But even the researchers who found that a certain percentage of those blood samples could “recognize” SARS2 say that we don’t know if that even leads to milder cases, let alone complete “immunity.” My impression is that the primary significance of those studies is that t-cell response to coronaviruses in general can be long lasting, which is good news for vaccines. But even with the flu, for example, people may get milder infections if they’ve previously had a similar strain, or if the vaccine wasn’t a perfect match but included similar strains, but they can generally still catch it and can still pass it on. There is no evidence so far that having had a certain cold in the past means that half the population of the US can’t get Covid or pass it on. Heck we don’t even know if people who already had actual Covid can catch it again and/or pass it on. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, square_25 said:

Yes, I remember having this impression from earlier. But they may still spread it less. I'd also want to know whether the people with these T-cells to begin with do ever wind up testing positive. 

I wonder if droplet versus aerosol plays into this.  I mean if it’s primarily droplet you need some coughing sneezing etc symptoms should be helping the spread but If it’s aerosol then breathing will do it?  Would that make sense?

but yeah hopefully at some point there is follow up to know whether the T cell reaction gives any kind of immunity or not.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, square_25 said:

Yes, it would. Of course, we don't even know if people with these T-cells wind up having their airways colonized by the virus, right? We don't know much of anything. 

 

There has been a tremendous growth in knowledge since I was in the immunology part of my student days, so what I am about to write needs to be understood as possibly outmoded.

 

That said, there is a basic thing that I think you should understand about T-cells in general.  

They work to release things like cytokines and perforins which attack already infected cells.  

(The antibody recognizes an antigen presented on an infected cell; the perforins that are released by T cell punch a hole in the cell, and the cytokines go in and destroy the cell itself, hopefully along with viruses inside it. )

Afaik unless there’s new information on this T cells mainly deal with an infection relatively late in its course when cells (airway or whatever cells) have already been infected or as you put it, colonized.   That would be normal even if the T-cells are working. 

 

This is a reason why I  am particularly inclined to focus on whatever I can that may interrupt the viral mode of action well before that, especially anything that I can have personal control over such as particularly Vitamin D and also selenium which may both help to decrease the ability of the virus to succeed in infecting cells in the first place.

And zinc and Hydroxychloroquine also have potential early roles in the immune system pathways where they can potentially slow down viral attack relatively early, rather than a late, and thus give the body and immune system a better chance of coping.  It may turn out that HCQ is just working as a placebo for some people, but IMO the HCQ / zinc has a better chance of helping to decrease and slow the virus to where it can be dealt with by body successfully rather than to go into the T-cell mode which may be more likely to overproduce cytokines and cause more destruction and cell death than is desirable for a good recovery. 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, square_25 said:

Thanks! That makes sense. But it would be possible that the infection would be at very low levels with pre-existing T-cells, right? Or that it doesn't go into the airway? I really have no idea.

I am personally operating on the assumption that some of the people with these T-cells are the ones who are spreading it around, frankly. I was just thinking that we don't know. And the problem, of course, is if the people with T-cells can get it and spread it, then despite them not getting very sick, they aren't really contributing to the "herd immunity" -- we can't take them out of the possible pool of people that may be infected. 

Anyway, I'd like to see more research on it! 

 

If there are pre-existing T-cells able to make neutralizing antibodies quickly and in substantial quantities, that, at least in theory, can quickly kill infected cells while there are still relatively few infected cells.  So it should be that it stops the infection fairly early and with little damage (this is very probably what happens with most pathogens we encounter that get past the innate branch of our immune systems ).  

And if that’s happening, I think it probably would help to contribute substantially to herd immunity.  

Yes if there are people with   T-cells already recognizing SARS2 and responding with good neutralizing antibodies, they could spread the virus while the Asymptomatic  killing off process is happening, but if it were a fast robust response mostly , then, probably, not a whole lot of viral shedding would be happening because it would be fairly short, with fairly few cells infected, and self limited.

However this particular virus seems to be doing all sorts of weird things including infecting T-cells themselves somewhat like AIDS.

I think it’s very hard to predict for it. 

 

And while they may not be the majority, there seem

to be some people who have long Asymptomatic periods with substantial viral shed who become “super spreaders” .  I think it would be helpful to examine some of their immune systems to try to figure out why, what’s goin on. 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, TravelingChris said:

Yeah, well I am glad I didn't waste my time and energy dealing with packages, etc.  

We mostly just quarantined things for three days.  Happy not to be doing it any longer though.

My employer is engaging in some hygiene theatre.  Masking is compulsory though, as is distancing where possible, but medieval buildings make that tricky.  Those same medieval buildings do have windows that open though, and no air conditioning.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From The Covid tracking project - “Once again, the state data on current COVID-19 hospitalizations is unstable. CA, SC, and TX have all posted notices stating their hosp. data is incomplete because of the HHS changeover. We’ve maintained the freeze on their hospitalization data again. More on that tomorrow.”

something to keep in mind when looking at data over the next few days

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here’s a thought.  If the main point of testing is to catch and isolate within three days why not test most recent tests first to older tests.  Yes it would mean some people who are waiting would wait even longer.  But it would mean in places with a backlog the contact tracers would still be effective.  Finding results from ten days ago might give peace of mind to people but actually achieves very little in terms of squashing the epidemic.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Plum said:

Of the 21 drugs that were effective at blocking viral replication, the scientists found:

  • 13 have previously entered clinical trials for other indications and are effective at concentrations, or doses, that could potentially be safely achieved in COVID-19 patients.

     

  • Two are already FDA approved: astemizole (allergies), clofazamine (leprosy), and remdesivir has received Emergency Use Authorization from the agency (COVID-19).

     

  • Four worked synergistically with remdesivir, including the chloroquine derivative hanfangchin A (tetrandrine), an antimalarial drug that has reached Phase 3 clinical trials.

Astemizole was withdrawn from the US market in 1999 and can't be taken with at least some antivirals, antibiotics and antimalarials because it was linked to cardiac issues, so it might not be a winner. It's good that people are sorting through the options, though.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Corraleno said:

The belief that 50% of the population have some magical immunity to Covid, so we only need 20% to get sick to reach herd immunity, has no basis in science. One of the articles most frequently cited as proof of this "theory" was self-published by a couple of engineers with zero background in medicine or epidemiology. It is based on the assumption that since only 20% of passengers on a certain cruise ship tested positive, then that population must have reached herd immunity (because there cannot possibly be any other explanation for why it did not spread further); therefore at least 50% of people on that ship must have been naturally immune to it, and this can be extrapolated to the entire US population. I put this "article" in the same category as one from the Hoover Institute showing mathematically that the US would not have more than 500 deaths —  which was later "updated" to 5000 deaths. The fact that someone can write an equation doesn't mean that any of their underlying assumptions about virology or immunology or epidemiology have any basis in fact. 

There has been some evidence that the gene I have that is responsible for my Ankolysing Spondylosis  (HLA B27) and for others Psoriasis, Crohns, Reactive Arthritis, and Irititis,  gives some immunity to the flu and maybe to Covid too - there has been some suggestion of this.  There are nowhere near 50% of people who have this gene.  

Did these people even know who the vector was on the cruise ship?  Let's say it was a crew member---- like a worker in some shop.  Lots of people don't go to all the shops or more than once to any shop.  I could easily see that a worker in one of the high end jewelry- watch stores may not infect many people.  Or some passenger brought it on but they spent all their time in one bar and their room-  again, easy to see how it would only be 20 passengers.  And to that person doing that so-called research- I can relate the story of the group of 19 young women who went out to a bar in Jacksonville, FL and all got COVID.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, square_25 said:

Yeah, I saw this as well. I do think there's a decent chance that half the population is already resistant, given this data. What I would REALLY like to know is whether people with this T-cell immunity are the ones who are asymptomatic and whether they can spread it? It's possible that explains the widely varying courses of disease to some extent. 

Well the puzzling thing is that those of us who are on biologics that are lowering our t-cells- things like Humira, Enbrel, Cimzia, ETC.  are actually not at higher risk for getting COVID amd some of these type of medications have been used with COVID with some success.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Ausmumof3 said:

Here’s a thought.  If the main point of testing is to catch and isolate within three days why not test most recent tests first to older tests.  Yes it would mean some people who are waiting would wait even longer.  But it would mean in places with a backlog the contact tracers would still be effective.  Finding results from ten days ago might give peace of mind to people but actually achieves very little in terms of squashing the epidemic.

My opinion?  Don’t delay testing for anyone. (Hire more lab personnel if possible). But utilize the contact tracers on the recent tests.  It’s a waste of resources to try to contact trace the older tests. 

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@square_25  this is a few months old, and extremely oversimplified (plus infected cells making tentacles and T-cells being hijacked etc wasn’t known then afaik) — but nonetheless possibly helpful in a partial explanation of the contagious Asymptomatic phase and also has electron microscope pictures 

https://youtu.be/4S3DXXtRZZg

https://youtu.be/4S3DXXtRZZg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/27/2020 at 7:45 AM, square_25 said:

I do not think he's actually being fair, that's my point. But it's certainly a compilation of studies, and I should take a look. Thank you! 

