wuhan - coronavirus

[Pen]

19 minutes ago, Corraleno said:

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?

 

I think he should speak for himself on that:

24 minute video on Ivermectin 

 

 

 

 

https://youtu.be/rFE3XE68Wfw

 

In addition,

some of the viewer comments include anecdotes from people who say they took it, comments about it in Bangladeshi use, etc. 

Edited July 29, 2020 by Pen

[Corraleno]

Sounds like there hasn't been any further research beyond the original in vitro study. I wonder why there seems to be so little interest in it?

[Pen]

12 minutes ago, Corraleno said:

Sounds like there hasn't been any further research beyond the original in vitro study. I wonder why there seems to be so little interest in it?

 

I think some studies are underway.

 

You might want to look at Peru information for Ivermectin.   (Peru seems to be very positive about it.  )

I think Dr Been May have said he has used it off label for some patients , but I don’t recall for sure. And I think Marik also discussed using it. 

 

Edited July 29, 2020 by Pen

[ElizabethB]

36 minutes ago, Corraleno said:

Sounds like there hasn't been any further research beyond the original in vitro study. I wonder why there seems to be so little interest in it?

Well, there are actually several countries that are using it...but they are, like with their HCQ use, just using it as a cheap drug with minimal side effects that they think may help, no trials, just using it on almost everyone. There was a kit I saw that had HCQ, vitamin D, zinc, ivermectin, basically throwing all possibilities in there. 

Brazil is apparently doing a study:

https://www.trialsitenews.com/prominent-brazilian-university-embarks-on-phase-2-ivermectin-clinical-trial/

 

[ElizabethB]

43 minutes ago, Pen said:

 

You might want to look at Peru information for Ivermectin.   (Peru seems to be very positive about it.  )

I think Dr Been May have said he has used it off label for some patients , but I don’t recall for sure. And I think Marik also discussed using it. 

 

Peru is basically just using it, no studies.

https://www.trialsitenews.com/perus-universities-now-produce-ivermectin-in-collaboration-with-regional-health-authorities-in-a-fight-for-survival/

Here is an active clinical trial for ivermectin, recruiting volunteers now, randomized, but so small I don't see how it will be able to prove anything either way.

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04472585?term=Ivermectin&cond=Coronavirus&draw=2&rank=2

Edited July 29, 2020 by ElizabethB

[Ausmumof3]

295 cases for vic today.  9 deaths.  39 couldn’t be contacted when checking if they were self isolating.  Contact tracing is successfully finding links through NSW cases.  The aged care scenario is bad.  Staff from my state going to vic to help out. 

[Corraleno]

1 hour ago, ElizabethB said:

Well, there are actually several countries that are using it...but they are, like with their HCQ use, just using it as a cheap drug with minimal side effects that they think may help, no trials, just using it on almost everyone. There was a kit I saw that had HCQ, vitamin D, zinc, ivermectin, basically throwing all possibilities in there. 

Brazil is apparently doing a study:

https://www.trialsitenews.com/prominent-brazilian-university-embarks-on-phase-2-ivermectin-clinical-trial/

 

That sounds promising, I wonder how many participants they will have? 
 

1 hour ago, ElizabethB said:

Here is an active clinical trial for ivermectin, recruiting volunteers now, randomized, but so small I don't see how it will be able to prove anything either way.

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04472585?term=Ivermectin&cond=Coronavirus&draw=2&rank=2

Too bad that one is so small, especially since they are including zinc. How can they have a randomized, placebo controlled, multi-arm study with only 40 people???

[Ausmumof3]

https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202007.0025/v1
 

I managed to get the link to the Zev zelenko HCQ zinc study time work now.  It Is a retrospective study and seems to be no control for age/ severity etc however it’s here if anyone wants to read it.  Not yet peer reviewed.  I think someone does need to do a large scale well designed study on this to either settle the question or prove it works.  I know there’s still studies ongoing so hopefully something bigger scale is in the works.

[ElizabethB]

2 hours ago, Corraleno said:

That sounds promising, I wonder how many participants they will have? 
 

Too bad that one is so small, especially since they are including zinc. How can they have a randomized, placebo controlled, multi-arm study with only 40 people???

Seriously.  You'll only get a significant finding with those numbers if everyone lives in one arm and everyone dies in the another, it's ridiculous.

