Quote from Dr Richard

So Costa Rica is effectively adopting Mass Fever Treatment with hydroxychloroquine but not the less targeted Mass Drug Adminitration approach. Good for them, hope the WHO will recommend this soon to limit the pandemic worldwide.

So: how many of these enlightened countries using HCQ are also using Zinc? I suspect not so many?

There are obviously many details that might change effectiveness. I'd caution those here looking at evidence not to cherry pick:

Trial shows no results - because it has the wrong combo of drugs

Trial shows results - counted positive even if it has the wrong combo of drugs.

Standard practice is to work out the effective drugs first, then see how the combine.

More maps of Costa Rica again malaria areas have v low COVID-19 cases

Map of provinces with confirmed coronavirus cases (as of 15 April) Confirmed 1–9 Confirmed 10–99 Confirmed 100–315
Map of cantons with confirmed coronavirus cases (as of 15 April) Confirmed 1–9 Confirmed 10–82
Disease

Malaria map

meat diets

Most meat/fish diets will supply sufficient Zn, only need extra if deficiency is suspected as in the veteran's case - or if on a vegan diet perhaps?

Quote from THHuxleynew

Obesity alone covers 39% - 23% (depending on state) of US population, and 20.6% of children aged 12-19, and 18.4% of children aged 6-11.

Yikes. You are right. I mis-remembered the stats, thinking that 39% included both overweight and obese adults, but that's just the obese. Overweight + obese is 72%!

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/obesity-overweight.htm

I should look these things up.

The CDC defines obesity as follows:

"Obesity in adults is defined as BMI greater than or equal to 30.0, based on the NHANES variable Body Mass Index."

"Obesity in youth is defined as BMI at or above the sex- and age-specific 95th percentile of the 2000 CDC growth charts."

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/2018/021.pdf

Top 15 Foods High in Zinc and Their Health Benefits - Dr. Axe

draxe.com › Nutrition › Vitamins & Minerals
30 Apr 2019 - Reports suggest that people who don't eat meat or animal products, like people on a vegetarian or vegan diet, need up to 50 percent more zinc ..

Well even consuming 100g of prime steak only gives you 4.8 mg Zn - so the 220 mg dose is probably appropriate in boosting HCQ effectiveness. Running up to toxic levels though, so may have to give some iron to counter Zn toxicity.

are their any data in regards to zinc intake and regions? in water, in foods, …… any blood studies as to Zn levels in blood? Or any studies showing Zn levels in fatalities or recovers in CV19?

Data taken from March to early April showed that the median age of patients was 63 years old and 53 percent of all coronavirus patients suffered from hypertension, the most prevalent of the ailments among patients.

In addition, 42 percent of coronavirus patients who had body mass index (BMI) data on file suffered from obesity while 32 percent of all patients suffered from diabetes

https://www.foxnews.com/health…-health-issue-study-finds

Quote from oldguy

In addition, 42 percent of coronavirus patients who had body mass index (BMI) data on file suffered from obesity while 32 percent of all patients suffered from diabetes

This report is from New York City. That sentence is in the report. It is a little hard to follow. I think it means:

The study was of 5,700 patients. Out of those patients, some number (unspecified -- they should have said) have BMI data on file. Out of that group, with the BMI on file, 42% suffer from obesity. Out the entire group of 5,700 patients, 32% suffer from diabetes.

In other words, I guess, they do not always record the BMI in the patients' records, but they do always record whether the patient has diabetes.

That seems strange. It doesn't make sense. I suppose the intake nurses always measure height and weight, so these researchers should have been able to calculate the BMI. Maybe they don't measure these things when the patient comes in on a stretcher?

The daily new case graphs are not symmetric. Several people have noted this. Here is an article by a professor of pediatrics about this:

It’s Too Soon to Reopen States. The Coronavirus Is Not Under Control.

Leaders are overestimating how far we’ve come and are underestimating what it will take to manage Covid-19 in a near-normal world.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/0…avirus-states-reopen.html

QUOTES:

Models are useful for the Covid-19 pandemic because they help us plan and make decisions. They also help us to predict the future. Most of the models that have caught the country’s attention are nicely symmetric. They show cases and deaths rising rapidly, peaking and then coming down just as fast. . . .

Models from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington, known as I.H.M.E., which reportedly caught the attention of the White House weeks later, showed a similar pattern. Cases and infections go up relatively smoothly, slow, and then come down smoothly.

Even as they are updated, though, many of the models remain symmetric. Reality isn’t.

Let’s start with new cases. According to the Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Research Center, Italy had its worst day of new cases (6,557) in mid-March. A month before, it had almost none. More than a month later, it’s still having thousands a day. Spain started seeing an increase in cases in the beginning of March and peaked about three weeks later at 9,630. About a month after that, it’s still finding around 4,000 a day. Belgium rose and flattened, not dropped. So did the Netherlands.

None of them rose, peaked and fell smoothly. . . .

Quote from THHuxleynew

Are you OK with 20% of US children (those likley to die from COVID) being removed from the statistics because they are obese.

Most countries do show no death among children. Exceptions are only severe preconditions. Also the New York Data Shane D. linked is very clear as most victims had precondition. Most probably 99.99% of all victims do have precondition as the recent German section result among patient with "no" preconditions did show. Thus the above (re-) post is nonsense.