 

The most negative study for HCQ to my way of thinking so far has been one using monkeys, but I have not yet been able to read the underlying study only that it did not find a benefit.

 

Against that there was clear in vitro evidence that started for SARS1 and MERS; the India decision based on their observations of prophylactic benefit; and several doctors who I believe and respect saying they see clinical benefits (not for every patient, but for the ones that are helped anything that can break a downward disease trajectory even in a subset of cases is excellent right now). 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Immune system 

 

@Ausmumof3 @square_25

https://youtu.be/7GRDVBiSE9U

https://youtu.be/qxIfNfc2Gic

 

2 recent and possibly helpful DrBeen videos, both reasonably short

 

This one iirc was about monoclonal antibodies— and in exploration of that it also went into some immune system function. (I haven’t rewatched before posting so hope it one I am thinking it is!) 

 

https://youtu.be/g8LFxGh2u28

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hcq antiviral 

 

 

I think it is helpful to look at some information from before this became a political issue, even though related to other viruses 

for example there are many studies for HCQ like the one pulled from google below (google scholar can reveal more)    HCQ helping innate immunity in the first place  fits very well with what seems to be needed to deal with HCQ . 

Does it actually work — not, mind you, as a magic bullet “cure” but as a useful tool to reduce severe consequences ? I can’t prove to you that it does.  

And I accept that there isn’t enough of the stuff to get to everyone. 

 

However, I am pretty sure that it does help—again, not a magic bullet cure (and probably not even as beneficial as getting Vitamin D levels,  zinc etc optimized, since helping innate immune wing needs to have the basic molecules etc present to work with.  Even excellent vaccines may not work well in absence of zinc etc). 

 

imo for an illness that seems to kill and debilitate due to over response of the acquired immune system, I think whatever can help at innate immune response level is preferable 

by TH Chang · 2014 · Cited by 5 · Related articles
Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) is an antimalarial drug also used in treating autoimmune diseases. It is also an autophagosome-lysosome fusion inhibitor broadly  ...
 
 
Edited by Pen
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, TravelingChris said:

Well the puzzling thing is that those of us who are on biologics that are lowering our t-cells- things like Humira, Enbrel, Cimzia, ETC.  are actually not at higher risk for getting COVID amd some of these type of medications have been used with COVID with some success.

Oh, that is comforting.  (I take Enbrel.) Do you have any links?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Junie said:

Oh, that is comforting.  (I take Enbrel.) Do you have any links?  

 https://www.ajmc.com/newsroom/majority-of-patients-with-rheumatic-conditions-recover-from-covid19-regardless-of-rheumatic-disease-therapy

In that article, it mentions that anti- TNF users (both Enbrel that you take and Cimzia that I take are anti-TNF biologics) are less likely to be hospitalized than non rheumatoid patients.  Moderate to high use of glucosteroids is linked to higher odds of hospitalization and I am very happy that I am back down to low dose of steroid now.    My rheumatologist also told me this last week- that with regards to my arthritis, I may have slightly better odds of getting it but with my medications, less likely to be severe.  Now I also have moderate asthma so there is that too and I am really uninterested in becoming a test subject for whether my genes will protect me, my biologic will protect me or whether my asthma will kill me.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bagels McGruffikin said:

Well this will break your heart to pieces, hunger trends reversing and worsening for the first time in decades, mostly impacting the youngest children 😭

https://apnews.com/5cbee9693c52728a3808f4e7b4965cbd

Food production and supply chains have to recover to have any hope of addressing the rising food costs squeezing the developed world. It’s just awful.

Ugh, between this and the story from my hometown of the orphaned toddlers who are sick with it, and the grandma is afraid to hold them for fear she'll get it and die, leaving them with no one...my hear tis just torn apart lately. 

  • Sad 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Pen said:

Hcq antiviral 

 

 

I think it is helpful to look at some information from before this became a political issue, even though related to other viruses 

for example there are many studies for HCQ like the one pulled from google below (google scholar can reveal more)    HCQ helping innate immunity in the first place  fits very well with what seems to be needed to deal with HCQ . 

Does it actually work — not, mind you, as a magic bullet “cure” but as a useful tool to reduce severe consequences ? I can’t prove to you that it does.  

And I accept that there isn’t enough of the stuff to get to everyone. 

 

However, I am pretty sure that it does help—again, not a magic bullet cure (and probably not even as beneficial as getting Vitamin D levels,  zinc etc optimized, since helping innate immune wing needs to have the basic molecules etc present to work with.  Even excellent vaccines may not work well in absence of zinc etc). 