[Ausmumof3]

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?cond=COVID-19&term=Ivermectin&cntry=&state=&city=&dist=&Search=Search
 

looks like 33 studies on ivermectin registered on but they are mostly under 100.  The singapore one is much larger but I feel like their outbreak may have been too well controlled to provide good evidence?

[BeachGal]

10 hours 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.

 

I don’t know if they’re being used much yet but they could be very helpful. (They’re far UVC lights.)

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-67211-2

[Pen]

6 hours ago, Ausmumof3 said:

https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202007.0025/v1
 

I managed to get the link to the Zev zelenko HCQ zinc study time work now.  It Is a retrospective study and seems to be no control for age/ severity etc however it’s here if anyone wants to read it.  Not yet peer reviewed.  I think someone does need to do a large scale well designed study on this to either settle the question or prove it works.  I know there’s still studies ongoing so hopefully something bigger scale is in the works.

 

It is hard to feel like it would be ethical— but it could be done.

Australia apparently has a good stockpile of HCQ— maybe half of all Melbourne / Vic teachers and students who don’t have    Health reasons not to and who would be willing to do the experiment could randomly receive the Solanco ZELENKO (speech recognition troubles) prophylactic Protocol (HCQ plus zinc plus in an interview I heard he said all his patients were tested for D status and brought to optimal whenever they saw him for anything—he wasn’t asked about vitamins K -&2, but they should be part of a test protocol too imo) or a placebo similar looking protocol and also a quarter or so sized cohort to receive just the zinc and D (and K) but no HCQ, and a last quarter to get the whole protocol except Quercitin rather than HCQ.   

Then (with the teachers and students who had bad health and were not able to get the HCQ-zinc Etc, or didn’t want to be in the experiment all staying home) schools now shut could then reopen, and scientists could follow what happens and see if there are statistically meaningfully fewer severe cases of CV19 in the people who were put on the prophylaxis than in those who were not. 

 

ETA- it would have to be a population size large enough to be meaningful yet small enough for researchers to administer the weekly HCQ or placebo for it.  And it would have to be a group of people who could be relied on to properly take their daily zinc etc (or placebo) .   Possibly an occasional mess up and forgetting would be similar to real

life and okay, but I can imagine people (and expect it would be case if tried to run in USA) deliberately screwing up the experiment. 

(As something that is supposed to activate and support innate immunity my hypothesis would be that I would expect some positive cases, but much less severity because innate immune system would handle it usually without it turning in to a cytokine storm crisis.  

Zelenko himself is an interesting test case, though not himself statistically significant.  I think he’s been back in hospital due to his cancer and he is a very high risk for CV19 severe case or fatality and was sort of doing self experimentation on himself by trusting his protocol .  Sort of like in much older days of science when scientists would test things on themselves.) 

 

Edited July 29, 2020 by Pen

[Pen]

1 hour ago, Ausmumof3 said:

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?cond=COVID-19&term=Ivermectin&cntry=&state=&city=&dist=&Search=Search
 

looks like 33 studies on ivermectin registered on but they are mostly under 100.  The singapore one is much larger but I feel like their outbreak may have been too well controlled to provide good evidence?

 

I know you want statistically significant numbers. 

I on the other hand, would be happy with information coming from someplace that I think has decent medical and science infrastructure and ability to report things, like Singapore or South Korea,  that Ivermectin given at such and such a stage appeared to clinicians to turn sick patients around toward wellness.  

There is a lot in medicine that we rely on and know on what would originally be considered a clinical or anecdotal basis. 

And I think doctors used to learn whom to treat with what and when partly / mostly on the basis of experience, not on evidence based studies. 

[Pen]

@Corraleno @Ausmumof3

another drBeen on Ivermectin - I think his comment early that there are multiple medicines that seem to work for some people is very important.   Another reason that clinical practice (rather than studies) can be important is that as a patient I want something that works for me, not something that works for a stat significant percentage of people — but not for me. 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 29, 2020 by Pen

[Pen]

The toolbar tools for doing links, etc, disappeared for me.  Anyone know how to fix it?   The bar is there but icons for link or bold etc vanished.

 

 

Edited July 29, 2020 by Pen

[BusyMom5]

I am behind- ivermectin like the cattle wormer???  From the farm store???

[TracyP]

2 hours ago, BusyMom5 said:

I am behind- ivermectin like the cattle wormer???  From the farm store???

