The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Bomb in Gilead: First Remdesivir Clinical Trial Fails
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Recently, a leaked anecdotal report that expensive new drug remdesivir was working wonders in a Chicago hospital drove stock prices up around the world. Today, though, bad news.

From Reuters:

Gilead’s coronavirus drug flops in first trial – FT
by Reuters

Thursday, 23 April 2020 17:01 GMT\April 23 (Reuters) – Gilead Sciences Inc’s experimental coronavirus drug failed its first randomised clinical trial, the Financial Times reported on Thursday, citing draft documents published accidentally by the World Health Organization.

Trading in the shares of the company was halted after they fell 6%.

The Chinese trial showed the antiviral remdesivir did not improve patients’ condition or reduce the pathogen’s presence in the bloodstream, the report https://on.ft.com/2VumJIA said.

Researchers studied 237 patients, giving the drug to 158 and comparing their progress with the remaining 79. The drug also showed significant side effects in some, which meant 18 patients were taken off it, according to the Financial Times.

This doesn’t mean this drug is hopeless. Maybe it works better at a different stage?

 
Hide 72 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Considering that both the positive and negative reports were leaks, perhaps we still have yet to learn the truth about how effective it is. Both trials may have been flawed, and maybe one was flawed and the other wasn’t. Both scientific reports still have to pass peer review.

  2. Can we trust the Chinese study as being real, or some kind of leak to sow doubt, and keep any hopes muted to further Chinese economic destruction of the US?

    • Replies: @anon
    more fundamental, can we trust them to do a good clinical trial? (why did Gilead pick the PRC of all places to run their study, rather than say Europe? Oh because there are less regulations to deal with...)

    Interestingly, the study was halted, it did not really fail, there were "too few patients" recruited.
    https://www.statnews.com/2020/04/23/data-on-gileads-remdesivir-released-by-accident-show-no-benefit-for-coronavirus-patients/
    https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04252664?term=remdesivir&cond=covid-19&draw=2&rank=1


    How can there not be enough Chinese patients?

    Anyway Do a phase III study right, sufficiently powered, or forget it.
  3. Study finds no benefit, higher death rate in patients taking hydroxychloroquine for Covid-19
    https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/21/health/hydroxychloroquine-veterans-study/index.html

    “In the study of 368 patients, 97 patients who took hydroxychloroquine had a 27.8% death rate. The 158 patients who did not take the drug had an 11.4% death rate.”

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Presumably, this hydroxychloroquine test was of people in severe trouble if 11% of the control group died.

    My impression is that most of the semi-informed hopes about that drug were for early or even prophylactic use, which would seem like a different kettle of fish altogether.

    , @Elli
    The hydroxychloroquine group were sicker, had much lower white blood cell counts.
    , @Anon
    @ Researcher did not track side effects but noted hints that hydroxychloroquine might have damaged other organs. The drug has long been known to have potentially serious side effects, including altering the heartbeat in a way that could lead to sudden death.

    One is supposed to have an electrocardiograma done before been put on Plaquenil. You have to rule out “QT síndrome” or Plaquenil is counter indicated.

    I wonder if those poor Vet guinea pigs were adequately chosen.

    A doctor in Switzerland, early on (feb?) specifically gave cloroquine (Aralen or Resochid) for a boarding school, saying it had already proven effective on covid19.

    I’m not saying it’s a silver bullet. I just think each of us has to choose treatment for ourselves and our families, with info on hand. On the run, as it were. My impression from talking to doctors and friends with first hand experience is that Plaquenil + Azit + Heparin is best choice right now. If your EKG + bloodwork gives you the green light.
    , @Anonymous (n)
    This study is worthless. Let's put aside the elephant in the room, namely that HC/AZ are assumed to work in the very early stages of the disease or as prophylaxis, not once the patient has declined to the point that hospitalization is necessary. This study looked at hospitalized patients only, in other words a group for which HC/AZ would not be expected to work in the first place.

    But again, let's put aside the fact that the study is fatally flawed from the outset. Let's instead look at the baseline characteristics of the patients in the HC/AZ (ie the "treatment") group vs the "controls." The treatment group is much sicker at baseline! Only 63% of the treatment group has a pulse oximetry in the normal range, compared to 74% in the control group. The treatment group is on average hypertensive whereas the control group is normotensive. The treatment group has worse renal function. The treatment group also has more patients with pronounced lymphopenia (ie fewer virus fighting white cells) than the control group, which anecdotally seems to be a crucial factor causing patients to be unable to mount an effective immune response and enter a rapid decline.

    So what exactly is this study telling us? It it telling us that given some initial starting point, the patients who were sicker tend to decline and die more than patients who were healthier. It's also telling us that HC/AZ are not miracle drugs that can take already very sick patients and bounce them back into health, but nobody in the medical profession expected any such thing in the first place. What it is NOT telling us is that HC/AZ is ineffective if given to the appropriate patient group, because the study did not look at the appropriate patient group: those who are only recently symptomatic and still in the mild stage of the disease. It is also definitely NOT telling us that HC/AZ worsens outcomes, because any moron could look at the baseline characteristics of the patients in the treatment and control groups and tell you the former would die at a higher rate regardless of what they were or weren't given. The fact that the study tries to pass that off as the conclusion is a sickening politicization of science by what is considered a reputable research university.

    , @Che Blutarsky
    Study finds CNN viewers are misinformed a great majority of the time, and many still believe a black hole swallowed the Malaysian airliner.
  4. Anonymous[334] • Disclaimer says:

    Not very affordable. No preventative use. Not generic. Not in abundant supply.

    HCQ is all of the above. HCQ cocktail is the path to wellness. Start the regimen early and you will be fine.

    Ivermectin is also proving effective.

    So that means an antimalarial an antibiotic and an antiparasitic to completely destroy this virus. STRANGE BUT TRUE.

    Bannon show had John Solomon on with story out of army biolab Ft Dietrich (anthrax mailer locale)… army is testing oleander extract and it looks promising. Oleander is recent breakthrough cancer treatment… Solomon is not a crackpot this could be big longterm cure.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason

    Ivermectin is also proving effective.
     
    What is the evidence for this? Where is it being given? At what dosage is it effective?
    , @Travis
    Scientists have known for decades that hydrochloquine is an anti-viral. This is why is was studied in the 90s to fight HIV and used in 2003 to fight SARS.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1232869/
    We report that chloroquine has strong antiviral effects on SARS-CoV infection of primate cells. These inhibitory effects are observed when the cells are treated with the drug either before or after exposure to the virus, suggesting both prophylactic and therapeutic advantage.
    , @Anon
    Oleander's growing outside her door
    Soon they're going to be in bloom up in Annandale
  5. My early notes on “remedies” suggest that this or a similar drug was combined with the antiviral Tamiflu with success in Thailand. These tests of drugs alone obscure combinations that may work.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Right.
  6. https://twitter.com/search?q=%23Hydroxychloroquine%20&src=typed_query

    About 28% who were given hydroxychloroquine plus usual care died, versus 11% of those getting routine care alone. About 22% of those getting the drug plus azithromycin died too, but the difference between that group and usual care was not considered large enough to rule out other factors that could have affected survival.

    • Replies: @Glaivester
    There are a number of flaws in that study:

    https://www.redstate.com/elizabeth-vaughn/2020/04/23/french-doctor-didier-raoult-cites-flaws-scientific-misconduct-in-recent-va-study-on-hydroxychloroquine/
  7. Big pharma scam.

  8. If you poke around on Facebook, you will find a lot of people talking about the improving condition of loved one suffering from the Wuhan coronavirus. They mention planquinil. iSteve smarties know this is the brand version of hydroquinone.

    I wonder if the brand does in fact work better than the generic? It would be yet another instance of that.

  9. @dilys
    My early notes on "remedies" suggest that this or a similar drug was combined with the antiviral Tamiflu with success in Thailand. These tests of drugs alone obscure combinations that may work.

    Right.

  10. @utu
    Study finds no benefit, higher death rate in patients taking hydroxychloroquine for Covid-19
    https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/21/health/hydroxychloroquine-veterans-study/index.html

    "In the study of 368 patients, 97 patients who took hydroxychloroquine had a 27.8% death rate. The 158 patients who did not take the drug had an 11.4% death rate."

    Presumably, this hydroxychloroquine test was of people in severe trouble if 11% of the control group died.

    My impression is that most of the semi-informed hopes about that drug were for early or even prophylactic use, which would seem like a different kettle of fish altogether.

