Why did Dr. Fauci wait 2 months to recommend an expensive patented nucleic acid analog produced by an American Company when he had proof that Chloroquine was effective as both an antiviral and immune regulator to prevent the lethal effect of Covid19??
PUBLISHED IN NATURE, 04 FEBRUARY 2020
Cell Reseach
“Chloroquine, a widely-used anti-malarial and autoimmune disease drug, has recently been reported as a potential broad-spectrum 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 Our time-of-addition assay demonstrated that chloroquine functioned at both entry, and at post-entry stages of the 2019-nCoV infection in Vero E6 cells (Fig. 1c, d). Besides its antiviral activity, chloroquine has an immune-modulating activity, which may synergistically enhance its antiviral effect in vivo. Chloroquine is widely distributed in the whole body, including lung, after oral administration. The EC90 value of chloroquine against the 2019-nCoV in Vero E6 cells was 6.90 μM, which can be clinically achievable as demonstrated in the plasma of rheumatoid arthritis patients who received 500 mg administration.11 Chloroquine is a cheap and a safe drug that has been used for more than 70 years and, therefore, it is potentially clinically applicable against the 2019-nCoV.”
He is now recommending Remdesivir, a patented extremely expensive yet less efficient.
According to Dr. Didier Raoult, a second wave of Corona will not happen and he supports his unequivocal opinion with the current statistics, the pathogenesis of the virus and epidemiological precedents. He calls it the myth of the second wave.
This is very interesting since our own preeminent ‘expert’ Dr. Fauci has emphatically declared that a second wave is inevitable. Let me just point out whereas Raoult has treated a few hundred cases, Fauci has treated 0.
He is now pushing what will undoubtedly be a very expensive Remdesivir. And they did a study with patients getting the drug and patients getting a placebo. Forget the unfairness for those getting a placebo, they are human beings not guinea pigs, the results were at best mediocre.
Average days in hospital for those getting Remdesivir: 11. Getting the Placebo: 15
Mortality rate for those getting Remdesivir: 8%. Getting the placebo: 11.5%
Notice that these are much higher mortality rates than what is being achieved in Bordeaux by Dr. Raoult wit his cheap chloroquine/azithromycin regimen. And he called it immoral to give any of his sick patients a placebo. Does anyone suspect that big money is at play here.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11463705/fauci-convinced-second-wave-of-coronavirus-hit-fall-trump-downplays-threat/
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/04/22/coronavirus-dr-anthony-fauci-says-i-am-convinced-second-wave/3009131001/
https://youtu.be/ZYqwJOtxtGQ
There are numerous clinical trials and randomized studies still ongoing.
See as examples:
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04328272
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04341727
because there is no good evidence that time. In addition there is ongoing randomized clinical trials regarding this issue + some new study results showed it is not that effective.
Regarding Dr.Fauci ; you need to ask another questions:
Why Dr.Fauci recommended remdesivir depend on the study that presented in manipulated way?
In my opinion , it is not impressive results when you want to treat around 28 patients with Remdesivir to save life of one patient.
Dear Dr. have a nice Sunday.
In my RG open question about the dramatic situation of Lombardia (N.Italy)
I propose the test of the natural compounds from Artemisia, according to previous extensive bibliographical reviews about toxic effect in potential biocontrol.
I hope this is useful.
RG open question and Artemisia review references: https://www.researchgate.net/post/The_novel_Coronavirus_in_N_Italy_Lombardia_COVID19_2019nCoV_SARSCoV2_shows_a_fatality_rate_compatible_with_SARS-MERS_Why#view=5eabf2ae32592944281a872b
______________________________________
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/ResGa-FxFac-post_fig102_339781431
|n.2|....The following 12 virus species have been recognized, both DNA-virus and RNAvirus, both phyto-virus and zoo-virus: BVDV bovine viral diarrhea virus; COPV, canine papilloma virus; DEN/2, dengue virus 1; FIV, feline immunodeficiency virus; HBV, human hepatitis B virus; HCMV, human cito-megalo virus; HFLUV, human influentia virus; HIV, human immunodeficiency virus; HSV/1, human herpes virus 1; HSV/2, human herpes virus 2; JUNV, junin virus; TMV, tobacco mosaic virus. ....
.. ... FROM Artemisia: absinthium, afra, annua, anomala, arborescens, capillaris, caruifolia, douglassiana, herbaalba,verlotorum, vulgaris.....
.. ... Natural compounds: aesculetina, arcapillina, artemisinina, artesunate, beta-arteannuina, beta-sitosterolo, deidro-artemisinina, deossi-artemisinina, isorhamnetina, N-N-N-3p-coumaroil-spermidina, stigmasterolo.
I’m all for that. But I’ll bet you the FDA will come up with fake reasons why not to try Artemesia.
We have experienced more political drug recommendations than evidence based drug recommendations during the covid-19 era.
Perhaps, it's Dr. Fauci's conflict of interest....follow the money....
This is ALL political.
Use HCQ and your scientific critical thinking skills and your patients will be the better for it.
There is currently no evidence that any drugs work to improve patient outcomes and no robust RCTs that have been published. The UK Recovery trial will hopefully deliver an answer in a few weeks or so
https://www.recoverytrial.net/
Avinash Aujayeb, what exactly do you consider Professor Didier Raoult’s results with chloroquine/azithromycin regimen In Bordeaux? Are you thinking that he is fabricating results? His patients don’t seem to think so and they should know better than anyone.
This article shows the most crucial findings of SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV2:
Article A SARS-like Coronavirus was Expected, but nothing was done t...
