Covid-19 News

Quote from Shane D.

I linked to another nursing home article a few days ago, that said containment within the homes was a major problem early on in the learning curve, and that is how it "fueled" the pandemic.

Yes, in the early days it was a problem. As I said, in Seattle especially.

Quote from Shane D.

Every day we learn more, and just fixing this one weak link with the nursing homes alone should go a long ways towards getting the numbers down.

Nope. Only in the first weeks. After March it was no longer a factor. Improving the situation in nursing homes will get the numbers down in nursing homes, but not elsewhere. Outside the homes, there will still be thousands of new cases per day from other sources.

Quote from Alan Smith

More than 22,000 care home residents in England and Wales may have died as a direct or indirect result of Covid-19, academics have calculated – more than double the number stated as passing away from the disease in official figures.

That's terrible. I think it is similar in the U.S. But I do not think these care home residents are infecting the population outside the homes. They are not in Japan, according to the case trackers. Except in a few incidents.

Quote from Shane D.

Well balanced article about everything you ever wanted to know about herd immunity. Why it may work, and why it probably wont.

Very well explained. Including some tricky concepts such as "overshoot" in which people continue to be infected for a while even after herd immunity is achieved.

Quote from Alan Smith

I have a moderate amount of Cloroquine Sulphate 500mg tablets, an over-the-counter purchase in France some weeks ago. I don't see much mention of this variant - do you know anything about it?

You didn't ask me but if I were you, I'd avoid it. Hydroxychloroquine is substantially less cardiotoxic (and has fewer other toxicities and a wider therapeutic margin) than does chloroquine. Current best evidence is also that either of those drugs, if someone decides to use them, should only be used a) with azithromycin and substantial doses of zinc, b) under daily EKG monitoring and frequent liver and renal function testing. This means, ideally, in a hospital setting. And remember, the safety and efficacy is as yet completely unproven though the lack thereof is equally unproven.

Quote from THHuxleynew

It always annoys me when people treat Chinese Medicine as guaranteed safe because it is natural.

Yeah. Cyanide occurs in natural too. So do thousands of unpleasant toxic substances. When you consider traditional medicine from any culture, remember that it was mostly developed when scientific method was unknown, the germ theory of infections did not exist, most diseases were poorly or uncharacterized and ill described and defined, and treatments that actually did anything were virtually absent. People could literally die from an ingrown toenail or a minor traumatic injury. Diabetes, endocarditis, tetanus, smallpox, etc. etc. etc. were untreatable death sentences. It is a bit of a stretch to say the least, to assume that chemists and doctors who lived centuries ago knew things that we currently don't in our age of technology and information.

Quote from Shane D.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/fe…rd-immunity-wont-save-us/

Well balanced article about everything you ever wanted to know about herd immunity. Why it may work, and why it probably will not. They admit there are may unknowns. Nice interactive graphic to play with.

Below is kind of a grim assessment regarding herd immunity from a researcher at the Univ. of Minnestota.

From a basic public health standpoint you want to think that yout country will win the race against herd immunity in the sense of having a working vaccine or other therapies before the population gets to herd immunity. I still want to think we have a chance at that here in the U.S. with working antivirals in the next 6 months or so, and a vaccine ready to be distributed in the next 18 months or so.

But I think no matter what happens there will be at least several countries on the planet where herd immunity is the end of the road with Covid-19. They just don't have the public health system infrastructure to distribute antivirals or a vaccine before the virus gets to 70% of the population.

In terms of people getting reinfected and even sick again with Covid after producing antibodies, lets hope Covid is like SARS and MERS and not the other 4 coronaviruses that infect humans, all of which produce recurring illness.

https://www.usatoday.com/story…far-from-over/3108333001/

The whole debate about HCQ is unbelievable and patently absurd. The dose response curves showing its initial discovery as an active agent which could act at therapeutic doses has been confirmed by the highest level of molecular biology and biochemical evidence possible published by Gordon et al fully referred by experts and thus is not in open to conjecture. Simple scientific inescapable FACT. In the top scientific journal NATURE. Indisputable. The question arises therefore as to the ability of clinicians to apply it to COVID patients, knowing that it works to limit viral load in the early stages of the illness. But the idiots are expecting it to work after all the damage has been done. Too little too late. Pointless, futile. That's simply why we need a totally different clinical approach which makes the clinicians effectivelyredundant. And they just can't stand that, who will pay their exorbitant fees? Who will bail them out if someone sues them for malpractice? No, the only way ahead is to make antiviral use the sole responsibility of the citizen. It's not all that complicated for C's sake, issue Anti Bat containing HCQ with the other five principle components with simple instructions to take the pills at the first sign of fever or cough (as they do in malarial regions for fever). Go back to work until a point of feeling unwell, take the pills over the course of a week' s convalescence, if still unwell THEN go and see your doctor for further treatment if necessary. Which is probably what they have already done in China and every other state like Germany who have beaten this pandemic by simply astute and timely use of antiviral therapy. A well-known tried and tested WHO strategy. Mass Fever Treatment. MFT. No pandemic no more. Got it?

