COVID-19 Research, Drug trials and Pathophysiology

Discussion in 'Coronavirus (COVID-19) News' started by Bowerbird, Apr 13, 2020.

PF does not allow misinformation. However, please note that posts could occasionally contain content in violation of our policies prior to our staff intervening. We urge you to seek reliable alternate sources to verify information you read in this forum.

  1. notme

    notme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    42,019
    Likes Received:
    5,395
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You got flat earth silly, and just nitpicking around. And you're just nitpicking around. The plug and play part is just an instrument like any instrument in a lab for viruses.... able to be used against the zika virus or ebola, nothing specifically against covid19 is in it.

    You originally hooked into a discussion where a poster claimed "Coronavirus vaccines has been invented long time ago".
    Like hell no. I'm far more correct to say it started from scratch.
     
  2. 557

    557 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2018
    Messages:
    17,371
    Likes Received:
    9,805
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Oh no. Not plug and play. If it were we would have an AIDS vaccine. (Every virus has its eccentricities.) Or a vaccine for the common cold, not just vaccines for some of the specific viruses that cause colds.
    Coronavirus vaccines were invented long ago. What’s incorrect is to claim that because a coronavirus vaccine exists for one specific coronavirus it’s easy to engineer one for a novel or different coronavirus. It’s also incorrect to claim current SARS-CoV-2 vaccines were started from scratch. It’s just that simple.
     
    Sallyally likes this.
  3. notme

    notme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    42,019
    Likes Received:
    5,395
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Seriously ....There are vaccines against the flu that some claim is "the common cold".
    They get updated every year to it's newest mutation.
    https://www.cdc.gov/flu/vaccines-work/vaccineeffect.htm

    Also:
    https://www.bbc.com/news/health-55041371
    The central piece of their plan was a revolutionary style of vaccine known as "plug and play". It has two highly desirable traits for facing the unknown - it is both fast and flexible.

    Nope. I just soured that only the plug and play part was invented... as I mentioned in my previous post.
    Source is also from the BBC.


    So where are your sources, ey?
     
    Last edited: Dec 10, 2020
  4. 557

    557 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2018
    Messages:
    17,371
    Likes Received:
    9,805
    Trophy Points:
    113
    LOL. Trivalent and quadrivalent influenza vaccines are not updated to “newest mutations”. The 3 or 4 strains are selected annually for the US based on prevalence of strains in Asia etc. (and some other metrics like availability of vaccine virus) before flu season begins here. These strains may be “new” based on antigenic drift or they may be strains already in existence for quite some time.
    https://www.cdc.gov/flu/prevent/vaccine-selection.htm

    A couple pull quotes from your link you apparently don’t understand.
    So we have luck that this pandemic was caused by a coronavirus and knowledge from previous research on MERS and SARS just like I said. No starting from scratch. No guarantees plug and play would work.

    Furthermore, adenovirus vectors are great. But the term plug and play is misleading. We've been trying this plug and play thing you're stuck on for a decade in HIV with no luck. A plug and play method of presenting antigen to the immune system is not always resultant in immunity to a pathogen. “Luckily” this time it did.
     
  5. notme

    notme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    42,019
    Likes Received:
    5,395
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You claimed there is no such thing as such a vaccine ..... and I sourced you're wrong.

    You now claim they are no updates. And you're wrong again. It's updated twice EVERY YEAR!
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Influenza_vaccine


    Oh pff... I never said there was a guarantee it would work....
    The starting from scratch, and hoped the plug and play method would work.... and so it did.
     
    Last edited: Dec 10, 2020
  6. 557

    557 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2018
    Messages:
    17,371
    Likes Received:
    9,805
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Quote where I said there was no influenza vaccine. Good luck. I said there is no vaccine for the common cold (caused by well over 100 different viruses). Which is true. Vaccines for specific cold viruses exist but no comprehensive vaccine for common cold. That’s a fact.
    I clearly stated there are updates. Please quote where I said there were no updates. LOL. You claimed:
    I pointed out that statement is factually incorrect. They are updated based on which strains we think will be most prevalent, most dangerous, and which strains we have good vaccine virus candidates to culture. While the trivalent and quadrivalent vaccine may contain a recently antigenically drifted strain often times the strains chosen are not newly drifted.
    The pull quotes I provided from your link clearly states that vaccine did not start from scratch, but was based on previous work on SARS and MERS. Just like I told you previously to you supplying your link.
     
  7. Tigger2

    Tigger2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2020
    Messages:
    3,661
    Likes Received:
    1,680
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
  8. notme

    notme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    42,019
    Likes Received:
    5,395
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And you previously stated they do not exist.
    Sure.... lol

    You now stated there are updates, while you previous stated "influenza vaccines are not updated to “newest mutations”".
    Sure.... lol

    That you proved that they had a vaccine against MERS, doesn't debunk they went from scratch using the plug-and-play method. I sourced they used the plug-and-play method. Period. That is starting from scratch... even though MERS = a Corona virus. They failed to make a vaccine in Australia using plug-and-play. They aint doing the... lets take the MERS vaccine and tweek it till it works.
     
