a question for the MD types here- It seems that one of the primary causes of death is via lack of O2. Is there anything out there that can take blood and oxygenate it?? - I am thinking of something like a dialysis machine that bubbles O2 in through the blood. Surely there is something somewhere that does that kind of thing.
Ventilator seem virtually useless against this and if the lungs are filled with all that CV glop even O2 additions to the air would have limited effect. What am I missing?
oldguy there is biochemical evidence for nicotine having antiviral affects and there are additional plant lectins in the tobacco plant with Anti viral properties too. So whether you have to smoke the plant or can make do with vaping to gain maximum benefit remains to be seen. Lots of plant lectins in marijuana too so smoke the weed but not the resin? I wonder if Colorado has a low incidence of COVID -19 as is the case in Canada since cannabis has been legalised there. Great, another reason to legalise it!
Add both to Anti Bat - might as well get stoned before we die of coronavirus!
Trump administration health spokesman tweets about Soros and Rothschild family ‘control’
“Are you kidding? Soros’s political agenda REQUIRES a pandemic,” Caputo said.
On March 27, Caputo tweeted a photo of Soros captioned “The real virus behind everything,” and added skulls and crossbones.
The Rothschild's have always been anti-fascist ever since WW2 when they backed the first ever modern terrorist group the Red Army Faction (Baader-Meinhoff) to hunt down ex nazis who re-infiltrated positions of power in Germany after the war. To say nothing of Nazi scientists recruited in the US after 1945. So there is bound to be some mud slinging at them from the present US administration which is all obviously BS.
oldguy you mean a heart - lung bypass machine used in heart lung transplants which oxygenates the blood and pumps it around while the heart is removed? Hi tech kit each hospital probably only has one or two. Could adapt some dialysis machines though with oxygenation.....blood transfusions are being used particularly from the newly recovered to give the sick a dose of antibodies as well as fresh red blood cells!
lung bypass machine
Thanks,
another dumb question - I think of mechanical/physics/chemical issues and not medical issues .... but why not put someone on a lung bypass or something that directly oxygenates the blood and then "rinse out" the lungs. I may have missed what is really going on in the lungs but I thought that the lungs get filled with CV and by produces that limit the lungs abilities.
The lungs till up with fluid from the blood which runs through capillaries surrounding the air sacs (alveoli) where the the absorption of O2 into haemoglobin in red blood cells occurs. The epithelial cells on the surface become leaky because the virus initiates a cytokine storm immune response involving interleukins and lots of other second messenger biochemical pathways which end up damaging gap junctions between cells, Serum builds up in the lungs until the patient eventually 'drowns' in his own fluids. So, yes a lung bypass would work but unfortunately the lung damage cannot be easily repaired, which is why anti viral therapy with HCQ Anti Bat has to be administered before this happens. Once the viral load has done its damage its too late to reverse it and the patient dies of oxygen starvation. That's only part of the story, there is also some evidence that the virus has haemaglutinin activity which also causes clumping of red blood cells leading to clot formation causing heart attacks and strokes. Some modelling data shows that HCQ or CQ blocks this effect as well as kicking the virus's ass!
I didn't examine every detail but most if not att of the items you listed, as I suspected, reflect lifestyle and economics and education and not a bit do they indicate quality of care.
Poor lifestyle and economics equal bad healthcare. Healthcare is not only what doctors and hospitals provide. It includes public health, with things like clean water, clean air, and sidewalks to encourage exercise. Sidewalks have a much larger impact than you might think. Healthcare also includes education. Teachers telling children what a healthy diet is, and how to disinfect things, and why you shouldn't ingest disinfectants. In Japan, obesity is rare because they teach about healthy diets, and also because public school lunches are delicious and healthy, so they set a good example and encourage the children to eat healthy. The lunches are tastier than you get in most U.S. restaurants.
Healthcare also includes public policy regarding things like agricultural subsidies. In the U.S., fattening foods tend to be subsidized, whereas fresh fruit is not.
