I think it is possible.

Ya.. it can be one of the option.

The lungs are very sensitive to ionizing Radiation

I think the radiotherapy-induced lung fibrosis could aggravate the lung interstitial situation, already heavily compromised in these patients

Radiotherapy targeted to areas of lung involved by COVID-19 may inactivate the virus, with coronaviruses requiring 1Mrads for this to occur. However, the acute radiation-associated toxicities may be severe in such patients. This is especially true for COVID-19 patients with several pre-existing co-morbidities. These may include radiation pneumonitis, pericarditis and oesophagitis

In addition although most late toxicities will develop in the period following the COVID-19 infection, these toxicities, such as pulmonary fibrosis and pleural effusions, will further reduce lung function following recovery, as previously indicated by @Lucio Mango.

Reports of up to a 30% loss in lung volume following COVID-19 recovery have already arisen, thereby highlighting the importance of preserving lung function.

Thanks for all who shared. My question to Lucio & Robert. Is there advanced radiotherapy technology to give this high dose 1 Mrads within seconds to destroy the virus without affecting the lungs during radiation & later on after recovery.

Although modern radiotherapy techniques allow for more precise irradiation, such as Stereotactic body radiotherapy, the dose required for viral inactivation is still significant. To my knowledge, viral inactivation using radiation is only performed successfully in vitro, where no dose constraints are required. This is done for highly virulent viruses to be made safer to handle and test.

Virus inactivation in vitro by radiation is a known technique, the required dose being of the order of the Mrad, i.e. 10 kGy.

Such a dose is high enough to destroy the lung and kill the patient.

The principle of radiotherapy is to concentrate the dose on the tissues that must be destroyed, while giving a lower dose to the surrounding healthy tissues, which are only partially destroyed and still able to recover.

I do not see any way to concentrate irradiation specifically on the virus.

Thanks Robert for your re-sharing. Thanks Francois for your valuable sharing.

ln addition to what colleagues have said about dose collimation, I do not think this can be useful as the lung disease of these patients involves large areas of lung. In this regard, I invite you to see the attached PET images that can be acquired online

Thank you Lucio. I think the updated discovery of COVID 19 disease pathogenesis will alter the trend of treatment.

منقول...Read this from doctors in China, it all makes sense and this is how we should be treating COVID-19

[ Trials to understand novel Corona Virus ]

In COVID- 19

-Why there is high ferritin level ?

-Why there is very high DDimer levels disproportionate with the severity of infection?

-Why ARDS in those are nearly

Not responding to high PEEP and Fio2 levels?

-Why all CT chest patterns are exclusively Ground glassing and associated with rapid and marked hypoxemia disproportionates with the geographical CT findings size ?

- Why Early Chinese protocol for Covid includes high dosing of systemic steroids which is questioned and rejected by WHO ?

- Why body immune response aganist Covid is not like other respiratory viruses by lymphocytosis ( Cytotoxic T cells and Natural killer cells) , insteadly body prefers to reacts against covid by phagocytosis ( monocytosis ) ?

- Why Covid Attacking mature red blood cell while it is one of body cells that dose not contain nucleus and DNA ?

-Why Critically ill Patients are responding well to anticoagulation , Hydroxycholoquine and novel antiviral Favipiravir ?

The following molecular pathogenesis is the only one for the time being that can answer all these questions .

COVID -19 may not cause pneumonia either typical or atypical or classical ARDs . It seems like we are dealing with a presumed wrong disease.

The Key pathogenic molecular step of SARS-Cov2 is to attack the 1-Beta Chain of Hemoglobin and hunting the porphyrins dissociating the iron form it and releasing iron into the circulation.

Thus Hb looses its capacity to bind with oxygen , so oxygen is not supplied to major organs. That is why we see resistant hypoxia coupled with very rapid multi-organ failures.

Moreover The free iron released into the circulation is so toxic as it causes a powerful oxidative damage to the lungs .

Free iron toxicity causes inflammation of alveolar macrophages- leads to CT scan characteristic changes.

The body try to compensate this by elevating the rate of Hb synthesis which explains why Hb is high in those patients.

Other compensatory mechanisms to deal with such iron load is increasing ferritin production ( iron store ) which explains the very high ferritin levels observed in those patients.

Therefore the cause of monocytosis is the body needs to excess macrophages to engulf the excess iron load .

And the cause of Lymphopenia is the WBCs differentiation favored twards monocytes line rather than lymphocytes line.

This makes ferritin a bad prognostic marker (too much iron means too much Hb lost its O2 carrying capacity) .

Also this iron load and increased Hb production lead to increased blood viscosity with recurrent and diffuse micro and macro circulatory thrombosis that is why there is high levels of DDimer in those patients and this explains the cause of sudden deterioration and death in some sporadic cases

This disseminated thrombosis is proved by postmortem examinations of ARDS victims ( it is not a real ARDS) .

This theory could explain why we are loosing patients so rapidly and why mechanical ventilation is not so much effective in treatment and using ARDS mechanical ventilation protocol is not causing any benefit. actually it could be futile and causing more lung damage.

On the other hand this is crucially explains the very rapid and good response of those patients to full therapeutic anti coagulation.

Chloroquine as antimalarial drugs is working by protecting Hb against invasion by malaria parasites .It is doing the same here but just protecting the Hb against invasion by the virus.

The chemical components in chloroquine phosphate compete with the porphyrin and bind to the viral protein, thereby inhibiting the viral protein's attack on heme or binding to the porphyrin.

Favipiravir is the latest anti-novel coronavirus drug with specific therapeutic effects.

In Favipiravir, the most critical ligand is 1RP, which is 6 - fluoro - 3 - oxo - 4 - (5 - O - phosphono - beta - D - ribofuranosyl ) - 3, 4 - dihydropyrazine - 2 - carboxamide.

Favipiravir cannot be bind to E2 glycoprotein and Nucleocapsid, and its binding energy to viral envelope protein, ORF7a, orf1ab is higher than that to porphyrin.

It is useful to note that the binding energy of Envelope protein and Favipiravir is more than 2700 times the binding energy of porphyrin.

The primary function of Envelope protein is to help the virus enter host cells, which shows that Favipiravir can effectively prevent the virus from infecting human cells.

* Recommendations :-

According to these clinical observations ,correlations and understandings :-

1- Hydroxychloquine , Favipiravir and early full anti coagulation therapy should be involved as early as possible in our National Management Protocol of Covid-19 .

* References :-

-Data is collected and interpritated from different clinical observations and reviews of many doctors and intensivists and from the postmortem examination pictures of Covid-19 victims in USA and Europe.

-Wenzhong Liu and Hualan Li2 (2020):

COVID-19: Attacks the 1-Beta Chain of Hemoglobin and Captures the Porphyrin to Inhibit Human Heme Metabolism; School of Computer Science and Engineering, Sichuan University of Science & Engineering, Zigong, 643002, China;

School of Life Science and Food Engineering, Yibin University, Yibin,644000, China; Correspondence: [email protected];

👇👇👇👇 The same opinion is in the following French vedic

https://youtu.be/ZH4fgB24Xas

According to French, COVID 19 disease is considered catastrophic antiphospholipide vasculitis syndrome & not ARDS.

It has been proposed that a very low dose of radiotherapy (50 to 100 cGy) to the entire lung could be used in the treatment of covid-19. Pay careful attention to the fact that the intended use of radiotherapy in this setting would not be to kill SARS-Cov2 virus, but to prevent the inflammatory cytokyneses storm that can be lethal for many patients.

There are very few references, one of the best is:

DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2020.04.004

Thanks so much Miguel for your sharing. I think low dose radiotherapy will be indirectly danger to lungs even if it gave initial improvement of pulmonary condition because not only this low dose will not kill COVID 19 virus but it will activate the virus becoming more harmful to lung. Of virological view high dose of ionizing radiation can kill the virus & low dose of ionizing radiation can activate the virus in the lab during research on it.

I completely agree with Hazem

Again, I am not talking about killing virus, but about preventing the cytokynes storm by the antiimflammatory action of low-dose-radiation-therapy. You can read about this action in several references, in addition to the previous one:

Article Anti-inflammatory effects of low-dose radiotherapy

Article Modulation of Inflammatory Immune Reactions by Low-Dose Ioni...

