• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

Discussion thread V - COVID-19 (new coronavirus)

Status
Not open for further replies.
"Dobber said that AstraZeneca could “simply not take the risk” of being faced with liability claims if “in four years the vaccine is showing side effects.”"

Four years? What the heck are they afraid of going wrong that far down the line? If they want their customers to be confident, they should be more confident themselves.
 
https://arxiv.org/abs/2006.11609
Temporal data series of COVID-19 epidemics in the USA, Asia and Europe suggests a selective sweep of SARS-CoV-2 Spike D614G variant
"The epidemiological curves were compared at early and late epidemic stages. At early stages, where containment measures were still not fully implemented, the viral variants are supposed to be unconstrained and its growth curves might approximate the free viral dynamics. Our analysis shows that the D614G prevalence and the growth rates of COVID-19 epidemic curves are correlated in the USA, Asia and Europe. Our results suggest a selective sweep that can be explained, at least in part, by a propagation advantage of this variant, in other words, that the molecular level effects of D614G have sufficient impact on population transmission dynamics as to be detected by differences in rate coefficients of epidemic growth curves. "
 
The use of Convalescent Plasma seems to be highly politicized. As usual these days. If you look at the results of the studies so far with Convalescent Plasma, you can see this hardly works? May be if you are early, very early ? Yet to be proven?
 
It seems all of the treatments are politicized. So much money is at stake. Greed is running rampant. This site has a policy since the beginning that people should consult their medical practitioner about any drug, vaccine, treatment etc. Frankly, I don't know what to believe at all.
 
The objections to this are the silliest so far. On NBC National New last night the reporter acknowledged the doctor being interviewed's statement that the efficacy has not yet been established and then asked the doctor what the biggest drawback or risk of this emergency approval was. The doctor's answer was that if people could ask for it then they might not have enough people to do their double-blind study with. So basically, while it may not help, it isn't going to hurt... so, if it is not very effective we are wasting time and money (which everybody just seems to think we can buy our way out of this pandemic), but if it does work, we need to let more people die getting placebo so we can tell you it does work...
 
https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-35331/v1
it's slow in my firefox, better get the pdf
the first 4 pages list the authors ,no "conclusion"

preexisting T-cell responses in 81% of unexposed
similarity to common cold human coronaviruse
higher in the convalescent donors compared to unexposed individuals,

-----------------------------------------------

so, shouldn't we deliberately spread suitable common-cold coronaviruses ?
I assume these 81% were in Germany. is it maybe less in Spain,UK,Bel,NYC,
(and more in East-Europe)
and that's the reason that they had a more severe 1st wave ?

and was it maybe high in spring from a common-cold-wave and wanes now ,
so Europe gets a 2nd wave ?

-----------------------------------------------

what a luck for mankind, that we had common cold coronaviruses !
Imagine how it had went without them.
 
They are concerned about the potential for ADE responses somewhere down the line i.e when there is a significantly mutated variety of the virus. It simply cannot be ruled in or out by anyone at this point.
 
Censored Contagion II

A Timeline of Information Control on Chinese Social Media During COVID-19

August 25, 2020
...
Conclusion

The censored content we collected from Chinese social media invites unique reflection on the COVID-19 pandemic and demonstrates the harms of information control.

Throughout the pandemic, information on COVID-19 has been tightly controlled on Chinese social media even after China managed to keep the spread of the virus under control at later stages. The themes of censored content show areas of sensitivity for the Chinese government from how the virus is contained in China, international diplomacy, and ongoing tensions between the U.S. and China. Outside of this political content, we also found censorship of health-related information, including the number of confirmed COVID-19 cases and deaths, as well as references to personal protective equipment supplies and medical facilities. Censorship of this type of health-related information can hinder disease prevention and awareness.For example, if messages on future waves of COVID-19 infections in China are censored on WeChat, the public could be put at risk.

Censorship of COVID-19 on Chinese social media illustrates the ongoing politicization of the pandemic and the importance of fact-based, open, and effective communications pertaining to public health awareness and response.

https://citizenlab.ca/2020/08/censo...trol-on-chinese-social-media-during-covid-19/
 
The aim is to add IgG from recovered patients to provide some dampening in the rate of spread of the virus in that host. The problems are when to give it - if you give it very early I should mop up some of the virus. Is this a good thing? It may be in in patients whose in innate immune response is not getting on top of the virus fast enough, on the other hand a lot of people are asymptomatic, or only mildly so, in which case you may make the virus clear without making a robust adaptive host immune response giving little or no protection to reinfection. If given after a week or more, post symptom onset there is likely to be little or no virus present so the IgG will be of no use.
The other problem with serum, as apposed to mAbs, is it also includes lots of clotting agents. One problem that is occurring is thrombotic complications (one study showed clots in 40%) from week 2+ in patients needing hospitalisation and blood thinners are becoming a common late stage and post release medication. Serum is probably not a good idea after week two. The compassionate use of a number of potentially useful medications has been limited to severe late stage cases which has generated data which shows the agent as not helpful, which should be read as 'not helpful in these patients' but gets the treatment a bad name because it was tried in a group that were never likely to benefit from it anyway. The MSM, and twitter tend not to notice these subtleties but settle for 'It does not work' headlines.
 
gs this paper is discussed in Immune https://www.microbe.tv/immune/immune-34/
It is an interesting read but does not give any real indication if these CD4+ cells are doing anything to modulate SARS-CoV-2's course of infection. It does not cover the CD8 response. The discussion at the link looks at the MHC Class2 peptide presentation and estimates, given a peptide length of about 15NT, that the signal specificity is probably limited to about 3 or 4NT. Given that many sequences motifs are conserved across the whole Linnean tree this is likely to occur to a certain degree even without prior CoV infection. The CD4+ activation of plasma B cells has safeguards to prevent this activation without a significant threshold of a given antigen. The other small niggle with the paper is they split their peptides into two groups, based on high and low homology between SARS-2 & common cold CoVs, based on the sequence i.e. primary protein sequence rather than its tertiary proteins structure and presentation.
At least that is my understanding of the situation - which could well be wrong given my limited knowledge of the subtleties of the immune system.
 
The doctor in Seattle I've mentioned before said his wife's father is a doctor in China. He has been in trouble with the CCP for speaking out on the Internet three times so far. First time they cut his access to the Internet for 1 week, then 3 months, then the last time he was silenced for a full year.
 

FluTrackers.com
@FluTrackers
?
16h
Hey everyone. Thank you for following.

It has been a tough year.

Try to hang in there. Everyone is doing their best to get through.

A Big Hug.

The Team at FluTrackers


balouft.webp
 
FluTrackers.com
@FluTrackers
?
3m
Just wanted to emphasize that everyone needs to act as their own health advocate.

Do not believe anything from the internet. Always objectively assess info from any gov or pharma.

Consult your medical practitioner.

Always question. Use your common sense.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom