Quote from JedRothwell

Some agencies such as the FDA think that ivermectin does not work, but they have no power to stop it.

The FDA do have voice. but its power is limited..

Here is the Filipino parrot version.

Judging by the comments many Filipino people have a low regard for the parrot..

Brain fog,’ blurred vision and loss of taste: 85% of long-haulers who started with mild COVID-19 have 4 or more neurological symptoms, Northwestern study finds

https://www.chicagotribune.com…story.html?outputType=amp

In what is thought to be the first study of its kind, Northwestern doctors found high levels of neurological symptoms among patients who developed long-term COVID-19 symptoms after a relatively mild initial illness that did not require hospitalization.

Eighty-five percent of patients reported four or more neurological symptoms, problems such as “brain fog” (or attention and memory problems), loss of taste or smell, headache and blurred vision. In addition, patients experienced non-neurologic symptoms, such as fatigue (85%) and depression or anxiety (47%).

About half of patients in the study missed more than 10 days of work, due to what doctors call long COVID syndrome, or symptoms lasting more than six weeks.

“Long COVID syndrome affects probably millions of people in the world, and people have persistent (neurological) symptoms, and some have cognitive dysfunction that significantly impairs their quality of life,” said study co-author Igor Koralnik, chief of neuro-infectious diseases at Northwestern Medicine.

COVID-19 will probably have a “serious impact” on the U.S. workforce, Koralnik said.

The study, published Tuesday in the Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology, focused on 100 patients who sought care at Northwestern Memorial Hospital’s neuro-COVID-19 clinic between May and November 2020.

another reason to suppress ivermectin. It's all about money

Pfizer begins early stage clinical trial testing oral antiviral drug for Covid

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2021/…-oral-antiviral-drug.html

Pfizer said Tuesday it has begun an early stage clinical trial of an experimental oral antiviral drug for Covid-19.

The New York-based company said the phase one trial of the drug – called PF-07321332 – is being conducted in the United States. The drug is part of a class of medicines called protease inhibitors and works by inhibiting an enzyme that the virus needs to replicate in human cells.

Protease inhibitors are used to treat other viral pathogens such as HIV and hepatitis C.

"Tackling the COVID-19 pandemic requires both prevention via vaccine and targeted treatment for those who contract the virus," Pfizer's chief scientific officer, Mikael Dolsten, said in a press release. "Given the way that SARS-CoV-2 is mutating and the continued global impact of COVID-19, it appears likely that it will be critical to have access to therapeutic options both now and beyond the pandemic."

The trial comes as Pfizer is also working on an intravenously administered protease inhibitor, known as PF-07304814. That drug is currently in a phase 1b clinical trial in patients hospitalized with Covid-19.

A framework for research linking weather, climate and COVID-19

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-19546-7

Early studies of weather, seasonality, and environmental influences on COVID-19 have yielded inconsistent and confusing results. To provide policy-makers and the public with meaningful and actionable environmentally-informed COVID-19 risk estimates, the research community must meet robust methodological and communication standards.

When COVID-19 began to spread, environmental scientists recognized that the world faced a dangerous upper respiratory viral disease that might exhibit sensitivity to seasonal weather conditions. Many of these scientists have sought to aid COVID-19 response by studying the potential to monitor, forecast, or project disease transmission rates or symptom severity as a function of climate zone, season, meteorological variability, air quality, and other environmental parameters1,2,3,4. The rapid pace of COVID-19 research has meant that studies on this topic appeared on pre-print servers and then on news and social media outlets faster than the information could be cross-checked and peer-reviewed. As many such studies accumulated, it became clear that reported evidence was often contradictory, and in some cases studies were being selected subjectively in a manner that seemed intended to support political agendas. Carlson et al.5 recently provided a cogent assessment of the policy-relevant challenges associated with studies that have attempted to quantify meteorological sensitivities of the virus and the disease. We appreciate this perspective. Here we argue that the research community must act to ensure that work on this topic meets its potential to contribute to pandemic understanding and response, and that fears of inappropriate data analysis or miscommunication do not dampen innovation or the effective use of research results.

Environmentally-informed disease risk monitoring and prediction has proven to be useful for numerous infectious diseases6, including viral upper respiratory infections7 like COVID-19. These disease risk forecasts have been applied to vaccination strategies8 and have demonstrated value for informing deployment of non-pharmaceutical preventative measures and treatments9,10. In the case of COVID-19, environmentally-informed analysis has already revealed associations between chronic air pollution exposure and the health impacts of the disease11. The veracity of forecasts of COVID-19 incidence based on seasonality or other meteorological factors, however, continues to be in dispute, and the creation of robust disease risk forecast systems has been limited by data challenges12 and the dominance of or interplay with other drivers and pressures in the early phases of a respiratory disease epidemic13. If and when more consistent and meaningful climatic and environmental sensitivities are identified, such disease forecasts have the potential to help policy makers and public health officials target interventions in a way that optimizes effectiveness while minimizing their social and economic burden. Seasonally-informed physical distancing, other personal protection policies, and climate-informed vaccination strategies, for example, could make meaningful contributions to COVID-19 control, if the evidence that underlies science-based recommendations is robust and credible.

