3083 replies to this topic

[gamesguru]

I'm an agnostic on chloroquine, but it was indeed strange that so many serious side effects were found when the drug has been used so widely for so long.

 

I wonder if the doctors could have been seeing cardiac/clotting problems and damage to organs and mistakenly attributing it to the chloroquine? Early on those risks were not anticipated, but we now know they are common in serious cases. Normally the risk of this should be minimized when doing a randomized trial, but I imagine misinterpretations can happen when the disease isn't yet well understood.

 

It was not used so widely.  It was discovered in the 1930s, but ignored for a decade because it was assumed too toxic for humans.  It got use in the 1940s.  Not at lot of really old medicines have stood the test of time, for example TCA antidepressants and first generation antipsychotics have fallen nearly completely out of use now.

 

But today (pre-corona) only a few hundred tons are produced yearly.  Generally it is used briefly, as a last resort.  Even the well-tolerated patients are monitored closely for eye damage and cardiac issues.  These issues were known beforehand.

 

The study quoted in post 1344 about cardiac damage is from 2018.. years before this craziness set in.

 

 

The trouble with cytokine modulators and auto-immune treatments generally is side effects, immuno-suppression or cardiotoxic or genotoxic effects.  It's not clear HCQ could even be a good inspiration for new medicines.  It could be that something like button mushrooms, turmeric and quercetin are much safer and almost as helpful.

Edited by gamesguru, 30 April 2020 - 02:50 PM.

[Dorian Grey]

Here's a tall glass of water on the chloroquine/COVID studies if anyone is still interested: 

 

https://docs.google....6N1aDjY/preview

 

Sequential CQ / HCQ Research Papers and Reports January to April 20, 2020 Executive Summary Interpretation of the Data In This Report

[Gal220]

I think with the level I am at I will probably substitute two weekly 5,000 iu with 2,000 iu to try and maintain or lower

a tiny bit.

 

The issue with vitamin D is that it is so hard to know exactly what amount to take to hit a certain level since

it can be different for different people.  

 

No doubt you are doing the best thing having tested yourself, thanks for the information.

[sciack]

It was not used so widely.  It was discovered in the 1930s, but ignored for a decade because it was assumed too toxic for humans.  It got use in the 1940s.  Not at lot of really old medicines have stood the test of time, for example TCA antidepressants and first generation antipsychotics have fallen nearly completely out of use now.

 

But today (pre-corona) only a few hundred tons are produced yearly.  Generally it is used briefly, as a last resort.  Even the well-tolerated patients are monitored closely for eye damage and cardiac issues.  These issues were known beforehand.

 

The study quoted in post 1344 about cardiac damage is from 2018.. years before this craziness set in.

 

 

The trouble with cytokine modulators and auto-immune treatments generally is side effects, immuno-suppression or cardiotoxic or genotoxic effects.  It's not clear HCQ could even be a good inspiration for new medicines.  It could be that something like button mushrooms, turmeric and quercetin are much safer and almost as helpful.

it is used by rheumatoid arthritis patients every single day for years! also lupus patients. Side effects are well known and never been a concern for decades.

[lancebr]

Trump Has ‘Financial Interest’ in Hydroxychloroquine Manufacturer: NYT

THERE IT IS

Justin Baragona

President Donald Trump has a “small financial interest” in the maker of an anti-malarial drug that he has been touting as a “game changer” in treating coronavirus, according to The New York Times. Over the past two weeks, Trump and his Fox News allies have aggressively promoted hydroxychloroquine as a potential cure, despite top infectious-disease expert Dr. Anthony Fauci and others urging caution and noting that there was not enough evidence of the drug’s efficacy.

 

Another MSM talking point that they fail to give the full information about.

 

Politifact did a fact check on that claim and showed the following:

• Trump has a small stake through a mutual fund in Sanofi, a French company that makes hydroxychloroquine.

• The president’s holdings in Sanofi are valued up to $1,500, meaning he would not profit much from the company’s stock performance.