    • Replies: @Manfred Arcane
    Exactly. The VA trial was obviously set up to fail by the medical branch of the deep state, in order to provide the media with a "study" to support their "HCQ doesn't work and WILL KILL YOU" narrative. Thanks to the evil of the media-DNC-deep state cabal, we're now looking at a Bizzaro World situation in which a Third World disease cesspit like India (which is using lots of HCQ) is handling an epidemic with more medical common-sense than the US.
    , @neprof
    Speaking of prophylactic use, look what the French are investigating. Maybe people should start vaping.

    https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-04-france-nicotine-coronavirus.html
    , @Glaivester
    The study finding no benefit was deeply flawed.

    https://pjmedia.com/trending/five-problems-with-the-study-that-claims-more-deaths-from-treating-coronavirus-with-hydroxychloroquine/
    , @utu
    Chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine for prophylaxis of COVID-19
    https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(20)30296-6/fulltext

    "In-vitro studies have shown that chloroquine is effective against several viruses, including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV)."

    "... the true clinical efficacy of chloroquine in treating coronavirus infections was not established."

    COVID-19: S. Korean Study fails to prove potential cure
    https://www.aa.com.tr/en/asia-pacific/covid-19-s-korean-study-fails-to-prove-potential-cure/1814774

    "A recent study in South Korea has failed to definitively prove that an anti-malaria drug seen as a candidate in treating the novel coronavirus would be effective against the global pandemic, local media reported on Wednesday."

    "The researchers completed a process known as post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP), which refers to preventive medical treatment following exposure to a pathogen. they administered hydroxychloroquine to 184 patients and 21 medical staff at a long-term care hospital in Busan, where they were exposed to COVID-19 after massive infections were reported there."
    , @JohnnyWalker123
    The test was of patients who were hospitalized.

    Over 90% of Corona Virus deaths are in hospitals.

    https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/17498/production/_111648359_coronavirusonsplace-nc.png

    Hydroxychloroquine increases your risk of very low blood sugar and cardiac arrest. So taking it as a prophylactic isn't necessarily a good idea. Especially if you take into account that unhealthy elderly individuals are already at a very high risk for these issues, you have to wonder if it's really worth it as a preventative measure.

    So if you give the drug to hospitalized patients, you increase their risk of mortality by 2-2.5x. If you give the drug to non-hospitalized patients, you decrease their risk of Corona-related death slightly while increasing their risk of hypoglycemia and cardiac arrest.
    , @Chrisnonymous
    The first mention I heard of HCQ was back in February sometime related to use in Thailand. My guess is that they tried it in Thailand and other parts of Asia because it's relatively cheap. Anecdotal reports of its success then spread without good evidence. This is rather like the ventilator use, which I think was also primarily based on using the treatments that had been tried in Asia. There was never much reason to think it would work, however. There's nothing much else to be done.

    My guess is that modifying the body's immune response is the thing to focus on rather than trying to inhibit viral replication per se.
  11. Anon[228] • Disclaimer says:

    When we looked back on it, US funding of the Wuhan lab is going to be the ultimate ‘outsourcing our jobs’ screwup. This one is killing people and causing a worldwide economic depression. So yeah, keeping our lab work in the US and paying lab techs what they’re worth, and hiring good white lab techs in the first place instead of sloppy orientals would have been smarter.

    • Replies: @BenKenobi
    https://y.yarn.co/c3ae1d06-a27f-4432-951b-3e6c0241fd50_screenshot.jpg
    , @Mehen

    When we looked back on it, US funding of the Wuhan lab is going to be the ultimate ‘outsourcing our jobs’ screwup. This one is killing people and causing a worldwide economic depression. So yeah, keeping our lab work in the US and paying lab techs what they’re worth, and hiring good white lab techs in the first place instead of sloppy orientals would have been smarter.
     
    This presumes those labs were not meant for biowarfare research and were not built outside the U.S. in order to avoid regulations and transparency.
  12. @utu
    Study finds no benefit, higher death rate in patients taking hydroxychloroquine for Covid-19
    https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/21/health/hydroxychloroquine-veterans-study/index.html

    "In the study of 368 patients, 97 patients who took hydroxychloroquine had a 27.8% death rate. The 158 patients who did not take the drug had an 11.4% death rate."

    The hydroxychloroquine group were sicker, had much lower white blood cell counts.

    • Agree: Anonymous (n)
    • Replies: @Redneck farmer
    Don't reason with blackpillers, it's a waste of time.
  13. First Remdesivir Clinical Trial Fails

    Is there bomb in Gilead?

    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Bomb in Gilead: First Remdesivir Clinical Trial Fails
     
    Hahahaha yesssss! Much better. :)

    (Not the news; the wording.)
    , @Steve Sailer
    OK, I'll steal that.
    , @Anonymous
    It's a shame... I wonder if anyone tried using the actual balm of Gilead? Apparently it does have some real medicinal properties, besides being a pleasant perfume.

    https://youtu.be/8fcMxI_6xsk
  14. Remdesivir = Semi driver

    Joking aside, “Semi Driver” would inspire more confidence as a trade name, wouldn’t it? Remdesivir sounds like an obscure Spanish verb, or an ashram for H-1bs.

    Truckers, like health personnel, are too essential to be “locked down”. They’re robust, like a remedy should leave you.

    Smokin’ Joe’s gives truck drivers access to meal delivery

    Is a name like “remdesivir” supposed to suggest randomized testing, with its randomized spelling? What’s its Scrabble score?

  15. It is frustrating to read these badly written press releases vs. an actual research document, because the methodology matters. Part of the replication crisis in medicine has to do with crap methodology.

  16. @Steve Sailer
    Presumably, this hydroxychloroquine test was of people in severe trouble if 11% of the control group died.

    My impression is that most of the semi-informed hopes about that drug were for early or even prophylactic use, which would seem like a different kettle of fish altogether.

    Exactly. The VA trial was obviously set up to fail by the medical branch of the deep state, in order to provide the media with a “study” to support their “HCQ doesn’t work and WILL KILL YOU” narrative. Thanks to the evil of the media-DNC-deep state cabal, we’re now looking at a Bizzaro World situation in which a Third World disease cesspit like India (which is using lots of HCQ) is handling an epidemic with more medical common-sense than the US.

  17. @Steve Sailer
    Presumably, this hydroxychloroquine test was of people in severe trouble if 11% of the control group died.

    My impression is that most of the semi-informed hopes about that drug were for early or even prophylactic use, which would seem like a different kettle of fish altogether.

    Speaking of prophylactic use, look what the French are investigating. Maybe people should start vaping.

    https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-04-france-nicotine-coronavirus.html

    • Replies: @Hernan Pizzaro del Blanco
    Thanks. Now I have a great excuse for using smokeless tobacco again. Just ordered some Swedish Snus.
  18. @Steve Sailer
    Presumably, this hydroxychloroquine test was of people in severe trouble if 11% of the control group died.

    My impression is that most of the semi-informed hopes about that drug were for early or even prophylactic use, which would seem like a different kettle of fish altogether.

    • Replies: @Anon
    I read the article about that study in the DailyMail (fiercely in anti-Trump mode, often in very amusing ways), and it also struck me as a very slanted headline. Even the text contradicted the headline.
  19. @Anon
    When we looked back on it, US funding of the Wuhan lab is going to be the ultimate 'outsourcing our jobs' screwup. This one is killing people and causing a worldwide economic depression. So yeah, keeping our lab work in the US and paying lab techs what they're worth, and hiring good white lab techs in the first place instead of sloppy orientals would have been smarter.

  20. @Steve Sailer
    Presumably, this hydroxychloroquine test was of people in severe trouble if 11% of the control group died.

    My impression is that most of the semi-informed hopes about that drug were for early or even prophylactic use, which would seem like a different kettle of fish altogether.

    Chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine for prophylaxis of COVID-19
    https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(20)30296-6/fulltext

    “In-vitro studies have shown that chloroquine is effective against several viruses, including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV).”

    “… the true clinical efficacy of chloroquine in treating coronavirus infections was not established.”

    COVID-19: S. Korean Study fails to prove potential cure
    https://www.aa.com.tr/en/asia-pacific/covid-19-s-korean-study-fails-to-prove-potential-cure/1814774

    “A recent study in South Korea has failed to definitively prove that an anti-malaria drug seen as a candidate in treating the novel coronavirus would be effective against the global pandemic, local media reported on Wednesday.”

    “The researchers completed a process known as post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP), which refers to preventive medical treatment following exposure to a pathogen. they administered hydroxychloroquine to 184 patients and 21 medical staff at a long-term care hospital in Busan, where they were exposed to COVID-19 after massive infections were reported there.”