SARS-CoV-2 Structural Analysis of Receptor Binding Domain New Variants from United Kingdom and South Africa

https://riojournal.com/article/62936/

Discussion

The mutations in the spike glycoprotein that affect ACE2 receptor binding are N501Y for United Kingdom variant and two more, K417N and E484K for South Africa variant. The UK mutation interacts closely with Y41 in the receptor therefore producing aromatic-aromatic interactions that provide for stronger binding between receptor and spike.

On the other hand, the South Africa variant has two more mutations. K417N disrupts the repulsive forces between K417 and H34 (positive-positive) providing less repulsion between the binding partners which adds to the effect of Y501 aromatic attraction.

Finally, K484 has been recently demonstrated to be an escape mutant against the immune system since prevents binding from polyclonal human serum antibodies (Greaney et al. 2021).

These mutations are spreading rapidly and more efficiently than the previous version of the virus therefore the public health concern is very critical. Further studies are needed to quantify the binding strength of these variants compared to wild type in wet lab experiments but the distance between Y501 and Y41 is very close, even when they move (molecular dynamics). Likewise, N417 does not interact anymore with H34 since this amino acid has a shorter side chain and not positive therefore the repulsive forces are disrupted between these two amino acids (K417-H34).

Due to the public health emergency that these variants are originating I found it URGENT to publish these results as soon as possible without further testing which the future will provide.

India reports novel COVID-19 variant, daily deaths at year’s high

New ‘double mutant variant’ detected, says health ministry amid concerns over highest single-day tally of new infections and deaths.

https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/…aily-deaths-at-years-high

India has detected a new “double mutant variant” of the novel coronavirus, the health ministry said, adding to concern as the government struggles with the highest single-day tally of new infections and deaths this year.

Genome sequencing and analysis of samples from Maharashtra state found mutations in the virus that do not match previously catalogued “variants of concern” (VOC), the ministry said in a statement on Wednesday.

Maharashtra is one of India’s worst-affected states but the ministry said it was not clear if the new variant was causing a surge there or in other states.

“Though VOCs and a new double mutant variant have been found in India, these have not been detected in numbers sufficient to either establish a direct relationship or explain the rapid increase in cases in some states,” the ministry said in a statement but did not elaborate.

India has already reported several cases of a variant first detected in Britain, as well as ones first found in South Africa and Brazil.

Quote from RobertBryant

There is no value in ivermectin for any BIGPharma. not J&J.. not Sanofi not. 'Roach..'

They cannot leverage $1000 per treatment as per Remdesivir .. not even $100 per treatment..

This makes no sense. Drug companies make money selling aspirin! Sell billions of items at $1 each that cost practically nothing to manufacture and you make a billion dollars. Vaccines bring in little profit, but the drug companies are making them as fast as they can, and they will make ~14 billion doses.

They would prefer to make $100 per treatment, but if J&J can make $1 per treatment by taking away Merck's $100, they will do it. They are not in business to benefit Merck. It does not help them that Merck has a cash cow that brings in $100 per treatment. They will take 1% of that profit if they can, and they will not give a darn that Merck loses $100 every time they sell a $1 pill. There is absolutely no industry-wide loyalty in pharmaceuticals or any other industry. It does not exist! It never did. If Ford finds a way to make a car and sell it at a profit for $5,000, they will do it, because they will take away all of the sales from GM, Toyota, VW and everyone else by doing so. Granted, if they could make a car for $5, they might think twice about it, because even if you had the whole market for cars you wouldn't make any money doing that. They would hesitate, but someone else would soon bring out the $5 cars, and that would be the end of all other automobile companies.

You can see actual examples of this dynamic at work in things like the cost of air transportation, ocean freight and oil transport, the cost of telephone service, illumination, computers, computer memory (RAM and disk) and many others goods and services. The cost of these things has fallen by factors ranging from 10 to 10^8 (computer memory). At no point did the companies making these things stop and say: "Wait a minute! It will hurt our competitors if we bring out a cheaper, better version. We here at J&J should not do anything that will hurt Merck or increase our market share. That wouldn't be nice. They wouldn't do it to us." No one has ever, ever, EVER said that. If any corporate executive said that, they would haul him away in a straitjacket.

