Jump to content

Coronavirus - Part Two.

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, petemcewan said:

El Cid,

 

Thanks for the link. It provides more reassurance.

 

They are trying to ban social media posts which claim steam will cure you of COVID. Surely anyone that takes those things serious are beyond help.

Quite ok to discuss side effects and effectiveness of drugs, people can see which is the right path. It was saying on radio fout that an anti-astmha drug Budesonide that, in a small trial by Oxford uni was 90% effective at reducing hospitalisation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, El Cid said:

They are trying to ban social media posts which claim steam will cure you of COVID. Surely anyone that takes those things serious are beyond help.

Quite ok to discuss side effects and effectiveness of drugs, people can see which is the right path. It was saying on radio fout that an anti-astmha drug Budesonide that, in a small trial by Oxford uni was 90% effective at reducing hospitalisation.

It also said that the trial of this particular steroid was far too small to take any conclusions from, at this stage.  

By coincidence an hour before,  Inside Health on the same channel, a senior hospital consultant was saying that by the time Corovirus patients arrived in his wards the majority of  patients already needed  intervention with drugs if not mechanical help for their hypoxia/breathing problems. 

The programme focused on the classic symptoms and suggested that the criteria that needed to be met before a test was given was not good enough.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Annie Bynnol said:

 

The programme focused on the classic symptoms and suggested that the criteria that needed to be met before a test was given was not good enough.

 

Ever Government discission seems to be political, rather than following the science. Beat the big drum about sending someone to jail for 10 years, for filling a form in incorrectly.

I have thought for a while that the criteria for a test was wrong, not sure if that is NHS Englands fault, or the Governments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Israel are running stage three trials on a Covid drug!!

https://www.timesofisrael.com/feeling-better-in-2-hours-covid-drug-for-critically-ill-starts-phase-3-trials/

15 minutes ago, Annie Bynnol said:

It also said that the trial of this particular steroid was far too small to take any conclusions from, at this stage.  

By coincidence an hour before,  Inside Health on the same channel, a senior hospital consultant was saying that by the time Corovirus patients arrived in his wards the majority of  patients already needed  intervention with drugs if not mechanical help for their hypoxia/breathing problems. 

The programme focused on the classic symptoms and suggested that the criteria that needed to be met before a test was given was not good enough.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

El Cid, 

I think what would be a major break through in this pandemic would be an effective treatment; which commences immediately after a postive test for Cov-19 and before symptom commence.

Quote

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, El Cid said:

Ever Government discission seems to be political, rather than following the science. Beat the big drum about sending someone to jail for 10 years, for filling a form in incorrectly.

I have thought for a while that the criteria for a test was wrong, not sure if that is NHS Englands fault, or the Governments.

I said "not good enough" not "wrong" for example thin people may feel feverish but their body temperature may be below the threshold needed for a test. Similarly a person may exhibit none of the major covid indicators but several of the minor ones and not get a test soon enough.

 

7 hours ago, petemcewan said:

El Cid, 

I think what would be a major break through in this pandemic would be an effective treatment; which commences immediately after a postive test for Cov-19 and before symptom commence.

 

There are rarely mass "effective treatments" particularly of a viral disease during a pandemic and even if there was, the manpower and resources could not be amassed to provide such treatments for hundreds of thousands. 

When hospital transmissions are down to a trickle, more can be done than just maintaining life and the huge amount of experience and information gathered can provide for some treatment of symptoms. 

In reality the virus causes damage to a greater or lesser extent to a whole range of body systems not all of which will recover.

 

Vaccination is the simplest, cheapest, easiest and most effective way of dealing with a viral pandemic. Treatments do not protect, they do not stop the spread, they do not provide immunity, they do not stop the damage caused by the attack and they do not help prevent a return of the virus. 

Edited by Annie Bynnol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Annie Bynnol

 There's a viral infection that is successfully treated prophylactic ally by antiretroviral drugs. It's called HIV. HIV disease causes a whole range of damage to the human organism if left untreated.


Yet many people are treated.The person power and resources

-on a global scale -are marshalled in the campaign against the virus that causes AIDs.

Quote

 

 

26 million [25.1 million–26.2 million] people were accessing antiretroviral therapy as of the end of June 2020. 38.0 million [31.6 million–44.5 million] people globally were living with HIV in 2019.

 

An effective prophylatic treatment for Cov-19 would be a worthy adjunct to mass vaccination.

 

If one cannot access vaccines or one cannot be vaccinated, an effective treatment could be offered if  you test positive.

 

Putting all your eggs in the vaccine basket is scientifically shortsighted .