 

imo for an illness that seems to kill and debilitate due to over response of the acquired immune system, I think whatever can help at innate immune response level is preferable 

by TH Chang · 2014 · Cited by 5 · Related articles
Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) is an antimalarial drug also used in treating autoimmune diseases. It is also an autophagosome-lysosome fusion inhibitor broadly  ...
 
 

 

@square_25  quoting myself to add that the timing (of multiple possible mitigation strategies) is extremely important .  For a medicine that has been shown to activate or support innate immunity with regard to viruses (established in times past with other viruses—but keep in mind that innate immune system does not have the same degree of specificity as the acquired part of the immune system (antibodies)) applying it too late is nonsensical.

 

As an analogy, we could argue about whether or not seatbelts and airbags do or do not help to protect people in a car crash.  Timing though is critical.  No number of studies, no matter how good the randomness and controls and perhaps double blind aspects, no matter how prestigious the journal it appears in, where it is concluded that seatbelts and airbags deployed on patients in the hospital both on the ward and in icu do not seem to improve outcomes is going to convince me that they have no place when used at correct time and circumstances. To help, I believe that good seatbelts must already be properly fastened prior to impact, and the airbags need to deploy properly at impact.  Will seatbelts and airbags applied to patients in icu beds help them? Of course not.  (Or at least I don’t thing so unless falling out of bed is a problem.)  Once a person is in hospital after a car crash, it is too late for seatbelts and airbags to be likely to help.

I find the late (already in hospital) application of Hcq or indeed anything with a principal mode of action being support of innate immune system to have a similarly  very low probability of helping. That it has helped at all apparently in some cases early in course of hospitalization is actually really remarkable! But that it often doesn’t is not particularly a surprise.  Similarly, using a too high dose at wrong time causing more harm is also no surprise, kind of like giving exploding airbags to people already in ICU.  

 

I know you were studying viruses for homeschool.  Your daughter sounds super smart .  Maybe you would both enjoy studying the immune system next!!!

 

Edited by Pen
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QLD.

two new cases.  One school closed down temporarily due to a teacher being infected.  Two women went to qld via Sydney from Melbourne and did not self isolate/quarantine but went to multiple locations.  It’s being treated as a criminal investigation.  Because of their absolute selfishness aged care homes across three QLD areas have had to close to all visitors as a precaution.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Norman Swans Coronacast was interesting today.  I had wondered why not move people out of aged care settings where there was an outbreak if possible.  He said apparently moving people with dementia has a high risk of causing delirium which can also kill so moving dementia patients requires a huge amount of care.  

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Ausmumof3 said:

Norman Swans Coronacast was interesting today.  I had wondered why not move people out of aged care settings where there was an outbreak if possible.  He said apparently moving people with dementia has a high risk of causing delirium which can also kill so moving dementia patients requires a huge amount of care.  


Trying to find that podcast.  Yes, moving plus dementia can be harrowing.  And witnessing delirium is pretty traumatic for loved ones (said with experience).  I did not know it could kill.  Not surprised, but would like to hear more.
 

I think often, too, there’s no safer place to move elderly care home residents.  We have one elderly dementia patient at home - her care is all I can manage, and one in assisted living getting ready to move to long term nursing.  We can’t handle her care needs.  We have another parent in nursing, whose care needs are beyond our abilities, also dementia, but wheelchair bound as well.  I wish we could bring them all home, but we just can’t accommodate the level of care.

  • Like 4
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Teaching3bears said:

Has anyone heard of FAR UV3 (sp?) lights to kill coronavirus? It sounded really promising in the podcast I was listening to. You turn them on in the room and it kills coronavirus and flu. They haven't manufactured many yet though.

 

Yes.  That would help probably to decrease a number of infectious illness if deployed in places like schools

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Spryte said:


Trying to find that podcast.  Yes, moving plus dementia can be harrowing.  And witnessing delirium is pretty traumatic for loved ones (said with experience).  I did not know it could kill.  Not surprised, but would like to hear more.
 

I think often, too, there’s no safer place to move elderly care home residents.  We have one elderly dementia patient at home - her care is all I can manage, and one in assisted living getting ready to move to long term nursing.  We can’t handle her care needs.  We have another parent in nursing, whose care needs are beyond our abilities, also dementia, but wheelchair bound as well.  I wish we could bring them all home, but we just can’t accommodate the level of care.

https://www.abc.net.au/radio/programs/coronacast/
 

here you are.. it was only a short part of the overall podcast 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Pen said:

 

A good general discussion today on DrBeen

(And a direct statement that he thinks schools

should not open.)

 

Pen, what is his general take on Ivermectin? I was really interested in that when it was first being floated as potential treatment, but there doesn't seem to have been much (if any) research beyond that initial in vitro study, has there?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...