Damage by plasmodium?
damage by another pathogen..is probably a better translation from the Japanese
actually although we don't normally harbor plasmodium..as you say
there are some benign protozoa.. that we do entertain
e pluribus unum as they say..
maybe not in the USA..
approximately 30 identified species of protozoa live in a variety of human tissues, both intracellularly and extracellularly.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/…cle/pii/S1525001600902181
This is old but it deals with chloroquine overdose and treatment for it. Relevance to current crisis is doubtful so I include it only for perspective.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p…465/pdf/bmj00028-0055.pdf
QuoteMitchell is a very senior consulting oncologist and radiobio;ogy expert.
Thank you. Do you know if he is practicing clinically (with patients) and if so where?
So far, what I have seen here from him (assuming accurate quotes) has been disappointing. He is obviously qualified from what you report. What is he thinking, I wonder? Where does he get his information? I wish he would contribute here to discuss it.
Coronavirus, far as I know, is not a rhinovirus. It is a picornavirus. Structure is somewhat similar. I'm not a virologist but I am pretty sure antiviral action is highly specific to the type of virus so I would not rely on the above report.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhinovirus
I think Dr. Swartz is a medical doctor (is he ?) but he seems to be promoting consistently sketchy/dubious/premature information without appropriate qualification.
From my understanding coronaviruses are their own distinct family. There were 6 of them known to transmit to humans, with COVID-19 now becoming the 7th.
Here is an excellent interview with Larry Brilliant:
https://www.wired.com/story/co…-smallpox-epidemiologist/
Epidemiologist Larry Brilliant, who warned of pandemic in 2006, says we can beat the novel coronavirus—but first, we need lots more testing.
[He addresses some technical issues that have been discussed here:]
Since it's novel, we’re still learning about it. Do you believe that if someone gets it and recovers, that person thereafter has immunity?
So I don't see anything in this virus, even though it's novel, [that contradicts that]. There are cases where people think that they've gotten it again, [but] that's more likely to be a test failure than it is an actual reinfection. But there's going to be tens of millions of us or hundreds of millions of us or more who will get this virus before it's all over, and with large numbers like that, almost anything where you ask “Does this happen?” can happen. That doesn't mean that it is of public health or epidemiological importance.
[That is what the Japanese epidemiologist on National News said; "it was probably a test failure."]
Is this the worst outbreak you’ve ever seen?
It's the most dangerous pandemic in our lifetime.
We are being asked to do things, certainly, that never happened in my lifetime—stay in the house, stay 6 feet away from other people, don’t go to group gatherings. Are we getting the right advice?
Well, as you reach me, I'm pretending that I'm in a meditation retreat, but I'm actually being semi-quarantined in Marin County. Yes, this is very good advice. . . .
Flatten the curve.
By slowing it down or flattening it, we're not going to decrease the total number of cases, we're going to postpone many cases, until we get a vaccine—which we will, because there's nothing in the virology that makes me frightened that we won’t get a vaccine in 12 to 18 months. . . .
I hold out hope that we get an antiviral for Covid-19 that is curative, but in addition is prophylactic. It's certainly unproven and it's certainly controversial, and certainly a lot of people are not going to agree with me. But I offer as evidence two papers in 2005, one in Nature and one in Science. They both did mathematical modeling with influenza, to see whether saturation with just Tamiflu of an area around a case of influenza could stop the outbreak. And in both cases, it worked. . . .
Now that we've missed the opportunity for early testing, is it too late for testing to make a difference?
Absolutely not. Tests would make a measurable difference. We should be doing a stochastic process random probability sample of the country to find out where the hell the virus really is. . . .
Display MoreIn the US, Bayer has also made an identical offer. Another maker is Teva from Israel. Not sure their status.
I am not sure I understand. The numbers are certainly sufficient but they are way more than sufficient and there are risks. A proper clinical trial would be much smaller and much more manageable. It requires a control population that does not get the drug. They must be matched to those who do get it, for a variety of parameters. There needs to be proper testing for all sorts of tests and documentation and followup. Otherwise, nobody will know WTF is actually going on. Next, Plaquenil is not the proprietary name for chloroquine. It's hydroxychloroquine, a variant which may be more potenr *and* safer. Finally, any reasonable study would also include an arm of patients getting both hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin because the Marseilles study, while extremely tentative, does suggest this could make a big difference. This is all simple scientific method and there is peril in ignoring it.
The frustrating thing here is that a proper and adequate experimental trial of a protocol of hydroxychloroquine with and without azithromycin could be performed in a relatively short time and comparatively modest time (a few months). I hope this is being done in many places and being done properly with adequate funds.
Another issue is that it could turn out that the proposed dual drug therapy is useful and effective in early cases but does not work after the disease has progressed to consolidation of the lungs with or without so-called cytokine storm. For that condition, it may be that monoclonal antibodies, gamma globulin (convalescent serum) or other strategies are more effective.
SoT,
This could be done on a military base.
Quarantine/separate 100 people,
prep as needed, administer, monitor etc.
publish results.
hold out hope that we get an antiviral for Covid-19 that is curative, but in addition is prophylactic. It's certainly unproven
https://www.smh.com.au/politic…study-20140410-zqt3i.html
The manufacturer of Tamiflu... made a lot of money out of it
They also made much of relatively slim data.. typical of BigPharm
The ethics of Roche even with a product such as Vitamin C are disgraceful
Australia and others... spent billions on stocking hospitals with Tamiflu..
unfortunately it is also useless against Covid
Proof of efficacy is a MUST.. I don't believe that a Tamiflu focussed attack would have stopped a birdflu pandemic
There is the Cult Theory.