    • Thanks: epebble
  21. @JohnnyWalker123
    https://twitter.com/search?q=%23Hydroxychloroquine%20&src=typed_query

    About 28% who were given hydroxychloroquine plus usual care died, versus 11% of those getting routine care alone. About 22% of those getting the drug plus azithromycin died too, but the difference between that group and usual care was not considered large enough to rule out other factors that could have affected survival.

     

  22. My impression is that most of the semi-informed hopes about that drug were for early or even prophylactic use, which would seem like a different kettle of fish altogether.

    Remdesivir is most effetcive for early stage – which is why your oximeter suggestion is so vital – and moderately effective for middle stage. It is known not to be good for late stage; it causes inflammation and is not good for kidneys.

    When I read the negative report my first thought was stock market manipulation. Time will tell. Everybody still needs to get an oximeter.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    It's harder to test early stage use because the % of bad outcomes is pretty small. You need a bigger sample size and probably to wait longer.
    , @Anon
    Anyone who day trades a stock knows you make more money in a very volatile market. You go short one day, cover your short the next, sell the gain the day after that, then rinse and repeat. When most of the shares of a particular stock are locked up in the hands of large funds and institutions who just buy-and-hold, this tends to cause prices to gradually climb up.

    When the longs panic-sold the drop, this loosened up enough shares that the day traders can manipulate stocks pretty easily. They just band together and work the market. The funds and institutions haven't sucked up enough loose shares yet to tighten up prices, which usually causes the market to be less volatile.

  23. Anonymous[303] • Disclaimer says:

    Wow, America has just reached the historic mark of 50,000 dead by SARS2-COVID. A lethality rate of 0.5% my ass. There is no way that there are 10 million infected Americans, which is what would need to be true for that number of deaths. Such an infection number would be over a dozen times greater than the official number of infected people. This is especially the case considering that the country went on lockdown more than a month ago, after the very first people started to become ill. Given the incubation period of 5-10 days, there is no way the virus would have infected 10 million in just around one week. – especially considering that exponential progression only starts to pick up speed after more than 10 consecutive infections at a rate of 1 person infecting on average 2.

    The most likely death rate of this virus is around 2-4% of infected people *overall* . It is possibly as low as 0.3% for healthy females under 40, and as high as 10% for men over 80 and people with serious respiratory problems like asthma and bronchitis. Overall, this virus is a lot more lethal than the flu(and even more contagious), but not nearly as lethal as measles, hantavirus and Ebola. But it’s combination of relatively high lethality with it being extremely contagious makes it an absolute disaster.

    There will be one million dead Americans by July if a reasonable quarantine continues. If we suspend the quarantine, the number of dead Americans can reach up to 5-10 millions in 3 months.

    • Replies: @Inverness

    There is no way that there are 10 million infected Americans, which is what would need to be true for that number of deaths. Such an infection number would be over a dozen times greater than the official number of infected people.
     
    The "official number of infected people" is an artifact of testing, for the thousandth time. And the NYC area alone is supposed to have more than three million cases

    Your last paragraph (which I didn't quote) is particularly nonsensical. Stop bloviating.
    , @adreadline
    Just like there are those minimizing the pandemic, there are those exaggerating it.

    If you're serious, you are not thinking very straight. It is very possible that there are already 10 million infected Americans (seroprevalence tests suggest just that, though they have yet to be replicated). The chances there will be 10 million dead Americans already by July due to the covid are slim (though it's of course not impossible, and more likely than, say, Earth getting hit by another Chicxulub-level impactor in the next three months). Dialing it down to 1 million, or that there will be 10 millions dead by the end of the year is credible (still not very likely if people do things right, wear masks, wash their hands, avoid crowds in closed spaces, and so on).

    There are about 2,000 confirmed and probable deaths combined per day, and while it's true that number seems to be increasing, which is scary, it is doing so slowly. It would have to get to a point in which we'd have 20,000 deaths a day, ten times what we got now and 40% of the totality of confirmed WuFlu deaths in the United States so far. Exponential growth would have to be switched on again, and for that, something would have to radically change, like the virus mutating to a significantly more contagious (likely) and/or lethal (possible) strain, or the immunity to it fading off quickly, while lockdowns were abandoned altogether, for your catastrophic prediction to come true. That's not to say the pandemic is under control (it sure doesn't seem to be) or that it's impossible-can't happen-no way for many millions of Americans to have bitten the dust in three months. But you are presenting maybe the worst case scenario, and treating it as if it were already reality. Now go wash your hands.

    , @Intelligent Dasein
    Ron Unz, the Imelda Marcos of sock puppetry.
  24. @Glaivester
    The study finding no benefit was deeply flawed.

    https://pjmedia.com/trending/five-problems-with-the-study-that-claims-more-deaths-from-treating-coronavirus-with-hydroxychloroquine/

    I read the article about that study in the DailyMail (fiercely in anti-Trump mode, often in very amusing ways), and it also struck me as a very slanted headline. Even the text contradicted the headline.

  25. @James Speaks

    My impression is that most of the semi-informed hopes about that drug were for early or even prophylactic use, which would seem like a different kettle of fish altogether.
     
    Remdesivir is most effetcive for early stage - which is why your oximeter suggestion is so vital - and moderately effective for middle stage. It is known not to be good for late stage; it causes inflammation and is not good for kidneys.

    When I read the negative report my first thought was stock market manipulation. Time will tell. Everybody still needs to get an oximeter.

    It’s harder to test early stage use because the % of bad outcomes is pretty small. You need a bigger sample size and probably to wait longer.

    • Agree: James Speaks
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Steve: It’s known that all antivirals (drugs ending in “vir”) really only work if taken early. It’s one of the main hallmarks of prescribing Tamiflu.
    , @James Speaks

    It’s harder to test early stage use because the % of bad outcomes is pretty small. You need a bigger sample size and probably to wait longer.
     
    Undoubtedly a bigger sample size is needed. And more time. Just before an area opens up, you need 50,000 volunteers to be tested for infection and antibodies. Then everyone who tests clean can participate in a study. Test for presence of nCV-19 weekly. Test the newly infected for O2 saturation daily. When O2 < 90%, administer placebo versus remdesivir versus remdesivir plus tamiflu.
  26. @Steve Sailer
    Presumably, this hydroxychloroquine test was of people in severe trouble if 11% of the control group died.

    My impression is that most of the semi-informed hopes about that drug were for early or even prophylactic use, which would seem like a different kettle of fish altogether.

    The test was of patients who were hospitalized.

    Over 90% of Corona Virus deaths are in hospitals.

    Hydroxychloroquine increases your risk of very low blood sugar and cardiac arrest. So taking it as a prophylactic isn’t necessarily a good idea. Especially if you take into account that unhealthy elderly individuals are already at a very high risk for these issues, you have to wonder if it’s really worth it as a preventative measure.

    So if you give the drug to hospitalized patients, you increase their risk of mortality by 2-2.5x. If you give the drug to non-hospitalized patients, you decrease their risk of Corona-related death slightly while increasing their risk of hypoglycemia and cardiac arrest.

    • Replies: @Lot
    “ Over 90% of Corona Virus deaths are in hospitals.”

    That graph says it is for England and Wales.

    A much higher share of CV deaths elsewhere are in nursing homes. For example, in France there were 13,547 deaths in hospitals and 8,309 in “care homes” meaning nursing homes or “other long term care.”
  27. @Anonymous
    Not very affordable. No preventative use. Not generic. Not in abundant supply.

    HCQ is all of the above. HCQ cocktail is the path to wellness. Start the regimen early and you will be fine.

    Ivermectin is also proving effective.

    So that means an antimalarial an antibiotic and an antiparasitic to completely destroy this virus. STRANGE BUT TRUE.

    Bannon show had John Solomon on with story out of army biolab Ft Dietrich (anthrax mailer locale)... army is testing oleander extract and it looks promising. Oleander is recent breakthrough cancer treatment... Solomon is not a crackpot this could be big longterm cure.

    Ivermectin is also proving effective.

    What is the evidence for this? Where is it being given? At what dosage is it effective?

  28. Anon[228] • Disclaimer says:

    Before everyone freaks out, go look at the new cases in South Korea. Since April 19th, They’ve been having less than 15 new cases a day. They were having new cases in the 20s and 30s a week before that, and 80-125 new cases a week further back. It is possible Covid-19 could die out in a couple more weeks in that country.

    Do not despair so easily.