• Experts told us that Trump’s holdings do not violate federal conflict of interest laws.

 

 

Edited by lancebr, 30 April 2020 - 03:23 PM.

[lancebr]

it is used by rheumatoid arthritis patients every single day for years! also lupus patients. Side effects are well known and never been a concern for decades.

 

I notice a lot of people reporting on this drug like to intermingle the side effects of chloroquine with hydroxychloroquine. 

Chloroquine's side effects are much more worse than hydroxychloroquine.

 

There are many people who have been taking hydroxychloroquine for years without any issues but when people complain

about how bad it is they usually are talking about chloroquine.

 

 

[joelcairo]

It was not used so widely.  It was discovered in the 1930s, but ignored for a decade because it was assumed too toxic for humans.  It got use in the 1940s.  Not at lot of really old medicines have stood the test of time, for example TCA antidepressants and first generation antipsychotics have fallen nearly completely out of use now.

 

But today (pre-corona) only a few hundred tons are produced yearly.  Generally it is used briefly, as a last resort.  Even the well-tolerated patients are monitored closely for eye damage and cardiac issues.  These issues were known beforehand.

 

The study quoted in post 1344 about cardiac damage is from 2018.. years before this craziness set in.

 

 

The trouble with cytokine modulators and auto-immune treatments generally is side effects, immuno-suppression or cardiotoxic or genotoxic effects.  It's not clear HCQ could even be a good inspiration for new medicines.  It could be that something like button mushrooms, turmeric and quercetin are much safer and almost as helpful.

 

Of course it has been used widely. I'd be surprised if it (along with its analogues such as HCQ) hasn't been used by millions of people over the years. I've took it myself for several months when I was travelling in Africa a long time ago.

[Daniel Cooper]

It has been considered a last resort in treating a select handful of few diseases, and then only with constant patient monitoring.

 

It was especially silly to promote it then, at a time when fear was so high and reason so low.  In my opinion the president and his Fox News puppets shouldn't be promoting anything.  They're not an authority on medical consensus.  It was revealed Trump had financial connections to HCQ as well, which just makes the whole situation 300% more frightening and inappropriate.

 

There are ways to accelerate controlled studies, but the way to do that is not by having the spokesperson of the country encourage every hayseed yobbo run down to the fish supply store and start snorting non-medical grade powder.  Do you not see how a line has been crossed in going from accelerating medical research, to this?

 

Are you kidding me?  Hydroxychloroquine has been given prophylactically to people traveling into areas with Malaria that might get sick for decades.  People are taking this drug chronically for lupus and rheumatoid arthritis.  This drug isn't a last resort for a number of diseases.  It isn't particularly dangerous when taken as prescribed by a doctor.  Hell, I took this drug a few decades ago before traveling to a region in South America where malaria was endemic. The doctor wrote me a script, handed it to me, and said "Take this as written on the bottle a week before you leave", so I took it without having any disease. 

 

It can cause QT prolongation like any number of other drugs routinely prescribed. Like for instance most of the tricyclic antidepressants and probably at least a dozen other drugs.  If you are susceptible to QT prolongation you might have an issue with hydroxychloroquine just like you might with nortriptyline.  

 

The risk is low, the cost is low, and there is to this day some evidence that it might be useful.

 

You really are letting your hatred of a particular politician blind you to what was very arguably a reasonable course of action.  Trump is ineloquent. He speaks and tweets frequently without thinking.  But prodding the FDA to get off their ass and investigate a low cost readily available drug that had every bit as much evidence behind it when this all started as remdesivir was the right thing to do. I wish he was more well spoken about it, but the FDA is a highly sclerotic bureaucracy and honestly that sort of public prodding is possibly required.

 

Contrast this with remdesiver which got virtually all of the initial press.  It like HCQ had a single in vitro study showing that it might block SARS.  But, it has never been approved, has only been produced in small batches in a research laboratory (never in a production facility), and is going to cost a king's ransom if it works.  And if it does work, you're probably looking at 6 - 12 months to ramp it to volume production so you could use in widely.  