Quote from Shane D.

So, is there something wrong with this? She is a talk show host, had some guests who recovered, and is a little (too?) excited over what looked at the time to be a game changer, Not something I would fault anyone on.

That's beside the point. You claimed Fox news were ‘very careful to say HCQ is not proven yet’. I pasted some quotes from Ingraham that would seem to dispute that.

But is there something wrong with this? Yes, if you prefer facts over cheerleading. No if you just tune in for the entertaining hyperbola.

Fact is, there’s currently very little proof either way for the efficacy of HCQ. Medical science isn’t based on anecdote, a tweet, rumours from China, un-peer-reviewed preprints, or what someone rants about on a forum. Most sensible people understand this, so are reticent to make a judgement either way. This isn’t political, its just the way things work, and thats a good thing.

Quote from Shane D.

So, is there something wrong with this? She is a talk show host, had some guests who recovered, and is a little (too?) excited over what looked at the time to be a game changer, Not something I would fault anyone on.

Yes there is. Sarcastically putting down the only way to prove the issue, a double blind study, is pure idiocy. We may be entitled to talk show hosts who have at least a minimum of education in the subjects they discuss or if they don't, who can find some expert who does.

“But they want a double-blind controlled study on whether the sky is blue.”

The above statement is the purely moronic. It is arrogant, ignorant and stupid.

Quote from Shane D.

Maybe I was not clear, but I meant to say that doctors were afraid to publicly admit they were administering HCQ, because of the hoopla created by the media. No, I do not think any doctor would let their political beliefs interfere with their choice of drugs. And clearly many doctors of all persuasions have been using it. Plenty of articles, and that world wide poll of doctors, showed that. They are just very quiet about it.

Do you have any evidence that doctors are afraid to discuss their use of HCQ and many other approaches? I read a health professional forum entitled sermo.com and never saw anyone reluctant to discuss what they use and what results they think they are getting.

Quote from Shane D.

Surely you jest? Here are just a few articles you can chew on:

https://www.mediamatters.org/c…loroquine-and-chloroquine

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/…chloroquine-wars-n2567405

But I do not need someone to tell me what I see, and read every day. This thing has become politicized, and because it is, that is a form of suppression. Yes, HCQ is not proven yet, and even the small portion of the massive media industry conservatives own (Fox News) has been careful to say that. Same goes for Trump. But because the left made it radioactive, doctors are afraid to openly use it, or report their success. Oh yes, if some doctor wants to report it did not work, they are encouraged to say that publicly and are treated as heros. Something positive to report...well, they have to slip that in quietly when no one is looking to avoid the backlash.

Let me tell you how this began from my perspective as a conservative. There were reports of HCQ being effective. After the reports continued, and I started reading Dr. Richards continual promotion of it, I started taking interest. I got hopeful. It is that simple. Same could be said of any conservative. They did not have hope because of their political beliefs. They had hope because they heard good things about a new drug.

We surely did not expect that merely going about our business having hope would set off a political battle, but it sure did. Maybe I should not even call it a battle, as it is only one side fighting. We are now referred to as "HCQ truthers", and this just another right wing conspiracy...just for having hope something works! That our "promoting" a promising new drug, was somehow reckless, and could cost lives.

And you tell me I am biased? Maybe you should start pointing the finger elsewhere.

Display More

Shane,

THis really depend if you get your “News” from CNN.

“Trump touted drug fails”

or something to that extent usually headlines the far left media.

As if Trump is the sole source of data, coverage and medical info for

HQC, AZ and Zn.

As soon as a report comes out that suggests it doesn’t work, Trump is blamed for saying it works.

