PhilGeis

Good grief - as ill informed on science and policy as many of you are - you sure are experts re. your bias.

Another facebook-style childish comment. Works for the ignorant. Perhaps you might offer a scenario by which anyone else profits from chlorquine. Suggest you review ANDA submissions for this generic drug.

Suggesting that Pres Trump profits from these the pharmaceutical is facebookian hateful bias. Perhaps you should invest a tiny amount of time to consider the facts. Chlroquine has been off patent for decades and its two primary large company suppliers - Teva and Bayer -_ are both publically-held companies. Both have donated millions of doses. Typical hateful bias. Suggest you folks stick to the ill-informed technical and policy discussions.

Suggest you spare us your hateful bias.

tap water always includes pseudomonads - burden being a function of residual chlorine.

Not that simple. In US, FDA policy is controlling https://www.fda.gov/media/136118/download among other challenges, pasteurization can NOT replace hydrogen peroxide. H2O2 is intended to address contamination by heat-resistant, spore-forming bacteria. Ethanol and glycerine have to be of quality and please note WHO and FDA specify water quality - not a trivial consideration for water or for manufacturing system hygiene - https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/infection-control-and-hospital-epidemiology/article/outbreak-of-burkholderia-cepacia-bacteremia-traced-to-contaminated-hospital-water-used-for-dilution-of-an-alcohol-skin-antiseptic/15AAB.3A9306E02D9DE9B2434EDDEA5CD

How do you see the ball being dropped? Please recall, viral outbreaks are frequent and response has often exceeded the realized risk. The classic was swine flu of Ford presidency where mass immunization was attempted after one death. Even now - WHO was hesitant to call it a pandemic due to criticism for previous exaggerated announcements. Hopefully ignoring the loud background of political gamesmanship and with the observation of questionable hindsight among folks here who are not expert in relevant epidemiology - what was dropped? One clearly was CDC's failed test. how else should folks - at that time and with that experience - have responded.

China wet market are not only an important source of urban food, they also provides a source of fresh food. Tho' the communist regime has extensive power (recall the temporary ban on Beijing automobile travel during Olympics) permanently shutting down may lead to social unrest in cities. The world has made many demands on China - why would another have any substance?

CharonY is exactly right. If you applied the same level of detection used for copper - to cardboard you'd see cardboard only moderately different. Again swansont - read the paper.

Please think critically. Read the paper - not just the comments. Cardboard was tested and wasn't much worse than copper.

Here's a link to Enthalpy's article as published. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.09.20033217v1.full.pdf?__cf_chl_jschl_tk__=a86b2dd74b9552d1d4f20a7864035bd659d7cab3-1584459780-0-AQvqZdHHCaPow7_aaVyOciisxEsFxWD7dt5LxZz9yFnctl19BJBIuXBcPM5A9ozQtN76r8AbM2OxyT-6jdSNOUKeza-1Xmh5mxDa16U1p2Tpzu-blP6XlUI4lOv1zjDbQeV_687uWYZ3Ai5azCdkigYIOW58LDlm9eJebevJCExQJJ5dhc0SW7O6V1OxW-1oxoI5hVuyCoI7kx_0tzshxPwkyPPzurSHOPt83t9ApuIKJyfOxyRV8rG12b9eQPd1EoUzpOT2RuxRMuzC3soObDxDMd2FhWrKmDbRBQutfEOetdr8-LahRy3d2rkVg9vHpNtm6BdmBcD5wXLShkl7Ltg

Yes CharonY - was referring to this paper it's authors fulfilled their expectation based on prev data such as you mentioned.

Please read the protocol and results as well as the conclusions. Published or not, it has some flaws. As can be seen with the top graphs, inconsistent challenge inoculum titers and more importantly LOD's biased (by about a log) in favor of copper treatment. If cardboard had the same LOD, it would appear nearly as effective as copper.

Thanks Phi A significant but trivial change in platelet count (treatment v control) was observed but was not shown to be clinically relevant. As authors noted - There is still no specific treatment for dengue. This publication does not appear to support your excitement for papaya juice. What in this study did you see as compelling? Methods are so poorly described that it would be impossible to precisely reproduce this study without contacting authors for more information. We don;t know papaya juice dosing parameters or how platelet were counted. 1) Dosing and relevant testing were not made clear. " Patients in the intervention group received fresh juice from 50 grams of C. papaya leaves, once daily, 15 minutes after breakfast for 3 consecutive days." I guess we can assume intervention group subjects drank the juice but we do not know when 48 hours of blood testing was initiated relative to consumption. 2) The critical parameter evaluated was platelet count and NO method was identified for this analysis. Only "The haematological and biochemical tests were conducted by the Pathology Department at Hospital Tengku Ampuan Rahimah, Klang and the validated results were later traced and recorded." MORE Importantly - Results are not compelling 1) Authors noted "Study on the treatment effect of CPLJ on platelet count regardless of time did not show any significant difference in mean platelet count between intervention and control group." However, if they dissect time point they did find what in effect was a trivial difference. " However, analysis of the effect of CPLJ over the study period (time and treatment effect) showed that there was a significant interaction between treatment groups and time." 2) . Normal platelet counts are 150,00-450,000 per microliter. This report refers to platelet counts but offers no number per any volume. Fig. 1 reports platelet counts as a simple number (no volume identified) difference of treatment v. control. There was trivial difference between 1 hour and 40/48 hour time points although authors managed to find a significance in comparison of 0 and 40/48 hour v control. Look at Fig 1 - 1 hour is really not that much different than 40 and 48 whatever its statistical difference.

