Jump to content

Menu

Recommended Posts

 

 

1 hour ago, Ausmumof3 said:

 for myself personally I’m leaning toward doing the Quercetin thing if we end up exposed because it’s much more accessible here.

 

I’m doing the Quercitin- zinc-C  (following. MATH  Marik protocol on those More or less) thing **now** because it seems to me that the ideal time to get optimized is ***before***  exposure!

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 16.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Ausmumof3

    3248

  • Pen

    2468

  • Arcadia

    1337

  • prairiewindmomma

    305

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

DS got home 3 hours ago!  ❤️❤️

Update-  my youngest is not only short of breath, coughing, dizzy, nausaues, and with headache-  she is also confused.  I called our doctor and talked with him and she is going to be going to the ER.

That's not a blanket right.  If my religion required human sacrifice, I can't practice it.  If my religion required sexual assault, I can't practice it. Freedom of religion isn't a blanket right

Posted Images

29 minutes ago, Pen said:

 

 

 

I’m doing the Quercitin- zinc-C  (following. MATH  Marik protocol on those More or less) thing **now** because it seems to me that the ideal time to get optimized is ***before***  exposure!

 

Yep.  We haven’t got community spread here yet so I’m waiting on that stuff... but if I lived where there was I might start 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

3pc positivity in Vic now.  This was below 1pc last week so seems like a clear indicator that what we’re doing there isn’t enough.  The masks only came in a week ago so maybe that will have a bigger effect.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know it’s somewhat probably weekend dip but US had first day under 60,000 in a while and lower than last weeks dip so I’m hoping for you all that things might be turning around.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Ausmumof3 said:

Yep.  We haven’t got community spread here yet so I’m waiting on that stuff... but if I lived where there was I might start 

You can't go wrong getting your vitamin D levels up!  It's helpful for so many things.  With my food allergies, I'm saving all other things until I need them but taking weekly vitamin D.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, ElizabethB said:

You can't go wrong getting your vitamin D levels up!  It's helpful for so many things.  With my food allergies, I'm saving all other things until I need them but taking weekly vitamin D.

Yep I’m already doing the vit d and my usual b vitamins.  I also have some elderberry plus zinc here which I’m doing whenever anyone has a sniffle or whatever so hoping that helps.  Just haven’t got the quercetin happening yet or a dedicated zinc.  Incidentally overall energy levels have improved since I’ve been doing to the  vit d plus an hours outdoor time weather permitting 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Ausmumof3 said:

Are India using hydroxychloroquine widely given they held onto a lot early?  How is the cfr compared to elsewhere?  Obviously one of many many factors just interested.

Supposedly they are.

Here is an interesting article about how Equador turned around their death rates after starting HCQ, you can feed it into Google translate 5,000 words at a time if you're interested, they did more than that, too, very interesting article.

https://www.lanuevaprensa.com.co/component/k2/del-desastre-a-la-victoria-como-guayaquil-vencio-al-covid-19

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Ausmumof3 said:

Yep I’m already doing the vit d and my usual b vitamins.  I also have some elderberry plus zinc here which I’m doing whenever anyone has a sniffle or whatever so hoping that helps.  Just haven’t got the quercetin happening yet or a dedicated zinc.  Incidentally overall energy levels have improved since I’ve been doing to the  vit d plus an hours outdoor time weather permitting 

getting zinc to a good level

is probably also a good idea for general health - 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Ausmumof3 said:

Are India using hydroxychloroquine widely given they held onto a lot early?  How is the cfr compared to elsewhere?  Obviously one of many many factors just interested.

 

What I’ve read so far is they were using it for voluntary prophylaxis  for law enforcement and medical workers in some places and using it as medicine for some sick people. 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Ausmumof3 said:

4 cases linked to the neonate NICU in children’s hospital in vic. (all in adults).  Hope and pray that the lower infection rate in kids holds here.

one is an infant under 3 weeks old

 a baby, 2 parents - I am guessing parents of the baby - and one nurse

Edited by Melissa in Australia
  • Sad 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Melissa in Australia said:

one is an infant under 3 weeks old

 a baby, 2 parents - I am guessing parents of the baby - and one nurse

Oh man..: those poor parents 

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it on this thread that someone recommended the podcast This Week in Virology?  Anyway, this episode about rapid antigen testing has completely upended my thinking about how it might be possible to control this pandemic.  Here Is a shortened version of the interview, and here is a news article with some more details about various tests in development.  

The basic idea -- that what we need are tests primarily figure out when people are contagious and that the technology exists to make such tests cheaply and at scale -- seems potentially transformative to me.

 

 

 

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, JennyD said:

Is it on this thread that someone recommended the podcast This Week in Virology?  Anyway, this episode about rapid antigen testing has completely upended my thinking about how it might be possible to control this pandemic.  Here Is a shortened version of the interview, and here is a news article with some more details about various tests in development.  

The basic idea -- that what we need are tests primarily figure out when people are contagious and that the technology exists to make such tests cheaply and at scale -- seems potentially transformative to me.

 

 

 

Singapore have just developed a 36 minute one 

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/covid-19-singapore-testing-community-quick-pcr-ntu-12965532?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

widespread available and rapid turn around testing would make a massive difference 

There was a study the other day showing contact tracing has to happen within three days to make a significant difference.  Given our fastest test around here is around 24 hours and it might take 24 hours for people to get down for a test etc it doesn’t leave the contact tracers much time.  Getting same day results would be good.

Edited by Ausmumof3
  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Ausmumof3 said:

 

There was a study the other day showing contact tracing has to happen within three days to make a significant difference.  Given our fastest test around here is around 24 hours and it might take 24 hours for people to get down for a test etc it doesn’t leave the contact tracers much time.  Getting same day results would be good.

