Coronavirus

[mtrycrafts]

What percentage of votes do the marginal parties receive? Like it, or not- the two gorillas in the room will continue to win elections until the others can come up with a viable candidate.

I have no idea of all the other parties total but someone posted here that the two gorillas were the minority? Or perhaps I misunderstood their meaning by it. After all, they (2 gorillas)received most of the votes.
Anyhow, they should also have a seat at the table. How many overall and what the leftovers get is another debate.

 

[Swerd]

I was hoping that people like Swerd and TLS Guy and others with good knowledge could look this over and see if it has anything good in it.

Those two links about 'aptamer' treatment don't provide much to look over. They're press releases. I'd have to look for a scientific publication on this before I could say anything.

Speaking of press releases, I saw this report on remdesivir in today's Washington Post, in the Business section:

Gilead says NIH will release positive results on remdesivir as treatment for coronavirus​

"In brief remarks at the White House Wednesday, Anthony Fauci, chief of NIAID and a key advisor on Trump’s task force, said the result "doesn’t seem like a knockout'' but that it was a strong "proof of concept'' for the drug, according to a pool report."​

​

"Fauci said the drug had produced only a minor improvement on deaths — 11 percent for the placebo arm of the study and 8 percent for those treated with remdesivir. He cited a "31 percent improvement'' with the drug, without providing details."​

I think that all depends on how many patients were on the remdesivir arm and the placebo arm. If it's small, under 100, then a difference of 8% vs. 11% is insignificant. Larger than 100 patients/arm, let's say 300 to 500, it's statistically significant. But as Faucci said, it's not a knockout.

 

[Danzilla31]

Those two links about 'aptamer' treatment don't provide much to look over. They're press releases. I'd have to look for a scientific publication on this before I could say anything.

Speaking of press releases, I saw this report on remdesivir in today's Washington Post, in the Business section:

Gilead says NIH will release positive results on remdesivir as treatment for coronavirus​

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/04/29/gilead-says-positive-results-coronavirus-drug-remdesivir-will-be-released-by-nih/

"In brief remarks at the White House Wednesday, Anthony Fauci, chief of NIAID and a key advisor on Trump’s task force, said the result "doesn’t seem like a knockout'' but that it was a strong "proof of concept'' for the drug, according to a pool report."​

​

"Fauci said the drug had produced only a minor improvement on deaths — 11 percent for the placebo arm of the study and 8 percent for those treated with remdesivir. He cited a "31 percent improvement'' with the drug, without providing details."​

Ok no problem yeah it is preliminary but thanks for looking it over for me

 

[mtrycrafts]

...

​

"Fauci said the drug had produced only a minor improvement on deaths — 11 percent for the placebo arm of the study and 8 percent for those treated with remdesivir. He cited a "31 percent improvement'' with the drug, without providing details."​

I think that all depends on how many patients were on the remdesivir arm and the placebo arm. If it's small, under 100, then a difference of 8% vs. 11% is insignificant. Larger than 100 patients/arm, let's say 300 to 500, it's statistically significant. But as Faucci said, it's not a knockout.

I saw this on TV this morning.
I think Fauci said it reduced hospital stay or treatment from 15 or 16 days to 10 or 11, that is where that 31% comes from. Perhaps most of those would have survived anyway but spent less time there.

 

[Swerd]

I saw this on TV this morning.
I think Fauci said it reduced hospital stay or treatment from 15 or 16 days to 10 or 11, that is where that 31% comes from. Perhaps most of those would have survived anyway but spent less time there.

I just saw more info on CNN. It says what you said.

FDA will reportedly authorize use of remdesivir for Covid-19 after trial shows 'positive effect' on recovery time

Researchers released some good news about a possible treatment for coronavirus Wednesday -- evidence that the experimental drug remdesivir might help patients recover more quickly from the infection.

www.cnn.com

 

[TLS Guy]

I just saw more info on CNN. It says what you said.

FDA will reportedly authorize use of remdesivir for Covid-19 after trial shows 'positive effect' on recovery time

Researchers released some good news about a possible treatment for coronavirus Wednesday -- evidence that the experimental drug remdesivir might help patients recover more quickly from the infection.

www.cnn.com

As I stated earlier, I thought Remdisivir was the most promising candidate. The problem is there is no antiviral that is equivalent to antibiotics for susceptible infections. So they just give you some edge. But if they can shorten ICU and life support time that is a useful edge.