 

HCQ has many features to recommend it over remdsiver - If either of them end up working that is.

 

But stop it with this notion that a drug that has been prescribed for decades prophylactically is some seriously dangerous compound.  Do you image that remdesivir is going to be free from side effects? It hasn't even be trialed enough to know what it's warts are.  

 

 

 

 

[Dorian Grey]

Yes, remdesivir therapy is no lover's kiss.  

 

https://www.biospace...ooks-promising/

 

That being said, about 25% of patients receiving it have severe side effects, including multiple-organ dysfunction syndrome, septic shock, acute kidney injury and low blood pressure. Another 23% demonstrated evidence of liver damage on lab tests.

 

At a thousand bucks a dose, I better get a complimentary liver/kidney transplant before they send me home.

[gamesguru]

HCQ has many features to recommend it over remdsiver - If either of them end up working that is.

 

Why are we concerned with "recommending" a drug at all?

 

I thought we just wanted fair clinical trials.. which, ironically, we're getting.

 

I'm in no hurry to recommend something.  Especially after the Swiss study with COVID attacking blood vessels, I would be firmly cautious of a known cardiotoxic[1][2][3] agent.  Things have to be weighed on their pros and cons before they can be recommended.  Crisis is no excuse for haste and lack of science.

 

And to everyone who used HCQ without side effects—good for you, let's not forget about the still significant minority who didn't.

Edited by gamesguru, 30 April 2020 - 03:54 PM.

[Daniel Cooper]

 

Another MSM talking point that they fail to give the full information about.

 

Politifact did a fact check on that claim and showed the following:

• Trump has a small stake through a mutual fund in Sanofi, a French company that makes hydroxychloroquine.

• The president’s holdings in Sanofi are valued up to $1,500, meaning he would not profit much from the company’s stock performance.

• Experts told us that Trump’s holdings do not violate federal conflict of interest laws.

 

 

 

Oh good lord, the idea that anyone is going to get rich off hydroxychloroquine is silly.  That's the beauty of it (if it works).

 

From Wikipedia:

 

Hydroxychloroquine was approved for medical use in the United States in 1955.^[2] It is on the World Health Organization's List of Essential Medicines, the safest and most effective medicines needed in a health system.^[7] In 2017, it was the 128th most commonly prescribed medication in the United States, with more than five million prescriptions.^[8][9]

 

Approved in 1955.  Probably went off patent no later than the late 1960s.  Produced generically all over the world by numerous companies in numerous facilities. No one is going to make serious money off this drug.  Nothing like Gilead will make if remdesivir pans out.

 

Also note the state above "It is on the World Health Organization's List of Essential Medicines, the safest and most effective medicines needed in a health system." Has that someone suddenly changed since Trump mentioned it?

 

Personally, I hope hydroxychloroquine works.  I think it is shameful to root against something like this for political reasons.  I also hope remdesivir works for the same reason.  I hope they find ten other drugs that are useful for treating covid-19.  We need drug options to help the people seriously affected. And they need to be as affordable as possible because this will affect regions not as wealthy as the US and Europe. To get mired in politics when this is an issue of medical science is ludicrous. 

[Daniel Cooper]

Why are we concerned with "recommending" a drug at all?

 

I thought we just wanted fair clinical trials.. which, ironically, we're getting.

 

I'm in no hurry to recommend something.  Especially after the Swiss study with COVID attacking blood vessels, I would be firmly cautious of a known cardiotoxic[1][2][3] agent.  Things have to be weighed on their pros and cons before they can be recommended.  Crisis is no excuse for haste and lack of science.

 

And to everyone who used HCQ without side effects—good for you, let's not forget about the still significant minority who didn't.

 

Do you not understand the English language? I only ask because we have some that are not native English speakers and perhaps that use of the word "recommends" is subtle.