Yeah, pretty much. Except I'm pretty sure they have better ways to administer it than squeezing it out of the tube... 🤣

[TracyP]

2 hours ago, BusyMom5 said:

I am behind- ivermectin like the cattle wormer???  From the farm store???

Last time I bought wormer for my horses there were signs all over warning "not for human consumption."

[Pen]

2 hours ago, BusyMom5 said:

I am behind- ivermectin like the cattle wormer???  From the farm store???

 

Not from the farm store.  

self administered  bovine medicine is probably very dangerous. 

Ivermectin  From a pharmacy.  It’s FDA approved for worms in humans. 

[Corraleno]

8 hours ago, Pen said:

Australia apparently has a good stockpile of HCQ— maybe half of all Melbourne / Vic teachers and students who don’t have    Health reasons not to and who would be willing to do the experiment could randomly receive the Solanco ZELENKO (speech recognition troubles) prophylactic Protocol (HCQ plus zinc plus in an interview I heard he said all his patients were tested for D status and brought to optimal whenever they saw him for anything—he wasn’t asked about vitamins K -&2, but they should be part of a test protocol too imo) or a placebo similar looking protocol and also a quarter or so sized cohort to receive just the zinc and D (and K) but no HCQ, and a last quarter to get the whole protocol except Quercitin rather than HCQ.   

That would be absolutely ideal, as it would allow the effects of HCQ, quercetin, and Zinc/D to be measured separately. That is the kind of the study I would find convincing if it showed significant benefit for HCQ.

[matrips]

18 hours ago, Corraleno said:

Sounds like there hasn't been any further research beyond the original in vitro study. I wonder why there seems to be so little interest in it?

I’m probably cynical but I don’t see the money in it.  Doing official studies takes time and money and for what?  A cheap existing drug?  So many doctors/countries are using drugs off-label that they claim anecdotally is working, but no interest in clinical trials.  There’s more money and funding in a brand new vaccine.  Again, don’t need to flame me.  It’s just how I feel.

[Pen]

35 minutes ago, Corraleno said:

That would be absolutely ideal, as it would allow the effects of HCQ, quercetin, and Zinc/D to be measured separately. That is the kind of the study I would find convincing if it showed significant benefit for HCQ.

 

Also, if it showed Quercitin equal or even close, I would like to know that. 

 

Quercitin for those who can take it seems worthwhile also for potentially reducing allergies and thus there being less “is this allergy or is this Covid” confusion perhaps.  

[Pen]

32 minutes ago, matrips said:

I’m probably cynical but I don’t see the money in it.  Doing official studies takes time and money and for what?  A cheap existing drug?  So many doctors/countries are using drugs off-label that they claim anecdotally is working, but no interest in clinical trials.  There’s more money and funding in a brand new vaccine.  Again, don’t need to flame me.  It’s just how I feel.

 

I think you may be correct.  And financial gain may be a reason for studies done in ways to discredit some cheaper meds.  

 

[ktgrok]

43 minutes ago, matrips said:

I’m probably cynical but I don’t see the money in it.  Doing official studies takes time and money and for what?  A cheap existing drug?  So many doctors/countries are using drugs off-label that they claim anecdotally is working, but no interest in clinical trials.  There’s more money and funding in a brand new vaccine.  Again, don’t need to flame me.  It’s just how I feel.

But in countries with socialized medicine, a cheap existing drug is exactly what they would want to work. 

And dexamethasone is a cheap, existing drug, and being studied and considered to be effective. 

Heck, prone positioning is free, and being considered effective. So cost doesn't seem to be the main factor. 

Edited July 29, 2020 by Ktgrok

[Jean in Newcastle]

1 hour ago, Pen said:

 

Not from the farm store.  

self administered  bovine medicine is probably very dangerous. 

Ivermectin  From a pharmacy.  It’s FDA approved for worms in humans. 

Ivermectin is approved for humans. I have taken it. It was a pill. I am fairly sure that my dose was much much less what is given to a cow seeing as my weight is much less. 

[Pen]

3 hours ago, Plum said:

This is interesting. If fit and fabric are key to an effective mask that will protect the wearer, I don't think you can get better than this. It uses kinesiology tape to seal all around the face. No ties at all. They are disposable and can be worn all day. They can be removed temporarily to eat, but as with most adhesives, once removed, it loses a little bit of the tackiness. What says the Hive? https://spidertech.com/us/ready-face-mask

 

I’d like to know what their viral filtration efficiency is.   It does seem like for long hours use it could help. 