    Cuomo reports 21% of New York City citizens have Covid-19 antibodies:

    https://apnews.com/01e148acd7226332d14e9ce350d8de16

    Even though 21% doesn’t sound like herd immunity, new cases of Covid-19 have been declining in NYC. 21% immunity may be enough to start the disease on its downwards slope. If, for example, the ‘most socializing’ members of a population are immune, that may play an important role in the slowing down of disease rates.

    In my own state, over half of those who had been infected have now recovered, and the death rate is still 0.46%. We certainly aren’t going around and trying to test everybody in sight, either. What’s more, I live in a state not particularly noted for good senior health. Older people where I live have a definite tendency towards being overweight, hypertension, and type 2 diabetes.

    As for the Rem-study, there’s a problem doing a study on extremely ill patients. The most important deciding factor may not be the drug they’re testing. Some people are just too far gone to be saved even by a drug that has some degree of effectiveness when you give it to them.

    It is possible the test group actually was sicker than the control group. Trying to pick a control group of very sick patients, and a test group of very sick patients, and presuming they’re going to be equal, is an inherently dodgy affair.

  29. @Steve Sailer
    Presumably, this hydroxychloroquine test was of people in severe trouble if 11% of the control group died.

    My impression is that most of the semi-informed hopes about that drug were for early or even prophylactic use, which would seem like a different kettle of fish altogether.

    The first mention I heard of HCQ was back in February sometime related to use in Thailand. My guess is that they tried it in Thailand and other parts of Asia because it’s relatively cheap. Anecdotal reports of its success then spread without good evidence. This is rather like the ventilator use, which I think was also primarily based on using the treatments that had been tried in Asia. There was never much reason to think it would work, however. There’s nothing much else to be done.

    My guess is that modifying the body’s immune response is the thing to focus on rather than trying to inhibit viral replication per se.

    • Replies: @Joseph Doaks
    "modifying the body’s immune response is the thing to focus on rather than trying to inhibit viral replication per se."

    Yeah, starting with optimal nutrition, vitamin therapy, supplementation with herbal antivirals, etc.

    Fat chance the medical/pharmaceutical/government axis will go for that!
  30. Anon[593] • Disclaimer says:
    @utu
    Study finds no benefit, higher death rate in patients taking hydroxychloroquine for Covid-19
    https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/21/health/hydroxychloroquine-veterans-study/index.html

    "In the study of 368 patients, 97 patients who took hydroxychloroquine had a 27.8% death rate. The 158 patients who did not take the drug had an 11.4% death rate."

    @ Researcher did not track side effects but noted hints that hydroxychloroquine might have damaged other organs. The drug has long been known to have potentially serious side effects, including altering the heartbeat in a way that could lead to sudden death.

    One is supposed to have an electrocardiograma done before been put on Plaquenil. You have to rule out “QT síndrome” or Plaquenil is counter indicated.

    I wonder if those poor Vet guinea pigs were adequately chosen.

    A doctor in Switzerland, early on (feb?) specifically gave cloroquine (Aralen or Resochid) for a boarding school, saying it had already proven effective on covid19.

    I’m not saying it’s a silver bullet. I just think each of us has to choose treatment for ourselves and our families, with info on hand. On the run, as it were. My impression from talking to doctors and friends with first hand experience is that Plaquenil + Azit + Heparin is best choice right now. If your EKG + bloodwork gives you the green light.

  31. @utu
    Study finds no benefit, higher death rate in patients taking hydroxychloroquine for Covid-19
    https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/21/health/hydroxychloroquine-veterans-study/index.html

    "In the study of 368 patients, 97 patients who took hydroxychloroquine had a 27.8% death rate. The 158 patients who did not take the drug had an 11.4% death rate."

    This study is worthless. Let’s put aside the elephant in the room, namely that HC/AZ are assumed to work in the very early stages of the disease or as prophylaxis, not once the patient has declined to the point that hospitalization is necessary. This study looked at hospitalized patients only, in other words a group for which HC/AZ would not be expected to work in the first place.

    But again, let’s put aside the fact that the study is fatally flawed from the outset. Let’s instead look at the baseline characteristics of the patients in the HC/AZ (ie the “treatment”) group vs the “controls.” The treatment group is much sicker at baseline! Only 63% of the treatment group has a pulse oximetry in the normal range, compared to 74% in the control group. The treatment group is on average hypertensive whereas the control group is normotensive. The treatment group has worse renal function. The treatment group also has more patients with pronounced lymphopenia (ie fewer virus fighting white cells) than the control group, which anecdotally seems to be a crucial factor causing patients to be unable to mount an effective immune response and enter a rapid decline.

    So what exactly is this study telling us? It it telling us that given some initial starting point, the patients who were sicker tend to decline and die more than patients who were healthier. It’s also telling us that HC/AZ are not miracle drugs that can take already very sick patients and bounce them back into health, but nobody in the medical profession expected any such thing in the first place. What it is NOT telling us is that HC/AZ is ineffective if given to the appropriate patient group, because the study did not look at the appropriate patient group: those who are only recently symptomatic and still in the mild stage of the disease. It is also definitely NOT telling us that HC/AZ worsens outcomes, because any moron could look at the baseline characteristics of the patients in the treatment and control groups and tell you the former would die at a higher rate regardless of what they were or weren’t given. The fact that the study tries to pass that off as the conclusion is a sickening politicization of science by what is considered a reputable research university.

    • Agree: Bernard, FPD72
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    So this wasn't a randomized trial? They gave HC to the really sick people who needed a miracle?
  32. @Anonymous
    Not very affordable. No preventative use. Not generic. Not in abundant supply.

    HCQ is all of the above. HCQ cocktail is the path to wellness. Start the regimen early and you will be fine.

    Ivermectin is also proving effective.

    So that means an antimalarial an antibiotic and an antiparasitic to completely destroy this virus. STRANGE BUT TRUE.

    Bannon show had John Solomon on with story out of army biolab Ft Dietrich (anthrax mailer locale)... army is testing oleander extract and it looks promising. Oleander is recent breakthrough cancer treatment... Solomon is not a crackpot this could be big longterm cure.

    Scientists have known for decades that hydrochloquine is an anti-viral. This is why is was studied in the 90s to fight HIV and used in 2003 to fight SARS.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1232869/
    We report that chloroquine has strong antiviral effects on SARS-CoV infection of primate cells. These inhibitory effects are observed when the cells are treated with the drug either before or after exposure to the virus, suggesting both prophylactic and therapeutic advantage.

  33. @Anonymous
    Wow, America has just reached the historic mark of 50,000 dead by SARS2-COVID. A lethality rate of 0.5% my ass. There is no way that there are 10 million infected Americans, which is what would need to be true for that number of deaths. Such an infection number would be over a dozen times greater than the official number of infected people. This is especially the case considering that the country went on lockdown more than a month ago, after the very first people started to become ill. Given the incubation period of 5-10 days, there is no way the virus would have infected 10 million in just around one week. - especially considering that exponential progression only starts to pick up speed after more than 10 consecutive infections at a rate of 1 person infecting on average 2.

    The most likely death rate of this virus is around 2-4% of infected people *overall* . It is possibly as low as 0.3% for healthy females under 40, and as high as 10% for men over 80 and people with serious respiratory problems like asthma and bronchitis. Overall, this virus is a lot more lethal than the flu(and even more contagious), but not nearly as lethal as measles, hantavirus and Ebola. But it's combination of relatively high lethality with it being extremely contagious makes it an absolute disaster.

    There will be one million dead Americans by July if a reasonable quarantine continues. If we suspend the quarantine, the number of dead Americans can reach up to 5-10 millions in 3 months.

    There is no way that there are 10 million infected Americans, which is what would need to be true for that number of deaths. Such an infection number would be over a dozen times greater than the official number of infected people.

    The “official number of infected people” is an artifact of testing, for the thousandth time. And the NYC area alone is supposed to have more than three million cases

    Your last paragraph (which I didn’t quote) is particularly nonsensical. Stop bloviating.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Listen here dummy, The official number doesn't matter as far as my argument goes. The point is that a mortality rate of 0.5% is extremely unlikley as it would require 10 million Americans being infected already.

    As for my paragraph being nonsensical, I fail to see anything that is nonsensical about it as I make very clear and direct statements where I establish a premise and then follow it with a logical conclusion. Maybe the problem is not that it doesn't make sense, but that you are not very smart?
  34. Anonymous[367] • Disclaimer says:
    @Steve Sailer
    It's harder to test early stage use because the % of bad outcomes is pretty small. You need a bigger sample size and probably to wait longer.

    Steve: It’s known that all antivirals (drugs ending in “vir”) really only work if taken early. It’s one of the main hallmarks of prescribing Tamiflu.