What I wrote here is the point of view of people in public health. See, for example, the book "Prescription for a Healthy Nation."
https://www.amazon.com/Prescri…/dp/B007Y30BSW/ref=sr_1_1
The reason we are not controlling this epidemic better is not because of poor healthcare. It's because of all the dildo-thinkers in America who believe the thing to do is disregard the public health, virus biology and epidemiology experts of which we have some of the best, if not the best, in the world.
It is poor healthcare in the larger sense, which is how public health experts see things. That's why the American Public Health Association listed those metrics. They consider the number of teen pregnancies and the number people who get shot, or die of drug overdoses, to be health problems, and something the healthcare system should attend to. Other people say these are personal problems. Or moral problems. I would say they are all of the above: public health, doctor-provided healthcare, personal and moral. A complicated mixture.
Obesity, for example, has increased tremendously since the 1970s in the U.S. This is a public health catastrophe. It cannot be caused by millions of people suddenly deciding that their health doesn't matter, and they should eat as much frozen pizza as they want. Millions of people do not spontaneously change their behavior for no reason, with no external stimulus. Some individual people let themselves go and are guilt of gluttony, to put it in religious terms. Others were poorly educated and never learned how dangerous obesity is. They did not realize what they were doing. Overweight children, for example, are normalized in many communities. People think that's how children are supposed to look. The food manufacturers, grocery stores and restaurants encouraged over-eating with "portion distortion" (what the CDC calls it). In short, there is plenty of blame to go around, and many reasons why this happened. Society, industry, educators, doctors, policy makers and individuals are all at fault.
Regarding the best epidemiologists, I would say the best in the world today are in China, Korea and Japan. They are using the most up-to-date technology. They have done a stellar job using internet technology and big data. (Actually, based on the NHK interviews I saw, the epidemiologists themselves are not internet experts, but they are working closely with cyber-geek experts in coordinated teams.) Back in January, when their projects began, some leading American and Canadian epidemiologists predicted these projects would not work. They said it would be impossible to monitor or trace enough patients to control the epidemic. They were wrong about that. Some of them are still saying it, and predicting a bounce-back of cases. I think that's sour grapes.
Display MoreAxil,
Interesting story, but It was the Daily Mail that first made the connection between Hydroxychloroquine, and the fish tank cleaner 3 days ago:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/he…tested-COVID-19-drug.html
Although one of their typical political hit pieces, I do give them credit for at least warning readers: "Sellers of the fish tank product warn it is not for human consumption".
Now think about it; this bright idea to drink a cleaning product was the wife's. The husband is dead, while she is still alive...although she claims to have gotten sick also. Although not too sick to talk to the news, and make it a point to drag Trump into this. What does that tell you?
Tells me, either this story is better suited for "True Detective" magazine (if that is still in print), and if not, is a candidate for this years Darwin Award.
https://www.nationalreview.com…investigation-for-murder/
"Arizona police are now conducting a homicide investigation into a woman who claimed she gave her husband fish tank cleaner after President Trump claimed the anti-malarial drug hydroxychloroquine was an effective treatment for coronavirus."
"The Washington Free Beacon, which first reported that Wanda was a “prolific” Democratic donor and that she had a troubling relationship with her husband that included a previous domestic assault charge, revealed Tuesday night that Mesa City Police Department is conducting a criminal investigation into the death of Gary, and requested recordings of the Free Beacon’s interviews with Wanda."
As soon as a vaccine is tested and shown to be safe and effective it will then be one of the greatest undertakings in human history to try to manufacture and distribute billions of doses of it.
Yes. Many groups of researchers are looking for an effective vaccine. Other industry groups are working on improved methods of manufacturing vaccines, so that when a vaccine becomes available, it will be deployed in record time.
One of the ironies here is that we tend to think in terms of the quality of interventions to help ill people, when they get ill. Unsurpassed (for those who get all of them) in the US.
Surpassed. I have been in hospitals in the U.S. and Japan, and my friends and relatives have been hospitalized in Europe. U.S. hospitals as a rule are filthy, disorganized, obsolete, and they treat patients like dirt. See: "How American Health Care Killed My Father" (https://www.theatlantic.com/ma…-killed-my-father/307617/). Actually, they treat patients like slot machines that always pays off. They are in it for the money. Years ago, after I had an accident, they made me wait an hour without giving me ice or anything stop the bleeding, and then they wouldn't treat me until they were sure I would pay. That would never happen in Japan.
I guess I should say that more recently I went back to that hospital when my wife had a bicycle accident, and they treated her first and asked for the money second. Maybe they reformed. Maybe a law was passed? Before that, there were many reports of hospitals sending gravely injured patients home without treatment because they were not insured. I mean people with glass shards in their face. "Take an Aspirin, get some tweezers, and take the glass out yourself," is more-or-less what they were told. They should have had their medical licenses suspended. Or been arrested.
Wealthy people in the U.S. get good treatment in hospitals. But it is no better than just about everyone gets in Japan or Europe, measured in outcomes.
However health has always been MOSTLY about arranging society with good preventive health systems so that people don't get ill in the first place:
That is true.
that Wanda was a “prolific” Democratic donor
New movie: A fish tank murderer called Wanda?
Remsdesivir - as expected - of no use for severely sick patients!
https://www.bbc.com/news/health-52478783
The title of the communication is a usual positive as it was once for the "useless" Tamiflu too.... It only may slightly reduce the treatment time of normal patients.
Thus Ivermectin is still the choice number one for patients going to ICU!
"Most anti-vaxxers are highly educated but still argue against vaccination. We now face a similar situation with ‘anti-herders’, who view herd immunity as a misguided optional strategy rather than a scientifically proven phenomenon that can prevent unnecessary deaths."
Of course it is scientifically proven. It is the only way any epidemic in nature comes to an end! But the rest of the sentence makes no sense. By definition, herd immunity cannot prevent deaths. It takes roughly 60% of the population to achieve it. That's 200 million people in the U.S. If 200 million people are infected by the coronavirus, 2 to 4 million of them are sure to die. Many millions of others -- especially young people -- will suffer from severe strokes, brain damage, amputations, lifelong inability to breathe and shortened lifespans. That must happen. There is no way you can get from the present ~1% infections up to 60% without at least 60 times more deaths and disabilities. It is not like you skip over the deaths. It is not like the doctors will discover some miracle therapeutic that stops people from dying. With 60% infected, there is no way you could protect vulnerable people such as elderly and obese people. You cannot protect them from influenza today. The only reason influenza does not kill tens of thousands of elderly people every year is because there is a vaccine for it that works pretty well. In the 1970s, I knew a hospital nurse in Ithaca, NY during the influenza season who told me the elderly patients were dying like flies.
If herd immunity takes months, so that the curve remains low and hospitals are not overwhelmed, then mortality will be ~1%. If it happens suddenly, mortality will be 2 to 3%. But the same 1% mortality will apply if we use Korean methods and keep the virus from spreading to no more than a few percent of the population before a vaccine becomes available. The difference is, with Korean methods starting now, ~70,000 Americans die, and with herd immunity, at least 2 million will die.
HCQ +Famotidine study.. from 2.06
first results in 2-3 weeks (n=391).. Don't buy Pepcid.. its in short supply anyway..the doses used are 9x the heartburn doses and also in the injection form
Very interesting study. Thanks. I would only quibble about the intravenous part. Famotidine is well absorbed when given by mouth. I think the only reason for IV may have been that the patients were very sick and unable to reliably take oral meds. That could be wrong though. I guess we find out when the study comes out. Also need to know how long to treat for and drug/drug interactions with that much famotidine. It's a very safe drug but at 9x usual dose, that has to be checked!
Most states are making it difficult for physicians to prescribe or pharmacists to dispense these medications.
Most states? Are you sure? Here in California, there was a very vague warning from the state medical board but prescribing is as easy as writing the script. I recently did just that for a friend who works at a nursing home, her husband and their children. It took a while to find a pharmacy that had it but the prescriptions were filled with no problems. I also did the same thing through a Canadian pharmacy. Again no problems. It took about ten days to get the drugs delivered.
