AndersB

Advanced members
  • Content count

    1494
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

35 Good

About AndersB

  • Rank
    Aussie expat

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

14549 profile views
  1. Be careful with news feeds. We can probably agree that journalists are the worst people to listen to regarding health advice or interpreting scientific studies. Google scholar is fairly good - you can search for published studies within a date range (e.g. 2020 only) and see how often the studies have been cited. A study with a higher cite count tends to be 'interesting': https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&as_ylo=2020&q="covid-19"&btnG= It also helps to know the quality of the journals: https://www.scimagojr.com/journalrank.php?category=2701 But then again, there was recently an infamous study about hydroxychloroquine published in the Lancet that was later retracted: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31324-6/fulltext Let me give you an example of interesting things you can find out that journalists don't seem to want to cover: why is Covid-19 prevalence and mortality higher among black people? https://www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj.m1548/ One potential reason stated in the study is that vitamin D deficiency is more prevalent among blacks. That makes sense since black people living in northern hemisphere countries with low sunlight would have a problem with vitamin D. Then you can do a Google Scholar search for vitamin D and immune system health: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q="vitamin+d"+immune+system&btnG= Which reveals that there seems to be a strong link between vitamin D deficiency and having a weak immune system. Then one may ask: why doesn't public officials recommend people to strengthen their natural immune system? It may be as simple as getting good sleep, exercise, and making sure to get adequate vitamin D. That would be extremely cost efficient health economics if such measures reduce the spread of Covid-19 or reduce its effect.
  2. Epidemiologists are pretty much just statisticians and know next to nothing about clinical therapeutic treatment of viral lung disease. I think an expert immunologist or a pulmonologist would be better people to listen to.
  3. Aussies are rugged and hardy people. We can handle any natural disaster, hardship or challenge, be it cyclones, drought, bushfires or pandemics - and we can face every enemy in world wars with grit, determination, and bravery. We are as tough as anything! But if property values are threatened....
  4. Congrats! :+1:
  5. 100k deaths for a 330 million population is 303 deaths per million. Italy will probably end up above that at the end of it all. Still, I agree that 300+ deaths per million is a terrible outcome. On the other hand, the normal flu took 61k lives during 2017/18 in USA and an estimated 34k lives during 2018/19: https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/past-seasons.html So from that perspective an outcome of twice the normal flu death toll would be reasonable containment considering how dangerous the coronavirus is.
  6. Oh dear! You know I like you tor, but do you mind keeping away from Sweden or Australia until your jinx is broken?
  7. Again, sorry to hear about your troubles Mr Medved. Everything does indeed look bleak and it is difficult to see how this situation is going to improve soon. I think health authorities and government officials around the world know about the potential treatment for coronavirus patients with the medications that I have mentioned earlier. An indication of this is that the UK, India, and Hungary have banned the export of hydroxychloroquine. But supplies are short and it will take a month or two to ramp up supply to meet the needs of a pandemic. That is why the governments are trying to buy time by reducing the rate of infection spreading. Also, ironically, they want to dampen the interest in people demanding their doctors to prescribe the drug as it will reduce availability for the serious cases in the meantime. Hence, we don't hear much about the promising results of treatments and the health authorities expressing themselves as reluctant and extremely cautious about it when confronted. But the big risk is that you will kill big parts of the economy and large viable businesses/employers close down, never to reopen again. We have an extremely co-dependent just-in-time supply chain economy that can very easily be irreparably damaged, or take many years to recover. Worse, individual lives will be shattered, with people losing their houses (with 10-year bankruptcy effects or credit rating damage), can't pay their rents, and lose all their savings that may have taken years to build up. If the governments are not careful, this event will cause a strong backlash in two ways. Both against the draconian measures, which can lead to riots and revolts. But also, this can be another generational divide. The young, who are relatively not badly affected by the virus, are the ones that will bear all of the burdens of the shut down economy, to protect the older generations that are already on pensions and government support. The mortgage-free boomers win again!
  8. During the previous SARS-CoV epidemic, there were studies finding that chloroquine had both prophylactic and therapeutic effect. For example: https://virologyj.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1743-422X-2-69 Chloroquine seems to work in several ways: making it more difficult for the virus to enter cells by raising endosomal pH and interfering with glycosylation of the ACE2 cellular receptor (which smokers have more of, btw). And, as Dr Seheult explained, chloroquine also acts as a zinc ionophore which allows zinc into the cells so that it can stop RdRP enzyme activity. That is the enzyme that replicates viral RNA. However, the above is a bit speculative. The Vincent et al (2005) study above was based on only in-vitro (Petri dish) tests. But the anecdotal reports of the effect of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in humans are very good. So I am optimistic. These two cheap off-patent drugs have had known anti-viral effects for RNA-based viruses for a long time - at least 15 years. Yet, there has been little research done to see whether these drugs could become standard treatment protocol in case of future pandemics, like the one we have now. I am cynical about the reasons for this: there is no big money and profits to be made from such generic drugs. But why haven't health authorities in any country in the world demanded to find out from a disaster preparedness point of view? If laymen can find out potential cures that are worth investigating further, why aren't the experts doing it? Chloroquine is already on the WHO Model List of Essential Medicines, so it is not some obscure pharmaceutical drug.
  9. It is very sad to see this nightmare scenario unfold. However, I am now quite hopeful that things will turn around quickly. So now I'm an optimistic bull?
  10. The coronavirus is now probably mostly spreading in Centrelink queues and people crowding in Centrelink offices.
  11. Wednesday, March 18, 2020 (9:30PM EST): New controlled clinical study conducted by doctors in France shows that Hydroxychloroquine cures 100% of coronavirus patients within 6 days of treatment. A recent well controlled clinical study conducted by Didier Raoult M.D/Ph.D, et. al in France showed that 100% of patients that received a combination of HCQ and Azithromycin tested negative and were virologically cured within 6 days of treatment. In addition, recent guidelines from South Korea and China report that hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine are effective antiviral therapeutic treatments for novel coronavirus.
  12. Sorry to hear about your recent challenges. Hope things will improve quickly for you.
  13. The drugs that seem to be effective treatments for coronavirus patients are lopinavir/ritonavir and Chloroquine: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8118933/Australian-researchers-make-huge-coronavirus-breakthrough.html The University of Queensland is ranked in the top-50 in the world so I think the scientific finding is credible. The advantage of these drugs is that they are in production and use. This means that they have already been tested for safety in clinical trials - and can be quickly re-purposed for coronavirus treatment. In theory, if you can convince your medical doctor to prescribe these drugs then treatment with these drugs could be available immediately. Please note that I am not medically trained and this email is not advice of any kind. I am just sending it to you so that you are informed about potential options to discuss with medical professionals, if you would be in the unfortunate situation where it is needed. Channel 7 news: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tH_-9vrn5LU Interestingly, at 2:29 you can see MinION DNA sequencing device that is produced by Oxford Nanopore - a company I worked with at Oxford: https://nanoporetech.com/products And here is an interview by Sky News: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3c3giYCP5I
  14. Maybe there is hope:https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/health/health-problems/coronavirus-australia-queensland-researchers-find-cure-want-drug-trial/news-story/93e7656da0cff4fc4d2c5e51706accb5