Regarding the hazards due to the received dose, compare a risk of 1% of induced cáncer in 10-30 years by a 60-80 years old patient vs. a 10% risk of dying because of the inflammatory effect of the infection on the lungs.

Excuse me, Miguel. Is the used low radiotherapy proved to not activate the virus ? That is my question.

I'm not aware of that effect, if you have any source of information, please share, I'd be very interested. Radiotherapy was used to moderate success in the treatment of infections such a pneumonia or tuberculosis in the pre-peniciline era, so I'd be surprised is such effect is present.

It is mentioned in the literature that during working on virus inside the lab, low dose of ionizing radiation can be used to activate the virus on study for increasing its numbers by multiplication in the plate media. But to prepare a vaccine against that virus, a high dose of ionizing radiation is used to kill firstly the virus. I think there is a level of radiation which may be previously studied that it will not affect the nature of virus during applying such low radiation to treat classic infectious pneumonia. What is the dose of low radiotherapy which avoids activating the virus during treating the lung? I think it is important to test that on diseased animals with COVID 19 to study the effect of low radiotherapy on virus side aside the lungs to know the safe dose which will be useful to lung without activating intrapulmonary COVID 19 virus.

I would also like to add that radiotherapy for COVID-19 also presents a logistical issue, which is often overlooked. Planning of radiotherapy treatments is time-consuming and requires significant resources. Moreover, due to the current situation, radiotherapy departments are working with reduced staffing and alterations in protocols. This therefore limits the amount of COVID-19 patients which can be treated with radiotherapy. Bringing COVID-19 positive patients into a radiotherapy department would also put oncology patients at risk, especially since such patients may be immunocompromised.

Therefore, it is my opinion that radiotherapy would not be a suitable alternative treatment for COVID-19 for all patients. However, it may be utilised in select cases taking the appropriate precautions to safeguard other patients,given further research to evaluate whether low doses of radiotherapy are effective. As I previously stated however, I do not recommend radiotherapy for such a purpose due to the development of early and late radiation-associated toxicities.

As there is no medicine or vaccines are found yet , we can try this too.

Thanks so much again Robert for your re-sharing. I think when it will be possible to use radiotherapy in treatment of COVID 19 patient, special Radiotherapy Centers can do that for these patients, leaving others centers for cancer patient. What is the balance between using high radiotherapy to kill the virus with risk of affecting lungs, and low radiotherapy for improving lung condition by reorganizing its immunity with risk of activating the virus becoming more harmful to lungs.

Thanks Varatharaj for your sharing. I think if it is proved that radiotherapy can not be used in treatment of COVID 19 patient, Ohers talkes about Nanotechnology as a promising therapeutic tool against virus in general & why not for COVID 19.

I agree that the logistical issues mentioned by Mr. Pisani are a significant challenge in orderto implement this kind of treatment.

There is some literature out there on immunotherapy with proton radiation to fight cancer. Some research points to advantages for Proton Therapy over conventional Radiotherapy (for instances Transl Lung Cancer Res. 2018 Apr; 7(2): 180–188. ) when it comes to "enhancing the immunoadjuvant effects of RT, but also reducing immunosuppressive mechanisms".

For sure I am not an expert on any of this. But maybe an interesting angle?

Proton therapy, beyond being a very valid therapy in some oncological cases, even if it could potentially be used in covid 19 cases, certainly suffers from the scarce diffusion on the territory, mainly due to the high costs of the implants. This fact provokes the generation of long waiting lists absolutely to be avoided in covid 19 patients, where a strong therapeutic urgency is needed

Lucio Mango Actually, the long waiting list today is not because of the lack of centers, but the lack of referrals and resistance by insurances to cover the cost. Especially in Italy and Germany, many more centers would have been built if a reimbursement scheme was in place. Proton Therapy is cheaper than chemotherapy in most cases. Most PT centers that I am involved with have free capacities (not necessarily for COVID patients, due to the complex logistics and current re-purposing of staff).

In Europe there are about 20-25 clinical centers depending on the definition of Europe... Check out ptcog.ch for a list of clinical centers. Munich has closed in Dec 2019, there it is still on the active list.

Most of the immunotherapy research however is not Europe based. But this is pre-clinical anyway, so it does not matter so much where great results are achieved as long as they become available.

Joern Meissner

Dear Joern, I think you are absolutely right that the spread of the centers also passes for the amount of the reimbursement expected, but you are also right when you say that covid patients would need "current re-purposing of staff" and require "complex logistics" ", and I would add that every treated patient would stop the machine and the rooms for the time necessary for disinfection.

Thanks Joerm for your sharing. I think proton therapy is a suitable therapy for localzed lesion like brain tumor & pediatric head/neck tumor but not for diffuse pathology. So, it is practically faraway to be used in COVID 19 patients. There is also worldwide limited centers e.g. in middle east there is only one center in Saudi Arabia.

Hazem Y. Abdelwahed yes, that is true for straight proton therapy (incl lung by the way). But the research seems to indicate that a combination of immunotherapy / Proton Therapy affects other sites in the body also.

Is the proton center at King Fahad Medical City operational?

Joern Meissner, You would clarify what is the mechanism of a combination immunotherapy/proton therapy & how it affects other sites in the body also. What is the benifit of that for COVID 19 patients?

Regarding your question, I think so. https://sptc.med.sa/en/home-en/

I do not think radiotherapy will be usefull, becaues it is a localised therapy and can be applied to a portion of lung and not the whole lung. My suggestion will be steam inhalation in such cases.

Greetings to all colleagues from Athens, Greece and National Technical University of Athens. From the perspective of a radio-biophysicist, I believe yes with a LOW DOSE RADIATION (LDR) 0.5 Gy or between 0.1 to 0.5 Gy single X rays dose. There are a lot of supportive data of anti-inflammatory action of such LDR. Also please further response to https://www.linkedin.com/mwlite/in/alexgeorgakilasntua

See my thoughts here : #linkedin #georgakilas https://t.co/ELE5dtQMFe

Thanks Alexandros for your sharing. Nowadays, the real pathogenesis of COVID 19 is not ARDS but disturbed haemoglobin function by the effect of virus causing resistant hypoxia to oxygenotheraby which can affect all body systems leading to death in some severe cases. Do you think your proposal of low radiotherapy does not activate the virus?

You would send to me PDF file of your article because your article link can not open.

Besides debates on SNSs here and there, I have recognized that the following two (both PDF freely downloadable) in the scientific journals are supportive of low dose radiation therapy for COVID-19 pneumonia and even proposing clinical trials. More will follow, but rebuttals will follow as well.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2020.04.004

https://doi.org/10.31661/jbpe.v0i0.2003-1085

Thank you Nobuyuki Hamada for your sharing. Of your opinion, is there any risk of COVID 19 activation during low dose radiotherapy?

Low dose radiation bath to both the lungs is possible but the patient must have good hematological profile.

My pleasure, Dr Hazem Y. Abdelwahed. Re: your question to me. Ionizing radiation-induced viral reactivation has long been known, e.g., in hepatitis virus (HBV, HCV), HIV, and Epstein-Barr virus, but I have recognized no data relevant to SARS-CoV-2 and other coronaviruses. As such, I do not think that there is underpinning scientific basis sufficient to discuss the possibility for radiogenic reactivation of coronaviruses, although I am not in a position to rule out that possibility.

Nobuyuki Hamada. Thanks so much for your reply.

My pleasure, Dr Hazem Y. Abdelwahed

Thank you Md Abdul Hai for your sharing.

How about, Radiation-induced cancer!

(stochastic and deterministic effect)...

I do not think this is a good idea.

Follow-up of my earlier post. As far as I know, this is the third article (PDF freely downloadable) on low dose radiation therapy for COVID-19 pneumonia discussed in the scientific journals

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2020.04.026

Viruses much more radioresistant compare to human body.

Thanks Mohammed Alaswad for sharing. Do think single high dose radiotherapy can induce cancer?

Thanks Dmitri Popov for your sharing. You would support your comment by an article because it was mentioned in the literature that viruses can be inactivated by high dose of ionizing radiation. My question to you, is there radiation antidote which can decrease the harmful effect of high dose radiotherapy on lungs. Do you think that single high dose radiotherapy will be harmful to lungs?

