Re: SARS-CoV2 treatment
Posted: Mon Apr 06, 2020 11:41 pm
That was good, but (unless I missed it) he didn't list the most glaring fault in the study of this stuff IMO: Patients in the control arm were counted as dropouts if they died. Death seems to be a pretty relevant thing to measure, not remove from your results.
Cheers for that, very informative.
He covers that in another video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smI60BngTnsMatatouille wrote: ↑Tue Apr 07, 2020 7:47 amThat was good, but (unless I missed it) he didn't list the most glaring fault in the study of this stuff IMO: Patients in the control arm were counted as dropouts if they died. Death seems to be a pretty relevant thing to measure, not remove from your results.
Thanks for that - I hadn't seen it because it was on a different channel.basementer wrote: ↑Sat Apr 11, 2020 3:01 amHe covers that in another video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smI60BngTnsMatatouille wrote: ↑Tue Apr 07, 2020 7:47 amThat was good, but (unless I missed it) he didn't list the most glaring fault in the study of this stuff IMO: Patients in the control arm were counted as dropouts if they died. Death seems to be a pretty relevant thing to measure, not remove from your results.
I hadn't heard of it. They really seem to think they have a hammer and that everything is a nail.sTeamTraen wrote: ↑Sun Apr 12, 2020 12:27 amSomeone is trying to convince me of the merits of ozone as a treatment. "Apparently" it worked well in Italy. I found this paper. Thoughts? (Googling for "ozone therapy" brings up a large amount of woo.)
Dunno about thalidomide (isn't that for treating symptoms rather than preventing infection?) but from my reading of the Bloomberg piece BCG has a general effect which would apply to unrelated infections and there doesn't need to be any similarity in biochemistry for this.Boustrophedon wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2020 5:01 pmIt would be interesting if both BCG and Thalidomide are effective against leprosy: One wonders what biochemistry is shared by SARS-CoV-2 and Mycobacterium leprae?
“It can boost the immune system so that it defends better against a whole range of different infections, a whole range of different viruses and bacteria in a lot more generalized way,”
I found this WHO report: https://www.who.int/immunization/sage/m ... online.pdf which distinguishes between the specific effect of BCG in protecting against leprosy and the non-specific effects which protect against any old infection.probably by enhancing the body’s innate immune system -- specifically white blood cells that target non-specific pathogens before an antibody response has kicked in
BCG vaccination has been reported to have non-specific (‘heterologous’) effects (NSE), which, like the
specific effects of BCG, may differ between genotypes and manufacturers.51,83,84,85 The implications of these
effects, and the settings and circumstances in which they are clinically important need to be more clearly
defined.86,87,88,89,90 The NSE of BCG should not be confused with the specific and cross-protective effects of
BCG vaccination against M. leprae, M. ulcerans and other non-tuberculous mycobacteria.
NSE of BCG vaccination:
A recent systematic review by Higgins et al166 concluded that BCG vaccination was associated with a
reduction in all-cause mortality of approximately 50%. Because TB is an infrequent cause of death in infants
and young children, this reduction is unlikely to be entirely due to fewer deaths from the disease. It is
postulated that, in high mortality settings, BCG’s immunomodulatory effects reduce all-cause mortality by
also preventing infections other than TB.93
If you can find it.tom p wrote: ↑Fri Apr 17, 2020 12:03 pmThis isn't really about a treatment (it's about chloroquine, which unless you're a French fraudster (and yes, what he did is tantamount to fraud, so dodgy was his data & the fact that he knew exactly what he was doing), an orange moron or a Polish friend of the orange moron, isn't a cure), but I'm sure it will brighten up everyone's day to learn that there is a chloquine-containing drug in Bangladesh called "Clit".
I expect it will stimulate the patient so they'll have it licked in no time.
Somebody in a reply linked to https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/sci/med/resea ... covery-rs/Ventilating patients with Covid-19 seems to drive the infection deeper into the lungs and doesn’t save many lives. We urgently need the results of the PRCTs of ventilation versus non-invasive oxygen therapy in patients with this poorly understood infection.
Is that still the case? There are some pretty big bioreactors out there now (15,000 L or more).FlammableFlower wrote: ↑Fri Apr 24, 2020 5:21 pmmAbs (monoclonal antibodies) are stupidly expensive and very difficult to develop. One of the hardest things is production on any kind of scale.
Not sure our levels of natural immunity would be that high. Measles is the most contagious of those three so we would have had higher levels of natural immunity against this, and notifications before 1968 were about 1-2% of the population. Ish. Dunno if every case would have been notified but I think that they were meant to be (and looking at the deaths they seem to be in the 1 per 2500-5000 notifications range for the 1950s and 60s). It might be a bit higher than 1-2% if not all cases were notified but I'd be surprised if it was even remotely close to the figures for vaccine coverage - especially once MMR was introduced.raven wrote: ↑Sat May 02, 2020 4:33 pmIt would be hilarious.
More seriously, it's safe, we have it on hand in quantity, we could start doing it tommorow, so there's some advantages.
But.
Is it likely that MMR would also protect from Covid-19? Would that be full protection or only partial?
We must already have pretty high levels of immunity to measles, mumps and rubella in the population. Certainly many of us oldies actually had them as children, so if immunity was protective against Covid-19 we'd be seeing it in those age groups too I'd have thought, not just the under 25s who've had MMR.
Although I suppose it depends on whether 'natural' immunity is as good as immunity after a vaccine. I thought it was. The immunity to mumps after MMR might possibly fade over time, or at least some of the cases at universities recently have been students who've had the vaccine. But I've never heard of anyone getting mumps after they've had it as a child.
Looks to me like they're suggesting people who've had MMR might be less ill with Covid-19 rather than being fully protected.
we hypothesize that MMR could protect against poor outcome in COVID-19 infection. As an initial test of this hypothesis, we identified that 1) age groups that most likely lack of MMR vaccine-induced immunity had the poorest outcome in COVID-19, and 2) COVID-19 disease burden correlates with rubella antibody titres, potentially induced by SARS-CoV2 homologous sequences
Those most likely to have not had the MMR are older and thus more likely to have additional health problems and therefore more likely to have a poorer covid19 outcome.jdc wrote: ↑Sat May 02, 2020 7:31 pmLooks to me like they're suggesting people who've had MMR might be less ill with Covid-19 rather than being fully protected.
we hypothesize that MMR could protect against poor outcome in COVID-19 infection. As an initial test of this hypothesis, we identified that 1) age groups that most likely lack of MMR vaccine-induced immunity had the poorest outcome in COVID-19, and 2) COVID-19 disease burden correlates with rubella antibody titres, potentially induced by SARS-CoV2 homologous sequences
Yes. They appear to be conjecturing vaccination status from age, when they really ought to be disentangling the two.JQH wrote: ↑Sat May 02, 2020 9:08 pmThose most likely to have not had the MMR are older and thus more likely to have additional health problems and therefore more likely to have a poorer covid19 outcome.jdc wrote: ↑Sat May 02, 2020 7:31 pmLooks to me like they're suggesting people who've had MMR might be less ill with Covid-19 rather than being fully protected.
we hypothesize that MMR could protect against poor outcome in COVID-19 infection. As an initial test of this hypothesis, we identified that 1) age groups that most likely lack of MMR vaccine-induced immunity had the poorest outcome in COVID-19, and 2) COVID-19 disease burden correlates with rubella antibody titres, potentially induced by SARS-CoV2 homologous sequences