    Last edited: Dec 11, 2020
    ronv likes this.
  9. 557

    557 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2018
    Messages:
    17,371
    Likes Received:
    9,805
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I stated a vaccine for the common cold does not exist. That’s true. The common cold is caused by so many different viruses many have not even been identified or classified. However, some of the specific viruses that cause the common cold are known. And there have been vaccines against that specific virus developed. “The common cold” and viruses causing the common cold are two different things. Just as SARS-CoV-2 and Covid 19 are not the same thing.
    They are not updated to the newest mutations. They included strains are chosen based on their prevalence and severity in other parts of the world prior to our flu season and sometimes in the feasibility of inclusion. They simply are not just updated to newest mutations” as you claimed.
    By definition plug and play is not from scratch. If you started from scratch there would be nothing to plug in and nothing to plug it into. LOL

    This my friends is why authoritarianism is so dangerous. Those most willing to exert their will on others are the most uninformed on the science of the things they wish to mandate or impose.
     
    Last edited: Dec 11, 2020
  10. Tigger2

    Tigger2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2020
    Messages:
    3,661
    Likes Received:
    1,680
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    That is certainly how I read your post, and how I would have phrased my reply. There is no such thing as "The common cold disease" so its unlikely they will develop a vaccine. There are a number of viruses that cause the cold symptoms and some of these have do have vaccines.
     
  11. Tigger2

    Tigger2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2020
    Messages:
    3,661
    Likes Received:
    1,680
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Plug and play does not mean this.
    However no research starts from scratch, there is always at the very least data to be used. What makes the new set of vaccines unique is the use of RNA to trick the body into producing Virus like protein strands, which the immune system then identifies and reacts to.
    But then this came off the back of crispr research.
    The are two great advantages this method.
    1, The vaccine delivers faster all around the body.
    2, By copying the protein spike its hard for the virus to mutate away because the protein spike cannot vary if it is to penetrate human cells.
     
    ronv likes this.
  12. 557

    557 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2018
    Messages:
    17,371
    Likes Received:
    9,805
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The plug and play I was discussing with the other poster is not an mRNA vaccine. It is an adenovirus vector vaccine. Completely different technology. He has no idea what he is talking about with the term plug and play.

    I agree with you mRNA vaccines have huge inherent advantages to older technologies. We have had some in the veterinary world for a while and they work well. If this c19 mRNA thing works out the way it looks like it will, the treatment of cancers and other diseases will be revolutionized as well as the vaccine side of the equation. It’s a big deal. But it’s not what the other poster was referencing which is adenovirus vectors—exciting technology in its own right.
     
    Last edited: Dec 11, 2020
  13. Tigger2

    Tigger2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2020
    Messages:
    3,661
    Likes Received:
    1,680
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    adenovirus vectors are the basis for CRISPR aren't they?
     
  14. 557

    557 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2018
    Messages:
    17,371
    Likes Received:
    9,805
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Not that I’m aware of. The most used enzyme in CRISPR gene editing is originally derived from the bacteria causing strep throat, Streptococcus pyogenes.

    I suppose the mechanics are somewhat similar between CRISPR and adenovirus vectors. Natural CRISPR is a result of bacterium developing “resistance” to viral attacks by incorporating some of the viral DNA into their genome in repeating sequences. An adenovirus vector infects the target cell and presents the “added on” antigen to induce an immune response, but the host cell is not altered genetically as with CRISPR.
     
  15. Tigger2

    Tigger2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2020
    Messages:
    3,661
    Likes Received:
    1,680
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Thanks for this.
    I thought I'd read that they were using a virus to deliver the edited DNA?
    I must catch up again. :eek: Especially adenovirus vector.
     
    Last edited: Dec 12, 2020
  16. Tigger2

    Tigger2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2020
    Messages:
    3,661
    Likes Received:
    1,680
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    OK just got my head back on. Yes of course the difference is CRISPR is permanent Adenovirus vector is not.
    Major difference, I was comparing the wrong things.
     
    557 likes this.
  17. 557

    557 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2018
    Messages:
    17,371
    Likes Received:
    9,805
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well, it’s a crazy world where the lines between viruses, bacteria, and eukaryotes is more blurred than we once knew.
    https://www.cshl.edu/the-non-human-living-inside-of-you/

    Who’s to say at some point there wasn’t adenovirus genetic material inserted into our DNA? This pandemic reminded me of how ignorant we are of the world around us. We are mere children just learning to walk. :)
     
  18. Tigger2

    Tigger2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2020
    Messages:
    3,661
    Likes Received:
    1,680
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Jeez 557 that is fascinating. Mad. Its crazy enough that we need to pee when we get cold because we're still fish. Let alone we are viruses.
    My favourite research at the moment is the quantum mind. I like the idea that god turns out to be a combined quantum consciousness. :cool:
     
    Last edited: Dec 12, 2020
    557 likes this.
  19. truth and justice

    truth and justice Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2011
    Messages:
    25,728
    Likes Received:
    8,770
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And bacterial. Mitochondria are thought to have originally been symbiotic bacteria whose DNA eventually became enveloped/incorporated into the DNA of the host
     