  35. @neprof
    Speaking of prophylactic use, look what the French are investigating. Maybe people should start vaping.

    https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-04-france-nicotine-coronavirus.html

    Thanks. Now I have a great excuse for using smokeless tobacco again. Just ordered some Swedish Snus.

  36. I was wondering how Elizabeth Holmes was going to while away the time until her new trial date of 2021.

  37. @Anon
    When we looked back on it, US funding of the Wuhan lab is going to be the ultimate 'outsourcing our jobs' screwup. This one is killing people and causing a worldwide economic depression. So yeah, keeping our lab work in the US and paying lab techs what they're worth, and hiring good white lab techs in the first place instead of sloppy orientals would have been smarter.

    When we looked back on it, US funding of the Wuhan lab is going to be the ultimate ‘outsourcing our jobs’ screwup. This one is killing people and causing a worldwide economic depression. So yeah, keeping our lab work in the US and paying lab techs what they’re worth, and hiring good white lab techs in the first place instead of sloppy orientals would have been smarter.

    This presumes those labs were not meant for biowarfare research and were not built outside the U.S. in order to avoid regulations and transparency.

  38. Two interesting new Supreme Court cases:

    Barton v Barr is a 5-4 partisan win for us, making it easier to deport permanent residents who commit crimes. Oddly, the test case was a Jamaican gangster with a drug, gun, and assault rap sheet. The rule applies more broadly so Team Immivasion could have found a less crooked immigrant as a test case.

    On the loss side was Ramos v Louisiana. Two states do not require unanimous jury verdicts in criminal cases, Louisiana and Oregon. Both still require 10 of 12 votes to convict, and in the past the Supreme Court said this was OK.

    In a really awful decision by Gorsuch, he threw out the murder conviction of a man who raped and murdered a woman in New Orleans, the day before Thanksgiving, and stuffed her into a garbage can, possibly while still alive and bleeding to death.

    Potentially thousands of violent criminals will be freed from prison as a result. Technically they can be retried, but that is expensive or impossible for older crimes. Meanwhile the courts in those states will be flooded with prisoner lawsuits.

    In the N.O. case, the jury only took two hours to reach a verdict. Probably with more time it would have been unanimous, as Ramos had semen dna in the victim and on the garbage can handle and was the last one seen with her.

    Kav also joined the bad decision. Alito wrote a powerful Scalia-quality dissent joined by Roberts and, surprisingly, Kagan.

    • Thanks: Joseph Doaks
  39. @JohnnyWalker123
    The test was of patients who were hospitalized.

    Over 90% of Corona Virus deaths are in hospitals.

    https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/17498/production/_111648359_coronavirusonsplace-nc.png

    Hydroxychloroquine increases your risk of very low blood sugar and cardiac arrest. So taking it as a prophylactic isn't necessarily a good idea. Especially if you take into account that unhealthy elderly individuals are already at a very high risk for these issues, you have to wonder if it's really worth it as a preventative measure.

    So if you give the drug to hospitalized patients, you increase their risk of mortality by 2-2.5x. If you give the drug to non-hospitalized patients, you decrease their risk of Corona-related death slightly while increasing their risk of hypoglycemia and cardiac arrest.

    “ Over 90% of Corona Virus deaths are in hospitals.”

    That graph says it is for England and Wales.

    A much higher share of CV deaths elsewhere are in nursing homes. For example, in France there were 13,547 deaths in hospitals and 8,309 in “care homes” meaning nursing homes or “other long term care.”

  40. Anon[228] • Disclaimer says:
    @James Speaks

    My impression is that most of the semi-informed hopes about that drug were for early or even prophylactic use, which would seem like a different kettle of fish altogether.
     
    Remdesivir is most effetcive for early stage - which is why your oximeter suggestion is so vital - and moderately effective for middle stage. It is known not to be good for late stage; it causes inflammation and is not good for kidneys.

    When I read the negative report my first thought was stock market manipulation. Time will tell. Everybody still needs to get an oximeter.

    Anyone who day trades a stock knows you make more money in a very volatile market. You go short one day, cover your short the next, sell the gain the day after that, then rinse and repeat. When most of the shares of a particular stock are locked up in the hands of large funds and institutions who just buy-and-hold, this tends to cause prices to gradually climb up.

    When the longs panic-sold the drop, this loosened up enough shares that the day traders can manipulate stocks pretty easily. They just band together and work the market. The funds and institutions haven’t sucked up enough loose shares yet to tighten up prices, which usually causes the market to be less volatile.

  41. @Anonymous
    Wow, America has just reached the historic mark of 50,000 dead by SARS2-COVID. A lethality rate of 0.5% my ass. There is no way that there are 10 million infected Americans, which is what would need to be true for that number of deaths. Such an infection number would be over a dozen times greater than the official number of infected people. This is especially the case considering that the country went on lockdown more than a month ago, after the very first people started to become ill. Given the incubation period of 5-10 days, there is no way the virus would have infected 10 million in just around one week. - especially considering that exponential progression only starts to pick up speed after more than 10 consecutive infections at a rate of 1 person infecting on average 2.

    The most likely death rate of this virus is around 2-4% of infected people *overall* . It is possibly as low as 0.3% for healthy females under 40, and as high as 10% for men over 80 and people with serious respiratory problems like asthma and bronchitis. Overall, this virus is a lot more lethal than the flu(and even more contagious), but not nearly as lethal as measles, hantavirus and Ebola. But it's combination of relatively high lethality with it being extremely contagious makes it an absolute disaster.

    There will be one million dead Americans by July if a reasonable quarantine continues. If we suspend the quarantine, the number of dead Americans can reach up to 5-10 millions in 3 months.

    Just like there are those minimizing the pandemic, there are those exaggerating it.

    If you’re serious, you are not thinking very straight. It is very possible that there are already 10 million infected Americans (seroprevalence tests suggest just that, though they have yet to be replicated). The chances there will be 10 million dead Americans already by July due to the covid are slim (though it’s of course not impossible, and more likely than, say, Earth getting hit by another Chicxulub-level impactor in the next three months). Dialing it down to 1 million, or that there will be 10 millions dead by the end of the year is credible (still not very likely if people do things right, wear masks, wash their hands, avoid crowds in closed spaces, and so on).

    There are about 2,000 confirmed and probable deaths combined per day, and while it’s true that number seems to be increasing, which is scary, it is doing so slowly. It would have to get to a point in which we’d have 20,000 deaths a day, ten times what we got now and 40% of the totality of confirmed WuFlu deaths in the United States so far. Exponential growth would have to be switched on again, and for that, something would have to radically change, like the virus mutating to a significantly more contagious (likely) and/or lethal (possible) strain, or the immunity to it fading off quickly, while lockdowns were abandoned altogether, for your catastrophic prediction to come true. That’s not to say the pandemic is under control (it sure doesn’t seem to be) or that it’s impossible-can’t happen-no way for many millions of Americans to have bitten the dust in three months. But you are presenting maybe the worst case scenario, and treating it as if it were already reality. Now go wash your hands.

    • Agree: epebble, Ron Unz
    • Replies: @Peter Frost
    It is very possible that there are already 10 million infected Americans (seroprevalence tests suggest just that, though they have yet to be replicated).

    Very possible? I'm less sure. The current data indicate that seroprevalence rates are much lower outside the major urban centers. You can't extrapolate from one to the other.

    The chances there will be 10 million dead Americans already by July due to the covid are slim

    Is anyone arguing that everybody who gets infected will die?

    Dialing it down to 1 million, or that there will be 10 millions dead by the end of the year is credible

    And scary. It would be scary even if the final death toll is just a quarter of a million. Keep in mind that the fatalities are just the tip of the iceberg. Many more people will suffer permanent organ damage. I'd like to see some figures on that aspect of the problem

  42. @Anonymous (n)
    This study is worthless. Let's put aside the elephant in the room, namely that HC/AZ are assumed to work in the very early stages of the disease or as prophylaxis, not once the patient has declined to the point that hospitalization is necessary. This study looked at hospitalized patients only, in other words a group for which HC/AZ would not be expected to work in the first place.

    But again, let's put aside the fact that the study is fatally flawed from the outset. Let's instead look at the baseline characteristics of the patients in the HC/AZ (ie the "treatment") group vs the "controls." The treatment group is much sicker at baseline! Only 63% of the treatment group has a pulse oximetry in the normal range, compared to 74% in the control group. The treatment group is on average hypertensive whereas the control group is normotensive. The treatment group has worse renal function. The treatment group also has more patients with pronounced lymphopenia (ie fewer virus fighting white cells) than the control group, which anecdotally seems to be a crucial factor causing patients to be unable to mount an effective immune response and enter a rapid decline.

    So what exactly is this study telling us? It it telling us that given some initial starting point, the patients who were sicker tend to decline and die more than patients who were healthier. It's also telling us that HC/AZ are not miracle drugs that can take already very sick patients and bounce them back into health, but nobody in the medical profession expected any such thing in the first place. What it is NOT telling us is that HC/AZ is ineffective if given to the appropriate patient group, because the study did not look at the appropriate patient group: those who are only recently symptomatic and still in the mild stage of the disease. It is also definitely NOT telling us that HC/AZ worsens outcomes, because any moron could look at the baseline characteristics of the patients in the treatment and control groups and tell you the former would die at a higher rate regardless of what they were or weren't given. The fact that the study tries to pass that off as the conclusion is a sickening politicization of science by what is considered a reputable research university.

    So this wasn’t a randomized trial? They gave HC to the really sick people who needed a miracle?

    • Replies: @Anonymous (n)
    It wasn't a trial at all. It was a retrospective study, which just means a bunch of statheads looked at the medical records of dead or recovered coronavirus patients to see what had transpired. The actual physicians treating those patients at the time of their illness were not doing so under the auspices of any kind of trial or study, which is why the characteristics of those given or not given HC/AZ are so different. The sicker a patient was the more likely his doctor was to try an off-label and somewhat toxic drug regimen on him as a last ditch effort to stave off further decline.

    The clowns who wrote up this garbage of a study are well aware that it's only fit for toilet paper duty. I'm just curious to see whether it actually passes peer review as that will tell us just how deep and wide the politicization of science runs even in an unprecedented health crisis like the one we're experiencing right now.

  43. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8251605/Donald-Trump-suggests-bizarre-treatments-coronavirus-including-injections.html#comments

    Dr. Trump has now suggested injecting the body with disinfectant to get rid of coronavirus.

    Strangely enough, I once had exactly the same idea–drinking Dettol– but I was 8 years old at the time.

    At tomorrow’s press conference I expect him to volunteer to be a guinea pig and to get trampled in the rush of doctors running to administer the first dose before he changes his mind.

    • LOL: Ron Unz
    • Replies: @Anon
    A disinfectant like, say, ozone?

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3312702/

    https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3561379
  44. Anonymous[249] • Disclaimer says:

    Pro hydroxychloroquine: Top infectious disease MDs around the world, most everybody on earth not connected to Big Pharma, most everybody not poisoned by Trump Derangement Syndrome.

    Anti hydroxychloroquine: Every psycho Trump hater, nearly all network TV news hosts and executives, Hollywood, most all impeachment fantasists, Mueller Report maniacs, Russian hacking liars, fans of Al Gore, fans of Bill Gates, fans of Hillary Clinton, gullible people who love the U.N. the W.H.O. and the Chinese Communist Party.

    But of course it’s only public opposition. In private they’re stockpiling HCQ for themselves and their family members.

    • Replies: @utu
    I was not aware that the hydroxychloroquine issue was transformed into a big political divide in which Big Pharma and Deep State are against Trump who supposedly is fighting for a common man who is prevented from protecting himself with fish-tank cleaner by the Deep Sate and Big Pharma. The hope dies last might be the operating principle that could explain this phenomenon.
    , @Manfred Arcane
    This, a thousand times. Note that the repulsive Tom Hanks and Rita Wilson were treated with it, recovered, and then immediately rushed to tell everyone it probably didn't make any difference and anyway it had totally gross side effects. Note also that the black Michigan state congresswoman who recovered thanks to the drug and praised Trump for recommending it is now facing discipline for doing so. The ruling cabal are desperate to discredit the treatment.
  45. Every day the same thing, 30,000 new cases, 2000 deaths. We have been isolating for five weeks, one would assume that within the first two weeks cases would peak, then begin to fall. Where are these new infections coming from? If the answer is from irresponsible behavior, let’s hear about it, but from what I’ve seen, most people are compliant. This suggests to me that we are merely postponing the inevitable.

    It seems as though there will be no flattening of the curve. As soon as we open things back up, cases will drastically spike. In the first few weeks of the crisis we had so little data, the shutdown seemed prudent, if only to make an assessment as to its nature. That time has past. It’s becoming pretty clear that we have no alternative but to let it run it’s course.

    Perhaps on a more hopeful note, I do believe that the overall severity can be significantly mitigated by using the pejoratively named “Trump Pills”. Creating enough of these meds for all who are willing to take them should be a top priority. I certainly would be thrilled to have a supply when our quarantine ends.

    • Replies: @epebble
    I am surprised that there is not much discussion on this topic. With all the shutdowns and care people are practicing, the rate of infections and deaths seems to remain fairly constant (and large). Some new theory is needed to explain this. One explanation I keep hearing is Covid's extreme efficiency in infecting others when the carrier is asymptomatic. If the number of infections in Georgia starts skyrocketing next week, we have an answer.
  46. @utu
    Study finds no benefit, higher death rate in patients taking hydroxychloroquine for Covid-19
    https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/21/health/hydroxychloroquine-veterans-study/index.html

    "In the study of 368 patients, 97 patients who took hydroxychloroquine had a 27.8% death rate. The 158 patients who did not take the drug had an 11.4% death rate."

    Study finds CNN viewers are misinformed a great majority of the time, and many still believe a black hole swallowed the Malaysian airliner.

    • LOL: Joseph Doaks
  47. Anonymous[105] • Disclaimer says:

    Ivermectin is also proving effective.

    What is the evidence for this? Where is it being given? At what dosage is it effective?

    What’s a computer? What’s the internet? What’s a search engine?

    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason

    What’s a computer? What’s the internet? What’s a search engine?
     
    My point exactly. The only information out there is from a couple weeks ago that a study in Australia found that ivermectin killed coronavirus in vitro, albeit at a much higher concentration than could safely be given clinically. Now an anonymous poster claims it is being used successfully without providing any useful details.

    Obviously we would all love to know that cheap, commonly available substances could knock out the virus or save our lives. I have a vial of 500mgs of ivermectin in my medicine cabinet (for my dog) and it would be wonderful to know that it could be a lifesaver, but realistically it is wishful thinking.

    Vodka will also kill the virus in vitro, but the dose required to kill the virus in the human body would kill the human body too.

    This is the fallacy of Trump's disinfectant theory. Perhaps he just misspoke and really meant to say that local application of an antiviral or antibiotic, rather than disinfectant, might work on the affected organ, but when you are a POTUS you need to watch what you say.

    Words do have meanings.

    A disinfectant is a solution that kills organisms on inert surfaces. Disinfecting is not quite the same thing as sterilizing, which is killing all life forms including spores that disinfectants might miss.

    Antibiotics destroy microorganisms within the body.

    Antiseptics destroy microorganisms on living tissue.

    Ultraviolet radiation in small doses such as in sun tanning lamps or sunlight may be beneficial in killing skin bacteria in cases of acne, and is used in large doses to destroy pathogens in sewerage,but it does destroy DNA, so has limited medicinal uses.

  48. @Anonymous
    Not very affordable. No preventative use. Not generic. Not in abundant supply.

    HCQ is all of the above. HCQ cocktail is the path to wellness. Start the regimen early and you will be fine.

    Ivermectin is also proving effective.

    So that means an antimalarial an antibiotic and an antiparasitic to completely destroy this virus. STRANGE BUT TRUE.

    Bannon show had John Solomon on with story out of army biolab Ft Dietrich (anthrax mailer locale)... army is testing oleander extract and it looks promising. Oleander is recent breakthrough cancer treatment... Solomon is not a crackpot this could be big longterm cure.

    Oleander’s growing outside her door
    Soon they’re going to be in bloom up in Annandale

  49. @Steve Sailer
    So this wasn't a randomized trial? They gave HC to the really sick people who needed a miracle?

    It wasn’t a trial at all. It was a retrospective study, which just means a bunch of statheads looked at the medical records of dead or recovered coronavirus patients to see what had transpired. The actual physicians treating those patients at the time of their illness were not doing so under the auspices of any kind of trial or study, which is why the characteristics of those given or not given HC/AZ are so different. The sicker a patient was the more likely his doctor was to try an off-label and somewhat toxic drug regimen on him as a last ditch effort to stave off further decline.

    The clowns who wrote up this garbage of a study are well aware that it’s only fit for toilet paper duty. I’m just curious to see whether it actually passes peer review as that will tell us just how deep and wide the politicization of science runs even in an unprecedented health crisis like the one we’re experiencing right now.