Excerpt: "Unlike the other coronaviruses, both the SARS-CoV strain of 2003 and SARS-CoV2 (COVID19-virus) do not contain the HE protein [9,10]. Further, a short lysine-rich region (KTFPPTEPKKDKKKKTDEAQ) in the N-protein was reported to be unique to SARS-CoV [10]. Intriguingly, an almost identical sequence (KTFPPTEPKKDKKKKADETQ) is found in the N-protein of SARS-CoV2 [11]. Both characteristics prove that we are dealing with a variant of the same virus of 2003."
Preprint Use of product labels to investigate the treatment of Covid-...
Fauci and Trump are pursuing an agenda. Both are keen to demonstrate that America is leading the world in the war on Covid-19.
Take trumps statements on possible treatments. For example, it has been suggested that ingestion of disinfectants may be beneficial to treat patients infected with SARS-CoV-2. DO NOT DO THIS. IT IS HARMFUL TO HUMAN HEALTH.
The above article may be of interest and could provide some light relief.
Salvatore Vicidomini may please read our publication in the following, if you have free time:
(Current status: This paper already accepted in The Internet Journal of Infectious Diseases -> indexed in Scopus and ranked in ScimagoJR)
Amin, Firman Zulkifli, Sari, Mila Kurnia, & Amin, Zulkifli. (2020, April 26). Nigella sativa (Habbatus sauda): the perspectives for COVID-19 treatment. Zenodo. http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3766576
Preprint Nigella sativa (Habbatus sauda): the perspectives for COVID-...
I just leave this here: https://truepundit.com/cover-up-fauci-approved-chloroquine-hydroxychloroquine-15-years-ago-to-treat-nobody-needed-to-die/
”In this study of adult patients admitted to hospital for severe COVID-19, remdesivir was not associated with statistically significant clinical benefits.”
More evidence that approving Remdesivir over Chloroquine/azythromycin treatment for Covid19 is a travesty! Anthony Fauci is more politician/lobbyist than scientist. What is going on? He has been screwing up since 1983 with AIDS approving scam treatments that caused countless lives. Why is this despicable character in charge?
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31022-9/fulltext
professor Didier Raoult challenges Anthony Fauci.
”Remdesivir does not save lives”
https://youtu.be/U95kkLiODK0
Trudy J. Rumann Heil Behrendsen Your link goes to a right wing rag that tries to link a 2005 study that had nothing to with Fauci or NIAID
Here is the paper:Article Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infect...
The study was done in cell culture and is a quantum leap from there to human trials. Authors are from the CDC and Canada.
Not even the most disturbed pharma executive will green light human trials based on tissue culture data.
Stanley Laham French doctor, Didier Raoult, whose recent article on Chloroquine use in treating COVID 19, will be retracted by Elsevier and Medscape:
https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/928336
...as bad science
Hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19 Study Did Not Meet 'Expected Standard'
From the article:
"The paper that appears to have triggered the Trump administration's obsession with hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for infection with the novel coronavirus has received a statement of concern from the society that publishes the journal in which the work appeared."
Stanley Laham The hydroxychloroquine boondoggle set off by trump is more of a political ploy to save his reelection. It is more desperation than science. Some are desperate to believe a conman from New York.
Seriously, trump said that injections with disinfectants and blasting the body with UV light should be looked at as a treatment for the virus. Their devotion to trump reminds me of a cult.
The only people that will benefit from this hydroxychloroquine hoopla are malpractice lawyers that will go after doctors, elected officials and pundits that are pushing this snakeoil remedy.
Dr AS Fauci did not recommend chloroquine or hydroxichloroquine because he is a true scientist who bases recommendations on evidence and objective grounds , not on compulsive inspiration of illuminated people who use this situation as an opportunity to become famous or be on TV, magazines and newspapers
The premise in this question is wrong . There was no "proof " and what's more there still isn"t. In fact the better data examination of the question is against any effectiveness, however even this conclusion is still wanting in the strict requirements needed to ascertain with scientific certainty that is doesn't work . Its just more believable due to the nature of the information . Scientific certainty is at the center of this debate ; this is not meant to signify ,as some people may think, the absolute truth . Rather it means the statistically high likelihood for something to be true or not. It is the best mathematically examined conclusion . It is not " gut feeling" ( to paraphrase, you do not think with your gut) , or "experience" ( the next worse "proof" ) or even worse, "testimonials".
At the time it was made public it was more of an " experience " even if it was stated by a MD and researcher . He should have known better
On the other hand due to the design data collection, number of patients, and quality in the collection data ( completeness and reliability) the "nucleotide analog" study ( https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31022-9/fulltext) showed a 999 to 1 chance that it is true that it will accelerate recovery by 31%. Notice the difference ?
Its not " I think this is going to be a game changer" or "what do you have to lose?"sloppy thinking. . It is serious thorough reliable scientific Inquiry . So that's why Fauci , a seasoned scientist , did not fall for the fools errand.
;
JRV MD
According to Dr. Didier Raoult, a second wave of Corona will not happen and he supports his unequivocal opinion with the current statistics, the pathogenesis of the virus and epidemiological precedents. He calls it the myth of the second wave.
This is very interesting since our own preeminent ‘expert’ Dr. Fauci has emphatically declared that a second wave is inevitable. Let me just point out whereas Raoult has treated a few hundred cases, Fauci has treated 0.
He is now pushing what will undoubtedly be a very expensive Remdesivir. And they did a study with patients getting the drug and patients getting a placebo. Forget the unfairness for those getting a placebo, they are human beings not guinea pigs, the results were at best mediocre.
