I know, it might just be the plant lectins, the evidence for nicotine is thin. In a clinical setting you only need ivermectin,hydroxychloroqine, zinc sulphate doxycycline with avigan or remdesivir if available. That would be the basis of the RCT double blind clinical trial. The rest are all optional and keep Gllead happy. I think there has been too much demonization of pharmaceutical companies, which is rather irrational.
Covid-19 News
- Alan Smith
- Closed
-
-
quercetin
artemisia annua (sweet wormwood) / artemisinin
Of course Sutherlandia - if you can get it.
Here once more the older Ivermectin references. Ivermectin is very safe and widespread used
Usefulness of Ivermectin in COVID-19 Illness.pdf
The FDA-approved drug ivermectin inhibits the replication of SARS-CoV-2 in T vitro.pdf
-
also, to the list of "mild items" that MIGHT help
Melatonin was shown to inhibit NLRP3 inflammasomes in mice with myocardial septic conditions, transforming severe myocardial inflammation into milder symptoms, preventing cardiac failure, and significantly enhanced survival rates of septic
https://www.thailandmedical.ne…reventing-cytokine-storms
Melatonin acts as a anti-inflammatory agent. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3001216/ and https://www.nature.com/articles/s41419-019-1556-7 and
https://www.researchgate.net/p…onin_A_mechanistic_review and
-
My problem about melatonin - and it applies to lots of these things, is that anti-inflammatories may help with the cytokine storm although it is complex and they do not necessarily do so, because the pathway COVID uses to provoke cytokine storm is very specific - so you have to test it against that. But, they may harm the initial non-specific immune response. So as with so much to do with COVID we can agree that this has activity relevant, but we cannot be quite sure when it will be good or bad.
People are trying strong anti-inflammatories like IL6 inhibitors. I'm interested in all this stuff but have not yet heard of results clear enough for us to understand what helps. I suspect because cytokine storms are complex, involve interactions across many tissue types, cannot be modelled in vitro, and cannot easily be determined theoretically because there are too many unknowns. So everyone is guessing.
The above is just what I expect, I'm willing to be corrected by links to relevant papers.
-
https://ticotimes.net/2020/05/…ne-for-covid-19-treatment
hot (1 hr ago ) off the CR press
Costa Rica to reevaluate use of hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19 treatment
“We’re just acting by precaution,” WHO emergencies chief Michael Ryan agreed.
Román Macaya, executive president of Costa Rica’s Social Security Fund (CCSS),
acknowledged the HCQ news and said Monday that the country is convening an urgent meeting of pharmaceutical experts to determine next steps.
At the same time, Macaya said Costa Rica has used hydroxychloroquine differently than what was studied by researchers, who analyzed 96,032 patients who were hospitalized with COVID-19.
In Costa Rica, all patients — including those with minor symptoms or who are asymptomatic —
are offered the option to take hydroxychloroquine upon their diagnosis, as long as they don’t have contraindications to the drug, Macaya said.
Costa Rica has a low case fatality rate (1.07%), and fewer than 5% of known active coronavirus cases are currently hospitalized.
“We can’t say that’s a result of this medication, but we can’t discard it either,” Macaya said.
The Costa Rican health system has not released data comparing the outcomes of patients treated with hydroxychloroquine to other methods.
-
WHO stops HCQ trial after Lancet report:
https://www.theguardian.com/wo…-coronavirus-safety-fears
Also D. Raoult goes further off the deep end, now not believing in 'big data', as well as RCTs.
-
WHO stops HCQ trial after Lancet report:
https://www.theguardian.com/wo…-coronavirus-safety-fears
Also D. Raoult goes further off the deep end, now not believing in 'big data', as well as RCTs.
The VaccineEmpire Strikes Back.
-
Edinburgh study of out-going protection from a mask (none,surgical,n95/ffp1,2, home-made,shields...)
They all cut down the forward flow, but many have significant side/up/down/behind leakage.
Press release https://www.dropbox.com/sh/fvp…preview=Press+release.pdf
Paper https://www.dropbox.com/sh/fvp…l=0&preview=Paper+V13.pdf
They note that 2 meters (6 feet) may not be a safe distance, but decline to offer a different value.
My short opinion : rely on your own mask for incoming protection within at least 6 feet. -
now not believing in 'big data', ...as well as RCTs.
Zeus... your reporitng is inaccurate.. about Raout
1."now not believing in the big data conclusions of the Lancet"... .. is true.
but 2. "as well as RCTs" is not true..
There are no RCT's yet,, which is why the Lancet is writes in their latest report
""" Randomised clinical trials will be required before any conclusion can be reached regarding benefit or harm of these agents in COVID-19 patients."
-
For the armchair physicians and epidemiologists who keep claiming this is about ECONOMY vs LIVES read this letter:
https://www.scribd.com/documen…ned#fullscreen&from_embed
They are teaching the population, and all the people on this forum new behaviors. Accept more technical imposition and spying. Rat out your neighbour -- just like in communist countries -- one city here had 2000 phone calls to "tell on your neighbour -- oh too close."
So when the "next one" hits they can ratchet up control even faster.
The next-one? Gates says it is a bioweopon and we should have vaccine systems full funded all the time to prepare for that. For him, everything is about the needle.
News flash: the people with the needles are the ones with the bioweopons -- they are the boogiemen folks! They dress him up in mohair sweaters and you think he is a "philanthropist trying to save the world." The joke: when told this, most go along with this and rat out others as "conspiracy theorists." Most people social distance from the truth. Slap your face and wakeup! -
NURSE!
Zeus... your reporitng is inaccurate.. about Raout
...but 2. "as well as RCTs" is not true..
Normally, Raoult demands that “Studies of infectious syndromes should no longer be mined without consistently using negative controls to assess the positive predictive value of a positive result.” This he obviously does not apply to himself, especially when the clinical result is already decided in advance. In his own research, Professor Raoult is no fan of randomised controlled clinical trials. A PubPeer user translated his interview: “I have never done randomized trials (…). The effect of randomized stuff, maybe it works on people who had a myocardial infarction, but putting that in infectious diseases, it doesn’t make sense”
-
Thanks Zeus.. the truth is always a bit more complicated than headlines..
That is a much closer to the truth.. so for myocardial infarctions RCT's are believable with Raoult.? N'est-ce pas?
In surgerythousands of stents have been done in preference to CABG without regard to RCT's for decades..
https://www.onlinejacc.org/content/75/11_Supplement_1/1536
The recent RCT showing that no stent was sometimes better... was way after the fact.
-
After listening to this MedCram video --
Coronavirus Pandemic Update 75: COVID-19 Lung Autopsies - New Data
External Content youtu.beContent embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.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.-- and reading this Science paper --
"T cells found in COVID-19 patients ‘bode well’ for long-term immunity"
https://www.sciencemag.org/new…e-well-long-term-immunity
-- I am wondering whether a vaccine is even necessary, since it appears that Covid-19 immunity
may already be widespread due to previous benign Corona exposures, i.e., certain common colds.
A significant percentage of us have helper T-cells that are already primed to fight Covid-19.
And, I wonder whether individual and herd immunity could be induced with a simple exposure to
these much less dangerous corona viruses, say with a simple spray aerosol.
Here is the key excerpt from the Science paper:
[... The teams also asked whether people who haven’t been infected with SARS-CoV-2 also produce
cells that combat it. Thiel and colleagues analyzed blood from 68 uninfected people and found
that 34% hosted helper T cells that recognized SARS-CoV-2. The La Jolla team detected this
crossreactivity in about half of stored blood samples collected between 2015 and 2018, well before
the current pandemic began. The researchers think these cells were likely triggered by past
infection with one of the four human coronaviruses that cause colds; proteins in these viruses
resemble those of SARS-CoV-2.
The results suggest “one reason that a large chunk of the population may be able to deal with
the virus is that we may have some small residual immunity from our exposure to common cold viruses,”
says viral immunologist Steven Varga of the University of Iowa. However, neither of the studies
attempted to establish that people with crossreactivity don’t become as ill from COVID-19...]
-
There are no RCT's yet,, which is why the Lancet is writes in their latest report
""" Randomised clinical trials will be required before any conclusion can be reached regarding benefit or harm of these agents in COVID-19 patients."
There has been at least one decent RCT of HCQ, which was negative, and this is why I, too, am negative.
https://emcrit.org/pulmcrit/hydroxychloroquine-fail/
Now, I agree, this one RCT does not settle the matter. HCQ given earlier, or in conjunction with different drugs, could possibly be a useful treatment.
From this RCT what we know is that HCQ given relatively late (but still having its acknowledged affect on the immune system and therefore modulating the cytokine storm) does not seem to help these mild to moderate patients. A much larger RCT might find significant marginal advantage even for this use case. A different RCT, with severely ill patients, might find some advantage.
THH
PS - the very positive 31+31 RCT which impressed me a while ago no longer impresses me ever since I discovered quite how much it differs from its original specification, with details omitted of why or even that this was done. There is a very good reason why trials are registered and fully specified before they are done - otherwise anyone can cherry-pick the results they want.
PPS - a study like this with positive outcomes for all patients (no-one died) shows why we can draw so little information from trials with HCQ in which outcomes are good but without controls. COVID in the US appears to have 0.4% SCFR (symptomatic case fatality ratio). That is quite small. Zelenko, for example, was drawing on the same pool of mild patients, with a large age advantage.
-
Selected Comments on the decent RCT.. one of which is not so decent..
There has been at least one decent RCT of HCQ
"
"Treatment was initiated late, an average of 16-17 days after disease onset:‘
WTF?!""
"Also- since zinc appears to be the active entity, by inhibiting viral RNA polymerase, and hydroxychloroquine may only be the facilitator of zinc entry,
using it without zinc may not be very effective."
https://emcrit.org/pulmcrit/hydroxychloroquine-fail/
Perhaps Costa Rica will cease HCQ.. that should be an interesting comparison ..10 deaths with and ??? without..
I am just waiting for NZ to open its borders.they are going for Covid elimination.. in 1 weeks time..I. can't get back in, with or without HCQ..
-
-- I am wondering whether a vaccine is even necessary, since it appears that Covid-19 immunity
may already be widespread due to previous benign Corona exposures, i.e., certain common colds.
A significant percentage of us have helper T-cells that are already primed to fight Covid-19.
And, I wonder whether individual and herd immunity could be induced with a simple exposure to
these much less dangerous corona viruses, say with a simple spray aerosol.
I too have wondered whether there might be existing viruses that confer some immunity. That spike protein is well conserved and would be a target, as well as maybe other things not understood. I guess against the effectiveness of this are the relatively high mortalities in older people, who would normally have high exposure, but that does not preclude significant protection.
-
Maybe Dr. R.s anti-bat cocktail should be just a selected common cold smorgisbord.
Sneeze now and survive later.
-
WHO stops HCQ trial after Lancet report:
WHO is a bunch of criminals. Nobody that knows the situation will ever read more than the first page of the lancet ham action. The data they use is based on hospital cases only. 96% of all successful HCQ treated people never did go to a hospital.
Thus why do people discuss this outraging nonsense ??
I too have wondered whether there might be existing viruses that confer some immunity. That spike protein is well conserved and would be a target, as well as maybe other things not understood.
Even in the worst affected care homes 50% of the old & vulnerable did show no symptoms !! Bad news for the vaxxers....
-
The truth is always a bit more complicated...
...so for myocardial infarctions RCT's are believable with Raoult.?
Well even that's only a "maybe" according to him.
-
The WHO appear to be a corrupt beurcratic lost the plot organisation which pharma bribes them to do what they want. Rather like the EU which we left in Brexit to end such corruption. Trump should shoot them in the head, if he is the cowboy he is made out to be, take no notice of their rubbish paid by international pharmacy. I can see why Raoult is giving up in disgust, HCQ is just as effective as remdesivir. We had the same problem when we patented the use of nicotinamide and adenine for treating cholera. Shiells and Falk, 1989. Look it up in the Journal of physiology. Oh we can't make any money out of that , it's a third world problem,what is the point . Falsified evidence against it it just disgusts me.
