Covid-19 News

    controversial of course but


    Doctors group asks court to order release of 'Trump drug'

    https://www.wnd.com/2020/06/do…order-release-trump-drug/

    Association of American Physicians & Surgeons


    "Her organization released a chart showing that in nations where hydroxychloroquine is allowed and encouraged – such as South Korea, Israel, India and Russia – the case fatality rate is in the range of 1%....


    But in nations where hydroxychloroquine is banned or discouraged – such as Italy, France, Belgium and the U.S. – the case fatality rate ranges as high as 18%."


    Yes, it is just one factor but still...….

    Quote from stefan

    The corona viruses typically get milder in summer and to me at least in sweden people and news and experts starts to downplay the issue and claim no such thing for covid-19. So I checked icu jospitalisatikns and compared to weather data. We have had nice weather sinse shortly before june started and before that a cold may. And low and behold the trend down started almost mathematically 10 days after the nice weather started e.g. the delay from infection to icu. So the southern states should have dropping cases as surely its hotter there than in sweden. Its not decreasing in some states and thats worrying. Also this means that sweden and other countries will be supprised when the temperature starts to drop again.


    There are two effects: sunlight - heat kills virus, and outdoor transmission much less likley than indoor. When there is good weather contacts between people skew more towards outdoor.


    People have been iffy about first affect - does not seem that significant - but everyone agrees with second. How much it matters depends on weather, culture, town / country - many factors. That is why people are so uncertain.


    THH


    This evidence is weak: physicians basing treatment on such evidence will often do bad by their patients.


    In general though, HCQ is such a marginal thing, I'd want to leave it to individual judgement except that many doctors are rubbish at interpreting the quite complex scientific picture. It is not easy for anyone to interpret it, let alone those working 24/7 in terrible conditions. So maybe it makes sense to provide rules.


    It is always a judgement call, when you have rules. There is just no evidence that if HCQ were open in US you'd get overall better outcomes from its use than if it were not open. On balance I'd say it won't make much difference, but overall mildly negative.


    That leaves open the possibility that the right treatment using HCQ could be significantly helpful. No-one knows what that is (at least I have not seen any reliable info on this yet). You'd want it to be clear enough so that when it is used, it gets used in this beneficial way rather than the (known) harmful ways we have evidence for.


    What we do know:

    The risks for those with healthy hearts and monitored are very small

    The risks for COVID sufferers are different because during cytokine storm immune response changes, and HCQ modulates that. We don't understand how, but evidence is not good.


    So something like: try it out for non-serious cases, stop it before any chance of case becoming serious. In that case the people you are using it on are by definition those most likely to recover. You hope for some sort of a prophylactic effect reducing progression to severe COVID. You need a lot of evidence to know whether that is happening or not.It is not much use since such cases are normally not in hospital. Giving HCQ then is risky, unless at low dosage or for small length of time. SOT would probably say even then you need outpatient checking first. All of which makes it's use problematic.


    THH

    Quote from THHuxleynew

    This evidence is weak: physicians basing treatment on such evidence will often do bad by their patients.


    Your arguments as usual are even weaker...


    Did you tyr to read the latest post of Lou? Do you inderstand when and why HCQ should be used ?


    Efficacy and safety of chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine in moderate type of COVID-19:

    a prospective open-label randomized controlled study

    https://www.medrxiv.org/conten…101/2020.06.19.20136093v1


    No - I don't understand why and when it should be used. Does anyone?


    For example, that study does not address either morbidity or progression to more serious disease, and is also very small due to the epidemic being controlled in Wuhan before it got the required number of subjects (which also makes the data somewhat suspect).


    So while it is helpful, it does not answer the question of is this stuff overall helpful for patients (except in documenting, negatively, adverse reactions).

    "On May 24, a closed-door Chatham House expert meeting about Covid included the editors-in-chief of The Lancet and the NEJM. Comments regarding the article were leaked to the French press by a well-known health figure, Dr. Philippe Douste-Blazy, who felt compelled to blow the whistle.

    His resulting BFM TV interview was posted to YouTube with English subtitles on May 31,[xviii] but it was not picked up by the English-speaking media."


    https://rclutz.wordpress.com/2…y-big-pharma-data-miners/


    External Content youtu.be
    Content 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.


    https://hiddenhistorycenter.or…-exploited-by-big-pharma/

    A new interview of Dr. Raphael Stricker by Trial Site News prompted by his paper -

    "Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis for COVID-19: Lessons From the Past and the Search for New Options"

    https://www.trialsitenews.com/…e-search-for-new-options/


    The audio interview discusses HCQ, mefloquine, remdesivir, and invermectin and is at --

    https://www.trialsitenews.com/…covid-19-podcast-s2-e-27/


    EXCERPT:

    "... It's unfortunate that HCQ has become so politicized - but, on the other hand, it's good in a way that

    HCQ treatment is being rejected for treatment of active for active coronavirus infection, because this is

    a drug that is really not well suited to treat active infection as it is to prevent infection, and that's how we

    see it. And, to put it in another way, this isn't the treatment you go to when the house is burning down.