Average days in hospital for those getting Remdesivir: 11. Getting the Placebo: 15
Mortality rate for those getting Remdesivir: 8%. Getting the placebo: 11.5%
Notice that these are much higher mortality rates than what is being achieved in Bordeaux by Dr. Raoult wit his cheap chloroquine/azithromycin regimen. And he called it immoral to give any of his sick patients a placebo. Does anyone suspect that big money is at play here.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11463705/fauci-convinced-second-wave-of-coronavirus-hit-fall-trump-downplays-threat/
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/04/22/coronavirus-dr-anthony-fauci-says-i-am-convinced-second-wave/3009131001/
https://youtu.be/ZYqwJOtxtGQ
Steingrimur Stefanson, stop mixing your politics with science.
As far as I know I’m not discussing Trump‘s scientific views, but rather those of Anthony Fauci whose record with Gallo in trying to credit themselves wiith Professor Montegnier’s isolation of HIV in the 80s was scandalous, as opposed to the views of Didier Raoult whose work in Bordeaux with SARS/Covid 2 is appreciated by thousands of his patients.
So please refrain your comments as to the validity of scientific arguments presented by scientists unless perhaps you consider Trump to have a modicum of knowledge in virology, a field in which I’m qualified to judge.
Can a vaccine be made by this proccess?
1. extract the nucleus of some human cells
2. put them in nutrient medium with (any type) virus particles
3. the DNA(RNA) penetrates the cells
4. the capsids stays outside
5. remove the cells with the virus D(R)NA - they can not reproduce viruses
6. take the capsids and use them to produce antibodies - they are ideal as they are in fact viruses 99% but totally harmless as they have no D(R)NA in them
Stanley Laham
I evacuate better scientists than you every morning with great regularity. Anyone who promotes crackpot ideas like "reverse translase" and celebrates a French quack is on track for an idiottrifecta. Please go for it!
Ilian Peruhov . Sadly, no. Viral particles are synthesized outside of the nucleus. Vaccines that are currently in trials use recombinant COVID19 proteins as antigens.
Hey Stanley Laham ,
Have you accumulated any published data for your crackpot "reverse translase"? You have been at it for decades. The scientific world is holding its breath for your erudite insights.
Thank you @Steingrimur Stefansson for the polite answer which is considering the core of the idea of my suggestion!
I come from vastly remote part of science like Quantum Physics where are my complete interests. So I don't have any knowledge in biology other then school. Also I read about the types of vaccines.
Now back on the question.
1. Can one damage (remove or replace) other (than the nucleus) component/s of a human cell so the virus can not reproduce or its reproduction will be dilated so one can extract the cell with the viruses before they leave it?
2. I know the virus does not leave the cell before its full of virus DNA which build pressure inside it that breaks the cellular walls. So there is plenty of time for the infected cell to be put out of the nutrition medium. (Its like some sort of fishing.)
The human cells can be removed from the nutrition medium before the virus has made copies that can leak out! This can be repeated as many times as necessary so all virus DNA is collected and there are only the capsids in the medium.
As far as the modern vaccines work they are vastly inefficient and come out way to late (decades and more!) and have many lateral effects.
Thanks to all that will answer the technical aspects of the proposition in advance.
Hi Ilian Peruhov Viruses are not alive and are more comparable to malware that takes over the cell machinery both inside and outside the nucleus to make copies of itself.
Viruses need to get into cells. Most of them bind to cell-specific proteins that triggers their internalization. In the case of COVID19, it has a "key" called the spike protein. We know that functional spike proteins are present on mature virions, so it is easier logistically to harvest mature virions after they have been made. That is the route to make attenuated viruses like cowpox and polio.
Another route is to express the COVID19 spike protein recombinantly and have the body make antibodies against it via vaccination, like flu
I hope this answered some of your questions.
@ Steingrimur Stefansson as you write ´the virus takes over the cell machinery´ and ´makes copies of itself´. My question is can you not damage that machinery in order the virus gets in but can not reproduce. I think there are plenty of tools to damage specific parts of a cell or the whole cell (b.e. ionization radiation) or offer it sick cells. What happens to the virus when the cell machinery is broken? I don´t think it will avoid such cell or get back to the capsid if the machinery does not reproduce it.
Ilian Peruhov . Some viruses have an "Achilles heel" meaning that they have a specific route to propagate, which makes them vulnerable. A classic example is HIV.
Drugs have been developed that inhibit HIV specific enzymes and they have been tremendously successful.
The problem with COVID19 is that currently we don't know what works and what does not work. We need leadership from the top and we are not getting it.
Every human being, including Dr Fauci has strenghts and weaknesses , of course. Dr Fauci does not treat covid patients because it is not his job and it would be unwise given his age. He has been the director of one of the most prestigious institutes at the NIH devoted to infectious disases for mor than 30 years. One of the strenghts of Dr Fauci is that he is very knowledgeable . As a scientist he has the right dose of skepticism and as a political he is cautious. This means that when he makes a statement he makes sure that he has the best advisers who , of course, are also subjectd to human error. Taking care of lots of patients is very important and meritorious but , in itself, does not enable to make predictions. Getting advice from best virologists and epidemioloogists may.
Advance of treatment in medicine relies on clinical trials, which certainly and unfortunately may be subjected to economical/marketing pressures and biases but indpendent regulatory agencies garantee the safety of patients. It is not unethical to give placebo when there is no objective proof that a given drug works. In fact the majority of existing studies generate confusion more than clarification. The fact that, mechanistically, a given drug has chances to be active does not garantee that it is useful in the clinic. Thousands of in vitro or in silico potential drugs do not progress to advanced phase clinical trials.
Maria CId Xutgla
Clinical studies from Professor Raoult have been published but are being ignored. It seems they either think he is manipulating or that he did not follow strict randomisée blind studies which he claims would be immoral and criminally negligent for a clinician responsible for his patient’s lives.
It seems though that some pharmaceutical companies and countries are taking his results seriously:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-recipharm-cloroqui-idUSKBN22J1OW
https://www.france24.com/en/20200503-covid-19-in-cameroon-a-chloroquine-therapy-hailed-by-french-expert-becomes-state-protocol
https://www.collective-evolution.com/2020/04/14/professor-didier-raoult-publishes-results-of-a-hydroxychloroquine-treatment-study-on-1061-patients/
« A good clinical outcome and virological cure was obtained in 973 (out of 1061) patients within 10 days (91.7%)…A poor outcome was observed for 46 patients (4.3 %); 10 were transferred to intensive care units, 5 patients died (0.47%) (74-95 years old) and 31 required 10 days of hospitalization or more…The HCQ-AZ combination, when started immediately after diagnosis, is a safe and efficient treatment for COVID-19, with a mortality rate of 0.5%, in elderly patients. It avoids worsening and clears virus persistence and contagiosity in most cases. »
i would like to see any new published results of clinical trials on Remdesivir apart from those I already posted above on which Dr. Fauci based his approval.
The original abstract.
https://www.mediterranee-infection.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Abstract_Raoult_EarlyTrtCovid19_09042020_vD1v.pdf?fbclid=IwAR2Bx-Fldm2fFsLg7L06BYUz-8QvwuJ-hAW9uWmwx1KdKzCU0YGHtSwXXWw
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.07.20056424v2
I'm definitely no expert in virus diseases or pharmacology but this is what I read: Chloroquin is known to may have severe side effects on the heart. Therefore treating hospitalized Covid-19-patients (which are often a bit older) with Chloroquin might be more deadly for them than the infection itself.
For the same reason it is not necessarily "unfair" to be in the placebo group as someone stated above.
Vivica Grotelueschen
Chloroquine is one of the most used drugs in the world after aspirin. It is and hs been taken by tens of millions of people in Africa, Asia, Central and South America for the treatment and prevention of Malaria for the last 70 years. On top fo this for the last decade it as also been used to manage Lupus and Rheumatoid Arthritis.
But now that this very inexpensive drug that is showing some real promise with Covid19 and interfering with Big Pharma’s hope to capitalize with new drugs they can patent and make billions with, Chloroquine has become a dangerous drug to be feared. Don’t you find that the sudden alarm bells about it which remained silent for the millions who have been taking it rather odd.
Stanley Laham . Alarm bells should be ringing themselves to pieces because this HCQ nonsense is a naked political ploy to get an unpopular president reelected while enriching his cronies.
Trump demoted Dr. Bright, an HHS vaccine specialist, because he didn't buy into this COVID19 quick-fix craziness.
From:
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/05/whistleblower-complaint-rick-bright-blasts-team-trumps-pandemic-response
"He was pressured to invest in drugs and vaccines that lacked scientific merit, because the people selling them had friends in the Trump administration, up to and including the president’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner. He was forced to transfer funds to acquire drugs for the Strategic National Stockpile, America’s most important reserve of lifesaving medications, based not on health needs but on “political connections and cronyism.” He was instructed to use his department’s budget to purchase flu medications of questionable efficacy. And when the COVID-19 crisis erupted, he was pressured to approve a plan that would “flood” cities with unproven and untested doses of chloroquine drugs, from uninspected manufacturing plants in Asia."
Finally, three months late.. I wonder why now.
https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/nih-begins-clinical-trial-hydroxychloroquine-azithromycin-treat-covid-19
Dr. Fauci is a clever, knowledgeable physician and researcher.
Probably he knew the early results of failure of hydroxychloroquine by personal communication with researchers in USA.
This is why it became clear later that Hydroxychloroquine had no benefit in COVID-19 pandemic but was risky. (1-3).
Association of Treatment With Hydroxychloroquine or Azithromycin With In-Hospital Mortality in Patients With COVID-19 in New York State
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2766117
Observational Study of Hydroxychloroquine in Hospitalized Patients with Covid-19
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2012410
Risk of QT Interval Prolongation Associated With Use of Hydroxychloroquine With or Without Concomitant Azithromycin Among Hospitalized Patients Testing Positive for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19).
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32356863
A drug ta taken by hundreds of millions for over half a century for Malaria or its prevention is suddenly dangerous? So dangerous that it has also been given for Lupus patients who suffer an autoimmune disease? I presented his work and the in vitro studies published in Nature since a February 4th. confirming its inhibition of this Corona virus in tissues cultures. And the NIH has procrastinated till Ma 14 to do clinical trials with it.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-8184997/Doctors-worldwide-say-malaria-drug-best-coronavirus-treatment.html
https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/pune/maharashtra-expands-use-of-hydroxychloroquine-as-preventive-measure-6376275/t
https://aapsonline.org/hcq-90-percent-chance/
It is important to remark that hospitalized patients with Covid19 are very sick ( otherwise they would not be hospitalized in overcrowded hospitals) and that covid19 may produce myocarditis. I hope somebody finds a definitive answer about efficacy ( treatment or prevention) and safety in covid19 patients. I am glad that several robust trials are ongoing in different countries throughout the world
The Lancet just published a study looking at over 96 000 patients: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31180-6/fulltext
Although not randomized, and, therefore, subjected to bias by treating physicians regarding the decision of giving or not these drugs, this is SOMETHING
Yet at the same exact time we have this:
https://in.news.yahoo.com/govt-expands-hydroxychloroquine-prophylactic-healthcare-other-frontline-workers-162308949.html
Also while awaiting for more clarification and peer review on the cardiologist funded study, let me point out other articles from The Lancet:
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(20)30296-6/fulltext
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(03)00806-5/fulltext
https://principia-scientific.org/the-lancet-2003-praises-chloroquine-for-treating-coronavirus/
Stanley,
You should acknowledge that you currently have ZERO peer-reviewed publications in your RG profile.