 

[Ausmumof3]

34 minutes ago, Pen said:

 

Also, if it showed Quercitin equal or even close, I would like to know that. 

 

Quercitin for those who can take it seems worthwhile also for potentially reducing allergies and thus there being less “is this allergy or is this Covid” confusion perhaps.  

We actually do have a prophylactic trial registered for health workers though not with the zinc components unfortunately.  I’m not sure if it’s still running.

[Pen]

22 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

But in countries with socialized medicine, a cheap existing drug is exactly what they would want to work. 

And dexamethasone is a cheap, existing drug, and being studied and considered to be effective. 

Heck, prone positioning is free, and being considered effective. So cost doesn't seem to be the main factor. 

 

Cuba is using HCQ and apparently considering Ivermectin 

[Ausmumof3]

34 minutes ago, Pen said:

 

I think you may be correct.  And financial gain may be a reason for studies done in ways to discredit some cheaper meds.  

 

I used to think this.  But I spend some time searching the clinical trials site and there is over 200 trials registered for hydroxychloroquine.  The next highest number of trials is in the 50s and that’s for chloroquine.  So it seems like there is a huge number of studies being done on it, more so than for any other drug:  when you search for zinc there’s only a handful being done with the zinc and one of them doesn’t have a control group unfortunately.  So it seems that there are enough people invested in finding the solution that even cheap drugs are being studied.

[Pen]

4 minutes ago, Ausmumof3 said:

We actually do have a prophylactic trial registered for health workers though not with the zinc components unfortunately.  I’m not sure if it’s still running.

 

I wish they’d do it with both zinc and D as components. I think the innate arm of immune system needs its ... raw ingredients so to speak ...  or like the analogy that it’s like a gun where the gun is HCQ and the bullets are the zinc.   And I wish they would at least test D levels. 

 

[Pen]

6 minutes ago, Ausmumof3 said:

I used to think this.  But I spend some time searching the clinical trials site and there is over 200 trials registered for hydroxychloroquine.  The next highest number of trials is in the 50s and that’s for chloroquine.  So it seems like there is a huge number of studies being done on it, more so than for any other drug:  when you search for zinc there’s only a handful being done with the zinc and one of them doesn’t have a control group unfortunately.  So it seems that there are enough people invested in finding the solution that even cheap drugs are being studied.

 

Or... more cynicism... if a scientist in parts of USA where HCQ  is not allowed for prophylaxis or early use for CV19, a trial is a way to get around those laws and obtain  HCQ for a group of people who one wants to get it for. 

[Ausmumof3]

Just now, Pen said:

 

Or... more cynicism... if a scientist in parts of USA where HCQ  is not allowed for prophylaxis or early use for CV19, a trial is a way to get around those laws and obtain  HCQ for a group of people who one wants to get it for. 

Well it is global not just in be US.  But yes the WHO encouraged anyone using to to register as part of a study.  That just seems smart to me because then we might get some results on whether it actually works or not.  

[Ausmumof3]

11 minutes ago, Pen said:

 

I wish they’d do it with both zinc and D as components. I think the innate arm of immune system needs its ... raw ingredients so to speak ...  or like the analogy that it’s like a gun where the gun is HCQ and the bullets are the zinc.   And I wish they would at least test D levels. 

 

https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=379797&isReview=true
 

here’s one doing that although without a control group (general population is control group).  

 

[Ausmumof3]

732 cases and 13 deaths for vic.  3 cases in Qld.  I’m feeling less hopeful about all this.

[Pen]

2 hours ago, Ktgrok said:

But in countries with socialized medicine, a cheap existing drug is exactly what they would want to work. 

And dexamethasone is a cheap, existing drug, and being studied and considered to be effective. 

Heck, prone positioning is free, and being considered effective. So cost doesn't seem to be the main factor. 

 

@Ausmumof3 — how is Australia caring for CV19 patients 

@wathe what about Canada? 