    Last edited: Dec 12, 2020
    557 likes this.
  20. 557

    557 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2018
    Messages:
    17,371
    Likes Received:
    9,805
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I’ll have to give that a whirl. As long as the concepts can be understood without being able to reproduce complex mathematics I enjoy physics. Otherwise, I’m out. LOL
     
  21. Tigger2

    Tigger2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2020
    Messages:
    3,661
    Likes Received:
    1,680
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Just joking about the God bit.
    But there is research into quantum communication between brains, in an effort to understand how our brains sense something is wrong without evidence or know someone behind us is watching. We already know quantum computers can communicate without connections, so can the human brain?
    As for how quantum mechanics works, I'm in your camp. I still struggle with relativity.
     
    Last edited: Dec 13, 2020
    557 likes this.
  22. 557

    557 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2018
    Messages:
    17,371
    Likes Received:
    9,805
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I guess anyone who believes any god communicates with mankind would have to acknowledge existence of some kind of communication method we don’t understand.

    Who knows, plants have secretly been using mycorrhizal networks to communicate right under our noses for eons. Perhaps we critters have something similar we don’t know about as well. :)
     
  23. Tigger2

    Tigger2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2020
    Messages:
    3,661
    Likes Received:
    1,680
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    As you say, we have barely dipped our toes.
     
  24. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    8,378
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The MATH+ protocol I've praised here before, accepted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal on 10/26/2020, received some push-back from colleagues.

    Here is the peer-reviewed article:

    https://covid19criticalcare.com/wp-...ournal-of-Intensive-Care-Medicine-Dec2020.pdf

    Here is the current version of the protocol, which has been updated (this is the 12/17/2020 version) - most notably, including ivermectin:

    https://www.evms.edu/media/evms_pub...cine/EVMS_Critical_Care_COVID-19_Protocol.pdf

    And here is the article questioning it, in part:

    https://www.mdedge.com/hematology-o...rts+unconvinced+on+COVID-19+protocol&sso=true

    Me, I remain favorably impressed by the MATH+ protocol. I wouldn't get too caught up on the fact that comparing its 5.1% mortality with the 22.9% found in hospitals that don't adopt this protocol, is not a fair comparison (because one doesn't know the specifics of the different patient populations). This objection is correct but it doesn't mean that the protocol doesn't work. It just means that more studies are needed.

    I also don't grant a lot of importance to the controversy between methylprednisolone in the MATH+ protocol, and dexamethasone as in Oxford's RECOVERY RCT. Big deal. They are both potent steroids. Sure, one can use dexamethasone instead; still, other recommendations of the MATH+ protocol in my opinion do make sense.

    Overall I find the MATH+ protocol very interesting and I've used it.
     
    557 likes this.
  25. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    8,378
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    @Pollycy you asked me if I recommend ivermectin after infection by the SARS-CoV-2.

    See the protocol I mentioned one post before this one, post #474? Here, the link again:

    https://www.evms.edu/media/evms_pub...cine/EVMS_Critical_Care_COVID-19_Protocol.pdf

    It contains, on page 13, a table with 4 observational studies, and 4 randomized controlled trials, and you can see that overall, the studies favor ivermectin. The name of the first author is given, and the references to the full studies are found in the reference list at the end of the protocol, if you want to read the studies.

    See on page 3, table 1 that ivermectin is the only drug that the protocol recommends for all phases of the disease: pre-exposure / post-exposure incubation, symptomatic phase, and pulmonary / inflammatory phase.

    See on page 7, that the authors of this protocol recommend a dose of 0.15 to 0.2 mg per kilogram of body weight, given right after diagnosis, and to be repeated three days later. The protocol calls it "highly recommended."

    The dosing comes up to:

    50-64.9 kg - 12mg
    65-79.9 kg - 15mg
    80-94.9 kg - 18mg
    95-109.9 kg - 21mg
    ≥ 110 kg - 24mg

    Do I recommend it? I'm not about to practice medicine over the Internet, but I can tell you that I purchased enough for two doses for myself, and two doses for my wife, for use if we catch this virus. For me, the risks (very low) are likely to be outweighed by the potential benefits. But I do acknowledge that others (including the FDA) dispute the efficacy. So I think the issue is not yet settled. I think that when doubtful statements were issued about it, it was still when we only had in vitro studies. We now do have in vivo studies. But they aren't large and very conclusive studies.

    If you decide to take it, do know that it's a prescription medicine, so you'd need to convince a physician to prescribe it to you. Given that this is not yet widely known, you might want to print a copy of the protocol and the studies, to take to your physician.

    In NO CIRCUMSTANCE you should self-medicate with ivermectin intended for veterinarian use. The preparations for dogs, sheep, horses, etc., are not for human consumption. Also, do notice that ivermectin interacts detrimentally with certain other drugs (relatively infrequent drugs) but your physician would need to look into that, if you are on other medications.
     
    Last edited: Dec 23, 2020
    Pollycy likes this.

Share This Page