Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Big League Chew

*** OFFICIAL *** COVID-19 CoronaVirus Thread

Recommended Posts

A Sunday dip at Covid worldometers ...but still one of the highest daily new case counts with almost 109,000.  Reported deaths today at almost 3,200.  The usual culprits for the counts - U.S. - Brazil - Russia - Peru - India.  Big jumps the past couple of days (on a low base) in Haiti, which seems worrisome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I said coronavirus would be an afterthought by summer I didn't mean like this. 

  • Like 1
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, jobarules said:

When I said coronavirus would be an afterthought by summer I didn't mean like this. 

:goodposting:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Dinsy Ejotuz said:
4 hours ago, Don Hutson said:

People who are now getting infected are possibly only getting infected by a tiny amount of virus which the body's immune system can better handle.

Why would it be different?

The mere occurrence of viral infection is highly dependent on the number of individual virions trasmitted upon exposure. The exact tipping point is not known (and probably not consistent), but it is known that a healthy person's body will virtually always dispense with a small number of virions pretty handily. I believe that this is even true of the most notorious of viruses such as HIV and Ebola.

Furthermore, severity of viral infection is dependent on "dosage" in the same way. Viral infection is not simply a "yes/no" proposition. It's very much possible to have a sufficient number of SARS-CoV-2 virions to just barely get you over the hump to "measurably infected", but still not enough virions to get you severely sick -- or even all that sick at all.

Where the virus physically ends up in your body also makes a difference. Some COVID infections only latch on to the back of the throat and never make it into the lung tissue. That type of infection usually causes the milder forms of COVID-19 -- the kinds of symptoms easily fought off at home with TLC and rest.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Dinsy Ejotuz said:

I got all that.  But why are people getting smaller viral loads now than previously?

I think simple awareness of the virus — and the behavioral changes that resulted — have significantly reduced viral loads “in the wild”.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Doug B said:

I think simple awareness of the virus — and the behavioral changes that resulted — have significantly reduced viral loads “in the wild”.

Perfect example: Yesterday I went for a bike ride with my daughter. We like to go to a river crossing and see the ducks. There was a hard of hearing very old couple there watching too. My daughter says hello. They start talking to her. Start off keeping distance, slowly but surely they get closer and closer. I keep having to move us slowly backward. Finally after enough time of them continuously approaching I pretend to get a text that says dinner is ready and we go on. 

Previously they would have been right next to us and my daughter would have talked their ears off.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, bcat01 said:

Hard to know what he's arguing.  He's talking medically and then he shifts to a political statement when he talks about "terrorizing the country".  I doubt the virus substantially changed, but they locked down for so long that the numbers are just WAY down.  75 people died yesterday in Italy, so his statement that "In reality, the virus clinically no longer exists in Italy" is false. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was thinking about the impact of the protests.  In Tennessee, 1 out of every 1,000 people in the state have the virus.  There were large crowds of thousands in downtown Nashville.  Let's say there were 10,000 people there.  That would mean there were likely around 10 covid spreaders.  With so many masks, the potential for spreading was definitely lower than normal.  Plus they were outside.  I'd say from that protest, you'd likely see 10-40 people infected.  Not enough to really move the needle, thankfully.  

Events that can cause exponential spread are bad, but if they are rare, they are unlikely to significantly affect things if everyone goes back to their previous safer way of living.

Where the danger would come is if thousands were protesting day after day after day in one area.  That's when 10 people could become 500 in a week or so, and then you could have a whole little army of covid spreaders.  

No idea if this "thesis" is right, but my hope is that any cities that had one-off protests won't see a significant change in cases, maybe just a slight rise or a one-time jump of 100 cases, etc.  Minnesota/DC/NYC/Chicago/LA...these are areas that could see an explosive rise if the protests continue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, jobarules said:

When I said coronavirus would be an afterthought by summer I didn't mean like this. 

:mellow:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, culdeus said:

I'm not high risk and I'm not interested in flying.  Who said you are paranoid?

My idiot x gf that wants to fly me down to see her

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gilead stock falling hard.  I guess a new trial shows less good news than before.  I'm sure the execs made out like bandits somehow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New case counts still flat post "opening" in Texas.  Death counts are flat to down.  The thought that Texas will ever get close to the 700/100k case count that would push toward another "closing" seems very unrealistic at this point.  At least not until the fall, if we think this thing comes back in the fall stronger in some way.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not that anyone cares anymore, but rt.live is now showing 10 states with Rt >1.  It appears to come from a model update (5/20 model update: some states’ Rt have changed because we improved our testing volume adjustments), but clearly that's not all.  4 weeks ago, it was 6 states.

The state with the current highrest Rt: my adopted home state of South Carolina, coming in at 1.14.  4 weeks ago, we were at 0.82, roughly when we ended the shelter-at-home.

Other states with Rt>1: Arizona, West Virginia, Alabama, California, Tennessee, Georgia, Utah, Washington, and Texas.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, moleculo said:

not that anyone cares anymore, but rt.live is now showing 10 states with Rt >1.  It appears to come from a model update (5/20 model update: some states’ Rt have changed because we improved our testing volume adjustments), but clearly that's not all.  4 weeks ago, it was 6 states.

The state with the current highrest Rt: my adopted home state of South Carolina, coming in at 1.14.  4 weeks ago, we were at 0.82, roughly when we ended the shelter-at-home.

Other states with Rt>1: Arizona, West Virginia, Alabama, California, Tennessee, Georgia, Utah, Washington, and Texas.

I only care if CT is under 1.  If they are over 1, then I will claim the data is wrong.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Don Hutson said:

I wonder if getting smaller initial viral loads is the reason it is weaker.  In February and March, people would have been getting exposed to much larger viral loads in Italy which would have made it easier for the virus to overwhelm a person's immune system.

Dr. Bassetti has a Facebook page with translated posts. He seems to believe it's adapting (mutating?) to a less virulent strain in Italy.

 

https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100009356604674

 

Matteo Bassetti

5 hrs · 

Have a nice week everyone,

Covid numbers are more than encouraging. Fewer and less patients in ICU and more and more discharged. The growth of new cases in different regions is between 0.1 % and 0.2 % on the previous day, almost firm.

The COVID patients showing up to our attention today are deeply different from those arriving in our hospitals in March / April. To use an understandable comparison to my children I called the animal world: in March / April COVID was a tiger, today it's a domesticable wild cat. Why? Why? Less viral load and less virulence? Both hypotheses are valid, we are waiting for confirmations from the virology laboratories, already anticipated by San Raffaele and Brescia hospital. Don't say that today the virus is less lethal because we are better at it or because patients arrive at the hospital first. It's true that we are better, but the clinical presentation and the debut of the disease today are very different.

Chapter health passport to go to some regions: I find it little in line with patient s' privacy. It would create a precedent: asking Italians to exhibit the negativity of the buffer or serology would be like asking a young person to exhibit the test for HIV or negative syphilis before entering a disco. In my opinion, information should remain sensitive and evaluated exclusively by doctors.

Finally I found a South Korean scientific article interesting in which shows that those who come back positive after two negative tests do not infect and above all should not be considered the case as a new infection, but it is still the same that continues with less strength and contagisity. To be investigated.

 

Matteo Bassetti

May 29 at 5:52 AM · 

Last night with some colleagues, to team up (detail not recently that allowed us to manage the emergency at San Martino), I went to dinner in a restaurant and I was amazed by the strong interest of the many present on the Covid theme: They asked me what happened to the virus, if it actually lost power...

Well.. let's not forget that the purpose of the virus, whatever it is, is not to kill the host it infected (because in doing so doing he would die risking disappearing) but to survive adapting to the host himself. This is probably what's happening at SarsCOv-2. It's adapting to us, it's losing virulence and strength, because he had a lot of strength before and we felt it with our hands. So we have a less aggressive and less lethal COVID-19 disease today, this is a fact with medical-scientific evidence. The evidence published in medical magazines is still missing (hopefully colleagues in Brescia will do it soon) from the laboratoristic-virological point of view.

This is what many colleagues and myself say, who have had direct contact with the sick people today observing a significant reduction in the number of cases and their severity.

Hydroxicloriquin Chapter: A scientific study has shown that both alone and in combination with antibiotics, has no favourable effect on COVID patients but actually causes some side effects. This drug can no longer be used outside clinical trials. We who used hydroxychloroquine in the early stages of the epidemic, we already realized that there was no positive effects. Now we have proof.

This is the medicine of evidence. Dare and experiment for the good of the patient, but also have the ability to change their mind in the face of new scientific data, if negative.