Plus, your "reverse translatase" theory is a classical crackpot nonsense.
Read Stanley's theory and call for action:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is_anyone_interested_in_pursuing_the_existence_of_reverse_translase_activity_in_antigen_processing_macrophages_that_produce_Immune_RNA
Well, it is just a detail but Didier Raoult is actually working in Marseille, not in Bordeaux... As these towns are 650km apart (which is a lot at the french level!) I thought I would precise... Since the publishing of the Lancet article concluding on the apparent inefficiency of Chloroquine derivative treatment in the Covid -19 context, Raoult simply claims that the big data are irrelevent and have been twisted (this is the polite word for what he actually said...) compared to his data and that basically he doesn't give a damn!... Personally I would have expected something a bit more scientific...
Dominique Liger , I would appreciate a link to his reaction to the Lancet study. It is fine if it is in French.
As far as The Lancet, you can see that three previous experimental studies they published which I posted above, seem to give chloroquine good antiviral and immune regulator properties.
Additionally as you know the WHO has stopped clinical trials with chloroquine due to safety concerns Yet for six decades it was among the drugs it classified as essential for humanity to combat the scourge of malaria in the south. I wonder if these safety concerns are going to be extended for those taking it for malaria or more recently Lupus and Rheumatoid Arthritis.
Stanley Laham : The essential motor of science is doubt... Raoult has no doubt: he is sure he's right (which is certainly not a scientific proof...) and as a result he's sure others are wrong. This is a ethical problem as, as he has already done, any data coming against his opinion will be considered as rubbish...
https://www.lefigaro.fr/flash-actu/coronavirus-raoult-juge-foireuse-une-etude-critiquant-l-efficacite-de-la-chloroquine-20200525
Obviously the potential safety concern with chloroquine based treatment applies only to covid-19 positive cases.
@Dominique Liger Je vous remercie pour l’article. On verra les résultats à venir.
WHO RESUMES RECOMMENDING CLINICAL TRIALS WITH CHLOROQUINE
To all who were lauding the ´study’ published in The Lancet on the dangers of chloroquine while I was pointing out its inadequacy, now this:
“Last week, Italy, France and Germany banned the use of the drug to treat Covid-19 patients, citing new clinical evidence indicating that there was “an increased risk for adverse reactions with little or no benefit.”
The much-publicized study in medical journal The Lancet could not confirm any benefit from the drug against Covid-19, and also reported that taking it was associated with increased risks of in-hospital deaths. However, serious questions have been raised about the data used in that study.
The research, by US-based company Surgisphere, began to unravel in recent weeks as experts noticed red flags and questioned the credulity of its data-gathering and reporting. The Lancet journal issued an “expression of concern” over the study on Wednesday.”
The ”study” published in The Lancet publicized worldwide has been officially retractegd. I have pointed out in this discussion that it would be after scrutiny. But it has done much harm to the work of Professor Didier Raoult and set us back a month in the search for relief from Covid19.
In the meantime:
https://www.recoverytrial.net/news/statement-from-the-chief-investigators-of-the-randomised-evaluation-of-covid-19-therapy-recovery-trial-on-hydroxychloroquine-5-june-2020-no-clinical-benefit-from-use-of-hydroxychloroquine-in-hospitalised-patients-with-covid-19
Article A Randomized Trial of Hydroxychloroquine as Postexposure Pro...
As a result, chloroquine (if active) is certainly not the miracle molecule against covid as it was presented a few months ago
Two (2) more studies published in recent BMJ found negative results for HCQ in COVID-19.
Oladejo Ismail Oluwasegun, chloroquine as you know is excellent as a prophylactic against Malaria. There is no experimental evidence that it may act similarly with Covid19.
But there is circumstantial evidence that it might. This consists of the very low incidence of Covid19 in countries where malaria is endemic and chloroquine is taken for treatment and preemptively. Mostly I’m talking about the statistics I saw from some West African countries Such as Togo, Ivory Coast etc.
If you look at the in vitro studies published in Nature (that I quote above) it has been shown in tissue cultures that chloroquine affects the virus before cell penetration and intracellularly. In addition chloroquine immune modulation action is well known so it may very well attenuate the cytokine storm sometimes provoked by the virus.
What happens in vitro does not always happen in vivo where everything is far more complex. The majority of potentially interesting drugs identified by powerful and sophisticated screening methods never go into the Clinic.
Several well-designed trials have shown that, unfortunately, hydroxichloroquine, DOES NOT prevent infection in individuals that have been in contact with infected patients
What happens in Africa may be due to many other factors including isolation, cliimate etc. In fact what happens in African big cities is quite different from what happens in villages.
We must keep objectivity and open minds. This also applies to the retracted Lancet study . Even with large amounts of individuals ( its strenght), and even if data procesing had been appropriate, the study design was not optimal ( observational) and subjected to high risk of bias.