 

The types of tests that Michael Mina (among others) are proposing would probably make a lot of contact tracing unnecessary, actually -- the idea is inexpensive, at-home saliva tests that you could do nearly every day before going to school or work, visiting family, etc.  Such tests are not nearly as sensitive as PCR tests, but his point is that they don't need to be.  PCR tests are extremely sensitive and pick up even low levels of virus.  Antigen tests can't do that.  But they are plenty sensitive enough to pick up virus at the the level that people are shedding when they are contagious, and what we desperately need to know is when people are contagious.  

This doesn't seem to get as much attention, but I personally also think that it is very important to get some tests out there ASAP that don't require uncomfortable/painful swabs.  

Edited by JennyD
  • Like 9
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JennyD said:

 

The types of tests that Michael Mina (among others) are proposing would probably make a lot of contact tracing unnecessary, actually -- the idea is inexpensive, at-home saliva tests that you could do nearly every day before going to school or work, visiting family, etc.  Such tests are not nearly as sensitive as PCR tests, but his point is that they don't need to be.  PCR tests are extremely sensitive and pick up even low levels of virus.  Antigen tests can't do that.  But they are plenty sensitive enough to pick up virus at the the level that people are shedding when they are contagious, and what we desperately need to know is when people are contagious.  

This doesn't seem to get as much attention, but I personally also think that it is very important to get some tests out there ASAP that don't require uncomfortable/painful swabs.  

Hang on I think he is the guy I was following on twitter talking about this.  Yes would be great - similar to a pregnancy test in a sense.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Ausmumof3 said:

Hang on I think he is the guy I was following on twitter talking about this.  Yes would be great - similar to a pregnancy test in a sense.

 

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.)

 

Edited by JennyD
  • Like 8
Link to post
Share on other sites
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 post
Share on other sites

We report the identification of 100 molecules that inhibit viral replication, including 21 known drugs that exhibit dose response relationships. Of these, thirteen were found to harbor effective concentrations likely commensurate with achievable therapeutic doses in patients, including the PIKfyve kinase inhibitor apilimod2–4, and the cysteine protease inhibitors MDL-28170, Z LVG CHN2, VBY-825, and ONO 5334. Notably, MDL-28170, ONO 5334, and apilimod were found to antagonize viral replication in human iPSC-derived pneumocyte-like cells, and the PIKfyve inhibitor also demonstrated antiviral efficacy in a primary human lung explant model. Since most of the molecules identified in this study have already advanced into the clinic, the known pharmacological and human safety profiles of these compounds will enable accelerated preclinical and clinical evaluation of these drugs for the treatment of COVID-19.
 

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2577-1

 

accidentally hit submit

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.
Edited by Plum
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The spike protein on the surface of SARS-CoV-2 latches onto the ACE-2 receptor, a molecule on the surface of human cells. Once secured, the virus inserts its own genetic material into the cell, hijacking the cellular machinery to produce replica viruses. But the virus could just as easily be persuaded to lock onto a decoy molecule that offers a similar fit. The neutralized virus would be trapped and eventually degrade naturally.

Previous research has shown this decoy technique works in trapping other viruses, including dengue, Zika, and influenza A. To hear the researchers discuss their findings, watch this video.

"We're learning how to block viral infection, and that is knowledge we are going to need if we want to rapidly confront pandemics," said Jonathan Dordick, the lead researcher and a professor of chemical and biological engineering at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. "The reality is that we don't have great antivirals. To protect ourselves against future pandemics, we are going to need an arsenal of approaches that we can quickly adapt to emerging viruses."

The Cell Discovery paper tests antiviral activity in three variants of heparin (heparin, trisulfated heparin, and a non-anticoagulant low molecular weight heparin) and two fucoidans (RPI-27 and RPI-28) extracted from seaweed. All five compounds are long chains of sugar molecules known as sulfated polysaccharides, a structural conformation that the results of a binding study published earlier this month in Antiviral Research suggested as an effective decoy.

The researchers performed a dose response study known as an EC50 -- shorthand for the effective concentration of the compound that inhibits 50% of viral infectivity -- with each of the five compounds on mammalian cells. For the results of an EC50, which are given in a molar concentration, a lower value signals a more potent compound.

A separate test found no cellular toxicity in any of the compounds, even at the highest concentrations tested.

"What interests us is a new way of getting at infection," said Robert Linhardt, a Rensselaer professor of chemistry and chemical biology who is collaborating with Dordick to develop the decoy strategy. "The current thinking is that the COVID-19 infection starts in the nose, and either of these substances could be the basis for a nasal spray. If you could simply treat the infection early, or even treat before you have the infection, you would have a way of blocking it before it enters the body."

https://www.technologynetworks.com/drug-discovery/news/seaweed-extract-surpasses-remdesivir-at-blocking-sars-cov-2-in-cell-models-of-covid-19-337886

  • Like 3
Link to post
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 post
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 post
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 post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Terabith said:

How is that going to work when so many people seem to never get their sense of smell back at all?

Requoting to answer your question after dh talked to the head of employee health at his work. 

She said he has to wait 24 hours after his sense of smell returns to be able to go back to work. It is a sign the virus is still active. To make him feel better she also said that all of the employees they’ve had out that had this symptom has had their sense of smell return within 15-20 days. So far no one has had a permanent case of it (in their hospital chain). 
 

Which backs up the study I linked earlier. The olfactory nerves do not have ACE2 receptors and therefore are not destroyed. It’s the supporting cells that are the problem. 

  • Like 6
Link to post
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 post
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 6
Link to post
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 7
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ktgrok said:

 

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. 

Oh no! Sorry to hear. I hope everyone else stays well. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
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 post
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 post
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 post
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 post
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 post
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 post
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 post
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 post
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 post
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 post
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 post
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 post
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 post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...