Thanks again Nobuyuki Hamada for your valuable re-sharing. I read the last article, joined with your comment. It mentioned that it was published before activation of viruses during low dose radiotherapy. There is no evidence based confirmation that low dose radiotherapy will cause improvement of pulmonary condition of COVID 19 patients.

My pleasure, Dr Hazem Y. Abdelwahed

Radiation kills cell through two major mechanism: oxidative stress and autoimmune reactions. Viruses exists in human body in two variants: acting inside cells and moving through blood - viremia. Viruses quite resistant to radiation but can be neutralize through oxidative stress or immune reactions.

Oxidative stress inside human body can be created without radiation. In USSR in 1960-1980 and later in Russia was used technology for therapy of septicemia and viremia - injections of solution Anolyte I/V. Scientific literature from this years suggested that this method was effective. Immune reactions - vaccine and antibodies to virus COVID-19 under development. I think this is a really not good idea use low dose radiotherapy against COVID -19.

I endores the view of Dr. Dmitri Popov

Dmitri Popov Low dose radiation therapy (LDRT) can be used for pneumonia treatment. However, this method doesn't make viruses inactive. As Dmitri mentioned it, to inactivate viruses doses as high as tens of kGy are needed. The anti-inflammatory effects of low dose radiation therapy and some other effects are the main mechanisms behind this recommended method.

We first introduced this method in March 2020 in one of our recent publications:

Article COVID-19 Tragic Pandemic: Concerns over Unintentional “Accel...

Now, other scientists around the world have also addressed this issue.

You may be interested in our commentary, which as far as I know is the fourth article on low dose radiotherapy for COVID-19 pneumonia discussed in the scientific journals

Article Low dose radiation therapy for COVID-19 pneumonia: is there ...

I agree with the conclusion of the fourth article of my colleague Nobuyuki Hamada.

I receive on Linkedin this message from colleague Ovidi. Since he has no RG account, he asked me to send it and to comment on it. Thanks

Inoltrato da Angelo Ovidi (linkedin.com/in/aovidi): Dear Dr. Mango,

I read with extreme interest your comments and questions on COVID 19 on ResearchGate: https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is_it_possible_to_use_radiotherapy_to_kill_intrapulmonary_COVID_19_to_stop_its_destroying_effect_on_lungs I tried to reply back to the thread on ResearchGate but not able to activate an account to do it. So I looked for your profile to send a direct message. I am a British/Italian manager and I live and work in the 'red zone' in Italy, near Milan. Among many things I worked in the past in R&D on nanomaterials and exotic isotopes and I am still director of an Oxford R&D in that area. There is an idea in my head that keeps me awake at night and that I would like to submit to the scientific community. Maybe is useless (I am not a doctor) but in this global emergency I feel like I have to bring my 2 cents to the discussion.

In the past I was in contact with companies able to produce a Copper isotope called Cu-67. This isotope that you surely know (and its Cu-64 similar) has a very short life and can be injected with almost zero risk in human body. It is used to 'mark' and cure some forms of cancer since the 80s, targeting only the cancer cells and not the healthy ones: http://jnm.snmjournals.org/content/29/2/217.full.pdf I have an hypothesis that if injected in a COVID patient, maybe in conjunction with a peptide to 'target' the virus it would be able to kill the infection pretty quickly. Such isotope can be produced in Italy at least in Rome and Pavia (via isolinear accelerator) Naturally is not good to irradiate patients from outside but this would be made from inside in a safe way. Not mentioning the fact that the copper isotope could end stopping the virus reproductive process also by chemical means. What do you think? If the idea is valid could you share it to the community? I hope this wasn't a time waste for you. Best regards, Angelo Ovidi Director of Nukey Europe Ltd Oxford, UK https://www.linkedin.com/in/aovidi/

Thanks so much Lucio Mango for passing your colleague Ovidi sharing. Please, you would inform him that I am so glad to read his idea which may be alternative to external radiotherapy. You would thank him so much.

We have already submitted our concerns about the paper "Low dose radiation therapy for COVID-19 pneumonia: is there any supportive evidence?" as a letter to the editor. In our letter the growing bulk of supportive evidence is addressed.

Moreover, Ed Calabrese and his colleagues have provided substantial supportive evidence in their paper published a few days ago:

Low dose radiation therapy as a potential life saving treatment for COV‐

ID-19-induced acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS)

Gaurav Dhawan, Rachna Kapoor, Rajiv Dhawan, Ravinder Singh, Bharat

Monga, James Giordano, Edward J. Calabrese

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2020.05.002

Many thanks for your interest in our commentary, Dr SMJ Mortazavi . Also, many thanks for information on the new paper by Dhawan et al, which will be published in the same issue along with the paper by Kirsch et al entitled "Lack of supporting data make the risks of a clinical trial of radiation therapy as a treatment for COVID-19 pneumonia unacceptable".

Low dose radiotherapy will not kill the virus. Other approaches are recommended as anti-inflammatory agents.

Nobuyuki Hamada Jan O. Aaseth Thank you for your comments. Viruses are not classified as living organisms because they are not alive outside a host (they are in the grey zone). As Jan O. Aaseth mentioned it, LDRT cannot make the novel corona-virus inactive! Is it bad? Not at all! Actually, this is the key advantage of LDRT over other treatment methods such as antiviral drugs.

A paper recently published in Viruses journal states:

https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4915/12/5/498

"In addition, an interesting potential idea for the treatment of pneumonia-related to SARS-CoV-2 and other similar viruses is a low dose of ionizing radiation (LDIR). SARS-COV-2 is an RNA virus with an expected mutation rate similar to other RNA viruses, as discussed above. This mutation rate is usually much higher than the corresponding one of any human host. Therefore, as discussed in a recent paper [43], any antiviral drug against SARS-CoV-2 would exert an intense selective pressure on the virus. This may result in highly adaptive and treatment-resistant virus types with enhanced pathogenicity".

Thanks for all, resharing my topic with their valuable comments.

Hazem Y. Abdelwahed Thank you very much for initiating this discussion! You may also be interested in a paper published recently by German scientists that addresses the importance of LDRT and the lack of selective pressure as an advantage of this method:

Low-dose radiation therapy for COVID-19 pneumopathy: what is the evidence?   https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00066-020-01635-7.pdf

Dear dr. Hazem Y. Abdelwahed thanks for your kind words on my comment and thanks to dr. Lucio Mango to help me post it. Also thanks to Md Abdul Hai for the recommendation.

Finally I can post something directly on the thread and I would like to add some details. As underlined before, I am not a doctor so sorry for anything I can write that is not correct. Mine was an idea coming from my experience in isotopes R&D.

As you know a "well-established coordination chemistry of copper allows for its reaction with a wide variety of chelator systems that can potentially be linked to peptides and other biologically relevant small molecules, antibodies, proteins, and nanoparticles" (cit. Article Copper-64 Radiopharmaceuticals for PET Imaging of Cancer: Ad...

This way you can use Cu64 and Cu67 in a theranostic (therapeutical - diagnostic) way: you can label cells (like in PET processes) and you can destroy them in a sort of one-to-one approach.

Since one the known applications involves 64Cu-labeled peptides for tumor-receptor targeting why not thinking about 64Cu-labeled peptides for COVID-19 receptor targeting?

In such respect have a look at this - Preprint NATURAL PEPTIDES VERSUS COVID-19: INFORMATION FOR CONSIDERATION

An idea would be to target the "23-mer synthetic peptide fragment of the ACE2 α1 helix is capable of effectively blocks the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein interaction with ACE2". But any mechanism that would stop the spreading or reproduction of the virus would be ok.

Leaving aside the peptide targeting I was referred from a source working on Cu64 therapy for cancer that a dose slightly bigger that the one used for PET labelling could basically work as un-targeted radio therapy against COVID-19 but I have no experimental data to support this.

I discovered that there are many companies selling Cu64 and Cu67 for PET and theranostic purposes. I could collect all the details if needed.

I hope this can be of some help.

Best regards,

Angelo

Thanks so much Angelo Ovidi for your direct sharing. In fact your ideas are highly appreciated for their valuability. I encourage you to present your distinguished idea in a proposal solution in dealing with COVID 19 management to WHO & I hope you receive a positive respond.