Happy weekend to all to live responsibly following with scruples and education the three simple rules:

- adequate distance

- mask (if needed and when needed)

- hand wash

You have all been great to date, with few exceptions, keep going.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Statorama said:
Quote

We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection. 

 

How could they have been so wrong on April 1st???

Quote

We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection. Public health authorities define a significant exposure to Covid-19 as face-to-face contact within 6 feet with a patient with symptomatic Covid-19 that is sustained for at least a few minutes (and some say more than 10 minutes or even 30 minutes)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ericttspikes said:

Well.. let's not forget that the purpose of the virus, whatever it is, is not to kill the host it infected (because in doing so doing he would die risking disappearing) but to survive adapting to the host himself.

Wow, that's interesting. Never thought of it like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Statorama said:

New England Journal of Medicine – Wearing mask outside health care facilities offers little protection

Quote

We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection. 

Looking at it backwards -- you don't wear a non-medical face covering in indoor public spaces to protect yourself from infection. You wear a face covering as source control to help protect others. Also from your link, a few paragraphs down:

Quote

More compelling is the possibility that wearing a mask may reduce the likelihood of transmission from asymptomatic and minimally symptomatic health care workers with Covid-19 to other providers and patients. This concern increases as Covid-19 becomes more widespread in the community. We face a constant risk that a health care worker with early infection may bring the virus into our facilities and transmit it to others. Transmission from people with asymptomatic infection has been well documented ...

Replace "health care workers" with "shoppers", "diners", or "visitors". Then replace "other providers and patients" with "other people".

...

The point you highlighted was basically that if you are wearing a non-medical face covering and you end up exposed for sufficient time and in sufficient range to an unmasked infected person's breath, coughing, sneezing, etc. ... then the face covering won't prevent you from getting infected. That much is true -- but not particularly meaningful from a source control angle.

Put a non-medical mask on both the infected cougher/breather AND on the non-infected masked-up person, and otherwise leave the scenario the same ... and the transmission won't happen.

...

Also, that article leans a bit on the fomite angle. I still don't 100% know what's up with fomites exactly -- the CDC has more or less pushed fomites aside as a concern when compared to breathing, coughing, stale indoor air, long exposures to infected people in close-ish range (10-30 minutes in a 10' x 10' room, say).

  • Like 5
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, moleculo said:

not that anyone cares anymore, but rt.live is now showing 10 states with Rt >1.  It appears to come from a model update (5/20 model update: some states’ Rt have changed because we improved our testing volume adjustments), but clearly that's not all.  4 weeks ago, it was 6 states.

The state with the current highrest Rt: my adopted home state of South Carolina, coming in at 1.14.  4 weeks ago, we were at 0.82, roughly when we ended the shelter-at-home.

Other states with Rt>1: Arizona, West Virginia, Alabama, California, Tennessee, Georgia, Utah, Washington, and Texas.

Check in with them a couple times a week.  I like that they put the events of opening back up on the state graphs.  Paints a rather clear picture I am sure will be ignored by the "follow the guidelines!!!!!!!" guys who have all but disappeared.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
54 minutes ago, culdeus said:

New case counts still flat post "opening" in Texas.  Death counts are flat to down.  The thought that Texas will ever get close to the 700/100k case count that would push toward another "closing" seems very unrealistic at this point.  At least not until the fall, if we think this thing comes back in the fall stronger in some way.

Why is that unrealistic?  And why are you saying "if it comes back in some way"?  This isn't a mythical thing, it's a virus.  The reason that new case counts might be flat is because people are still being very cautious.  As long as that caution continues, the status quo in case counts will continue.

If you open things up more, it will spread more.  If you open things up all the way, it will spread exactly like it did before.

The question is whether the status quo is sustainable longterm.

 

Edit: For the record, I don't know where you're getting your "flat" casecount in Texas.  https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/usa/texas/

The last five days are the five highest days on the chart.  It appears things are picking up in Texas.

Edited by shader
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, jamny said:

Wow, that's interesting. Never thought of it like that.

 

19 minutes ago, jamny said:

Well.. let's not forget that the purpose of the virus, whatever it is, is not to kill the host it infected (because in doing so doing he would die risking disappearing) but to survive adapting to the host himself.

I'm no virus expert, but are viruses smart enough to make rational decisions?  I'm serious when I ask this.

I can hear the virus talking to his other little virus friends.
Hey, let's kick this guy's ###, but make sure he survives so he can have more of our babies.
OK, you went too far with this guy, I guess we'll call one of those human doctors to make him better.
Sounds good to me.  And while this doctor guy is fixing Earl, we can jump from Earl to him just like in Green Mile.
 