Quote from seven_of_twenty

You didn't ask me but if I were you, I'd avoid it. Hydroxychloroquine is substantially less cardiotoxic (and has fewer other toxicities and a wider therapeutic margin) than does chloroquine. Current best evidence is also that either of those drugs, if someone decides to use them, should only be used a) with azithromycin and substantial doses of zinc, b) under daily EKG monitoring and frequent liver and renal function testing. This means, ideally, in a hospital setting. And remember, the safety and efficacy is as yet completely unproven though the lack thereof is equally unproven.

Quote from Dr Richard

It's not all that complicated for C's sake, issue Anti Bat containing HCQ with the other five principle components with simple instructions to take the pills at the first sign of fever or cough (as they do in malarial regions for fever). Go back to work until a point of feeling unwell, take the pills over the course of a week' s convalescence, if still unwell THEN go and see your doctor for further treatment if necessary.

SOT -

Perhaps you could clear up a bit of confusion I have with your statement above. (I am not a medical doctor and do not pretend to be an expert. ) You state that HCQ should only be taken with daily EKG, frequent organ testing and as I understand it "only in a hospital if possible".

Dr. Richard states (I believe he is not claiming to be a medical doctor) that it is no big deal, take the medicine combo at first symptom by self diagnosis and go to the doctor if you get worse. The implication is that HCQ + Zn + Azithromycin is of little risk if in the proper dosages.

My understanding it that HCQ has been around a long time, is in extremely common use for malaria around the world and is not given (normally) under the close monitoring you mention above. It is used for Lupus and arthritis as well. Again, fairly common so horrible side effects must not be too likely?

So I would ask clarification... .since my Ibuprofen bottle reads "Do not take aspirin products without doctor approval" yet literally millions take it every day over the counter it appears that HCQ would be similar. (Although I understand more restrictive via prescription etc.)

What is your understanding of HCQ taken for malaria versus Covid19? Are you stating that "hospitalization" is warranted because HCQ is dangerous by itself or because the combination with Zinc and azithromycin is conclusively unknown OR how Covid19 will react to the combination?

It almost seems that mass media is stating that HCQ is an extremely dangerous drug that should "never" be used, (Kind of like my ibuprofen bottle warning),....yet it seems to be used daily by lupus, arthritis and malaria patients and not under extremely controlled conditions. It appears Dr. Richard is viewing the HCQ combo in this manner / level of risk. Take it early before you get really sick.

I would appreciate both of your thoughts or clearing up the position on the difference between Covid19 "early use" and lupus or arthritic use. This question is not whether it works or not but is the HCQ risk REALLY that much higher than with lupus or arthritis patients and why.

Just trying to learn something !

Thank you.

Quote from Bob#2

I would appreciate both of your thoughts or clearing up the position on the difference between Covid19 "early use" and lupus or arthritic use. This question is not whether it works or not but is the HCQ risk REALLY that much higher than with lupus or arthritis patients and why.

Just trying to learn something !

Watch this

Quote from Bob#2

It appears Dr. Richard is viewing the HCQ combo in this manner / level of risk. Take it early before you get really sick.

In most fake HCQ studies it is applied 9 days after first symptoms (mostly with no Zinc..) . Some people already die 5 days after first symptoms ... In Germany most deaths are people sent home after first symptoms and break down the next day. That's how arrogant doctors treat their victims and later suck the most money out of them. The simple cure costs less than 100$ 10 days ICU cost > 50'000$.

Of course, if you have the choice, I first would take Ivermectin & Heparin as these two are side effect free, but these are not that easy to get in most western countries.

Quote from Navid

Watch this

External Content www.youtube.com

Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.

Display all external content

Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

Thanks,

So this guy says HCQ is safe for 95% of the people, however it can be a BIG deal for that remaining 5%. However if he is correct, as simple one time test is only required to determine your compatibility.

Since nothing else is known to work and there is a lot of circumstantial evidence that HCQ + Zn + Azithromycin might very well work in the early stages, I would likely get the EKG and go run with it. (If I turn out not to be one of the 5%). Extreme low risk and a lot to possibly gain.

Unless this guy is wrong and others can point out good evidence, I would feel comfortable going to my doctor, getting "pre-certified" for using HCQ via EKG, consult with him on proper doses and procedure, get his approval and get ready for the symptoms. One cannot always get in to a physician on a moments notice and 4-5 days could be lethal! Better prepared than cremated!

I for one, do not believe the lock downs are doing anything but retarding the spread some. This is going to continue regardless and I most likely will contract Covid19. My business deals with the public and from many states. I do not see any absolute defensive protection against it!