Thanks for your kind words and support dr. Hazem Y. Abdelwahed

It is a possible for use specific immunotherapy or/and immune-prophylaxis for amelioration/mitigation the clinical symptomatic picture of COVID-19 induced toxicity.

Two new papers have just come out

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167814020302413

https://doi.org/10.1080/09553002.2020.1767314

I would be interested in seeing if the COVID group viruses had a resonant frequency sufficiently distinguishable from other material and if safe, run the patient through a suitably tuned MRI scanner to see if that damaged the proteins enough to make the virus non-viable, sort of a very selective microwave for certain viruses

Thanks Nobuyuki Hamada for the articles you shared. You would take a look on the following: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/waleedalnajjar_researchers-explore-low-doses-of-radiation-activity-6666700468409962496-dxDJ

My pleasure, Dr Hazem Y. Abdelwahed , also for your information on the article from Forbes

Thanks Dmitri Popov for your sharing. The black seeds has a promising role on supporting the immunity & also it contains a similar substance of hydroxychloroquin but safer & without any side effects.

Thanks to all the participants. I strongly support the views of Hazem Y. Abdelwahed about the use of black seed. Its a prophetic medicine and I think this may work well.

Kirsch et al. state: "As there are currently no approved treatments for COVID-19, some have suggested that 0.5 to 1 Gy of whole thorax radiation therapy would present a very low risk to COVID-19 patients in a clinical trial [9].". We first introduced the concept of LDRT and our recommended doses were as low as 100 mGy. Moreover, to reduce any potential risk, in our model patients receive a conditioning dose of 2mGy. This dose not only maximizes the anti-inflammatory effects of the main dose (100/180/250 mGy), but reduces the risk of cancer and any potential circulatory disease.

I have no experience with the mGy range of X-ray. If it works one may try but in our setting it will not be advisable to treat a covid-19 patient with the same machine where cancer patients are getting treatment.

Great question, thanks

Would Indian tonic water work? (quinine water) skip the gin? This is a respectful and serious question. Jesuit Bark extract was often used if you could afford it for malaria long before it was replaced by modern alternatives.

Christopher Moon, quinine, also called (R)-(6-metossichinolina-4-il)((2S,4S,8R)- 8-vinilchinuclidin-2-il)metanolo is coming back in fashion since cloroquine is pretty dangerous and have many side effects. Quinine block some DNA replication mechanism introducing errors. Who knows, maybe could work with the virus too. Only a large patients sample study would confirm it. I would trust that for sure more than ingesting cloroquine.

Good day all. This article reveals the benifit of black seeds in COVID 19 treatment.

Another article about the benefits of the black seeds in the treatment of COVID 19 patients.

thank you, the nigella recipes are food for thought, but I am inspired to dig out my copy of Martindale.

It is very simple to understand to guess when lungs are infected with corona virus that means its respiratory system affected so if you try to give radiation then it will be spread ed whole body through respiratory at once because that virus can conceal at hidden place by virtue but in the case of cancers tic lesion remains at a place where you can follow the patient several times.i have faced so why i am giving you knowledge of cancer though their radiation is not always effective because so many patients can not withstand its power and ruined daily and passed away so radiation is by expert oncologists and radiotherapist should be followed if it required or not.Always radiation is not necessary be cause i have seen that one big tumor upon kidney with full lesion operated and oncologists advised for radiation but suppose i am patient and i did not take it.Here some medicines of Italy of Homeo Doctor given very good result like radiation,after applying of this homeo alternative medicine by [Dr sutar of Rashbihari avuenue ]who also faced cancer and we the both taken such medicine and after application we have seen that there are small and big black spots throughout body.Doctor faced first time cancer then suppose i have taken so it is not that idea that you are scientist or oncologist or allopathetic doctor and you have to take the same. i hope that your idea is cleared practically and by virtue of superpower we the crossed eighteen years.My dear remember that there are some powerful drug if exetrs correctly and timely then cells carcinoma or inherent to malignancy can be protected by drugs not by radiotherapy. Radio Therapy IS NEEDED when you should have apply so that one little cells of affected virus can not mixed with plasma cells.

we are experienced on this practical matter and conveyed to you.