[Ausmumof3]

11 minutes ago, Pen said:

 

@Ausmumof3 — how is Australia caring for CV19 patients 

@wathe what about Canada? 

https://app.magicapp.org/#/guideline/L4Q5An/section/L0OPkj
 

there’s the whole shebang here.  In short dexamethasone for anyone on oxygen support, proning etc.  not currently recommending hydroxychloroquine outside of clinical trials but monitoring the evidence. There’s a few others but that’s the stuff we’ve talked about here.  Remdesivir in some circumstances

Edited July 30, 2020 by Ausmumof3

[wathe]

33 minutes ago, Pen said:

 

@Ausmumof3 — how is Australia caring for CV19 patients 

@wathe what about Canada? 

Current Ontario guideline summary https://4d9cc926-c314-41ac-908e-19322efdf1db.filesusr.com/ugd/b5d454_079e3d496a0549bc87c776f1d37286dc.pdf.

Long version of guideline

Dexamethasone for moderately ill hospitalized and critically ill pts. 

Remdesivir is only used sometimes - it is not widely available or easy to access.  Remdesivir was only just authorized for use (to treat covid) in Canada yesterday.

HCQ is not routinely used.  It only used if enrolled in a HCQ trial,, which I think is rare - I haven't heard of anyone receiving this drug for covid locally .

Edited July 30, 2020 by wathe

[Melissa in Australia]

40 minutes ago, Ausmumof3 said:

732 cases and 13 deaths for vic.  3 cases in Qld.  I’m feeling less hopeful about all this.

masks are to be compulsory across the whole state

Large areas of the state are to be under lock down in a few hours

 in lockdown areas no weddings or funerals , no visiting another persons house at all

 

[Ausmumof3]

66,000 cases 1400 deaths For US

WOrld passed 17 million

[Corraleno]

The US passed France today for per capita deaths. Our 7-day average is now over 1000 deaths/day.

[EmseB]

Has anyone read this extremely long Medium post about hcq?

Warning that the guy is extremely anti-Trump, but I'm not posting this to get into politics. He also uses profanity.

[Ausmumof3]

1 hour ago, EmseB said:

Has anyone read this extremely long Medium post about hcq?

Warning that the guy is extremely anti-Trump, but I'm not posting this to get into politics. He also uses profanity.

I’m almost done with talking about HCQ after yesterday (spent a lot of time looking up and providing links to studies etc that seem to pretty much be ignored in discussion), but the question I have is why are all of the doctors who want to use it against random control trials?  So far it seems like every single one is against them.  
 

and secondly why are Brazil and India where its readily available off label still having so many deaths.  Yes India is lower than the US but their outbreak is just starting to take off and the death rates are following.

[TCB]

4 minutes ago, Ausmumof3 said:

I’m almost done with talking about HCQ after yesterday (spent a lot of time looking up and providing links to studies etc that seem to pretty much be ignored in discussion), but the question I have is why are all of the doctors who want to use it against random control trials?  So far it seems like every single one is against them.  
 

and secondly why are Brazil and India where its readily available off label still having so many deaths.  Yes India is lower than the US but their outbreak is just starting to take off and the death rates are following.

I started reading the link. I want to believe that it could be true because what a relief to have a treatment. But I just heard Fauci on the BBC say all studies so far show it doesn’t work, and I think to myself why believe a random guy from Brazil on the internet rather than Fauci. I’ll finish reading tomorrow.

[Jean in Newcastle]

8 minutes ago, Ausmumof3 said:

I’m almost done with talking about HCQ after yesterday (spent a lot of time looking up and providing links to studies etc that seem to pretty much be ignored in discussion), but the question I have is why are all of the doctors who want to use it against random control trials?  So far it seems like every single one is against them.  
 

and secondly why are Brazil and India where its readily available off label still having so many deaths.  Yes India is lower than the US but their outbreak is just starting to take off and the death rates are following.

I really appreciate all your links. 

[EmseB]

19 minutes ago, Ausmumof3 said:

I’m almost done with talking about HCQ after yesterday (spent a lot of time looking up and providing links to studies etc that seem to pretty much be ignored in discussion), but the question I have is why are all of the doctors who want to use it against random control trials?  So far it seems like every single one is against them.  
 

and secondly why are Brazil and India where its readily available off label still having so many deaths.  Yes India is lower than the US but their outbreak is just starting to take off and the death rates are following.

I am not pro or anti, or really educated enough to understand a lot of the discussion surrounding all of it, but I do think it's a very weird political football.

Also, I haven't read the whole thing before posting because it was so long.

[Corraleno]

25 minutes ago, EmseB said:

Has anyone read this extremely long Medium post about hcq?