Dr Fauci said that there was no proven indication or positive clinical trial whether chloroquine could be used for the treatment of COVID 19. However, the doctors can give patients the drug as 'off label' prescription. But in this regard Dr Fauci says, the 'off label' drugs used for the ailment of the diseases is not approved by FDA and hence,it should not be taken as a "knockout' drug in treating COVID-19.
Not only there is in vitro proof that chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of the corona virus both extracellularly and intracellularly, but also the successes achieved with it by Prof. Didier Raoult in Marseille with it.
for the experimenta in vitro proof I refer you to the Nature publication that I posted with my the question. I don’t really know what Dr. Fauci means by a « knockout » drug. He did recommend Remdesivir which has a much less stellar performance. Though it seems he is less enthusiastic about it now.
Please refer to the following thread on a similar discussion:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Chloroquine_effective_in_COVID-19_True_or_false
There's been widespread interest in hydroxychloroquine as both a preventative measure and for treating patients with coronavirus.
President Trump has promoted it, and even took it himself for a while to ward off infection.
But despite some early studies raising hopes, one subsequent larger scale trial has shown it's not effective as a treatment.
The World Health Organization (WHO) has halted its trials, saying that the drug doesn't reduce death rates in patients with coronavirus.
What is hydroxychloroquine for?
Hydroxychloroquine has long been used to treat malaria as well as other conditions such as lupus and arthritis.
It's used to reduce fever and inflammation, and the hope has been that it can also inhibit the virus that causes Covid-19.
Some early studies showed that it may be able to shorten the duration of symptoms experienced by coronavirus patients, while others indicated it had no positive effect at all.
One of the world's largest studies - the Recovery trial run by Oxford University - has involved 11,000 patients with coronavirus in hospitals across the UK and included testing hydroxychloroquine's effectiveness against the disease, along with other potential treatments.
It concluded that "there is no beneficial effect of hydroxychloroquine in patients hospitalised with Covid-19" and the drug has now been pulled from the trial.
There are more than 200 other trials currently underway around the world.
Why have the drugs become so controversial?
Promotion by leading political figures such as President Trump has led to both hydroxychloroquine, and the related drug chloroquine, becoming the subject of widespread speculation online about their potential benefits and harmful effects.
This has led to high demand for the drugs and global supply shortages.
There's also been controversy within the scientific community.
The RECOVERY trial has yet to release their data, over three weeks after announcing their results. In contrast, after announcing their dexamethasone results, they published their data within one week.
After the Lancet paper retraction researchers don’t get to have their results accepted at face value without the release of the data.
Robert Clark
The so called Recovery Study can be rightfully considered another scam like the study released by The Lancet. And from forty years of experience, it would not surprise me if Big Pharma commissions studies to discredit any un patentable cheap drug tha shows promise while they push their patented solutions like Remdesivir that proved a miserable failure agains SARS- Corona1.
This has been done many times before followed by elaborate coverups that were only exposed yers later.
Whereas, Dr. Didier Raoult has been totally transparent in opening up his data with chloroquine/azithromycin protocol. And as far as the cardiac risks, he found no signs of cardiac arythmie in the over 10,000 EKGs he performed on his patients.
No Remdesivir and no Bill Gates Foundation!!
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-laos/health-officials-praise-laos-after-coronavirus-free-declaration-idUSKBN23P1XU?fbclid=IwAR3xrjwBcXDl8GYc41K2UGxWOHsbvB4ag4sn87tHo4FHJb23MsPFG6Wh1qU
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-vietnam-pilot-idUSKCN24C09K
Again another country where Big Pharma and for profit healthcare doesn’t influence protocol.
https://www.cnn.com/videos/world/2020/07/12/cuba-flatten-curve-coronavirus-oppmann-tsr-vpx.cnn
Ivermectin showing great results in clearing SARS-Corona2
“In a recent in vitro study, the Vero/hSLAM cells infected with the SARS-CoV-2 or COVID-19 virus were exposed to 5 µM ivermectin in 48 h, and a 5000-fold reduction in viral RNA compared with control was found [15]. The results showed that treatment with ivermectin effectively kills almost all viral particles within 48 h. The study was the first to assess the antiviral effect of ivermectin on COVID-19. The authors acknowledged that the drug may have antiviral effects by inhibiting the importin (IMP) α/β receptor, which is responsible for transmitting viral proteins into the host cell nucleus.”
Health Ministries of many countries using it as main medication for Covid19. The US with Remdesivir has the highest mortality rate in severe cases in the world.
Full Article:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41429-020-0336-z
How incompetent can you get? Are there any real Epidimiologists around?
One test, the Antibody test from blood tells you whether or not you have neutralizing Abs to the virus whether from a resolved infection or even ongoing infection. Within 2 to 7 days after infection your body starts producing IgM and then IgG to the virus. You keep being positive for months when you are no longer contagious. Everybody should be able to get this immediate result test if we really want to know the true progression of this virus in the population and how susceptible we would be to a ‘second wave’. If a big % of the population tests antibody positive then we will have achieved “Herd Immunity” and there will be no feared second wave of Covid19.
The RT/PCR test for the virus from the swab will only be positive during ongoing active infection while you are still shedding virus and contagious. It is essential for people presenting with symptoms.
By mixing both sets tests into one data bank, you make it impossible to differentiate whose plasma can be used therapeutically from plasma that is still potentially infectious.
https://news.yahoo.com/cdc-states-were-mixing-coronavirus-140253262.html?soc_src=community&guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cDovL20uZmFjZWJvb2suY29t&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAADMakE8uOezLJ9-cq5wcsThbC6LInopf1tH6y1Xtb57Fl3QJoTXtZP_tBCGyzd7PWvEeYKUubQldu0dayBUXB3zPLHpl6AaXh6dgwG5TJUmprc2dkrAqL8z_EOLFIdR__xSuzYQ5XyPzxxPB4jXrxNKA3454y2N5UEQ255706tbs
We are being told that there are 40,000 average new cases a day being detected in the US, around 15,000 in Florida.
That is a vague pronouncement. By what tests are they being “detected”. Is it by antibodies in blood tests or viral RNA in nasopharyngeal swabs?
This makes a huge difference! Until June both of these tests results were being lumped together in the same data base Even at CDC. That is totally incompetent, negligent and very misleading. We must be told of these numbers the percent detected by Ab testing and percent by RT/PCR testing. It makes a huge difference in the epidemiology of the disease and prognosis for its future course and spread.
PCR detection kits for covid 19 are all crap (false positives and false negatives occur at an unacceptable rate) and serology is problematic too ( you may have been infected without expressing detectable level of specific antibody). The only relevant data to monitor the epidemy are actually daily death cases of diagnosed patients, total diagnosed cases treated in hospital emergency service for respiratory distress and number of new case admissions in emergency service. But still they are just indicators.
A lot of political manipulation can be attributed to this issue. First is the market; who gets the larger share of the market. Second is the efficacy; as there is going to be a lot of vaccine any moment from now and thirdly, the credit. Who will get the credit at the end of the whole scenerio. Don't forget BCG is still available after several decades of discovery.
By the way...
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2558-4_reference.pdf
A day late and a dollar short...when some of us were screaming this we were thwarted by The likes of Anthony Fauci.
https://www.newsweek.com/key-defeating-covid-19-already-exists-we-need-start-using-it-opinion-1519535?amp=1&__twitter_impression=true
And this charade was taking place
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/06/two-elite-medical-journals-retract-coronavirus-papers-over-data-integrity-questions
Why is this man’s liscence to practice Medicine not been revoked? A notorious charlatan whose manufactured data might have caused the lives of hundreds.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/27/science/coronavirus-retracted-studies-data.html?referringSource=articleShare
The Dangers of an mRNA Vaccine.
In a traditional Vaccine such as Polio, Small Pox, Mumps etc...a killed virus or attenuated virus or viral antigens are injected so that your body goes through the process of recognizing this particular antigen as foreign and mounts an immune response to it. When faced with the real pathogen, you are already prepared to fight it off before it becomes too invasive and cause damage to the organs that are the natural target of that virus.
In a mRNA vaccine, a piece of the genetic material of the virus is injected into you. The m in mRNA stands for Messenger. Your cells are supposed to pick it up, translate it with the enzyme RNA Translatase into the viral protein in abundance. These proteins will migrate to the surface of your cells where your immune system will recognize them as foreign and make antibodies to them. These antibodies will now protect you when you are confronted with the virus itself.
But there is another process that will take place with this RNA. You have another enzyme in your cells called Reverse Transcriptase. This enzyme transforms RNA into DNA and can permanently insert it in your DNA and becomes part of your genetic makeup.
There are two adverse ways your immune system may may respond to these new foreign antigens being produced by your own cells. One consequence could be a fulminent or more likely a chronic Autoimmune Disease. This is not an exceptional condition and more and more pathologies are being recognized as autoimmune.
The other unintended consequence could be that since your own cells are producing this protein, it may at first make antibodies to it but then decide that it is part of self and stop so as not to damage your own body. In this possibility if you are later infected with the virus in question, you produce no response in time to stop the damage it causes.
The Immune System is intricate and still not fully understood. You can not introduce new genetic materials into a human and pretend to know all of its consequences. If this RNA gets incorporate in the DNA as I described, then the subject in a way becomes a genetically modified organism. And the pharmaceutical companies are being allowed to fast tract such a vaccine and giving them immunity for any unintended but predictable consequences.
https://osf.io/va7ux/
Single-cell gene regulatory network analysis reveals potential mechanisms of action of antimalarials against SARS-CoV-2 --- We applied a network-based comparative analysis, implemented in our machine learning workflow—scTenifoldNet, to scRNA-seq data from COVID-19 patients with different levels of severity. We found that genes of the Malaria pathway expressed in macrophages are significantly differentially regulated between patients with moderate and severe symptoms. Our findings help reveal the mechanisms of action of CQ and HCQ during SARS-CoV-2 infection, providing new evidence to support the use of these antimalarial drugs in the treatment of COVID-19, especially for patients who are mildly affected or in the early stage of the infection.
Stanley Laham
As I didn't come across it by chance and don't have time to search for it:
Do you have any proof for your mRNA -> endogenous rev. transcriptase -> genomic insertion idea in human beings or at least mammalians?
I mean scientific proof, not "newsweek", "nytimes" or "reuters"?
And as far as I know, the half-time of mRNA is not really long, so I guess (!) that a preliminary blocking of rev. transcriptases might be a means during the "internal immunogen production".
I mentioned the finding of RT in human cells in my doctoral dissertation in which I isolated and completely characterized a previously unknown RNA virus since 1978.. And many references I list in the bibliography and that dId not include Time or Newsweek Mz Grotelueschen. Do a simple search, you’ll find plenty of references.
The mRNA in the proposed vaccine codes for a whole viral protein or would be useless. And notice I said there is the very real possibly that it would come in contact with reverse transcriptase and be incorporated as DNA. I don’t know for sure but neither do the the Pharma companies.
