Coronavirus/COVID-19 (No Politics)

highfigh

highfigh

Audioholic Overlord
How would I know? The point is, nurses are able to tell the difference and theses people werent exhibiting symptoms of low oxygen levels. Please dont be so dismissive.
I don't expect YOU to know and I wasn't asking you, but I hope the question of "Is this person having cognitive difficulties at this time?" would be asked before someone declares that the patient is 'lucid'.
 
3db

3db

Audioholic Overlord
I don't expect YOU to know and I wasn't asking you, but I hope the question of "Is this person having cognitive difficulties at this time?" would be asked before someone declares that the patient is 'lucid'.
Again, the nurses would be qualified to tell the state of a person so Im guessing your either responding before you think or your just being difficult with no point being made on your part because you may not agree with the post.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Audioholic Overlord
Again, the nurses would be qualified to tell the state of a person so Im guessing your either responding before you think or your just being difficult with no point being made on your part because you may not agree with the post.
If the patient(s) came were admitted after the disease had already caused their state of lucidity (referred to ALOC, meaning 'Altered Level Of Consciousness') to slip, they wouldn't be able to make an accurate comment unless they actually knew the patient(s). ALOC is often mentioned by 911 callers and EMS personnel when they reach the location of
the call, or by hospital staff upon arrival and that level of consciousness can change between the time of arrival and being removed from the ventilator.

I don't know why you need to be argumentative when we're all just asking questions and offering our thoughts. Do you feel a great sense of pride when you do that?
 
3db

3db

Audioholic Overlord
If the patient(s) came were admitted after the disease had already caused their state of lucidity (referred to ALOC, meaning 'Altered Level Of Consciousness') to slip, they wouldn't be able to make an accurate comment unless they actually knew the patient(s). ALOC is often mentioned by 911 callers and EMS personnel when they reach the location of
the call, or by hospital staff upon arrival and that level of consciousness can change between the time of arrival and being removed from the ventilator.

I don't know why you need to be argumentative when we're all just asking questions and offering our thoughts. Do you feel a great sense of pride when you do that?
Based on the definition of lucidity, people who are oxygen deprived dont become lucid. Most people become confused, have difficulty making coherent sentences. Thats why I dont understand where you are coming from at all. How many strangers have you met did you judge as being mentally alert and on the ball (lucid) without knowing their past? I take no pride in arguing but your responses to my posts in this particular thread makes no sense.


lu·cid·i·ty
/lo͞oˈsidədē/

noun
  1. 1.
    clarity of expression; intelligibility.
    "his lecture combined intellectual lucidity and passion"
  2. 2.
    LITERARY
    brightness; luminosity.
 
Swerd

Swerd

Audioholic Spartan
The New England Journal of Medicine just posted an article about remdesivir administered on a compassionate-use basis.

My initial impression is that the results are encouraging (18% mortality of patients on vents compared to 80% mortality for patients on vents in NYC). I realize there's no way to know for sure what other factors may have contributed to the better outcomes in these cases.

>>>Results
Of the 61 patients who received at least one dose of remdesivir, data from 8 could not be analyzed (including 7 patients with no post-treatment data and 1 with a dosing error). Of the 53 patients whose data were analyzed, 22 were in the United States, 22 in Europe or Canada, and 9 in Japan. At baseline, 30 patients (57%) were receiving mechanical ventilation and 4 (8%) were receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. During a median follow-up of 18 days, 36 patients (68%) had an improvement in oxygen-support class, including 17 of 30 patients (57%) receiving mechanical ventilation who were extubated. A total of 25 patients (47%) were discharged, and 7 patients (13%) died; mortality was 18% (6 of 34) among patients receiving invasive ventilation and 5% (1 of 19) among those not receiving invasive ventilation.

Conclusions
In this cohort of patients hospitalized for severe Covid-19 who were treated with compassionate-use remdesivir, clinical improvement was observed in 36 of 53 patients (68%). Measurement of efficacy will require ongoing randomized, placebo-controlled trials of remdesivir therapy. (Funded by Gilead Sciences.)<<<

Thanks for posting that NEJM article. It's certainly encouraging to read. So far, it's the best available info on drugs that might inhibit or slow down SARS-CoV-2 infections.

I remind readers that this report shows the collective results of 53 patients who received remdesivir on an expanded access basis, previously called compassionate use. These patients were not on a randomized controlled clinical trial, where their clinical outcome could be directly compared with similar patients (matched by age, disease, clinical treatment, and other risk factors). Those trials are now underway, but no results are yet available.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Audioholic Overlord
Based on the definition of lucidity, people who are oxygen deprived dont become lucid. Most people become confused, have difficulty making coherent sentences. Thats why I dont understand where you are coming from at all. How many strangers have you met did you judge as being mentally alert and on the ball (lucid) without knowing their past? I take no pride in arguing but your responses to my posts in this particular thread makes no sense.


lu·cid·i·ty
/lo͞oˈsidədē/

noun
  1. 1.
    clarity of expression; intelligibility.
    "his lecture combined intellectual lucidity and passion"
  2. 2.
    LITERARY
    brightness; luminosity.
Are these tests objective?
 
Swerd

Swerd

Audioholic Spartan
I've been seeing articles about oral vaccines. I will concede I do not fully understand how these (supposedly) work.
Which part don't you understand, the oral vaccine part, or the non-replicating viral vector part? Both can be long answers. It can be tough trying to 'splain every thing when only a part is needed.
I remember that I blew this off Friday evening. I must have been getting hungry, tired, or both :rolleyes:.