For that reason, if cold fusion is ever made practical, it will instantly destroy all existing energy companies, no matter how big or politically powerful they are. They will try to stop it, but history shows they will fail. Nothing can stop consumers in a free society from choosing a better, cheaper product.

Quote from JedRothwell

his makes no sense

It makes no sense for BigPharma .. they have much higher running costs..

but it makes cents for smallpharma

the average Indian chenist doesn't earn 100K $... its more like rupees..

the factory workers earn even less..

https://www.sastimedicine.com/…ric-Alternatives-its-cost

Quote from Alan Smith

but fresh questions have now emerged about the data.

Nature article:- https://www.nature.com/article…39373-6f2d90b487-44567417

There are no questions raised in any of the articles except that Pifzer does not like somebody eats his cake...So only the headline is the message and that whats Pfizer pays nature for.

If the certainly bribed advisors would raise the same question for Pfizer & Moderna we would have a full stop already since day 4 start of vaccinations.

Researchers Warn: Preservative Used in Hundreds of Popular Foods May Harm the Immune System

https://scitechdaily.com/resea…rm-the-immune-system/amp/

A food preservative used to prolong the shelf life of Pop-Tarts, Rice Krispies Treats, Cheez-Its and almost 1,250 other popular processed foods may harm the immune system, according to a new peer-reviewed study by Environmental Working Group.

For the study, published this week in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, EWG researchers used data from the Environmental Protection Agency’s Toxicity Forecaster, or ToxCast, to assess the health hazards of the most common chemicals added to food, as well as the “forever chemicals” known as PFAS, which can migrate to food from packaging.

EWG’s analysis of ToxCast data showed that the preservative tert-butylhydroquinone, or TBHQ, has been found to harm the immune system both in both animal tests and in non-animal tests known as high-throughput in vitro toxicology testing. This finding is of particular concern during the coronavirus pandemic.

“The pandemic has focused public and scientific attention on environmental factors that can impact the immune system,” said Olga Naidenko, Ph.D., EWG vice president for science investigations and lead author of the new study. “Before the pandemic, chemicals that may harm the immune system’s defense against infection or cancer did not receive sufficient attention from public health agencies. To protect public health, this must change.”

TBHQ

TBHQ is a preservative that is pervasive in processed foods. It has been used in foods for many decades and serves no function besides increasing a product’s shelf life. Using new non-animal test results from ToxCast, EWG found that TBHQ affected immune cell proteins at doses similar to those that cause harm in traditional studies. Earlier studies have found that TBHQ might influence how well flu vaccines work and may be linked to a rise in food allergies.

AstraZeneca, After Rebuke, Releases New Data Supporting Its Vaccine

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2…vaccine-coronavirus-cases

AstraZeneca reiterated on Wednesday that its Covid-19 vaccine was very effective at preventing the disease, based on more recent data than was included when the company announced the interim results of its U.S. clinical trial on Monday.

The company said in a news release that its vaccine was 76 percent effective at preventing Covid-19. That is slightly lower than the efficacy number that the company announced earlier this week.

The new results strengthen the scientific case for the embattled vaccine. But they may not repair the damage to AstraZeneca’s credibility after U.S. health officials and independent monitors issued an extraordinary rebuke of the company for not counting some Covid-19 cases when it announced its initial findings this week.

In a news release on Wednesday, the company said complete results from its 32,000-person study showed that its vaccine was 76 percent effective. On Monday, the company said the vaccine appeared to be 79 percent effective, based on an interim look at 141 Covid-19 cases that had turned up among volunteers before Feb. 17. The latest finding was based on 190 trial participants who had gotten sick with Covid-19.

AstraZeneca said on Wednesday that the vaccine was 100 percent effective in preventing severe disease and 85 percent effective in preventing Covid-19 in people over age 65.

When it unveiled its interim results on Monday, AstraZeneca ignored dozens of recently confirmed Covid-19 cases that had cropped up in trial volunteers before mid-February.

In a letter to the company and federal officials, the independent monitoring board that was helping oversee the clinical trial issued an unusual reprimand of AstraZeneca for appearing to cherry-pick data to make its vaccine appear more effective.

“Decisions like this are what erode public trust in the scientific process,” the letter said. The members of the monitoring board wrote that their statistical modeling had found that the vaccine might have a lower efficacy rate — between 69 and 74 percent — if the Covid-19 cases in question were included in the analysis.

The Coronavirus Variants Don't Seem to Be Highly Variable So Far

SARS-CoV-2 may be settling into a limited set of mutations

https://www.scientificamerican…e-highly-variable-so-far/

No doubt you’ve heard about the novel coronavirus variants that are evolving around the world. There now appear to be more than a dozen versions of SARS-CoV-2, which are of varying degrees of concern because some are linked to increased infectivity and lethality while others are not. It’s easy to be overwhelmed by this diversity and to fear that we’ll never achieve herd immunity. Yet evidence is growing that these variants share similar combinations of mutations. This may not be the multifront war that many are dreading, with an infinite number of new viral versions.

