VetusLignum wrote:Adrien (ex-nico239) wrote:It is a treatment for relatively severely ill patients, right?
Yes, all with pneumonia (plus the onset of cytokine release syndrome for the majority). And without azythromicin.
VetusLignum wrote:Adrien (ex-nico239) wrote:It is a treatment for relatively severely ill patients, right?
And without azythromicin.
Perseus wrote:Hello,VetusLignum wrote:Adrien (ex-nico239) wrote:It is a treatment for relatively severely ill patients, right?
And without azythromicin.
You haven't read well.
96% of the hydroxychloroquine treated group had an additional antibiotic (azithro in 20% of cases).
1952/5000
First, viruses are not alive. Second, COVID 19 is a very large virus by KB and has a heavy capsid so it is more impervious to heat. You are advocating pasteurization, but even that is up near 104 f.
This problem with CV is that the virus attaches to human cells at various receptors, many of which are in the oral mucosa and the lungs. The human immune system is made up of two basic subsystems. The main one I call incendiary bombers and surgical strike antibodies. The first line of defense is the incendiary bomber, mainly macrophages which attack foreign bodies, bacteria or viruses without discrimination. So, with CV, it's the macrophages and debris that cause rapid damage to the lungs. Supporting the primary immune system in SARS, MERS, COVID 19, leads to massive lung damage. This was also true with Spanish influenza which also expressed the TMRPSS2 receptor in the lungs.
The immune system of antibodies is not triggered for days but it is very efficient and clean. So the game plan with diseases that attack the lungs is to save time, to use steroids to suppress the primary immune system in the hope of stimulating an antibody response before the primary response fills the lungs with mucus and debris and kills patients with ARDS and multi-organ failure.
So I would say that the approach of your technical representatives to let the primary immune system run free on lung patients is a bad idea, because it is the primary immune system that ravages the lungs.
While we're talking about the lungs, the vents are miserable on the lungs. Too much look for too long causes lung cracks that turn into inelastic scar tissue. This essentially guarantees many patients, especially the elderly, an oxygen cylinder and a nasal cannula for life. With COVID, 80% of patients on the vents die. It is hardly efficiency. Other approaches are to use nitrous oxide. I think maybe hyperbaric can have a sporting chance. But the vents are very questionable if not reckless.
thibr wrote:https://www.rtl.fr/actu/bien-etre/coronavirus-un-nouveau-medicament-l-azithromycine-guerirait-du-covid-19-7800395708
it is a treatment protocol that has been applied to several hundred patients, the patient base of three general practitioners from Moselle and the North. Doctors Denis Gastaldi, Jean-Jacques Erbstein and Olivia Vansteenberghe administered their patients with symptoms of the new azithromycin coronavirus, with, according to them, interesting results.
Doctor Denis Gastaldi explains their approach in the Parisian. "Azithromycin has the advantage of being an antibiotic, but also of having an action on viruses and anti-inflammatory activity on the pulmonary parenchyma", the functional tissue of the lungs, they explain.
They added to this, "empirically", zinc, in the form of two capsules of Effizinc, because it is known to increase the effect of azithromycin, and "of Singulair, used in people with asthma, to its role as an anti-inflammatory on interstitial lung tissue. " One of the keys, says Dr Gastaldi, "is to start this treatment at the first symptoms."
Faced with encouraging results, he explains that he and his colleagues have prescribed these molecules to all their patients with symptoms of Covid-19, as they cannot be screened by test, reserved for hospitals.
Encouraging results ...
in fact Chloroquine can be useless except to create heart problems ...
.
Adrien (ex-nico239) wrote:thibr wrote:https://www.rtl.fr/actu/bien-etre/coronavirus-un-nouveau-medicament-l-azithromycine-guerirait-du-covid-19-7800395708
it is a treatment protocol that has been applied to several hundred patients, the patient base of three general practitioners from Moselle and the North. Doctors Denis Gastaldi, Jean-Jacques Erbstein and Olivia Vansteenberghe administered their patients with symptoms of the new azithromycin coronavirus, with, according to them, interesting results.
Doctor Denis Gastaldi explains their approach in the Parisian. "Azithromycin has the advantage of being an antibiotic, but also of having an action on viruses and anti-inflammatory activity on the pulmonary parenchyma", the functional tissue of the lungs, they explain.
They added to this, "empirically", zinc, in the form of two capsules of Effizinc, because it is known to increase the effect of azithromycin, and "of Singulair, used in people with asthma, to its role as an anti-inflammatory on interstitial lung tissue. " One of the keys, says Dr Gastaldi, "is to start this treatment at the first symptoms."
Faced with encouraging results, he explains that he and his colleagues have prescribed these molecules to all their patients with symptoms of Covid-19, as they cannot be screened by test, reserved for hospitals.
Encouraging results ...
in fact Chloroquine can be useless except to create heart problems ...
Ah yeah but it's not randomized so it's trash
And then it's doctors ... they don't understand anything ... let the researchers do it: response after validation by peers (and the labs of course)
For all patients, a single return home treatment with doliprane EPICETOU ...
But what are these doctors who take themselves for sorcerer's apprentices and who pride themselves on wanting to cure their patients
And then their encouraging results you know the maxim of ABC "I say there is absolutely nothing you can say about it without knowing the populations that have been treated, that's all."
Basically they are charlatans
of course
In early April, the American company Moderna Therapeutics is to inject 45 participants with the first doses of its experimental vaccine against the virus responsible for Covid-19. It is the first time that a vaccine candidate has been tested so quickly on humans. Meeting with Ian Haydon, one of the volunteers.