Warning that the guy is extremely anti-Trump, but I'm not posting this to get into politics. He also uses profanity.

I tried really hard to fight my way through that, but it is exceptionally rambling and disorganized and full of bizarre asides about things like "horny, perverted panda bears," and it's extremely difficult to read. I also found whole tone of the article really obnoxious and off-putting, with him continually saying things like "Let's think about this... let's follow this logically... are you with me so far?" as if he is explaining really simple, obvious facts for idiots, that no one could reasonably disagree with.

The author's argument rests on an assumption that he feels no need to explain or defend: you really don't need randomization or control groups in clinical studies, because you can just compare one person's results with overall stats that are not part of any controlled study. And based on that assumption, he concludes (many thousands of extraneous words later), that since you don't need randomized, controlled studies the only possible reasons for rejecting nonrandomized pro-HCQ studies are either (1) political bias or (2) because Big Pharma doesn't want us to have cheap drugs.

He claims that the media ignored the criticisms of the VA study, which is false. He praises the TX doctor who used HCQ on nursing home patients and claims that the only reason he was criticized was because of his political leanings and because the powers that be actually wanted to keep the death rate high, when the real issues were that he obtained a large quantity of the drug through backdoor connections at a time when pharmacists were restricting use even among patients who needed it for lupus and other conditions; he used the drug without consent; and he used it outside of a clinical trial. He suggests the RECOVERY study purposely overdosed patients to make it look like HCQ doesn't work. He suggests that people were rejecting Didier Raoult's study based on nothing more than a personal smear campaign, and that people did not take Zelenko seriously because of his political and religious beliefs. I've never read anything about Didier Raoult's issues with photoshopped images or sexual harassment lawsuits, and I knew nothing about Zelenko's politics or religiion; my opinion of those studies is based entirely on the studies themselves, specifically the lack of randomization and a proper control group. 

[EmseB]

2 minutes ago, Corraleno said:

I tried really hard to fight my way through that, but it is exceptionally rambling and disorganized and full of bizarre asides about things like "horny, perverted panda bears," and it's extremely difficult to read. I also found whole tone of the article really obnoxious and off-putting, with him continually saying things like "Let's think about this... let's follow this logically... are you with me so far?" as if he is explaining really simple, obvious facts for idiots, that no one could reasonably disagree with.

To this point of tone and difficulty reading, it seemed poorly translated or at the very least definitely not someone using American English as their first language (obviously). It was hard for me to start reading it but got used to it after a bit.

[JennyD]

Israel has socialized medicine, a very low death rate, and lots of previously imported HCQ sitting in warehouses.  Doctors haven't been using it for months.  In fact, there was a report a while back that Israel donated a bunch of HCQ to Florida, because DeSantis wanted it and hospitals here were no longer interested in the drug.

OTOH, the country has  in recent weeks gone to considerable lengths to import more remdesevir, and Israeli hospitals were treating covid patients with dexamethasone well before the studies came out.  I am sure there are a lot of other treatments being tried as well, but I don't know what they are.  

I too do not at all understand the strange attachment to HCQ as a potential magic bullet.  Of course it would have been great if a cheap, readily available drug could help us resolve this terrible catastrophe.  Too bad this one can't.  Onward.

 

[Corraleno]

7 minutes ago, EmseB said:

To this point of tone and difficulty reading, it seemed poorly translated or at the very least definitely not someone using American English as their first language (obviously). It was hard for me to start reading it but got used to it after a bit.

It's not the effect of translation (an occasional odd vocabulary word or stilted syntax) that bothered me, it was more the condescending tone of "I, a brilliant journalist, have uncovered the truth of a vast conspiracy and I will enlighten you!" combined with a drunk-uncle-at-Thanksgiving-dinner level of rambling and tangents. The actual information in the article could have been easily distilled into a couple of pages, minus the side tracks into Brazilian torture techniques, Jim Jones, horny panda bears, etc. And after hacking through that verbal jungle, there was really nothing new or revelatory in it anyway.

[Laura Corin]

5 hours ago, Pen said:

 

@Ausmumof3 — how is Australia caring for CV19 patients 

@wathe what about Canada? 

The UK has been using the numbers of patients in the NHS to run the Recovery trials

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/07/one-uk-trial-transforming-covid-19-treatment-why-haven-t-others-delivered-more-results

https://www.recoverytrial.net/results