James J Cai
very interesting article. Deserves much more attention. i worked on peritoneal exudate Macrophages that produced Immune RNA after processing antigens. This RNA transfered to B Cells that never saw the antigen the ability to make antibodies to it. We conclude that this iRNA was inserted in the antibody gene region by reverse transcriptase detected in the lymphocytes.
Vivica Grotelueschen : reverse transcribed mRNA genomic insertion is well documented in human but it has been described only through LINE retrotransposon activity and ends up most of the time in processed pseudogene or PP (ie. inactive gene). For more info, read the following: Article Processed pseudogene insertions in somatic cells
In the case of RNA vaccine, such a process would be quite unlikely mainly because mRNA would be transiently present within the cell and therefore the chance to get a successful retrotranscription and functional genomic insertion would be low. But not null. Contrary to what Stanley claimed Pharma Companies developing such vaccines are perfectly aware of this as it has been described a long time ago. The other level of risk is the actual inactivation of a resident gene by PP insertion. Indeed validation of any RNA vaccine should get through the evaluation of the risk of promoting pseudogene formation or gene inactivation. Whatever the kind of vaccine, the risk of developing side effects is part of the process. Validation is always made from benefit versus risk ratio.
Dominique Liger
Isn’t the whole idea of an mRNA vaccine is for it to remain in cells long enough to be multiply translated in order to produce adequate quantities of the viral antigen in order to elicit a protective immune response?
This seems to me sufficient time for it to be reverse transcripted. I do not assert that this would happen. I said it was a possibility that can not be ignored. Has this possibility been tested in vitro? We have known since the early 70s that is what happens when iRNA elaborated in macrophages is incubated with B lymphocytes. They not only make antibodies to the antigen they never encountered, but also became memory B cells. This could only be through genomic insertion.
What I find reckless is the fast tracking of such a vaccine without animal testing to not only test its protective effect but also that possibility and its consequences over time.
Stanley Laham: What I meant is that the risk of reverse translation is less for an RNA used for vaccination (ie. present for a limited time in the cell) than for any of the endogenous mRNA which is present on a much more regular basis during the lifespan of the cell. The fact that PP formation from endogenous mRNA occurs at a low rate indicates that the whole process has a low efficiency. Which will be ever lower for "imported" mRNA as its abundancy will be low and also limited in time. Whatever the vaccine, the idea to produce it and use it immediately is nonsense, I agree.
Dominique Liger
“The vaccine developed by the Gamaleya Institute in Moscow with assistance from Russia's Defense Ministry uses a different virus — the common cold-causing adenovirus — that’s been modified to carry genes for the “spike” protein that coats the coronavirus...”
This is all that I could find concerning the Russian corona vaccine. I would very much appreciate if anyone can provide a link to a serious scientific publication on the subject.
I must say I am much amused by the appellation SputnikV.
Once again why are Ivermectin and Chloroquine not used as standard treatment for Covid19? Their efficacy coupled with azithromycin or doxycycline has been proved over and over again, in vitro and clinically.
Remdesivir has proven mediocre as a treatment and the death rate continues unabated but is making Gilead Phamaceutical billions. It is now the big joke that the worst place to be if you catch the SARS/Corona 2 virus is in the United States. What is wrong with politicians who for electoral gains and big lobby money are depriving thousands of Americans of sound treatment?
Great achievement in the immunochemistry of anti SARS Corona 2 antibody. This team in Pittsburgh has isolated the combining site of the antibodies and created a drug they named Ab8. The advantages in its administration, its permeability and the lesser probability of it being denatured after administration are tremendous.
https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(20)31148-X
Risk of cardiac arrhythmia is high, so risk to reward ratio is high too, and so not recommendable.
in Texas, Florida and Nevada, its look like getting prescriptions for Hydroxychloroquine (Plaquenil) is possible thru a general practitionner. ( DOCTOR) The protocol hydroxychloroquine + Azithromycin + zinc must be administered early with the first symptom A(lso recommanded by Pr. Didier Raoult, from France). Once the ban on hydroxychloroquine is no longer applied, it takes a while for this to be efficient. Doctors have to be made aware of the possibility, pharmacies have to get supplies.
Active cases ( known contagious)
Texas : July 27 190 000 - September 30 :87 500 54% decrease
Florida :August 30 538 000 - September 30 :371 000 30% decrease
Nevada : September 1 42000 - September 30: 22 000 48% decrease
I hope that this behavior will continue and help other state to take that route.
Michael Halim the reward to risk of chloroquine in the treatment and prevention of malaria has been negligible for 60 years. It has been taken over this period by tens of millions of people in all tropical and subtropical areas of the globe. Its nefarious cardiac effect was never a factor.
I for one suffer of coronary artery disease and have had two stents implanted. Yet I have taken chloroquine preventively since(20 years) whenever I am in Haiti where malaria and dengue fever are endemic.
as far as its effectiveness as an inhibitor of SARS-CoV 2 is concerned, if you look above I have linked papers from Nature, Cell, Lancet where it’s in vitro effectiveness in susceptible cell cultures is clearly demonstrated. The same for Ivermectine which is also now widely in use for the treatment of Covid19 throughout the Third World with much better prognosis than the highly expensive Remdesivir.
We have treated more than a thousand COVID positive patients successfully without using a single dose of chloroquine as it is not included in our treatment protocol.
Md Rabiul Alam Please share your treatment protocol with us.
In Central America and Caribbean, chloroquine and ivermectin as an antiviral supplemented with azithromycin or doxycycline and zinc have been used quite successfully.