  50. Anonymous[303] • Disclaimer says:
    @Inverness

    There is no way that there are 10 million infected Americans, which is what would need to be true for that number of deaths. Such an infection number would be over a dozen times greater than the official number of infected people.
     
    The "official number of infected people" is an artifact of testing, for the thousandth time. And the NYC area alone is supposed to have more than three million cases

    Your last paragraph (which I didn't quote) is particularly nonsensical. Stop bloviating.

    Listen here dummy, The official number doesn’t matter as far as my argument goes. The point is that a mortality rate of 0.5% is extremely unlikley as it would require 10 million Americans being infected already.

    As for my paragraph being nonsensical, I fail to see anything that is nonsensical about it as I make very clear and direct statements where I establish a premise and then follow it with a logical conclusion. Maybe the problem is not that it doesn’t make sense, but that you are not very smart?

  51. @Steve Sailer
    It's harder to test early stage use because the % of bad outcomes is pretty small. You need a bigger sample size and probably to wait longer.

    It’s harder to test early stage use because the % of bad outcomes is pretty small. You need a bigger sample size and probably to wait longer.

    Undoubtedly a bigger sample size is needed. And more time. Just before an area opens up, you need 50,000 volunteers to be tested for infection and antibodies. Then everyone who tests clean can participate in a study. Test for presence of nCV-19 weekly. Test the newly infected for O2 saturation daily. When O2 < 90%, administer placebo versus remdesivir versus remdesivir plus tamiflu.

  52. anon[222] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous
    Can we trust the Chinese study as being real, or some kind of leak to sow doubt, and keep any hopes muted to further Chinese economic destruction of the US?

    more fundamental, can we trust them to do a good clinical trial? (why did Gilead pick the PRC of all places to run their study, rather than say Europe? Oh because there are less regulations to deal with…)

    Interestingly, the study was halted, it did not really fail, there were “too few patients” recruited.
    https://www.statnews.com/2020/04/23/data-on-gileads-remdesivir-released-by-accident-show-no-benefit-for-coronavirus-patients/
    https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04252664?term=remdesivir&cond=covid-19&draw=2&rank=1

    How can there not be enough Chinese patients?

    Anyway Do a phase III study right, sufficiently powered, or forget it.

    • Replies: @Anon
    Gilead was a bunch of naive noobs. It didn't occur to them the Chinese would love to see Trump ousted, and so the Chinese don't want people in the US to recover from Covid-19 using an effective drug.
  53. @Anonymous
    Pro hydroxychloroquine: Top infectious disease MDs around the world, most everybody on earth not connected to Big Pharma, most everybody not poisoned by Trump Derangement Syndrome.

    Anti hydroxychloroquine: Every psycho Trump hater, nearly all network TV news hosts and executives, Hollywood, most all impeachment fantasists, Mueller Report maniacs, Russian hacking liars, fans of Al Gore, fans of Bill Gates, fans of Hillary Clinton, gullible people who love the U.N. the W.H.O. and the Chinese Communist Party.

    But of course it's only public opposition. In private they're stockpiling HCQ for themselves and their family members.

    I was not aware that the hydroxychloroquine issue was transformed into a big political divide in which Big Pharma and Deep State are against Trump who supposedly is fighting for a common man who is prevented from protecting himself with fish-tank cleaner by the Deep Sate and Big Pharma. The hope dies last might be the operating principle that could explain this phenomenon.

    • Replies: @anon
    I was not aware that the hydroxychloroquine issue was transformed into a big political divide
    Well, now you know.
  54. @Jonathan Mason
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8251605/Donald-Trump-suggests-bizarre-treatments-coronavirus-including-injections.html#comments

    Dr. Trump has now suggested injecting the body with disinfectant to get rid of coronavirus.

    Strangely enough, I once had exactly the same idea--drinking Dettol-- but I was 8 years old at the time.

    At tomorrow's press conference I expect him to volunteer to be a guinea pig and to get trampled in the rush of doctors running to administer the first dose before he changes his mind.

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/GL-COMPOSITE-Coronavirus-dettol-v2.jpg

  55. @Bernard
    Every day the same thing, 30,000 new cases, 2000 deaths. We have been isolating for five weeks, one would assume that within the first two weeks cases would peak, then begin to fall. Where are these new infections coming from? If the answer is from irresponsible behavior, let’s hear about it, but from what I’ve seen, most people are compliant. This suggests to me that we are merely postponing the inevitable.

    It seems as though there will be no flattening of the curve. As soon as we open things back up, cases will drastically spike. In the first few weeks of the crisis we had so little data, the shutdown seemed prudent, if only to make an assessment as to its nature. That time has past. It’s becoming pretty clear that we have no alternative but to let it run it’s course.

    Perhaps on a more hopeful note, I do believe that the overall severity can be significantly mitigated by using the pejoratively named “Trump Pills”. Creating enough of these meds for all who are willing to take them should be a top priority. I certainly would be thrilled to have a supply when our quarantine ends.

    I am surprised that there is not much discussion on this topic. With all the shutdowns and care people are practicing, the rate of infections and deaths seems to remain fairly constant (and large). Some new theory is needed to explain this. One explanation I keep hearing is Covid’s extreme efficiency in infecting others when the carrier is asymptomatic. If the number of infections in Georgia starts skyrocketing next week, we have an answer.

  56. @anon
    more fundamental, can we trust them to do a good clinical trial? (why did Gilead pick the PRC of all places to run their study, rather than say Europe? Oh because there are less regulations to deal with...)

    Interestingly, the study was halted, it did not really fail, there were "too few patients" recruited.
    https://www.statnews.com/2020/04/23/data-on-gileads-remdesivir-released-by-accident-show-no-benefit-for-coronavirus-patients/
    https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04252664?term=remdesivir&cond=covid-19&draw=2&rank=1


    How can there not be enough Chinese patients?

    Anyway Do a phase III study right, sufficiently powered, or forget it.

    Gilead was a bunch of naive noobs. It didn’t occur to them the Chinese would love to see Trump ousted, and so the Chinese don’t want people in the US to recover from Covid-19 using an effective drug.

  57. @Jenner Ickham Errican

    First Remdesivir Clinical Trial Fails
     
    Is there bomb in Gilead?

    Bomb in Gilead: First Remdesivir Clinical Trial Fails

    Hahahaha yesssss! Much better. 🙂

    (Not the news; the wording.)

  58. @utu
    I was not aware that the hydroxychloroquine issue was transformed into a big political divide in which Big Pharma and Deep State are against Trump who supposedly is fighting for a common man who is prevented from protecting himself with fish-tank cleaner by the Deep Sate and Big Pharma. The hope dies last might be the operating principle that could explain this phenomenon.

    I was not aware that the hydroxychloroquine issue was transformed into a big political divide
    Well, now you know.

  59. @Elli
    The hydroxychloroquine group were sicker, had much lower white blood cell counts.

    Don’t reason with blackpillers, it’s a waste of time.

  60. @Jenner Ickham Errican

    First Remdesivir Clinical Trial Fails
     
    Is there bomb in Gilead?

    OK, I’ll steal that.

    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
    ;)
  61. @Anonymous
    Pro hydroxychloroquine: Top infectious disease MDs around the world, most everybody on earth not connected to Big Pharma, most everybody not poisoned by Trump Derangement Syndrome.

    Anti hydroxychloroquine: Every psycho Trump hater, nearly all network TV news hosts and executives, Hollywood, most all impeachment fantasists, Mueller Report maniacs, Russian hacking liars, fans of Al Gore, fans of Bill Gates, fans of Hillary Clinton, gullible people who love the U.N. the W.H.O. and the Chinese Communist Party.

    But of course it's only public opposition. In private they're stockpiling HCQ for themselves and their family members.

    This, a thousand times. Note that the repulsive Tom Hanks and Rita Wilson were treated with it, recovered, and then immediately rushed to tell everyone it probably didn’t make any difference and anyway it had totally gross side effects. Note also that the black Michigan state congresswoman who recovered thanks to the drug and praised Trump for recommending it is now facing discipline for doing so. The ruling cabal are desperate to discredit the treatment.

  62. @Anonymous
    Ivermectin is also proving effective.

    What is the evidence for this? Where is it being given? At what dosage is it effective?

    What's a computer? What's the internet? What's a search engine?

    What’s a computer? What’s the internet? What’s a search engine?

    My point exactly. The only information out there is from a couple weeks ago that a study in Australia found that ivermectin killed coronavirus in vitro, albeit at a much higher concentration than could safely be given clinically. Now an anonymous poster claims it is being used successfully without providing any useful details.