Edited by TheWinz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, TheWinz said:

 

I'm no virus expert, but are viruses smart enough to make rational decisions?  I'm serious when I ask this.

It's basically evolution not actual decision making I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, TheWinz said:

 

I'm no virus expert, but are viruses smart enough to make rational decisions?  I'm serious when I ask this.

I can hear the virus talking to his other little virus friends.
Hey, let's kick this guy's ###, but make sure he survives so he can have more of our babies.
OK, you went too far with this guy, I guess we'll call one of those human doctors to make him better.
Sounds good to me.  And while this doctor guy is fixing Earl, we can jump from Earl to him just like in Green Mile.
 

if you were going for sarcasm, i missed it

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, joffer said:

if you were going for sarcasm, i missed it

I wasn't.  You missed nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Doug B said:

Looking at it backwards -- you don't wear a non-medical face covering in indoor public spaces to protect yourself from infection. You wear a face covering as source control to help protect others. Also from your link, a few paragraphs down:

Replace "health care workers" with "shoppers", "diners", or "visitors". Then replace "other providers and patients" with "other people".

...

The point you highlighted was basically that if you are wearing a non-medical face covering and you end up exposed for sufficient time and in sufficient range to an unmasked infected person's breath, coughing, sneezing, etc. ... then the face covering won't prevent you from getting infected. That much is true -- but not particularly meaningful from a source control angle.

Put a non-medical mask on both the infected cougher/breather AND on the non-infected masked-up person, and otherwise leave the scenario the same ... and the transmission won't happen.

...

Also, that article leans a bit on the fomite angle. I still don't 100% know what's up with fomites exactly -- the CDC has more or less pushed fomites aside as a concern when compared to breathing, coughing, stale indoor air, long exposures to infected people in close-ish range (10-30 minutes in a 10' x 10' room, say).

That's a great write-up and explanation.

Anyone still attempting to persuade with arguments about general public masks not protecting the wearer is someone that is blindly pushing talking points.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, The Commish said:

Check in with them a couple times a week.  I like that they put the events of opening back up on the state graphs.  Paints a rather clear picture I am sure will be ignored by the "follow the guidelines!!!!!!!" guys who have all but disappeared.

Just updated, Georgia now into the lead at 1.16.  The graph shows their daily cases are flat to down for the last couple weeks, so not sure why the Rt number is increasing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, moleculo said:

not that anyone cares anymore, but rt.live is now showing 10 states with Rt >1.  It appears to come from a model update (5/20 model update: some states’ Rt have changed because we improved our testing volume adjustments), but clearly that's not all.  4 weeks ago, it was 6 states.

The state with the current highrest Rt: my adopted home state of South Carolina, coming in at 1.14.  4 weeks ago, we were at 0.82, roughly when we ended the shelter-at-home.

Other states with Rt>1: Arizona, West Virginia, Alabama, California, Tennessee, Georgia, Utah, Washington, and Texas.

https://github.com/k-sys/covid-19/blob/master/Realtime Rt mcmc.ipynb

 

Just trying to read how they calculate the R values made my head hurt.  They have definitely put a lot of work into it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, phunktrain said:

Just updated, Georgia now into the lead at 1.16.  The graph shows their daily cases are flat to down for the last couple weeks, so not sure why the Rt number is increasing.

It could be any number of factors, but if the daily tests are going down and yet the cases are staying the same, that's one scenario where the numbers would go up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tennessee has four straight days over 400 and today over 500 cases.  Certainly not on a good trend. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, moleculo said:

not that anyone cares anymore, but rt.live is now showing 10 states with Rt >1.  It appears to come from a model update (5/20 model update: some states’ Rt have changed because we improved our testing volume adjustments), but clearly that's not all.  4 weeks ago, it was 6 states.

The state with the current highrest Rt: my adopted home state of South Carolina, coming in at 1.14.  4 weeks ago, we were at 0.82, roughly when we ended the shelter-at-home.

Other states with Rt>1: Arizona, West Virginia, Alabama, California, Tennessee, Georgia, Utah, Washington, and Texas.