 

When we say that hydroxychloroquine has features to recommend it, we are not talking about a person or organization "recommending" it.

 

What recommends hydroxychloroquine is that we've been using it for 65 years, we have a long history of knowing how do use it and what side effects to look out for, and the fact that it is very cheap and widely produced.  None of those apply to remdesivir.  But, ultimately what matters is whether either of those drugs work.  A cheap ineffective drug is useless.  And if an expensive drug is all that works we'll find some way to pay for it.

[gamesguru]

Do you not understand the English language? I only ask because we have some that are not native English speakers and perhaps that use of the word "recommends" is subtle.

 

When we say that hydroxychloroquine has features to recommend it, we are not talking about a person or organization "recommending" it.

 

What recommends hydroxychloroquine is that we've been using it for 65 years, we have a long history of knowing how do use it and what side effects to look out for, and the fact that it is very cheap and widely produced.  None of those apply to remdesivir.  But, ultimately what matters is whether either of those drugs work.  A cheap ineffective drug is useless.  And if an expensive drug is all that works we'll find some way to pay for it.

 

I do.  I'm just alarmed by the line that others seem to not understand they are crossing.

 

They will literally recommend an unproven drug.  And on the previous page, other defended the country spokesperson's similar reckless endorsement.

 

 

Oh good lord, the idea that anyone is going to get rich off hydroxychloroquine is silly.  That's the beauty of it (if it works).

 

I don't hope that it doesn't work.  I just don't go vigorously defending things that I'm unsure work.

 

And if you think they won't make money of this, or any other thing, just look at what his cretinous needler son-in-law Kushner has done with seizing medical supplies and rerouting them to swing states.

[Gal220]

I wonder if there has ever in the history of medicine been such a fanatical resistance to the off-label prescribing of a half century old cheap generic, sold over the counter in many countries for many years.  If the fullness of time eventually shows HCQ really was the "Best Medicine" for COVID we'll have in 2020, it will go down as the biggest blunder ever known in the history of medicine.

 

I think it could possibly be worse  as Vitamin D, zinc, and  quercetin may have been all we needed.  Maybe even just a multivitamin would be largely preventative.

Edited by Gal220, 30 April 2020 - 04:17 PM.

[resveratrol_guy]

Where did you hear that an overdose can cause total paralysis.  I have not been able to find any information

concerning that in reference to humans.  There are some dogs of certain breeds that it can cause seizures due

to them having a certain genetic issue with the drug. 

 

If you find the right brand of veterinary Ivermectin some of them have FDA approved marked on the packaging.

It is the exact same ingredient that is used in the human pills just in a gel base for easier use in animals.

 

Also if you read the many reviews on Amazon and other forums there are years of posts from people that have used

the veterinarian type for human use, for worms or scabies, with no issues since it is the exact same drug used in

the formulation.

 

Ivermectin is starting to look like it may be useful for cases that might be more serious and don't respond to Hydroxychlororquine.

 

The "total paralysis" wording was on of those "may cause..." items. As in, no numbers. I would not take the stuff prophylactically, but in the context of COVID19 infection, it seems to be a promising gamble.
 

Edited by resveratrol_guy, 30 April 2020 - 04:26 PM.

[resveratrol_guy]

Looks like Masterjohn is changing his tune about vitamin D supplementation since a new study

is showing that higher levels of Vitamin D have milder cases and lower levels of vitamin D have

more severe cases.

 

https://papers.ssrn....ract_id=3571484

 

Vitamin D levels ng/mL :

 

"Among mild cases, it was, on average, 31.2; among ordinary cases, it was 27.4;

among severe cases, it was 21.2; among critical cases, it was 17.1."

 

 

He was way behind the times on his thinking of Vitamin D....pretty much everyone that was recommending

Vitamin D supplementation months ago already had the consensus that Vitamin D was good for reducing the

severity of the virus.