Therapeutics for the treatment of Cov-19 are an absolute necessity for saving lives.Vaccines are just one step in that  direction.

 

 

 

Edited by petemcewan

Share this post


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

Annie Bynnol

 There's a viral infection that is successfully treated  prophylactic ally by antiretroviral drugs. It's called HIV. HIV disease causes a whole range of damage to the human organism if left untreated.


Yet many people are treated.

An effective prophylatic treatment would be a worthy adjunct to mass vaccination.

If one cannot access vaccines or one cannot be vaccinated, an effective treatment could be offered if  you test positive.

Putting all your eggs in the vaccine basket is scientifically shortsighted .

 

 

 

There is no prevention of HIV/AIDS. There is no cure for HIV/AIDS. There is nothing in the basket.

31 million people have died, around 40 million people are currently infected with HIV viruses.

It has been killing people for 40 years

700 000 people die annually from AIDS related illness.

 

2 million new cases a year-one third get no treatment

1 million new cases a year of TB related to HIV

 

Survivability depends on money.  Therefore prophylactics are not a solution for most of the world, neither do they protect those who think they are not at risk eg 75 000 American have the virus without knowing.

17% of women and 10% of men with HIV are not in the risk groups that would take prophylactics.

The social and economic effects of the HIV/AIDS pandemic continue to be immense.

UNAIDS estimates that US$ 26.2 billion will be required for the AIDS response in 2020.

 

 

Treatments don't stop new cases nor are they a cure, they enable some people to survive the effects of the virus.

The effort to find a vaccine is ongoing  and progress is being made, all this "treatment" is just putting a lid on the pandemic.

The basket is empty and waiting for a vaccine or some new method of eliminating the effect of the virus.

 

 

Sources UNAIDS and  Wikipedia Epidemiology of HIV/AIDS

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Annis Bynnol,

 With respect .Your first sentence is wrong. HIV infection is-in the main- a sexually transmitted  disease. Hiv can be contracted by blood to blood contact and intravenous dug use and contaminated blood supplies. Safe sex, not using drugs and a clean blood supply  stop HIV  infection in its tracks. So consequently HIV infection is preventable and treatable.

Dipping into the HIV treatment basket science scoops up PrEP.

If one is daft enough to indulge in unsafe sex. There's a treament you can take. PrPE does a pretty good job of stopping new cases.

The reason people die from HIV infection is because they cannot get Antiretroviral treatment. Everybody who  gets tested  and are putt on Antiretrovirals  do not progress to AIDS. The treatment works . And if treatment "puts a lid on the pandemic", then that is a worthwhile endeavour.

The mRNA vaccine technology my give to the world a vaccination for HIV.

I'm not arguing against vaccines. I'm of the opinion that vaccines are only part of the solution to saving lives during a viral pandemic.

 

(Note : For those taking the trouble to read my post. I do appreciate that this thread is not a platform for discussing the pro and cons of HIV. So I'll stop now).

 

PrEP (pre-exposure prophylaxis) is medicine people at risk for HIV take to prevent getting HIV from sex or injection drug use. When taken as prescribed, PrEP is highly effective for preventing HIV. This section answers some of the most common questions about PrEP.
Edited by petemcewan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, petemcewan said:

Annis Bynnol,

 With respect .Your first sentence is wrong. HIV infection is-in the main- a sexually transmitted  disease. Hiv can be contracted by blood to blood contact and intravenous dug use and contaminated blood supplies. Safe sex, not using drugs and a clean blood supply  stop HIV  infection in its tracks. So consequently HIV infection is preventable and treatable.

Dipping into the HIV treatment basket science scoops up PrEP.

If one is daft enough to indulge in unsafe sex. There's a treament you can take. PrPE does a pretty good job of stopping new cases.

....

Undermining the absolute necessity of developing and using  vaccines to protect everybody from a highly contagious disease by promoting a method that doesn't stop 2 million new cases and 700 000 deaths annually with a very low risk of transmission  annually is wrong. 

 

 

Share this post


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

Annie Bynnol

I really do not mean to be rude. But it appears to me that you are moralising.

If so, you can take it up with , The Terrence Higgins Trust and NHS and the local council.

 

https://www.tht.org.uk/hiv-and-sexual-health/prep-pre-exposure-prophylaxis

I have absolutely no idea what you mean.

I would be much happier sticking to the topic of Covid, pointing  how a very contagious virus can be controlled by vaccination.

 

Using an example of a totally different virus, with totally different characteristics which  has no available vaccine even after 40 years, with 2 million new cases and 700 000 deaths annually is pretty  awful example of an alternative to vaccines 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.