Think the evidence is a bit weak to support " Consumption of papain leaf extract can probably help in fighting Covid-19 infection..." Ahmad (2011) rported in a pretty obscure journal treatment of a single patient observed minor CBC changes and "patient feelings" and Kumar et al (2015) reported statistically significant but minor CBC changes and observed treated patients (there was no apparent control group) "started to recover". Pandey et al. (2016) offered a literature search for antiinflammatory and immunomodulation citation with ""papaya" and concluded "Although in vitro and in vivo studies have shown that papaya extracts and papaya-associated phytochemicals possess anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory properties, clinical studies are lacking." Did not see that they addressed dengue as implied above. Norhamad et al. 2019 saw change in cytokine level -with papaya leaf extract fed infected mice, did not see a reported therapeutic benefit. observed in the paper Papaya extracts may have anti-inflammatory and immunomodulation efficacy - that does not translate to cure of viral disease - esp. coronavirus for which there re no data.

Are you suggesting human therapy with bovine antibody?

I think I understand but don;t think I can help.. From 2nd link, you should see two layers - an upper chloroform layer and an aqueous lower layer - assume precipitated material in the middle. With lysis/chloroform addition, you certainly should have seen both layers. Suppose it's possible that excessive mixing might have effected an emulsion but hard to see that as stable. Suggest you call the Qiagen folks for help.

Radiation? Do you mean UV treatment? Can be used but bacteria will grow in distribution subsequent to treatment. Chlorine treatment is effective and the low levels of residual chlorine inhibit subsequent growth.

Can you provide a link to the "kit"? This sounds like you've just spun down a tube of blood. Plasma, serum? Was an anticoagulant used?

Vaccine would derive from the infectious agent - not the now immune individual. Another "host" is not going to replicate foreign antibodies.

Quinine/chloroquine efficacy vs viral replication - including coronavirus , is not new. Authors of recent report on Chinese epidemic coronavirus ignored/missed a review that wasn't very encouraging. Quinine/chloroquine efficacy vs. viral (Zika, herpes simplex, dengue, influenza) replication is apparently well known - e.g. . https://escholarship.org/uc/item/8ws167fr and https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30055216 and https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5192383/. These reports date as far back as the 1970's - https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF01250299. Most report in vitro efficacy but and efficacy was shown vs CORONAVIRUS in vivo in live animal model > 10 years ago - https://aac.asm.org/content/53/8/3416.short. Typically, news media report this as NEW and EXCITING. Zhang et al in their recent report of efficacy vs the Chinese epidemic coronavirus offer "Chloroquine, a widely-used anti-malarial and autoimmune disease drug, has recently been reported as a potential broadspectrum antiviral drug.8,9 Chloroquine is known to block virus infection by increasing endosomal pH required for virus/ cell fusion, as well as interfering with the glycosylation of cellular receptors of SARS-CoV.10 " Ref # 9 reported in efficacy in vivo animal model vs. influenza virus in 2013. recent review of limited clinical testing did not encourage. Microorganisms 2020, 8(1), 85; https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms8010085 Review The Use of Antimalarial Drugs against Viral Infection Nevertheless, some drugs have already been used in several clinical trials, as summarized in Table 1. Most of them regard the use of antimalarial drugs against HIV infection, but some of them failed, and for others, the final results are not available. Although these outcomes can seem discouraging, at least four clinical trials deserve attention: The one on the use of AS against HCMV, with particular regard to the drug-resistant strains, the one targeting CHIKV with CQ, and the other two very innovative and ongoing trials on the use of AS against HPV for the treatment of anal and cervical intraepithelial high-grade neoplasia. Based on these observations, we can state that the use of antimalarial drugs might be useful, especially in cases of antiviral resistance and in light of the emergence of many viruses against which effective drugs are not available.

I recall temperature screening upon entry at airports started with SARS and is still in place in China and some SE Asia countries. Short of Cobalt 60 insertion for gamma irradiation, the elevator is not going to be "sterilized" hourly or at all.

Please calm down Sensei. One can be aware of the statistics without being anxious and being aware serves no purpose. What are you doing about it other than worrying?

Did not see sleep deprivation cited as major factor in the linked Guardian article and in any case suggest caution in putting too much faith in Guardian. But you are correct - sleep deprivation is certainly a factor affecting immune function - e.g. https://academic.oup.com/sleep/article/38/9/1353/2417971 "Locked in with" affected family members would expose one to the virus - not sure what this has to do with sleep deprivation. If caring for family members disruptssleep - then we'd assume that would increase risk.

Agree - draconian projections (from AB resistance to climate change) that folks don't eventually observe in their daily lives drives to skepticism. I'm with dimreepr - what's for dinner?