I don't see a way out of this mess until we have a vaccine.

Germany released slightly, but the R naught has gone above 1 and they are having to clamp down again.

I do think the Oxford program has not been given near enough prominence here. I think the chance of success is very high and I'm not the only one. This wold give people more hope and the patience to save lives.

Until that happens the economy will not open up anyway. That is a far bigger pipe dream that getting a vaccine by fall.

The CEO of Fullers brewery in London was on the BBC news yesterday. They also have a hundred pubs in the London area. He said if he opened up and spread tables six feet apart and people could not 'prop' the bar and socialize, then he thought business would be off 70%. So he said it would be cheaper to be closed than open. So they will stay closed until there is total control. When it comes down to it that will be the decision for many businesses.

Airlines will be a particular problem. They are starting to file one by one,with Lufthansa declaring yesterday. Virgin Australia is in administration and Virgin Atlantic looking for a buyer with no success. British airways are on the edge of administration.

So there must be some creative solutions proposed to economic recovery, in this case for lifting the curve so to speak. So all ideas need to be on the table for shortening the length and depth of this curve. Proposals for increased death and destruction are not a solution and will have the opposite effect.

 

[Danzilla31]

As I stated earlier, I thought Remdisivir was the most promising candidate. The problem is there is no antiviral that is equivalent to antibiotics for susceptible infections. So they just give you some edge. But if they can shorten ICU and life support time that is a useful edge.

I don't see a way out of this mess until we have a vaccine.

Germany released slightly, but the R naught has gone above 1 and they are having to clamp down again.

I do think the Oxford program has not been given near enough prominence here. I think the chance of success is very high and I'm not the only one. This wold give people more hope and the patience to save lives.

Until that happens the economy will not open up anyway. That is a far bigger pipe dream that getting a vaccine by fall.

The CEO of Fullers brewery in London was on the BBC news yesterday. They also have a hundred pubs in the London area. He said if he opened up and spread tables six feet apart and people could not 'prop' the bar and socialize, then he thought business would be off 70%. So he said it would be cheaper to be closed than open. So they will stay closed until there is total control. When it comes down to it that will be the decision for many businesses.

Airlines will be a particular problem. They are starting to file one by one,with Lufthansa declaring yesterday. Virgin Australia is in administration and Virgin Atlantic looking for a buyer with no success. British airways are on the edge of administration.

So there must be some creative solutions proposed to economic recovery, in this case for lifting the curve so to speak. So all ideas need to be on the table for shortening the length and depth of this curve. Proposals for increased death and destruction are not a solution and will have the opposite effect.

Unfortunately the same thing applies to your last sentence in reverse

Not opening the economy until the curve is flattened enough to satisfy the health sector is just as if not more destructive in the long run

The state's aren't lifting in the US because they want there doing it because they HAVE to

You can't go another even 6 weeks on total economic lockdown without catastrophic consequences maybe the UK can but not the US

I hate to say this and in my heart I was afraid of this from the very beginning

But the truth is and I really prayed that it wasn't but when it got past China's borders we blew it we just blew it and I'm not pointing fingers here because there is more then enough blame to go around and it's not productive everybody in every country screwed up CDC the WHO everybody

You said it in an earlier post we are at war and I agree but the war isn't in eradicating this virus only

It's in keeping society at large in the world as functional as possible

The answer isn't on your side nor on mine but it's in the middle

And the bottom line is people are going to have to die before this is all over

We're going to have to slowly open up maintain distancing and hope we don't lose too many as we go along

Protect the weak and susceptible as best as we can but we have to start back up not stupidly or full blown but it's not an option at this point

As horrible as this virus is the data is already suggesting that it's not as lethal as previous outbreaks and at it's level of lethality you cannot justify plunging the world into a major depression and economic collapse

In war you can't destroy the many to protect a few and it's time some people accepted that

I'm sorry I've already had friends catch it I know people that have lost others to it one of my friends at work his mother died from it

But even he knows when he talked to me that we have to keep working he was at work within 3 days why? Not because he wants to but economically because he has too

Too many have no choice and it is unfair to force what your asking upon them to save the absolute number of lives we can from this

Hell I'll probably catch it at work eventually and I could die

But Id rather die on my feet then cowering in a hole waiting for a vaccine that quiet frankly is even if it's accelerated too far down the pipeline