 

He is now recommending 900 iu a day of Vitamin D, but even after this study showing higher levels of Vitamin D

had better outcomes with the virus, than lower levels, he is still saying that he believes:

 

"vitamin D may raise ACE2, which may increase the risk of getting COVID-19. I remain concerned that high

vitamin D levels may, through this mechanism, make COVID-19 outcomes more severe."

 

https://chrismasterj...-study-released

 

 

So the average for mild cases was 31.2 ng/ml....in the past doctors have told me that the optimal range

for vitamin D is 50 to 70 ng/ml.  So if someone had their levels in that higher range of 50 to70 would they 

have an even better outcome with this virus?

 

According to a Danish(?) study of high statistical significance, all-cause mortality is minimal around 35 to 40. Below or above that blood level, the U starts to bend upwards.

 

I suspect the reason has to do with the calcification and eventual fracture of plaque deposits. If true, this could be mitigated to some extent by vitamin K2, allowing us to reach much higher levels with comparable safety. That would defend against infection, dementia, cancer, etc.

 

[Gal220]

I suspect the reason has to do with the calcification and eventual fracture of plaque deposits. If true, this could be mitigated to some extent by vitamin K2, allowing us to reach much higher levels with comparable safety. That would defend against infection, dementia, cancer, etc.

 

 

Life extension is totally with you, I do wish they would do a better job highlighting their "extensive research" - https://www.lifeexte...tension-members

 

I dont have much confidence in their Vitamin A conclusions though.  

 

 

Interesting point on influenza

"In a controlled trial of African women, a low dose (800 IU a day) of vitamin D resulted in a three-fold reduction in cold and flu symptoms compared to those given placebo.39,40"

 

They also contradict Weil and Kessler on limiting Vitamin D

"As people age, they often over-express these same destructive pro-inflammatory cytokines. The result is chronic low-level inflammation that damages aging arteries, joints, and neurons.43-47 By down-regulating excess pro-inflammatory cytokine production, vitamin D could save the lives of those stricken with acute influenza, or the dozens of inflammatory diseases that afflict millions of aging Americans each year"

 

Edit Vitamin D cofactors - the short answer - https://vitamindwiki...s in a nutshell .   The long answer -  https://thehealthbea...-athletes-take/

Edited by Gal220, 30 April 2020 - 05:36 PM.

[Corri]

He then got a call from an ICU doctor working in the university hospital in Utrecht (one of the best in the Netherlands) and he told the GP that the only two things you need to successfully treat Covid-19 patients are a high dose of zinc PLUS quercetin. According to this ICU doctor (and the brilliant minds on this forum! thank you all so much!) quercetin has the exact same properties as HCQ, an extreme potent ionophore ready to penetrate infected cells to transport zinc into them and to 'kill' covid-19, but with zero side effects. Zinc is the most crucial element here, because they found out (like Dorian and I have been theorizing for many months now :D) that the elderly and people with underlying health conditions have very low levels of zinc and when they get infected these levels drop even more ---> immune system into overdrive trying to compensate but not having the right tools --> overreaction --> cytokine storm = organ failure = death.

 

Zinc orotate is the safest way of getting zinc into the cell. Zinc orotate is more neutrally charged than other forms, which allows the zinc to easily pass through the cell membrane. This means you can get part of the benefit of a zinc ionophore like hydroxychloroquine or quercetin, without the side effects. For more power you can combine it with an ionophore, for example Dutch GP Rob Elens successfully treated patients with hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin and zinc orotate.

The discovery of the clinical effects of orotates by Dr. Hans Nieper was little known because he spent most of his time treating patients instead of publishing. He studied the beneficial effects of the orotates of many metals including calcium, lithium, magnesium, potassium, and zinc. Orotate salts are electrically neutral, relatively stable against dissociation, and are taken up directly into the cell by the uracil transporter.