1) I have to pay bill, live and eat. I cannot shut down my business. I am not on a retirement plan nor "tenured". The government cannot support me the rest of my life, no matter what some say. Hell, I have not even been able to get a bit of the 2 TRILLION dollar relief package yet!

2) My business is dealing face to face with the public. I cannot "work at home". I cannot "tele-conference". I deal directly face to face.

3) This virus is not going to go away. It will continue to spread whether a state opens up or not. That is absolutely certain. I just went to Menards, in Illinois, a strong Democratic government who hates Trump and "abides" by science and data, as Pritzker (the governor) himself states. The sign outside Menards states "Due to Covid19 restrictions, no more than 500 people can occupy the store at one time." 500! Yet the mom and pop stores in our small town that may have 3-4 people in them at any given time are forced closed! This is absolutely insane. No, the virus will not be stopped, nor even slowed that much by the lockdowns such as this.

4) I am 60. I am fairly healthy, very active and very athletic, although I have high blood pressure and am pre-diabetic. I control my conditions by diet, exercise and marginal blood pressure medicine. No insulin yet. Yes, W, not all Americans have diabetes, high blood pressure because they are fat an lazy! Some get it by genetics! My great grand father (who lived to be 97 and I knew well), my grand father (who lived to be 89) and my father (who died from a surgical malpractice at age 84) all had diabetes. Just like Jed's enviable low weight is most likely greatly influenced by genetics as well! Certainly much health issues is due to life style in the US, I agree with, but not all!

5) My only option is to go on the offense. Find the most likely preventative or therapeutic treatment I can, that possibly might counter the virus in the early stages. and have it on hand. Practice as much safety as I can to possibly reduce the initial "dose" of the virus when I encounter it and then start treatment immediately upon symptoms.

I do not put my future in the hands of others. I would not depend upon a vaccine being available. Even if an effective one is found in 12 months, it could be too late for me! A one mutation and the vaccine could possibly be rendered useless. No, I should find the best proactive process and be prepared.

Do I care about RTC's? Not at this time! They will take too long and be too politicized by the media.

I will do my research and see what other countries are actually doing. I would not trust the uS news media for ANY information.

It seems that many are using HCQ / combo and if they are, it is because those doctors are seeing it work. I just need to confirm rumor from fact and I do not need a RTC for that.

If I find a combo that has very low risk, a very high potential upside, is immediately available and get a pre-approved plan from my doctor, I challenge anyone to tell me logistically why I should not proceed....... regardless if the AMA (or the liberals) endorse it or not.

Right now, HCQ + Zn + Azithromycin seems to be the front runner by FAR when looking at the entire package above.

Quote from Alan Smith

You can get Ivermectin easily if you are a horse.

They always seem to get things easily.

http://www.pond5.com

Noun. horse's ass (plural horses' asses) (Canada, US, vulgar, idiomatic) A jerk; an unpleasant, unlikable person; an asshole.

Quote from Bob#2

SOT -

Perhaps you could clear up a bit of confusion I have with your statement above. (I am not a medical doctor and do not pretend to be an expert. ) You state that HCQ should only be taken with daily EKG, frequent organ testing and as I understand it "only in a hospital if possible".

Good question. I am not absolutely sure of the difference between testing requirements when HCQ is given for malaria, or for lupus, or for COVID-19. It probably works something like this.

For malaria prophylaxis and also for treatment, the total dose is smaller than for COVID-19 and the length of treatment or frequency of treatment are much less. See: https://reference.medscape.com…hloroquine-sulfate-343205

Also, azithromycin, which also alters the heart's conduction system, is not used against malaria.

In the case of lupus, again, azithromycin is not used. I have read that internists treating lupus with hydroxychloquine rarely if ever see cardiac complications but when they start treatment, I am sure they do an initial EKG and several after before they increase the interval between EKG's to months.

Finally, in the case of COVID-19, not only is the hydroxychloroquine used often with azithromycin (and in very sick patients, all sorts of other drugs), but the heart can be also damaged by the virus increasing the risk of ventricular fibrillation and cardiac arrest. There is also the VA study showing cardiac issues though it is pretty awful study. It just seems prudent to monitor EKG until the use of the drugs is better understood. I would feel pretty terrible if I prescribed this drug without monitoring and the patient suffered a heart attack (MI) or died from cardiac causes. Liver function and renal function have been known rarely to be adversely affected by the drugs and I would think a COVID patient might be more vulnerable so I'd check those. It's easy.