I repeat and I hate to say this but it's the truth FAR more people will die from economic collapse far more then will die from the virus

It's time some people accepted this start using social distancing try to protect our vulnerable as best as we realistically can to start things up again SMARTLY and learn to live with this thing trying our best to keep the curve as flat as we can and triaging hotspots when they flare up

Because what your suggesting is just as unrealistic as people that want everything to go back to the way it was before by tommorow

What your suggesting you might as well start suggesting end of the world biblical crap because to just say no economy for months until theres a vaccine well there won't be literally anything left to come back too

 

[Danzilla31]

Look I'll end it with this and this will be my last post

National lockdowns were doomed to fail I agree with Sweden's scientists on this

Once you lock it down how do you even open it back up? Where do you even start to dig yourself back out of it?

We're criticized for making policy to open up because we don't have the right data. Well one thing I am disappointed in with scientists and the news is we got everybody worked up and we made all these huge drastic measures but they didn't have the data right on that side of the fence either. We just plugged in the worst case scenario and away we went with the most extreme reactions we could

I'll give you an example that paper that talked about those kids getting sick with that disease from COVID? They don't know that yet it's even stated in there in the paper it hasn't been studied enough peer reviewed it hasn't been PROVEN that that's what's going on. Yet we shotgun it all over the world news and just keep adding on to what this virus can do without ABSOLUTE studied reviewed proof it can do all of those things or if it does to how many?

I'm very disappointed in science for that people started dieing and even the science community just panicked you don't even have the true data for what the true death rate is we the general public were owed that transperacy from the start and it wasn't given to us

Everyone just made predictions based on models with inconsistent data and we were supposed to just accept it like it's gospel

Many forget the lockdown was only supposed to be for buying us some time it was never supposed to go on and on and look were we're at now

Quaranting hotspots as they developed really was our only realistic option and just putting up resources to them as every thing else kept running as best as it could was really our only option after this broke out

But nobody has the balls to say that because that means that a lot of people were going to die

And who wants to have to face that?

It's too late for any of that any way we're here where were at

You have your political side: your health side that wants to stop the virus but eradicate every thing else in society: your side that wants to open up the economy stupidly: and your side that wants to open it up as realistically as possible

I know my side whether it's popular or not Doc you have your side I respect where your coming from

It really doesn't matter anyway nothing we say here matters because at least in MY case I can't effect policy

So we'll just have to see which side gets to make the policy and well have to pray it works

And that's really all there is to it at this point

Sorry for the length but if it's the last thing I'm going to say then I just rather get it off my chest

Thank you Doc Swede and all the rest Jerry so many I can't even name for being patient with me as I tried to understand all this

I don't know many of you but I care about all of you you have no idea and I pray we all get through this thank you for all your time and patience and just kindness and knowledge you've shown to me on this thread

 

[Swerd]

The preliminary results from that remdesivir trial we heard about today look good enough, in my opinion, for provisional approval by the FDA. Other remdesivir trials presently in progress will continue to treat patients. But in the meantime this drug could be provisionally approved, while awaiting the results from those other trials.

I'm impressed that over 1000 patients on this trial were enrolled and treated so quickly. I guess everyone was highly motivated to get results ASAP.

For now, remdesivir is the only arrow in the quiver. I hope shortening hospital stays from 15 to 11 days, among severely ill patients who require hospitalization, will be enough to make a difference.

Faucci thinks this is a meaningful result. I wouldn't argue with him.

The question now becomes what about Covid-19 patients who do not need hospitalization? Will they also benefit from remdesivir? This drug is given IV, which cannot be done at home. Was it given by continuous IV, or shorter IV infusions? Will it require overnight stays in a hospital, or will it need a few hours in an IV infusion center? I guess these questions are good to have.

 

[Swerd]

Another thought…

The remdesivir trial was a randomized, placebo controlled, double-blind clinical trial of more than 1,000 people infected by SARS-CoV-2, all of whom required hospitalization. There were then randomly selected into two groups of about 500 patients each. One group, the experimental group, received remdesivir, and the other group received standard care for Covid-19 along with a mock drug, better known as a placebo. They were the control arm. This is said to be the gold standard for clinical efficacy trials.

Wouldn't it be wonderful if this was also the gold standard for listening tests in audio?