Because zinc orotate has no side effects in low doses, like 10 mg/day of zinc from zinc orotate, it can be used for prevention. If someone gets the coronavirus anyways, then the dose can be boosted to the 50 mg/day of zinc from 220 mg/day of zinc sulphate that Dr. Vladimir Zelenko used. The only difference is that because of the higher molecular weight of zinc orotate, there is one part of zinc in 6 parts of zinc orotate. So you need 300 mg/day of zinc orotate to get 50 mg/day of zinc.

Overall zinc orotate improves the zinc part of any coronavirus treatment or prevention plan.

[joelcairo]

Looks like Masterjohn is changing his tune about vitamin D supplementation since a new study

is showing that higher levels of Vitamin D have milder cases and lower levels of vitamin D have

more severe cases.

 

https://papers.ssrn....ract_id=3571484

 

Vitamin D levels ng/mL :

 

"Among mild cases, it was, on average, 31.2; among ordinary cases, it was 27.4;

among severe cases, it was 21.2; among critical cases, it was 17.1."

 

 

This is interesting but I wonder if the vitamin D level could have dropped as a result of the patients having more severe illness. I followed the link but didn't see where this had been addressed or accounted for. Does this tend to happen in illness, or is the body good at maintaining a steady balance based on stored vitamin D?

[lancebr]

Life extension is totally with you, I do wish they would do a better job highlighting their "extensive research" - https://www.lifeexte...tension-members

 

 

I notice that Life Extensions says that the new minimum target level of Vitamin D for optimal disease prevention is 50 ng/mL

 

To get to that level they are recommending 5,000 iu a day of Vitamin D.

 

If the studies on Vitamin D and covid are showing that patients with an average of 31 ng/ml have the best outcomes, then

I wonder if you have your levels around or above the 50 ng/ml will you do even better since you will have a higher level of D

 

Its starting to looks like vitamin D is probably one of the most important supplements to fight this Covid.

 

This is a good video, from a doctor who specializes in immunity, on how widespread Vitamin D deficiency is and how it plays

a role in Covid.  They recommend optimal levels to be between 40 to 60 ng/ml

 

 

 

Edited by lancebr, 30 April 2020 - 06:54 PM.

[lancebr]

So just out of curiosity.

 

I noticed on the news today they are really talking about how Oxford might have a vaccine by this fall

and have already contracted with a drug-maker to start production because they are so confident about it

 

They did say that governments would have to decide who would get it on an emergency basis (ie nursing homes,

elderly, underlying conditions) since there will be limited numbers of the vaccine available in the fall.

 

So if you were one to be able to get it would you take it....not really knowing if there were long term health issues

from it since it was rushed to testing and production so fast?

Edited by lancebr, 30 April 2020 - 07:16 PM.

[gamesguru]

So if you were one to be able to get it would you take it....not really knowing if there were long term health issues

from it since it was rushed to testing and production so fast?

 

Probably would want to save it for the ones who need it more.

 

But it also depends on what information comes to light on the virus itself and the risks of COVID.  I probably would wait.

 

So far the first woman to receive a vaccine in early March has had to deal with a sore arm at the injection site.  A bit concerning indeed, given the persistent nature.

 

Checking in with the Seattle woman who took the first dose of an experimental coronavirus vaccine  
 

Apr 20, 2020 at 3:21 pm

 

It's been one month since the first person took the first dose of an experimental coronavirus vaccine in Seattle.

 

So far, Jennifer Haller says she feels “great.”

 

“Yeah, I don't know if I'm feeling anxiety, but I mean, it's clear — life is not going to get close to normal until we find a vaccine,” Haller told KUOW’s Angela King.

 

“And that's really hit home for me. Certainly the importance of the steps that I've taken to participate in this study and the steps that many, many others are taking to get us closer to that vaccine.

 

“It is interesting that most of our hope right now seems to be on vaccine, which is who knows how far out -- 18 months, two years, 12 months?” Haller continued. “I don't know.”

 

Haller is one of 45 people participating in the trial through the Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute. She began getting a series of shots in late March. Now that she is done with the injections, she'll spend the next year undergoing blood draws to see how her body is responding to the vaccine.