New emerging data from Geneva (700 persons so far screened - ongoing) antibody IGg testing. Only 1/5 are known cases. Thus 80% of the population shows no ore only a minor reaction - or, may be, will show a delayed reaction - what will be monitored too.

From Theodore Roosevelt carrier data: only 1/3 of the tested did show symptoms. This data is in line with the above 1/5 as people with low level symptoms will not shine up at doctors.

So we have some facts now: 80% of the population will just feel some cold symptoms nothing more. - But be aware that also in some rare cases long term (lung) damage can occur.

What we need is a better break down for the 20% more strong affected ones. Who needs what medication, early protective medication. Which people need to be locked in to some extent.

Quote from Wyttenbach

Most countries do show no death among children. Exceptions are only severe preconditions. Also the New York Data Shane D.linked is very clear as most victims had precondition. Most probably 99.99% of all victims do have precondition as the recent German section result among patient with "no" preconditions did show.

Unfortunately, in the U.S. population, 70% of adults have a precondition: they are overweight or obese. So if the virus spreads widely, we can expect a higher mortality rate than most other countries such as Germany. In Germany, 23% of adults are obese, and 44% of men are overweight (and 29% of women). (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5644792/)

Standard practice tends to be thrown out of the window when things become this desperate. We end up with using anything that has a chance of being effective to save lives. More in vitro tests of other CQ analogues, doxycycline instead of azithromycin finding the best treatment options takes time and money, animal experiments are needed too for preliminary in vivo studies as oldguy has suggested. Our so-called advanced Western medical system has been caught napping by this coronavirus outbreak with all our advances in molecular biology, gene mapping, RNA virus vaccines, antibody screening etc we were arrogantly confident about handling this before it hit us this hard. Hence the initial government inaction in delaying quarantine measures and it's the hubris within the medical profession that is delaying roll out of potential treatments especially in the UK.

Quote from JedRothwell

The daily new case graphs are not symmetric. Several people have noted this. Here is an article by a professor of pediatrics about this:

It’s Too Soon to Reopen States. The Coronavirus Is Not Under Control.

Leaders are overestimating how far we’ve come and are underestimating what it will take to manage Covid-19 in a near-normal world.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/0…avirus-states-reopen.html

Display More

I agree, without a really strong national system of testing, tracing and containing (like South Korea is doing below) what would drive the confidence in reopening and just hoping that things somehow get better. Denial, wishful thinking? Maybe the virus will die down a bit when the summer hits and it’s 90 degrees out. Let’s hope.

The U.S. has to test a lot more people than South Korea, so we have a bigger task ahead of us for widespread testing. But why isn’t the Federal Government in the U.S. going all out right now to set up a national agency for testing and tracing to be carried out locally by the States? Do people think it would be too much money to create it? We are losing billions in GDP weekly. So a national agency will pay for itself by getting the economy on better footing faster.

https://www.theguardian.com/wo…ned-its-coronavirus-curve

Yes they are hoping the problem will just disappear as suddenly as it arrived - because that's what happened in previous SARS and MERS outbreaks. It will all be over when summer comes! What else do you expect from politicians?

And BTW, why should I have to "own up to the consequences of what I advocate"? If many more die from the cure, than the disease, proving me right, will those arguing for continued shut downs such as yourslf, be held accountable, and own up to the consequences?

I'd hope so. I see it as a moral choice. If you have utilitarian ethics you will be balancing the lives lost equally, and would be arguing for a much shorter lockdown, or for a world economy freeze with UBI, or whatever. If you view letting people die of athedisease by enabling its spread when it could be stopped as worse than people dying through poverty (which lets face it most countries seem pretty relaxed about), then you justify lockdown, even though in the end more people will die.

Quote

As to your point about "letting people die by enabling it's spread"...do not forget herd immunity. The Swedes are defending their policies against attack from the media, and others by saying something to the effect "do not judge us by the numbers now. This is just the beginning of the soccer match and we don't know the end score yet. Wait 3 years, and we will see if we saved more lives than you did". When this is over, we may be able to say the less drastic measures worked the best, but maybe not

In the case of most vanquished diseases (ie. polio, smallpox, measles) herd immunity is achieved by vaccination, not by risking lives infecting everyone. Yes, let's see how Sweden does. So far, it's dismal.

Here is a photo from 1918. The woman is wearing a sign saying, "WEAR A MASK or go to jail." This shows that strict laws were enforced in epidemics in the past, and it shows that most people back then were not rugged individualists who defied the laws.

Quote from THHuxleynew

If you view letting people die of athedisease by enabling its spread when it could be stopped as worse than people dying through poverty (which lets face it most countries seem pretty relaxed about),

That is a false dichotomy, as I said before. We can easily prevent people from dying through poverty. Just give them food. Whereas we cannot prevent the coronavirus once it is widespread except with a lockdown.

When I talk about "giving food" I do not mean the U.S. should supply 100% of the calories needed to keep people alive. That would be a terrible mistake. It would destroy the local agriculture. I think 2% or 3% at most is needed. Any more than that and the cost of food will collapse and local farmers will be in trouble. There are two problems in third world countries: 1. The food supply chain and distribution network has problems; 2. People are out of work and cannot afford to buy food. Both can be fixed by augmenting food supplies.

We have the same two problems in the U.S., but the supply chain and distribution is more automated, so there is less disruption.