I am an evolutionary microbiologist who studies how bacteria and viruses adapt to new environments or hosts. Like many microbiologists, my colleagues and I have turned our attention to understanding how SARS-CoV-2 is evolving adaptations for reproducing and transmitting in humans. Our favorite laboratory method is experimental evolution, where we grow multiple populations of microbes started from the same strain under identical conditions for weeks or months. We study problems like how antibiotic resistance evolves and how infections become chronic. The power of this method is that using multiple populations allows us to “replay the tape of life” and study how repeatable and ultimately predictable evolution might be.

One pattern we see is called convergent evolution, where the same trait emerges in different independent lineages over time, usually as they adapt to similar environments. Some of the best examples of convergent evolution include the sandy color of diverse desert animals; lobed swimming fins for whales, walruses, and manatees (which are actually distantly related); and even the ability for humans to digest lactose into adulthood, which arose several times in geographically isolated populations.

Quote from Fm1

AstraZeneca, After Rebuke, Releases New Data Supporting Its Vaccine

As said: This was noise from Pfizer only. Efficiency is always given within a time frame. So now by extending the time frame may be Pfizer did hope it will go down significantly what was not the case.

Pfizer still is hiding many thousand of vaccination induced CoV-19 deaths, that occur after the first shot (2 weeks time frame) because a vaccination during a pandemic is a high risk game.

Pfizer is also hiding the > x1000 deaths after the two shots and the bribed authorities do cover the big fish in the pond.

What people should learn. Expensive medicine: Doctors/politicians/authorities get big bribes cheap medicine/vaccines no bribes.

Worst case: Only cheap medicine (Ivermectin) works!

Here once more the link to the great summary given for CoV-19 treatment by swprs :

German: https://swprs.org/zur-behandlung-von-covid-19/

English: https://swprs.org/on-the-treatment-of-covid-19/

You can find everything just by navigating !

Quote from Fm1

The Coronavirus Variants Don't Seem to Be Highly Variable So Far

SARS-CoV-2 may be settling into a limited set of mutations

That's good news!

Georgia will now offer vaccinations to anyone over age 16. I thought that was an odd thing to do, but it makes sense. Two reasons:

1. Young people are spreading it more than older people.
2. Many people over 65 have now been vaccinated. Estimates are 60 to 70%. From the data I saw months ago, there is not much of difference in the fatality rate among people ranging from age 20 to 60. There is not much justification for holding off on a vaccinating a 20 year old to give it to a 60 year old. There was a great deal of justification for holding off both of them to give it to an 75-year-old, but now that most of them have been vaccinated there is no reason to separate the rest of population into age groups.

The one thing they should do -- but they probably won't -- is to continue to push people over age 65 to the front of the waiting list. If an elderly person manages to register for a shot, he or she should be given top priority. "Manage" is the key word. It is still very difficult to register for an appointment. I was able to do it using cyber legerdemain. (I watched the websites and figured out they opened new appointments at 5 or 6 a.m., so I got up early and typed like mad.)

Here is an article about the new policy:

https://www.ajc.com/news/atlan…IAGVYEUBAIPH6WHY2T4CH2SI/

Doctors seem supportive. But they have other complaints. Here is what one had to say:

Dr. Cecil Bennett, medical director of a primary care center in Newnan, and an adjunct professor at Morehouse School of Medicine’s Family Medicine Program, said while it was understandable Georgia started the vaccine rollout by vaccinating older adults and the most vulnerable residents, followed by teachers, he said it now makes sense to open it up to everyone 16 and over.

He called Gov. Brian Kemp’s step approach to expand eligibility “spot on in my opinion.” . . .

Bennett said his practice, while approved to administer the COVID-19 vaccine, is still waiting for its first shipment. He said he doesn’t know of a single primary care practice that has the vaccine to administer.

“I have seniors call me every day asking me if I have the vaccine yet,” Bennett said.

The registration systems have made it hard for some to get vaccine appointments, he said.

“I’m really, really not happy with the current online system for setting up an appointment for the vaccine, and I have a number of seniors I can tell you if they don’t have a loved one help them set it up, there is zero chance of them getting the vaccine,” he said.

That gets to another critical issue with the rollout now, experts said. Opening up vaccination to all comers will only go so far if the state doesn’t do outreach to populations that are hesitant or having difficulty registering online. . . .

So has it been determined that once someone has been vaccinated they can no longer spread the virus or infect anyone else?

Quote from Roseland67

So has it been determined that once someone has been vaccinated they can no longer spread the virus or infect anyone else?

No: They are now customers ready for the next vaccine!