In the US, doctors normally have wide latitude in prescribing "off label" however they are responsible for the results-- both in terms of action against their license and also malpractice lawsuits. But both while easy to bring to court, are very hard to win. And expensive and time consuming to prosecute. And most doctors have malpractice insurance so the insurance company will defend them thoroughly.
Wyttenbach ....not just ivermectin you need all the components of Anti Bat before O2 saturation drops below 93% (a measure of pneumonia lung damage) or better still when the fever and cough symptoms first appear. Remdesivir should work as well if given early enough judging by the biochemical evidence, again clinicians seem to have little understanding of basic biochemistry or pathology. The virus has to be killed off by antivirals before irreversible damage is done,you can do it cheaply with Anti Bat or use more expensive RNA polymerase inhibitors like remdesivir or other more exotic HIV remedies like protease inhibitors but the end result is the same. As you have pointed out pharma hate it when they can't make a profit out of cheap alternatives like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine and will go to extraordinary lengths to push their own patented products by inventing clinical outcomes to deny that cheaper alternatives are effective. Happens time and time again. For this reason chloroquine effectiveness against H1N1 flu should be 're-examined - in vitro work showed it to be effective but soon after one obscure negative clinical study it was dropped in favour of tamiflu, so they could make a killing out of flogging it to not so naive government officials probably for very large backhanders. Worse than county lines drug dealers on the street.
Santa Clara study reprint citation: stats done properly: infection rate not 2.5% - 4% but 0.27% - 3.21%
Sorry but I find this paper obscure and confusing. How did they determine specificity and sensitivity? From manufacturer estimates? If so, BOOOOO! And note the wide range of results. How useful is that? The problem with antibody tests is that any substantial rate of false positives obscures the results. I did see one exception from New York where the very high rate of infections clearly could not have been affected by specificity error. But that was in a very severely affected region.
"Discussion
Reanalyzing the data from Bendavid et al., we find that the rate of infection was likely between 0.27% and 3.21% in
early April. This interval is substantially lower than the interval used to draw conclusions by the original authors (2.49%
to 4.16%). Based on our analyses, there is a 79.47% chance that the true rate of infection was below the lower bound of
this interval even after re-weighting based on demographics.
We re-analyze some of the conclusions of the original authors based on our estimate of the rate of infection, 0.27%
to 3.21%. This rate of infection means between 5,000 and 65,000 people were infected in Santa Clara county. As of
April 1st, 956 cases had been confirmed in Santa Clara. This would correspond to between a 5-to-1 and 65-to-1 ratio of
observed-to-total cases of COVID-19 (the underascertainment rate)."
WHaaaaaaaaat?
Is there anything out there that can take blood and oxygenate it??
ECMO can. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…real_membrane_oxygenation
Problems are a) It is difficult, expensive, and unpleasant if the patient is awake. b) it often will not help because at the stage it is usually initialized, other major organs are failing or have failed and the patient dies of things not directly related to lack of oxygen. But certainly, in some cases, ECMO has been life saving. Selecting which patients to use it on requires a lot of experience and a team of specialists. Nowadays, there is often not the luxury of time for that.
Quoteanother dumb question - I think of mechanical/physics/chemical issues and not medical issues .... but why not put someone on a lung bypass or something that directly oxygenates the blood and then "rinse out" the lungs. I may have missed what is really going on in the lungs but I thought that the lungs get filled with CV and by produces that limit the lungs abilities
Not at all a dumb question. ECMO is the best one can do by way of a "lung bypass" although it is really a supplementation. Any attempt to divert surgically, the blood from the lungs would not be survived by patients this sick. Somehow cleaning the bronchi with various saline-based and perhaps enzymatic solutions may help in selected patients. I remember seeing a video from China in which a bronchoscopy procedure was being done. But I know of no way to clean the alveoli, the tiny air sacs in the lungs where gas exchange takes place. They are very small and very delicate.
-----------------------
OT note: I am no longer responding to a few members of the forum who consistently make outrageous and unsubstantiated ridiculous and potentially harmful claims. It is pretty clear by now that they won't learn anything and hopefully, the rest of the participants won't believe them. I think we know who the most flagrant ones are.