I care since I live in said state but I've also come around to the "it's gonna happen whether we stay at home or whether we open up" way of thinking. I haven't seen a case other than some large cities where medical facilities where overwhelmed. I think we can manage this but also keep in mind, we're at the early phases of opening back up. Everywhere I go in the Mill, masks are becoming a thing of the past and social distancing isn't far behind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Today was my first day back in the OR since mid March. I am not sure what to think other than I think I should be paid more. New protocols

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, prosopis said:

Today was my first day back in the OR since mid March. I am not sure what to think other than I think I should be paid more. New protocols

Glad you're back at work, though!

--

Nothing new at Covid worldometers.  Kinda scary that it feels like a lighter day with "only" 103,000 new cases and 3,000 deaths. By the end of the week, the U.S. will be around 2 million cases and 110,000 deaths.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why you should avoid some cough syrups if you think you've got the coronavirus

...

Coughing is one of the hallmark symptoms of being infected with the novel coronavirus. So it's no surprise that many are swigging dextromethorphan, a workhorse cough suppressant, to calm those bone-rattling expulsions of germs and air.

It may be doing them more harm than good, new research suggests.

As part of an ambitious project to identify drugs that could be repurposed to treat COVID-19, an international team of scientists reported Thursday they had happened upon a surprising finding: A common active ingredient in dozens of over-the-counter cough syrups, capsules and lozenges appeared to boost replication of the SARS-CoV-2 virus when tested under laboratory conditions.

That's a long way from concluding that cough medicines containing dextromethorphan will worsen the condition of people infected with the new coronavirus, or that it will make frightening outcomes more likely. But the researchers said the findings are concerning enough for them to advise cough sufferers who might be infected with coronavirus to avoid these medications.

Given that cough suppressants are likely to be widely used by people with coronavirus infections — whether they've got an official diagnosis or not — the researchers called for more research on dextromethorphan's safety.

Dextromethorphan stifles signals in the brain that set off the reflex to cough. It is a key ingredient of virtually all over-the-counter cough and cold formulations, including those sold as Robitussin, Benylyn, DayQuil/NyQuil, Delsym, Triaminic, and Theraflu.

In tests conducted at the Pasteur Institute in Paris, researchers found that when dextromethorphan was introduced into the cells of African green monkeys growing in petri dishes, the subsequent addition of SARS-CoV-2 resulted in more prolific viral growth.

...

But the group's discoveries raise hopes as well.

The research team, led by scientists at the Pasteur Institute and UC San Francisco, had set out to find promising potential treatments for COVID-19 among compounds that were already known to scientists, physicians and consumers. The idea was to identify drug candidates that could be deployed quickly, either separately or in combinations, to short-circuit the coronavirus's ability to infect and sicken humans.

Their search turned up an array of drugs that have long been in use, including the antihistamine clemastine (present in Tavist and Allerhist), the antipsychotic haloperidol (marketed as Haldol), the cough medication cloparastine (which is used widely in Japan, Hong Kong and Europe), and the hormone progesterone, abundantly present in females and used in hormone replacement regimens and in reproductive and sexual-health drugs.

Other promising compounds turned up in their search are still being tested for a variety of cancers, including the experimental drug zotatifin from San Diego-based Effector Therapeutics Inc.; plitidepsin, a substance derived from a Mediterranean marine worm that's being tested in Spain as a treatment for multiple myeloma; and ternatin, a mushroom-derived compound in early testing for its anti-cancer properties.

...

Some of the compounds the team identified are "many times more potent" than remdesivir, a failed Ebola drug that is finding new life as a COVID-19 treatment, said Krogan, senior author of the Nature study.

Krogan and his colleagues noted that many of the compounds would probably work best in tandem with remdesivir rather than competing against it.

"A treatment that will be successful will be combinatorial," said Krogan, a UCSF cellular molecular pharmacologist.

If scientists use his team's insights about where and how the coronavirus might be disrupted, he added, it should help them create a potent cocktail of drugs that will attack and disrupt the virus at many points in its life cycle, he added.

Why you should avoid some cough syrups if you think you've got the coronavirus
LA Times    
Melissa Healy
,LA Times•April 30, 2020
Cough and flu medicines for sale at a drugstore. Health experts warn that a common cough syrup ingredient has pro-viral properties and should be avoided by people with coronavirus infections. <span class="copyright">(Jeff Greenberg / Universal Images Group via Getty)</span>
Cough and flu medicines for sale at a drugstore. Health experts warn that a common cough syrup ingredient has pro-viral properties and should be avoided by people with coronavirus infections. (Jeff Greenberg / Universal Images Group via Getty)
More
Coughing is one of the hallmark symptoms of being infected with the novel coronavirus. So it's no surprise that many are swigging dextromethorphan, a workhorse cough suppressant, to calm those bone-rattling expulsions of germs and air.

It may be doing them more harm than good, new research suggests.

As part of an ambitious project to identify drugs that could be repurposed to treat COVID-19, an international team of scientists reported Thursday they had happened upon a surprising finding: A common active ingredient in dozens of over-the-counter cough syrups, capsules and lozenges appeared to boost replication of the SARS-CoV-2 virus when tested under laboratory conditions.

That's a long way from concluding that cough medicines containing dextromethorphan will worsen the condition of people infected with the new coronavirus, or that it will make frightening outcomes more likely. But the researchers said the findings are concerning enough for them to advise cough sufferers who might be infected with coronavirus to avoid these medications.

Given that cough suppressants are likely to be widely used by people with coronavirus infections — whether they've got an official diagnosis or not — the researchers called for more research on dextromethorphan's safety.

Dextromethorphan stifles signals in the brain that set off the reflex to cough. It is a key ingredient of virtually all over-the-counter cough and cold formulations, including those sold as Robitussin, Benylyn, DayQuil/NyQuil, Delsym, Triaminic, and Theraflu.

In tests conducted at the Pasteur Institute in Paris, researchers found that when dextromethorphan was introduced into the cells of African green monkeys growing in petri dishes, the subsequent addition of SARS-CoV-2 resulted in more prolific viral growth.

UC San Francisco pharmacologist Nevan J. Krogan, one of the team's leaders, said that the group had alerted officials overseeing the government's COVID-19 response to its concerns.

The findings were reported Thursday in the journal Nature.

But the group's discoveries raise hopes as well.

The research team, led by scientists at the Pasteur Institute and UC San Francisco, had set out to find promising potential treatments for COVID-19 among compounds that were already known to scientists, physicians and consumers. The idea was to identify drug candidates that could be deployed quickly, either separately or in combinations, to short-circuit the coronavirus's ability to infect and sicken humans.

Their search turned up an array of drugs that have long been in use, including the antihistamine clemastine (present in Tavist and Allerhist), the antipsychotic haloperidol (marketed as Haldol), the cough medication cloparastine (which is used widely in Japan, Hong Kong and Europe), and the hormone progesterone, abundantly present in females and used in hormone replacement regimens and in reproductive and sexual-health drugs.

Other promising compounds turned up in their search are still being tested for a variety of cancers, including the experimental drug zotatifin from San Diego-based Effector Therapeutics Inc.; plitidepsin, a substance derived from a Mediterranean marine worm that's being tested in Spain as a treatment for multiple myeloma; and ternatin, a mushroom-derived compound in early testing for its anti-cancer properties.

In the past, drug-hunters faced with a new viral threat have found new treatments by examining the distinctive features on the virus' surface. Then, they'd look for known chemical compounds that would latch on to those particular features and kill or weaken the virus.

The 22-person team that launched the latest search in mid-March took a starkly different approach.

Starting with the blueprints contained in the 30 genes of the new coronavirus, they built its world from the inside out. They synthesized all the proteins the virus makes and recorded how each one interacts with proteins inside a human host. Then they identified 332 distinct steps necessary to ensure the coronavirus can enter a cell, hijack its machinery, and make copies of itself.

The result was a commando's road map. Next, they had to find any compound known to intervene somewhere in that long chain of events.

Their search turned up 69 existing drugs, experimental drugs, or compounds still on the way to becoming drugs. Collectively, they offered the possibility of disrupting the virus' life cycle in 62 different ways.

Some of the compounds the team identified are "many times more potent" than remdesivir, a failed Ebola drug that is finding new life as a COVID-19 treatment, said Krogan, senior author of the Nature study.

Krogan and his colleagues noted that many of the compounds would probably work best in tandem with remdesivir rather than competing against it.

"A treatment that will be successful will be combinatorial," said Krogan, a UCSF cellular molecular pharmacologist.