    This is the treatment you go to to prevent the house from catching fire... [then referring to the use by healthcare

    workers in Indian hospitals who used it as preventive] ... In fact, there are two studies that were just published,

    in the last week or so from India, that show that treatment of healthcare providers who have high exposure

    risk to coronavirus were protected from getting infection by using HCQ prophylaxis ...

    I don't think we are going to have a vaccine for coronavirus for many years, if at all..."


    (He doesn't site the positive results seen with HCQ prophylaxis in the Mumbai police department.)


    He ends the interview by noting that the "hiding (at home) and hoping (for a vaccine) strategy" is doomed to fail, and a

    strategy of prophylaxis is much more reasonable.


    Also, possibly some other (too inexpensive) preventives may be provided by some natural products --

    "Ashwagandha can be effective COVID-19 preventive drug, finds research by IIT Delhihttps://health.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/diagnostics/ashwagandha-can-be-effective-covid-19-preventive-drug-finds-research-by-iit-delhi-and-japans-aist/75820118 and Japan's AIST"


    And lastly, another rationale for using (too cheap) doxycycline or pentoxifylline for Covid-19 --

    "Doxycycline and Pentoxifylline for Mild and Mild-To-Moderate Covid-19"

    https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202006.0293/v1


    A lead editorial in the Wall Street Journal reveals the per-capita death rate for the coronavirus is 75% lower in states that did not panic into lockdown mode.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/n…ckdown-states-11592954700


    A new analysis by The Sentinel, a Kansas nonprofit, compares the 42 states that shut down most of their economies with the eight that did not. The latter group includes mostly rural states with some small metropolitan areas: North and South Dakota, Nebraska, Iowa, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Wyoming and Utah


    …..per-capita fatalities due to the COVID-19 virus were 75% lower in open states."



    just relaying the info..... don't shot the messenger.....

    Quote from oldguy

    A new analysis by The Sentinel, a Kansas nonprofit, compares the 42 states that shut down most of their economies with the eight that did not. The latter group includes mostly rural states with some small metropolitan areas: North and South Dakota, Nebraska, Iowa, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Wyoming and Utah


    …..per-capita fatalities due to the COVID-19 virus were 75% lower in open states."


    Rural states with low population density did not need to close down. Neither did rural districts such as upstate New York. The virus spreads less easily in such places, unless they have meatpacking plants or prisons. (In Georgia, the highest per capita rates are in rural districts with meatpacking plants.) In Japan, rural prefectures with low population density have had only a few cases and some have had no deaths.

    • Official Post

    UK Newpapers report an uptick in Londoners looking for houses in the countryside, and an uptick in applications for jobs outside the capital. Meanwhile the London Chamber of Commerce conducted a survey of businesses in the capital and found that one in eight are not planning to re-open their offices, but are changing over to 'homeworking' as the way for them to carry on. There are also concerns voiced about high-rise office buildings, and the difficulties of getting people to social distance in the elevators.


    The world is changing, no more 'business as usual' it seems.


    So the question is: do we have any RCT data showing this claimed prophylatic effect?


    The problem here is that when a drug only confers a prophylactic effect, so you give it to lots of not ill people in the hope they will stay not ill, is more difficult to evaluate (you need higher numbers) and also the cost of any deleterious effects is much high, because you are giving the drug to many people who do not need it.


    HCQ is used for malaria prophylaxis in some places. So it is not an insurmountable barrier, especially for places more accepting of small risks for some gain. In the West you would want very good evidence of the gain.


    Where is it? You'd hope we had it by now.

    Ron Paul

    The Coronavirus hoax

    http://www.ronpaulinstitute.or…/16/the-coronavirus-hoax/


    "People should ask themselves whether this coronavirus “pandemic” could be a big hoax, with the actual danger of the disease massively exaggerated by those who seek to profit – financially or politically – from the ensuing panic.


    That is not to say the disease is harmless. Without question people will die from coronavirus. Those in vulnerable categories should take precautions to limit their risk of exposure. But we have seen this movie before. Government over-hypes a threat as an excuse to grab more of our freedoms. When the “threat” is over, however, they never give us our freedoms back."

    Quote from Toffoli

    People should ask themselves whether this coronavirus “pandemic” could be a big hoax, with the actual danger of the disease massively exaggerated by those who seek to profit – financially or politically – from the ensuing panic.


    It's not a hoax and also was not planned to happen that early. I think this pandemic in fact was planned to happen with a time horizon of 2-3 years because the capability to print money for the top 10'000 soon will run out. The real problem is that the folks that currently are ruling/running most big countries are cricket brains with basic animal behavior psychology names the "dinosaur/reptile subsystem". These folks no longer are guided by the cerebrum instead the cerebellum took over their mind. Thus Orwell was wrong: They are not pigs they are just a bit more developed than worms.


    As we know from the documents: Fauci (who is that..? for our US friends.. ) one of these "guys" did finance the Wuhan lab that developed CoV-19 and also the more deadly version that could be contained within Wuhan.


    Quote from Alan Smith

    UK Newpapers report an uptick in Londoners looking for houses in the countryside, and an uptick in applications for jobs outside the capital. Meanwhile the London Chamber of Commerce conducted a survey of businesses in the capital and found that one in eight are not planning to re-open their offices, but are changing over to 'homeworking' as the way for them to carry on.


    The three biggest banks will to a great part leave London due to Brexit and may be some 100'000 people will be missing - for all the luxury shops. They also will need no more soldiers for cleaning,food etc..


    This is not corona, it's corona mentalis.. also called Brexit.

    Ischgl Austrian CoV-19 hotspot that was responsible for many infection chain throughout Europe. (German news!)


    https://www.spiegel.de/wissens…bc-4f07-b537-4f10a9fface2


    Over 40% of Inhabitants infected - children much less. But only 2 deaths out of over 600 infections. Still a very bad flue with 0.3% mortality. If we assume all got it, what is very likely, then the mortality is still high with 0.15%. May be a good figure for a lower bound but statistically 2 dead people are to few for any confidence interval.

    In Georgia and Florida, younger people are getting COVID-19. I suppose this explains why the number of cases is rising dramatically, but the number of hospitalizations and deaths is not rising quite as rapidly in proportion to cases as they did in April. The deaths will probably rise in the coming weeks, because they lag. The Atlanta Journal reports on the trend:


    https://www.ajc.com/news/local…s/jbuSk1TkKh8LfHLL5Rvb9N/


    QUOTE:


    Georgia coronavirus cases spike among young adults as virus surges

    As reported cases of the coronavirus continue to surge in Georgia, an Atlanta Journal-Constitution analysis shows adults under 30 make up the fastest growing group of new infections.

    The spike in cases overall and among people aged 18 to 29 in Georgia mirrors other Southern states, including in Florida, which have also begun reopening their economies. Adults under 30 now make up Georgia’s largest cohort of cases.


    People 18 to 29 made up about 29% of the new cases so far in June, up from 21% in May and 13% in April, the AJC analysis shows. New cases among older adults have declined, public health experts said, reflecting stepped up efforts to protect vulnerable populations.


    Cases of COVID-19, the disease caused by the coronavirus, tend to be milder for young adults than for the elderly, but the disease isn’t without risk. Of the 13,496 adults under 30 who had tested positive through Tuesday, 542 or about 4% have been hospitalized and 11 have died, according to state data. . . .



    Georgia reported 7,008 newly confirmed cases among all age groups from June 14 to Saturday, the highest weekly count so far, and an increase of nearly 29% from the week before.


    Confirmed cases generally are a snapshot of the virus from several days or perhaps two weeks ago, because a person often does not seek a test until they exhibit symptoms, and it often takes days before results are known.

    Reported coronavirus cases have risen in Georgia in each of the past three weeks, and the state has reported week-over-week increases in five out of the past six weeks after four weeks of gradually declining cases. . . .




    Georgia coronavirus stats:


    https://www.ajc.com/news/coron…d/jvoLBozRtBSVSNQDDAuZxH/

    Quote from Wyttenbach

    It's not a hoax and also was not planned to happen that early. I think this pandemic in fact was planned to happen with a time horizon of 2-3 years because the capability to print money for the top 10'000 soon will run out.


    That's insane. No one "plans" to have a pandemic. There is no benefit to it. It does not help rich people or people who want more money to circulate. You can always print more money. We have been printing it for decades since 1945 without causing much inflation. The national debt in proportion to the GNP has hardly changed.

    Quote from JedRothwell

    That's insane. No one "plans" to have a pandemic. There is no benefit to it. It does not help rich people or people who want more money to circulate. You can always print more money. We have been printing it for decades since 1945 without causing much inflation. The national debt as in proportion to the GNP has hardly changed.


    I have to say, Jed, you have exactly caught my sentiment here.

    Quote from JedRothwell

    QUOTING AJC:


    Of the 13,496 adults under 30 who had tested positive through Tuesday, 542 or about 4% have been hospitalized and 11 have died, according to state data. . . .


    11 out of 13,496 is 0.08%, which is about the same as the seasonal influenza death rate, usually quoted at 0.1%.


    542 hospitalizations is 4%. The seasonal flu hospitalization rate is 1.5% for all age groups. Here is the estimated range of annual burden of flu in the U.S.:


    Illness: 9,300,000 - 45,000,000

    Hospitalization: 140,000 - 810,000 (~1.5%)

    Deaths: 12,000 - 61,000 (~0.1%)


    https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/index.html


    Roughly 20% of all coronavirus patients are hospitalized, mainly older people who tend to have more severe symptoms.

Subscribe to our newsletter

It's sent once a month, you can unsubscribe at anytime!

View archive of previous newsletters

* indicates required

Your email address will be used to send you email newsletters only. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

Our Partners

Supporting researchers for over 20 years
Want to Advertise or Sponsor LENR Forum?
CLICK HERE to contact us.