Your questions about oral vaccines is a very good one, with a complex answer. One that will result in another reading assignment. See the Wikipedia pages for Polio Vaccine and Peyer's patch. Both oral and injected vaccines against Polio were developed in the 1950s. Both were tested, and one of the oral vaccines, the Sabin vaccine, was found to be the most effective. It was effective because it was an "attenuated" vaccine instead of a chemically inactivated vaccine as was the injected Salk vaccine. And also because the Sabin vaccine was taken orally, it was more effective and longer lasting. It resulted in two types of immunity, humoral (antibody-mediated which clears infectious viral particles from the blood stream) and cell-mediated which can be more effective with viral diseases because it kills host cells which are virally infected. The injected chemically inactived Salk vaccine resulted only in humoral immunity. Read the Polio vaccine Wikipedia page for details.

Peyer's patches are important but small structures located in the small intestine. They play an important role in developing immunity and became the preferred route of vaccination, especially for polio which resides in the gastrointestinal (GI) tract for part of it's life cycle. They're elongated thickenings of the intestinal epithelium measuring a few centimeters long. About 100 Peyer's patches are found in humans. The lumen of the GI tract is exposed to the external environment. Much of it is populated with microorganisms, some are potentially pathogenic. Peyer's patches play an important role in the immune surveillance of the GI lumen and they facilitate production of immune responses.

Peyer's patches are the immune equivalent of standing flea markets for the immune system. Pathogenic microorganisms and other antigens entering the intestinal tract encounter a variety of immune cells, macrophages, dendritic cells, B-lymphocytes, and T-lymphocytes in Peyer's patches. Peyer's patches thus act for the GI system much as the tonsils act for the respiratory system, trapping foreign particles, surveilling them, destroying them, and starting a lasting immune response against them. A major reason why the oral Polio vaccine works better is because it sent the attenuated polio virus to the Peyer's patches. The injected Salk vaccine bypassed it.

The question about using a non-replicating viral vector is more technical, but easier to answer. As you can understand, the FDA is highly concerned about a vaccine delivering a virus known to cause serious disease to human. They want to be certain the virus vaccine develops immunity but cannot cause the viral disease itself.

A modern method to achieve this is to package the genes for the viral envelope proteins of SARS-CoV-2, in another virus – a vector, such as Adenovirus type 5 (Ad-5) – that causes no disease on it's own in humans. The Ad-5 virus is also engineered to lack the necessary genes for replicate on it's own. It can deliver the genes needed to develop immunity against SARS-CoV-2, or any other virus, without any danger of introducing a viral infection, even in a patient who might be immune compromised. So no-replicating viral vectors are safer to use in vaccines.
 
M

Mr._Clark

Full Audioholic
I remember that I blew this off Friday evening. I must have been getting hungry, tired, or both :rolleyes:.

Your questions about oral vaccines is a very good one, with a complex answer. One that will result in another reading assignment. See the Wikipedia pages for Polio Vaccine and Peyer's patch. Both oral and injected vaccines against Polio were developed in the 1950s. Both were tested, and one of the oral vaccines, the Sabin vaccine, was found to be the most effective. It was effective because it was an "attenuated" vaccine instead of a chemically inactivated vaccine as was the injected Salk vaccine. And also because the Sabin vaccine was taken orally, it was more effective and longer lasting. It resulted in two types of immunity, humoral (antibody-mediated which clears infectious viral particles from the blood stream) and cell-mediated which can be more effective with viral diseases because it kills host cells which are virally infected. The injected chemically inactived Salk vaccine resulted only in humoral immunity. Read the Polio vaccine Wikipedia page for details.

Peyer's patches are important but small structures located in the small intestine. They play an important role in developing immunity and became the preferred route of vaccination, especially for polio which resides in the gastrointestinal (GI) tract for part of it's life cycle. They're elongated thickenings of the intestinal epithelium measuring a few centimeters long. About 100 Peyer's patches are found in humans. The lumen of the GI tract is exposed to the external environment. Much of it is populated with microorganisms, some are potentially pathogenic. Peyer's patches play an important role in the immune surveillance of the GI lumen and they facilitate production of immune responses.

Peyer's patches are the immune equivalent of standing flea markets for the immune system. Pathogenic microorganisms and other antigens entering the intestinal tract encounter a variety of immune cells, macrophages, dendritic cells, B-lymphocytes, and T-lymphocytes in Peyer's patches. Peyer's patches thus act for the GI system much as the tonsils act for the respiratory system, trapping foreign particles, surveilling them, destroying them, and starting a lasting immune response against them. A major reason why the oral Polio vaccine works better is because it sent the attenuated polio virus to the Peyer's patches. The injected Salk vaccine bypassed it.

The question about using a non-replicating viral vector is more technical, but easier to answer. As you can understand, the FDA is highly concerned about a vaccine delivering a virus known to cause serious disease to human. They want to be certain the virus vaccine develops immunity but cannot cause the viral disease itself.

A modern method to achieve this is to package the genes for the viral envelope proteins of SARS-CoV-2, in another virus – a vector, such as Adenovirus type 5 (Ad-5) – that causes no disease on it's own in humans. The Ad-5 virus is also engineered to lack the necessary genes for replicate on it's own. It can deliver the genes needed to develop immunity against SARS-CoV-2, or any other virus, without any danger of introducing a viral infection, even in a patient who might be immune compromised. So no-replicating viral vectors are safer to use in vaccines.
Thanks Swerd, your insight is appreciated.
 
M

Mr._Clark

Full Audioholic
I'm tempted to look into volunteering for COVID-19 clinical vaccine trials.

If nothing else, I like their marketing strategy. "SARS-CoV-2 mRNA-1273" is really creative, snappy, branding that should appeal a wide range of consumers in the market for the latest in trendy new spring vaccines. I just wish I had thought of it.

 

Latest posts


newsletter
  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top