If scientists use his team's insights about where and how the coronavirus might be disrupted, he added, it should help them create a potent cocktail of drugs that will attack and disrupt the virus at many points in its life cycle, he added.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, prosopis said:

Today was my first day back in the OR since mid March. I am not sure what to think other than I think I should be paid more. New protocols

Good to hear you're finally back to work :thumbup:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, prosopis said:

Today was my first day back in the OR since mid March. I am not sure what to think other than I think I should be paid more. New protocols

I agree you should be paid more. Actually think we all should be paid more. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/18/2020 at 8:29 AM, McBokonon said:

I mentioned in the stock thread so will cross-post here: 

I'm only posting this because I think it's relevant to some of the news that might be causing today's spike, so it's worth filing away. This is my official "Political post but not really a political post" disclaimer.

With Moderna on fast track status and their aggressive path announced today, it's worth noting that the new "Therapeutics Czar" tabbed in the last week to coordinate vaccine efforts, currently sits on the board of Moderna.

Maybe they're the first ones we're hearing about because they're the best so far, but this seems like a conflict worth noting.

Moderna's coronavirus vaccine announcement set off a frenzy on Wall Street. Now some are calling for an investigation.

Quote

Just hours after revealing the promising vaccine results, Moderna (MRNA) sold 17.6 million shares to the public. That share sale, unveiled after the closing bell on May 18, was priced at $76; Moderna traded at just $48 as recently as May 6. The deal instantly raised $1.3 billion.

Two of Moderna's top executives also cashed in on the boom at their company, which had suddenly amassed a $29 billion market value despite the fact it has no marketed products.

.........................................

The timing of the transactions -- coupled with concerns from some medical experts that Moderna overstated the significance of its Phase 1 vaccine trial -- should be investigated by authorities, former SEC officials told CNN Business.

"The confluence creates an appearance, which may be inaccurate, that people were in a rush to take advantage of an early positive trial in what is often a long and tortured development of a new drug," Harvey Pitt, the former chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, said in an interview.

 

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, shader said:

Tennessee has four straight days over 400 and today over 500 cases.  Certainly not on a good trend. 

Cases keep going up but hospital stays and death down in Texas.  I'm generally ok with that.   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alaska has only 1 COVID death in the last 7+ weeks, and even that death wasn't really due to the virus.  It was a 90 year old man who was already dying of cancer and kidney failure.  He tested positive before he died, and COVID was put on his death certificate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, shader said:

Tennessee has four straight days over 400 and today over 500 cases.  Certainly not on a good trend. 

Florida has been double that since April...with spikes here and there of 900-1000 and we aren't even flinching.  We have had some delay days where one day it will bbe 400-500 and the next is 800-900 but it's been pretty consistent.  :lol: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rhode Island is crushing the testing.  At this point, only 6 other states are testing at even half the rate they are.  Are they going door to door offering free tests or something?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, The Commish said:

Florida has been double that since April...with spikes here and there of 900-1000 and we aren't even flinching.  We have had some delay days where one day it will bbe 400-500 and the next is 800-900 but it's been pretty consistent.  :lol: 

I'm shocked it hasn't spike with all the jackassery I've witnessed over the last couple of weeks.

  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, culdeus said:

Cases keep going up but hospital stays and death down in Texas.  I'm generally ok with that.   

Brewster is the largest county in Texas.  It is 6 times the size of Rhode Island, and has only 1 confirmed case of COVID.  Not death... case!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, Ron Swanson said:

I'm shocked it hasn't spike with all the jackassery I've witnessed over the last couple of weeks.

:lmao:  Agreed...though, to be fair, based on what we've been through compared to others, we've been really "open" this whole time.  And we are sliding ever closer to that magic "1" on rt.live.  Our "norm" would definitely be considered unacceptable in several other places...we definitely aren't going by the "guidelines" that were laid out.  We'd be resetting every 3rd day.  The one thing I do appreciate is the effort to get more testing done.  We're better than a lot of places in that regard.

Edited by The Commish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Friday comes and there aren't any bad indicators I think this thing is for all intents contained.  

Stay away from crowded indoor spaces, planes, public ####ters, and nursing homes.  Wear masks indoors and stuff.  Profit.

If I was black, fat, or old I'd have a different attitude.  Any combination of those and I'd have a REALLY different attitude.

  • Like 5
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, culdeus said:

Friday comes and there aren't any bad indicators I think this thing is for all intents contained.  

Stay away from crowded indoor spaces, planes, public ####ters, and nursing homes.  Wear masks indoors and stuff.  Profit.

If I was black, fat, or old I'd have a different attitude.  Any combination of those and I'd have a REALLY different attitude.

I'm fat and old... what should I do?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.