To stop the coronavirus, we need a vaccine quickly - and volunteers ready to receive it. Several products are being studied, but the first to be tested on humans comes from the laboratories of Moderna Therapeutics, a company whose technology has enabled the fastest ever launch of a vaccine trial.
The first step is underway. It consists in verifying that the vaccine is not dangerous and that it does indeed provoke an immune response. In March, after a call for volunteers, 45 people were called to come to the Kaiser Permanente health center in Seattle. They must sign a 20-page disclaimer, recognizing that there may be risks and that the vaccine is unlikely to help them. They also agree to undergo a series of blood tests in the following months, in order to share their genetic information, and undertake not to have children for the duration of the study.
We spoke with Ian Haydon, communications specialist at the University of Washington. He explained to us why he decided to participate in the study and how he was selected.
You will be one of the first 45 people to receive a Covid-19 vaccine in Seattle. Why did you decide to do it?
It's a good question. I am an institutional information specialist at the University of Washington (Seattle), in particular for the Institute for Protein Design, which does research on the Covid-19. In the laboratory, there are currently 35 researchers working on a vaccine. The others stay at home. I never took part in such studies, but I attended these scientists and it seemed logical to me to participate in a different way.
When will you be vaccinated?
April 8, 9 a.m. I will be injected with a second dose a month later.
How were you chosen?
I was especially lucky. I heard about the project from a lab colleague who announced the recruitment on Slack [a collaborative communication platform]. I sent a file: they wanted to know my health history and my age. I did not expect to be contacted as they had hundreds of responses. But it did. I went for a check-up and a blood test, and I was told about the study. I was asked if I was still interested, I answered yes and I signed.
Have you had no regrets?
No. I very much hoped that someone would call me back.
How old are you ?
I am 29 years old.
What are the risks, in your opinion?
They are not very important, but they do exist. First, there is the risk of anaphylactic shock [a severe allergic response] - which can be a problem for a small number of people, and this is not just about this study. The second risk is called “facilitation of antibody infection” [when the vaccine worsens the disease], it is not known if it affects Covid-19. This is part of what the researchers are going to study, I imagine. And the third risk is what we did not anticipate. Such a risk exists for any vaccine, especially if it uses new technology.
How does the vaccine work?
It is a messenger RNA vaccine. Part of the genetic code of the virus is integrated into the vaccine, in a lipid nanoparticle. When injected into a subject like me, it is supposed to produce a protein - in the case of this coronavirus, a protein “spike” (the protein of the protuberances that form the crown of the virus). This is what is supposed to trigger the reaction of my immune system, which should then produce antibodies. The vaccine provides the genetic material, not the protein directly.
See also Research. We begin to understand the biology of the virus
How soon will you produce antibodies?
This will be monitored throughout the trial, over a year. At each visit, my antibodies and my immune cells (leukocytes) will be examined.
Have you researched this technology a bit?
Yes a little bit. As I understand it, this vaccination technique based on lipid nanoparticles has been tested in phase 1 trials, for infections other than coronavirus. In fact, from what the clinicians have told me, I especially remember that one in three patients who received a messenger RNA vaccine had severe pain that hampered their activities during the day. It worries me a little.
What is your point of view on Moderna?
I think their technology is great, I'm glad it can be tested. It could have applications not only for Covid-19, but also for many other diseases. Moderna is really on the front line today. In my opinion, the company made a very good decision in seeking to develop a vaccine against Covid-19 and to test it on humans in the midst of a pandemic. They seem to be betting big on this vaccine, I hope it will work.
How much are you paid to be a volunteer?
I think it's 100 dollars [about 92 euros] per visit, so about 1 dollars if we do them all.
Did Covid-19 affect you personally?
Like almost everyone, I would say. Our lives are turned upside down by the pandemic - telecommuting, being confined, especially when we live in Seattle [the first epicenter of the Covid-19 pandemic in the United States]. Some of the barriers between my private life and my professional life have been blown up. Many people experience it. I know many scientists at the university who have volunteered to process the clinical trial samples that arrive at the lab. It is not their main job. Professional habits have changed. I have not been close to the infection itself, but I can feel it all around me.
Also read Apple tree. Confined during the Great Plague, Isaac Newton had effectively teleworked
The clinical trial documentation states that the safety study lasts fourteen months. Why so long?
I have heard that we will have a clear idea of safety from the third month. If the safety data is clear by the third month and the Covid-19 continues to wreak havoc, I would expect to see phase 2 trials start early. But these clinical trials cannot be accelerated very much. A new vaccine candidate has never been tested so quickly on humans, although I must say that I did not feel rushed. All the people I encountered were calm and extremely professional.
Do you think there is a chance that the vaccine will protect you?
It's possible, I imagine. But part of the researchers' job is to assess different dosages, so I'm not participating in the project telling myself that my immunity is coming soon.
The consent form states that all trial participants must use contraception. Why ?
I asked myself the question, I have certain theories on this subject. I had to promise to use condoms. I wonder if, in the case of a genetic vaccine, we are not trying to prevent the birth of a new generation of children who have the vaccine messenger RNA in their genetic heritage.
Do you think DNA could end up in the germ line, in your sperm?
It is a hypothesis. I imagine that regulatory authorities, or Moderna itself, have considered this possibility, but would not take the risk that it would happen. Whether or not there is a molecular mechanism that makes this possible, it seems reasonable not to go this route.
How does it feel to know that you help so directly?
I am lucky to be healthy enough to participate in this study. I was also lucky to have been selected from a large population group, and I would like many people in my case to take the plunge and participate in the study.
GuyGadebois wrote:Raoult is a little player in the face of neo-Mengele who concoct for us "messenger ARM" vaccines based on nanoparticles ...
Back to "Health and Prevention. Pollution, causes and effects of environmental risks "
Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 395 guests