QuoteI think I have told you enough for a public space. After all, I might ask you the same questions. And that would never do.
Actually, the emergency is so dire and extreme, I have been debating whether to put my full credentials online where readers could see them. Instead, so far, I have tried to post the most useful information and to document as well as I can within the time I have.
full credentials
Humour us
Italian Doctor with CV.
The diet Doctor.
Coronavirus, far as I know, is not a rhinovirus. It is a picornavirus. Structure is somewhat similar. I'm not a virologist but I am pretty sure antiviral action is highly specific to the type of virus so I would not rely on the above report.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhinovirus
I think Dr. Swartz is a medical doctor (is he ?) but he seems to be promoting consistently sketchy/dubious/premature information without appropriate qualification.
yes, MD and MIT PhD
thank you Israel.
"Israeli generic drug giant Teva announced Friday that it will provide ten million doses of its anti-malarial drug hydroxychloroquine, which could potentially prove effective in fighting the coronavirus pandemic, to US hospitals free of charge. ......The company said six million doses will be delivered to US hospitals by March 31, and more than ten million in a month. ....According to the study carried out by Prof. Raoult on 24 patients with coronavirus, six days after the start of taking hydroxychloroquine, the virus had disappeared in three-quarters of people treated......
According to the study carried out by Prof. Raoult on 24 patients with coronavirus, six days after the start of taking hydroxychloroquine, the virus had disappeared in three-quarters of people treated.
[
Just for fun, my pet peeve: People who answer questions about Amazon products on the Amazon web site like
"I don't know. I never used the product." Baffling. And sort of comical that people are that stupid.
Have you been to ECW lately?
And Azithromycin is perhaps not the best antibiotic for bacterial pneumonia. Ampiciilin with clavulonic acid (Augmentin in the US) may be better as may Cipro and similar drugs. An infectious diseases expert, treating a specific patient, would decide on a case by case basis and (important) following sputum culture and sensitivity tests.
SOT: The above is the right comment. Others do recommend the ones you mentioned.
Normal air is loaded with harmful bacteria and virus in low concentration but an inflamed lung may not have not enough resistance. The examples I gave were translated by my wife from a Japanese paper something you may be cannot read. Japanese doctors could find the reason behind the non reversible lung defect after a deep covid-19 infection. May be she used the wrong term and amoeba would have been correct as the origin is not malaria. I also know many doctors that mix up some types of bacteria etc..
Thus giving Azithromycin is one try to prevent such negative effects. Whether it works out might be known in the near future, but as Alan references it seems to work with yet unknown damage!
Try to hold back your emotion. I even never recommended you should take hydroxy chloroquine just based on your own feelings as others do.
But it is easy to predict: It will happen - uncontrolled soon - in the USA too - as seen in Africa and the effect might be quite negative.
may be she used the wrong term and amoeba
The general term protozoa... is a probably a better..translation.. than plasmodium.. or amoeba
Of course SOT with his nonhumorous CV would have more extensive knowledge than these Japanese researchers...
BTW
I was wondering whether Roche's imprisoning and persecution of a whistleblower over Vitamin C pricing
is still common knowledge in Switzerland?'
". Adams' wife was told that he faced a 20-year jail term for industrial espionage. She committed suicide. "
I do not know enough about medicine to follow this discussion of hydroxychloroquine. I could not judge whether it might be effective. However, since it has been approved for other uses, I suppose it is reasonably safe in the correct dosage. Even if it does no good, I don't suppose it would do much harm. If doctors feel it helps, I would encourage them to use it. I would ask that it be used on me if I were sick. I understand that in normal circumstances you have to do double-blind testing and you have to be careful when deploying a new drug. You even have to be careful when using an old drug in new ways. But these are not normal circumstances. In this situation, I think we should put aside the rules and use whatever the doctors think is best. They may be judging by intuition, but the intuition of a professional is often a good thing to go by. You want ship captains and airplane pilots to pay close attention to their intuition.
We can always do double blind tests for a reserved set of people while many doctors outside the study go ahead and use the drug before the test results are in.
Since this situation is so extraordinary, I think we should skip some steps in the development of a vaccine, too. Or accelerate steps, even to the point of recklessness. As reported the other day, tests of vaccines on human volunteers has already begun. This might hurt the test subjects, but they are willing to take that risk. I would be willing too, even if they told me there is a significant risk of harm. In this case, the harm of delaying far outweighs the harm that a few dozen volunteers might suffer.
I believe in normal circumstances, they would not have started the human tests so soon. I guess they would still be inoculating mice or primates?
I guess they would still be inoculating mice or primates?
I think they are doing animal plus human trials in parallel
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00798-8
Normally, vaccines go into human trials after tests for safety and effectiveness in animals. But the Moderna vaccine and another being developed by Inovio Pharmaceuticals in Plymouth Meeting, Pennsylvania, are being tested in animals at the same time as human phase 1 trials are happening. Inovio plans to begin its first human trial in April.