 

[Kvn_Walker]

Wouldn't it be wonderful if this was also the gold standard for listening tests in audio?

We all know that the gold standard for testing in audio is asking how much it cost before actually listening to it.

 

[mtrycrafts]

We all know that the gold standard for testing in audio is asking how much it cost before actually listening to it.

Then, make sure your sight is working properly, not drowsy or hazed over. After all, you certainly need your eyes.

 

[highfigh]

I have no idea of all the other parties total but someone posted here that the two gorillas were the minority? Or perhaps I misunderstood their meaning by it. After all, they (2 gorillas)received most of the votes.
Anyhow, they should also have a seat at the table. How many overall and what the leftovers get is another debate.

If the Independents want to be taken seriously, they need more people to declare their independence from the two gorillas which, by receiving the most votes, makes them anything but a minority. The Green Party needs to find a way to be taken seriously because, honestly, they need real solutions, not hopes and dreams. The last Independent candidate who seemed to have any small chance went off the rails pretty early and just disappeared, so they had nothing. What will they bring to the table?

 

[shadyJ]

I was expecting this, but AXPONA has officially been cancelled. Ah well.

 

[Dan]

The preliminary results from that remdesivir trial we heard about today look good enough, in my opinion, for provisional approval by the FDA. Other remdesivir trials presently in progress will continue to treat patients. But in the meantime this drug could be provisionally approved, while awaiting the results from those other trials.

I'm impressed that over 1000 patients on this trial were enrolled and treated so quickly. I guess everyone was highly motivated to get results ASAP.

For now, remdesivir is the only arrow in the quiver. I hope shortening hospital stays from 15 to 11 days, among severely ill patients who require hospitalization, will be enough to make a difference.

Faucci thinks this is a meaningful result. I wouldn't argue with him.

The question now becomes what about Covid-19 patients who do not need hospitalization? Will they also benefit from remdesivir? This drug is given IV, which cannot be done at home. Was it given by continuous IV, or shorter IV infusions? Will it require overnight stays in a hospital, or will it need a few hours in an IV infusion center? I guess these questions are good to have.

IV drugs can and often are given at home. Typically this is done with chemotherapy and people requiring long term antibiotics that must be given IV for deep bacterial infections such as bone infections (osteomyelitis) or heart valve infections that need six weeks of therapy. They are administeredt through a Peripherally Inserted Central venous Catheter (PICC) usually into the non dominant arm. A small amount of tubimg hangs out of the arm and the IV is dripped or injrcted in under sterile techniaue. Often this can be done by a partner or the patient once they are trained how. Sometimes it is done by a visiting nurse. I am unsure of the requirements for remdesivir administration but hopefully it could be self administered given the patients are in isolation. I searched for the details but was unable to find the nitty gritty of administration except for dosing. (Need to know how much saline it is diluted with, what time frame it should be given over, and any immediate reactions to be observed during administration).

PICC lines are inserted by interventional radiologists under fluoroscopy or trained IV therapy nurses blindly followed by a chest x ray to confirm location of the catheter. The most common problems are infection (the site of entry must be cleaned and the port cleaned with alcohol each use and flush) and clotting due to the presence of a foreign object in the vein. This may be a particular problem inthese patients who are known to be hypercoagulable (prone to clotting) as a part of the covid-19 disease spectrum.

 

[GO-NAD!]

On a different note, does anyone know why the virus appears to live longer on solid surfaces (metal, plastic, etc) than on paper/cardboard? Could it be a dessicating effect?

 

[Swerd]

On a different note, does anyone know why the virus appears to live longer on solid surfaces (metal, plastic, etc) than on paper/cardboard? Could it be a dessicating effect?

Yes, it could be drying out.

The same has been seen with other viruses or bacteria. If you apply some known amount to solid non-porous surfaces, such as a plastic cutting board, you can recover more than if you applied it to a wooden cutting board.

 

[mtrycrafts]

Fact check link that should be consulted frequently:

Trump's COVID-19 Testing Claim Is Way Off - FactCheck.org

The United States has not done more COVID-19 testing than “every country combined,” as President Donald Trump claimed in remarks during a recent press briefing.

www.factcheck.org

world statistics:

COVID Live Update: 144,264,807 Cases and 3,066,213 Deaths from the Coronavirus - Worldometer

Live statistics and coronavirus news tracking the number of confirmed cases, recovered patients, tests, and death toll due to the COVID-19 coronavirus from Wuhan, China. Coronavirus counter with new cases, deaths, and number of tests per 1 Million population. Historical data and info. Daily...

www.worldometers.info

Check out the last two columns, total and per 1M population. Interactive and you can rank it. Per million population, we are way down and almost 19,000 per.
Even if you add up Russia and Germany it is almost the same as US. All you need is Belgium and have more tests done.

 

[Swerd]

Yesterday many news reports announced positive results for remdesivir in treating Covid-19 patients. I found them so vague that I had trouble understanding their full impact. I finally found the link for that remdesivir clinical trial, and another link for an NIH press release describing it's results so far.

The clinical trial itself:

ClinicalTrials.gov

clinicaltrials.gov

This is a very big trial, more than 1,000 patients, taking place in as many as 100 different locations around the world. It's still going on. It was designed to allow interim analysis while the trial is still going on. This can give results faster than if we had to wait for final results:

"There will be interim monitoring to introduce new arms and allow early stopping for futility, efficacy, or safety. If one therapy proves to be efficacious, then this treatment may become the control arm for comparison(s) with new experimental treatment(s)."​

The NIH press release from April 29, 2020.

NIH clinical trial shows Remdesivir accelerates recovery from advanced COVID-19

Preliminary results indicate that patients who received remdesivir had a 31% faster time to recovery than those who received placebo.

www.nih.gov

Two paragraphs from the press release said:

An independent data and safety monitoring board (DSMB) overseeing the trial met on April 27 to review data and shared their interim analysis with the study team. Based upon their review of the data, they noted that remdesivir was better than placebo from the perspective of the primary endpoint, time to recovery, a metric often used in influenza trials. Recovery in this study was defined as being well enough for hospital discharge or returning to normal activity level.​

​

Preliminary results indicate that patients who received remdesivir had a 31% faster time to recovery than those who received placebo (p<0.001). Specifically, the median time to recovery was 11 days for patients treated with remdesivir compared with 15 days for those who received placebo. Results also suggested a survival benefit, with a mortality rate of 8.0% for the group receiving remdesivir versus 11.6% for the placebo group (p=0.059).​

interim analysis – This was the analysis of about 400 patients, half of whom received remdesivir. The faster time-to-recovery for remdesivir patients met the study's primary goal at the interim analysis time point. The p value, p<0.001, means that this data fit the statistical model's prediction extremely well. In non-statistical language, this means the results are highly reliable. Data from a secondary goal, patient survival, had a p value of 0.059. In most statistical analyses of this kind of data, a p value of <0.05 is desired. So, p=0.059 is close but no cigar. Hence the words "suggested a survival benefit" are used, instead of saying the data demonstrated or indicated a survival benefit.

Preliminary results – This trial is still going on. It's final results will be evaluated closely at a later time. It is possible that the final results may differ from those reported after interim analysis.

Overall, these results for remdesivir are very encouraging.

Compare the remdesivir reports with those we previously saw with hydroxychloroquine. Instead of a well designed clinical trial of hundreds, we were told "What have you got to loose?".

 

[chris357]

Fact check link that should be consulted frequently:

Trump's COVID-19 Testing Claim Is Way Off - FactCheck.org

The United States has not done more COVID-19 testing than “every country combined,” as President Donald Trump claimed in remarks during a recent press briefing.

www.factcheck.org

world statistics:

COVID Live Update: 144,264,807 Cases and 3,066,213 Deaths from the Coronavirus - Worldometer

Live statistics and coronavirus news tracking the number of confirmed cases, recovered patients, tests, and death toll due to the COVID-19 coronavirus from Wuhan, China. Coronavirus counter with new cases, deaths, and number of tests per 1 Million population. Historical data and info. Daily...

www.worldometers.info

Check out the last two columns, total and per 1M population. Interactive and you can rank it. Per million population, we are way down and almost 19,000 per.
Even if you add up Russia and Germany it is almost the same as US. All you need is Belgium and have more tests done.

But we've done more tests than any other country. I would also add that with people being instructed to stay home unless they feel there symptoms are unmanageable. I feel like the numbers are intentionally slow. Who is controlling the tests? I know that right now it wouldn't be Trump saying I cant get a test done it would be the person at the test facility.