 

The vaccine doesn't contain any live or dead virus cells, so she cannot get the virus through the shots. NPR previously reported that the vaccine Haller is testing was initially developed by the National Institutes of Health, along with the Massachusetts-based biotech firm Moderna, Inc.

 

She was warned about a range of side effects from the injections, but each time was the same.

 

“My arm was sore the next day. But besides that, everything else has been fantastic,” Haller said.

 

“There's a ton of risks in the in the 45-page release that I signed,” she continued. “But, you know, if I'm gonna worry about a particular one of those risks, I'm probably just not the right person for the study and I just wanted to get this going and get something kicked off so that we can move forward.”

 

In the meantime, Haller notes that aside from a sore arm, things haven’t changed much for her middle-class family in Ballard. She feels lucky for that. She's been able to spend plenty of time with her two teenagers.

 

“I feel like we're gonna look back on this time and we're gonna think, ‘You know, think about how wonderful it was how we got to spend time together and we got to slow down and we got to kind of rethink our priorities and you know, all these great life things that we got to do.'

 

“I don't know what to do with that,” she said. “That's embarrassing. For me, that's difficult because that's not the experience of many Americans right now."

 

Haller pointed to the high number of people who were living paycheck-to-paycheck even before the Covid-19 crisis, and expressed concern for undocumented people who won't be eligible for federal assistance.

 

"This is a real dichotomy of class or a privilege right now," she said. "So I just, in doing this, I really want to think about those that are actually having a hard time right now and their lives are severely impacted.

[bladedmind]

I'm just alarmed by the line that others seem to not understand they are crossing.

 

They will literally recommend an unproven drug.  

 

 

By this standard, about 90% of longecity is "dangerous and irresponsible." 

 

There are no remedies for coronavirus that are supported by multiple, convergent RCTs and advancing theory.  Not a single thing in this thread.  All the remedies discussed here also have risks:  vitamin D, zinc, etc.  Some of us  are willing to weigh risks and benefits on less than ideal evidence because we are more likely to face the threat of serious damage or death sometime over the next five years before remedies are "proven" FDA effective and safe.  

 

Proof is for logical deduction.  Otherwise, a hypothesis is less supported by the evidence or more supported, in comparison to rival hypotheses.   

 

Most serious life and public policy decisions are made on the basis of less than purportedly gold-standard evidence.  Apologies, I've said it before:  If at all curious, consult philosopher of science Cartwright, Evidence-Based Policy.   It's a sophisticated yet friendly read.  It can be applied to deflate the kind of scientistic extremism that would deny "unproven" care to those at high hazard of serious damage or death in a crisis occasioned by eruption of a novel pathogen. 

Edited by bladedmind, 30 April 2020 - 08:42 PM.

[gamesguru]

By this standard, about 90% of longecity is "dangerous and irresponsible."

 

Yes.

 

I don't sign up for these group buys of chemicals you can't even pronounce, but I sure as hell enjoy the show.  And I like sipping my Japanese tea, even if it's harder to order with the Post being shut down for now

[lancebr]

This is a good video, from a doctor who specializes in immunity, on how widespread Vitamin D deficiency is and how it plays

a role in Covid.  They recommend optimal levels to be between 40 to 60 ng/ml

 

 

Dang Youtube is really censoring any videos that talk about alternative treatments or supplements for Covid.

 

That video was just about how Vitamin D helps the immune system and can possibly fight covid and they already

had it removed.

 

I saw a story in the news yesterday about them censoring videos from doctors who talked about vitamin C

and how it helps against covid.

Edited by lancebr, 30 April 2020 - 10:53 PM.

[smithx]

Looks like carrageenan lozenges (or swallowing a bit of it) could be useful in a throat infection of SARS-CoV-2:

 

https://media.marino...-et-al-2017.pdf

 

 

Nasal spray was found in clinical trials to reduce the duration of the common cold (often caused by coronaviruses):

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm...les/PMC4236476/

 

For example, this product:

 

https://www.betadine.ca/nasal-spray/

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by smithx, 30 April 2020 - 11:06 PM.

[bladedmind]

Dang Youtube is really censoring any videos that talk about alternative treatments or supplements for Covid.

 

That video was just about how Vitamin D helps the immune system and can possibly fight covid and they already

had it removed.

 

I saw a story in the news yesterday about them censoring videos from doctors who talked about vitamin C

and how it helps against covid.

 

Epistemic authoritarianism.  According to the Youtube monopoly, the WHO decides what is true, and no one is permitted to publicly contest a truth decided by WHO.

 

John Stuart Mill:

There is the greatest difference between presuming an opinion to be true because, with every opportunity for contesting it, it has not been refuted, and assuming its truth for the purpose of not permitting its refutation.   Complete liberty of contradicting and disproving our opinion, is the very condition which justifies us in assuming its truth for purposes of action; and on no other terms can a being with human faculties have any rational assurance of being right....

 

Complete liberty is the very test of truth....

 

The beliefs which we have the most warrant for, have no safeguard to rest on, but a standing invitation to the whole world to prove them unfounded.  This is the amount of certainty attainable by a fallible being, and this is the sole way of attaining it.

[DanCG]

By this standard, about 90% of longecity is "dangerous and irresponsible." 

 

There are no remedies for coronavirus that are supported by multiple, convergent RCTs and advancing theory.  Not a single thing in this thread.  All the remedies discussed here also have risks:  vitamin D, zinc, etc.  Some of us  are willing to weigh risks and benefits on less than ideal evidence because we are more likely to face the threat of serious damage or death sometime over the next five years before remedies are "proven" FDA effective and safe.  

 

Proof is for logical deduction.  Otherwise, a hypothesis is less supported by the evidence or more supported, in comparison to rival hypotheses.   

 

Most serious life and public policy decisions are made on the basis of less than purportedly gold-standard evidence.  Apologies, I've said it before:  If at all curious, consult philosopher of science Cartwright, Evidence-Based Policy.   It's a sophisticated yet friendly read.  It can be applied to deflate the kind of scientistic extremism that would deny "unproven" care to those at high hazard of serious damage or death in a crisis occasioned by eruption of a novel pathogen. 

I totally agree. To illustrate the point, consider the standard practice of putting Covid patients on a ventilator. This was considered the proper thing to do for advanced ARDS. But, with Covid-19 it is an unproven treatment. Everything is. It has turned out that doctors have begun to realize that the ventilator may be doing more harm than good if applied too soon. Doctors observed a better result by supplying oxygen and having the patient lie in prone position. This improved treatment was not arrived at by the result of a randomized controlled study. It was the result of doctors on the front lines doing what they thought was best and communicating with each other. Nobody has said a word about any lack of data.

Right now, doctors around the world are reporting that hydroxychloroquine is helping patients recover if administered early. I want my leaders to listen to them. I think their testimony is more valuable than a clinical trial that was clearly set up to prove that HCQ does not do something that nobody ever said it could do in the first place—rescue a nearly dead patient.

[Gal220]

I saw a story in the news yesterday about them censoring videos from doctors who talked about vitamin C

and how it helps against covid.

 

The havent got MasterJohns Vitamin D update censored yet.  About 4:15 to 5:10 he talks about whether the infection lowered D levels and claims that is a possibility.

 

At the end he recommends around 1000IU if you cant test(to reach 30ng/ml) with a maximum of 1700IU (thus the confusion from earlier posting).   Not sure if we could say anyone is more informed about it than him as far as taking advice.

 

https://www.youtube....h?v=738yuE5nDfg

[FSL]

"We found and tested 47 old drugs that might treat the coronavirus: Results show promising leads and a whole new way to fight COVID-19"

 

https://theconversat...covid-19-136789

https://www.nature.c...1586-020-2286-9