    Obviously we would all love to know that cheap, commonly available substances could knock out the virus or save our lives. I have a vial of 500mgs of ivermectin in my medicine cabinet (for my dog) and it would be wonderful to know that it could be a lifesaver, but realistically it is wishful thinking.

    Vodka will also kill the virus in vitro, but the dose required to kill the virus in the human body would kill the human body too.

    This is the fallacy of Trump’s disinfectant theory. Perhaps he just misspoke and really meant to say that local application of an antiviral or antibiotic, rather than disinfectant, might work on the affected organ, but when you are a POTUS you need to watch what you say.

    Words do have meanings.

    A disinfectant is a solution that kills organisms on inert surfaces. Disinfecting is not quite the same thing as sterilizing, which is killing all life forms including spores that disinfectants might miss.

    Antibiotics destroy microorganisms within the body.

    Antiseptics destroy microorganisms on living tissue.

    Ultraviolet radiation in small doses such as in sun tanning lamps or sunlight may be beneficial in killing skin bacteria in cases of acne, and is used in large doses to destroy pathogens in sewerage,but it does destroy DNA, so has limited medicinal uses.

  63. @Anonymous
    Wow, America has just reached the historic mark of 50,000 dead by SARS2-COVID. A lethality rate of 0.5% my ass. There is no way that there are 10 million infected Americans, which is what would need to be true for that number of deaths. Such an infection number would be over a dozen times greater than the official number of infected people. This is especially the case considering that the country went on lockdown more than a month ago, after the very first people started to become ill. Given the incubation period of 5-10 days, there is no way the virus would have infected 10 million in just around one week. - especially considering that exponential progression only starts to pick up speed after more than 10 consecutive infections at a rate of 1 person infecting on average 2.

    The most likely death rate of this virus is around 2-4% of infected people *overall* . It is possibly as low as 0.3% for healthy females under 40, and as high as 10% for men over 80 and people with serious respiratory problems like asthma and bronchitis. Overall, this virus is a lot more lethal than the flu(and even more contagious), but not nearly as lethal as measles, hantavirus and Ebola. But it's combination of relatively high lethality with it being extremely contagious makes it an absolute disaster.

    There will be one million dead Americans by July if a reasonable quarantine continues. If we suspend the quarantine, the number of dead Americans can reach up to 5-10 millions in 3 months.

    Ron Unz, the Imelda Marcos of sock puppetry.

    • LOL: William Badwhite
    • Replies: @Thomm

    Ron Unz, the Imelda Marcos of sock puppetry.
     
    Indeed. Gustavo Arellano in particular was a very obvious sock puppet of RUnzie Baby.

    Many other authors and commenters here are suspicious on that front too.
  64. Someone has got to play the role of shaman here in spiritually bereft modernity in interpreting these events. I will take it upon myself to read the tea leaves: Humanity wishes for a balm, a quick fix, but none can be found, even in Gilead. We must consider that the biosphere is Earth’s corona, and what is virus and what is vaccine is not absolute but depends on frame of reference. Camus had it right when he suggested in The Plague that the coastal town’s susceptibility was related to the residents having their backs turned to beauty. The only durable fix to this trouble that has beset fallen humanity rests upon a Revaluation of Values – a renewed wonder and respect for Creation as the ultimate source of wealth and well-being of all conscious life. The cure flows from this state of mind. We may be grateful that this chastening effort of our primordial Earth mother goddess, Gaia, is sparing. But if humanity doesn’t get the clue and straighten up Gaia may feel compelled to hit us harder next time.

    • Thanks: Current History
  65. Jesus H., I can’t believe the stuff that gets spouted about the badness of hydroxycholorquine.

    The VA study was complete bullshit — the regimen won’t work without Zinc. And it needs to be done early, with the right patient population.

    Meanwhile, the contraindications for hydroxycholorquine are well known. Just go to webmd:

    https://www.webmd.com/drugs/2/drug-5482/hydroxychloroquine-oral/details/list-contraindications

    Basically if you have uncontrolled diabetes, uncontrolled hypertension, COPD, liver disease, anemia, arythmia, it’s risky. Even then, if you manage the regimen, and get in early, the side effects are manageable.

    Boris Johnson, for example, was the perfect candidate.

    I have none of these contraindications, and if my pulse Ox goes below 90, and I test positive, I am banging on my doctor’s door to get the regimen. When all this blows over, we will learn how a vast army of health care workers in reasonably good health did the regimen successfully as a prophylactic. I know some.

  66. @Chrisnonymous
    The first mention I heard of HCQ was back in February sometime related to use in Thailand. My guess is that they tried it in Thailand and other parts of Asia because it's relatively cheap. Anecdotal reports of its success then spread without good evidence. This is rather like the ventilator use, which I think was also primarily based on using the treatments that had been tried in Asia. There was never much reason to think it would work, however. There's nothing much else to be done.

    My guess is that modifying the body's immune response is the thing to focus on rather than trying to inhibit viral replication per se.

    “modifying the body’s immune response is the thing to focus on rather than trying to inhibit viral replication per se.”

    Yeah, starting with optimal nutrition, vitamin therapy, supplementation with herbal antivirals, etc.

    Fat chance the medical/pharmaceutical/government axis will go for that!

  67. I never held out much hope for remdisivir. It was not designed specifically to interfere with this particular viral RNA-polymerase or evade the proofreading of the virus’ exoribonuclease. Absent some other accidental method of action, was pretty sure to be a bust.

    Additionally, even it worked as a kind of prophylactic (in this case, preventing advancement to series illness) in the newly infected, there isn’t enough of the drug extant, and not likely to be anytime soon by Gilead’s own press releases. The synthesis of this drug is very complicated and low yielding overall.

  68. Having written all of that, though- I would await the actual paper with the actual methology and results described. I really don’t trust the media any longer to tell me the sky is blue.

  69. Anonymous[192] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jenner Ickham Errican

    First Remdesivir Clinical Trial Fails
     
    Is there bomb in Gilead?

    It’s a shame… I wonder if anyone tried using the actual balm of Gilead? Apparently it does have some real medicinal properties, besides being a pleasant perfume.

  70. @adreadline
    Just like there are those minimizing the pandemic, there are those exaggerating it.

    If you're serious, you are not thinking very straight. It is very possible that there are already 10 million infected Americans (seroprevalence tests suggest just that, though they have yet to be replicated). The chances there will be 10 million dead Americans already by July due to the covid are slim (though it's of course not impossible, and more likely than, say, Earth getting hit by another Chicxulub-level impactor in the next three months). Dialing it down to 1 million, or that there will be 10 millions dead by the end of the year is credible (still not very likely if people do things right, wear masks, wash their hands, avoid crowds in closed spaces, and so on).

    There are about 2,000 confirmed and probable deaths combined per day, and while it's true that number seems to be increasing, which is scary, it is doing so slowly. It would have to get to a point in which we'd have 20,000 deaths a day, ten times what we got now and 40% of the totality of confirmed WuFlu deaths in the United States so far. Exponential growth would have to be switched on again, and for that, something would have to radically change, like the virus mutating to a significantly more contagious (likely) and/or lethal (possible) strain, or the immunity to it fading off quickly, while lockdowns were abandoned altogether, for your catastrophic prediction to come true. That's not to say the pandemic is under control (it sure doesn't seem to be) or that it's impossible-can't happen-no way for many millions of Americans to have bitten the dust in three months. But you are presenting maybe the worst case scenario, and treating it as if it were already reality. Now go wash your hands.

    It is very possible that there are already 10 million infected Americans (seroprevalence tests suggest just that, though they have yet to be replicated).

    Very possible? I’m less sure. The current data indicate that seroprevalence rates are much lower outside the major urban centers. You can’t extrapolate from one to the other.

    The chances there will be 10 million dead Americans already by July due to the covid are slim

    Is anyone arguing that everybody who gets infected will die?

    Dialing it down to 1 million, or that there will be 10 millions dead by the end of the year is credible

    And scary. It would be scary even if the final death toll is just a quarter of a million. Keep in mind that the fatalities are just the tip of the iceberg. Many more people will suffer permanent organ damage. I’d like to see some figures on that aspect of the problem

  71. @Intelligent Dasein
    Ron Unz, the Imelda Marcos of sock puppetry.

    Ron Unz, the Imelda Marcos of sock puppetry.

    Indeed. Gustavo Arellano in particular was a very obvious sock puppet of RUnzie Baby.

    Many other authors and commenters here are suspicious on that front too.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
How a Young Syndicate Lawyer from Chicago Earned a Fortune Looting the Property of the Japanese-Americans, then Lived...
Becker update V1.3.2