Dr saroj kumar khan

You might be interested in our new paper "COVID-19: Introducing Low Dose Radiation as an Effective Treatment for pneumonia that Shouldn’t Induce Selective Pressure and New Mutations". Our article addresses the undeniable advantages of low dose radiation therapy over a small potential risk.

DOI: 10.31661/JBPE.V0I0.2005-1114

Moreover, the International Geriatric Radiotherapy Group has recommended the study of low dose radiation therapy for elderly COVID-19 patients.

Thanks all for sharing my topic.

The preliminary results of the 1st clinical trial are published. I hope in future clinical trials doses less than 1.5 Gy (the dose used by researchers at Emory University Hospital) is used. If Mohammad Khan et al. had used doses < 0.5 Gy instead of the 1.5 Gy, their 5th patient would have recovered more quickly. We were the first scientists who introduced the concept of low dose radiation therapy for COVID-19 related pneumonia. We still believe that the best therapeutic radiation dose is between 100-500 mGy, not more. http://jbpe.sums.ac.ir/article_46588_0310a04220fde09e17224d7d0ebf59a3.pdf

Moreover, the public should be warned about the hidden dangers of antiviral drugs such as Remdesivir. Now, we know that when the treatment is not effective and viral genome replicates, selective pressure leads the virus to rapid adaptation toward resistance “An increasing number of viral infections that impair host health are treated using antiviral drugs, .... If the treatment is robust and viral fitness is impaired sufficiently, no viral genomes will be successfully replicated, but if treatment is not as effective and some genomes replicate, selective pressure may result in rapid adaptation toward resistance”.

Article COVID-19 Tragic Pandemic: Concerns over Unintentional “Accel...

it is not easy to preparing vaccine because you see previous vaccine discovered but long time taken. if you applied radiation on corona virus patient and cured then no question arises.is there any trial ?

Low dose radiotherapy used for which stage if COVID19 are for five stages so I think for first stage pneumonia and it will exert when medicine also effective.

Thanks very much for all.

Low dose is up to second please of COVID19 but not for last stage of COVID19

Hydroxcholoroquin and Azithromycin are enough for first and second dose.ostalmvir may be for first.

Low dose radiation for first and second stages hope fine

I agree with SMJ Mortazavi

The following PCP article may be of interest to some of you.

POINT COUNTERPOINT Free Access https://lnkd.in/df-5bqM Low dose radiation as a treatment for COVID‐19 pneumonia: a threat or real opportunity? SMJ Mortazavi, Amirhosein Kefayat, Jing Cai First published: 03 July 2020 https://lnkd.in/dBybYMN

Virtual workshop on LDRT for COVID-19 will be held at 9:30–15:00 EDT on 23 July. Registration needs to be completed by 15 July. Please see below for more details.

https://ncrponline.org/wp-content/themes/ncrp/PDFs/2020/LDRT_COVID_Announcement7-9-20.pdf

Thanks my dear colleague Nobuyuki Hamada so much for advertising the coming webinar discussing Benifits or Risks of LDRT for COVID 19. I invite all sharing my topic to follow this Webinar.

My pleasure, Dr Hazem Y. Abdelwahed

The STAT news article is available at

https://www.statnews.com/2020/07/16/an-old-idea-ignites-new-debate-with-clinical-trials-testing-radiation-for-pneumonia-in-covid-19-experts-remain-divided-on-its-merits/

Although the authors of the original article (Salomaa et al.) are knowledgeable scientists, there are some omissions in their paper. Our responses to the omissions in their paper are now published in the Int'l J Radiat Biol.

In particular, we have addressed shortcomings such as focusing on linear no-threshold hypothesis and not considering the key advantages of LDRT (compared to using antiviral drugs) such as antithrombotic effects of LDRT and lack of “selective pressure”. 

Article Re: Low dose radiation therapy for COVID-19 pneumonia: is th...

The final PCP article is published now.

My dear Colleague SMJ Mortazavi. The published article is just a discussion without presence of application on Covid 19 patients as a group & Control research.

This is not wrong to tell a now we can't apply but low dose can do something or may not be

The following two new papers came out this week in the Red Journal

https://www.redjournal.org/action/showPdf?pii=S0360-3016%2820%2931444-9

https://www.redjournal.org/action/showPdf?pii=S0360-3016%2820%2931445-0