Merck: “anti-virals must be given early!”

Login or register to post comments Last Post 0 reads   3 posts
  • Sat, Apr 17, 2021 - 06:28am

    #1
    davefairtex

    davefairtex

    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: Sep 03 2008

    Posts: 2365

    count placeholder10

    Merck: “anti-virals must be given early!”

Well after giving their antiviral Molnupiravir to hospitalized patients, and failing to show any benefit, Merck has belatedly noticed that anti-viral treatments must be given early in the course of the disease.

I mean, who knew, right?  You’ve gotta be a pretty sharp researcher at Merck to figure that one out.

Well sure, there’s Tamiflu, and that HIV post-exposure prophylaxis, both of which have been around for quite some time.  And all the literature insists that these anti-viral treatments be given very early.  Hours matter, or so they say.  But apparently the researchers at Merck didn’t notice – hoping against hope that giving an anti-viral to already-hospitalized patients would end up showing a benefit.  [Kinda like that RECOVERY HCQ trial – near-lethal HCQ doses given to half-dead hospitalized patients late in the course of the disease, producing the shocking result: “no benefit.”]

https://www.statnews.com/2021/04/15/merck-to-continue-tests-of-covid-pill-but-stop-trial-in-hospitalized-patients/

Merck said Thursday that it has seen “encouraging” results in a clinical trial of an antiviral pill to treat Covid-19 early in the disease’s course, but the pill failed to help hospitalized patients and must be used very early in the disease.

[!!!]

Baynes said that a 302-patient study of molnupiravir in people with Covid-19 who have not been hospitalized has shown signs of benefit for the drug.  The percentage of patients who were hospitalized or died in the treatment groups was lower than in the placebo group, but Merck said “the number of events reported are not sufficient to provide a meaningful measure of clinical effect.” Baynes said the medicine showed “a very clear antiviral effect.” Actual data will be presented at a medical meeting.

The biggest impact is for folks early on in their disease course in terms of the antiviral effect,” Baynes said. The Phase 3 portion of the study will be changed to say that in order to enroll, patients will need to be within five days of the onset of their symptoms, not seven. Merck will test the highest dose of the treatment, 800 milligrams given twice a day. Phase 3 results are expected in September or October.

Reading between the lines, the lack of significance from a 302-patient mild/moderate trial suggests that Molnupiravir is pretty lame.  I remember sub-hundred-person trials with calcifediol had very low p-values.  Same with ivermectin too. [And – hey – doesn’t ivermectin show benefit for hospitalized patients too?]

In my fantasy world, we’d see one of those head-to-head no-control trials, with:

  • Ivermectin
  • Hydroxychloroquine
  • Nigella Sativa
  • Bee Propolis
  • Nitazoxanide
  • Colchicine
  • and Molnupiravir.

But of course they don’t dare to do this.  Why play a game that you know you’ll lose?  I expect Bee Propolis would beat Molnupiravir.  Maybe all of them would.

Perhaps we can convince Iran to run a head-to-head trial like this.  A lot of the solid research on therapeutics is being done by the Mullahs, may blessings be upon them – far from the iron grip of systemically sociopathic Pharma corruption machine, and who knows what other malign influences that have apparently seized control of our national “health” authority.

I’m pretty sure that if Merck can manage to squeak out a p-value < 0.05  in the next trial [due out in October, apparently], the Gilead-dependent researchers heading the NIH therapeutics panel will approve this new drug in about five seconds flat.  After all, it doesn’t do very much, so its no threat to ending the pandemic. And it will probably be $1000/pill.

And whats-his-name – Siegel – over at FOX will call it a “game-changer.”

But there is some good news.  Merck has now reminded us all that:

ANTI-VIRAL MEDICATIONS MUST BE GIVEN EARLY IN THE COURSE OF A VIRAL INFECTION.

So that’s a plus.

“De-Oligarch-ify America”

  • Sat, Apr 17, 2021 - 07:53am

    #2
    dreinmund

    dreinmund

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Mar 19 2011

    Posts: 177

    count placeholder11

    Merck: “anti-virals must be given early!”

SMH. You really can’t make this shut up. Much of medical science has been exposed as the quacks they always were.

Sort of unrelated, but recently thought about how MMM and propaganda worked in the case of Covid.

Step 1: Attribute EVERY ailment to Covid

Step 2: Use expensive vaccines / treatments that do not have to be effective

Step 3: Attribute every ailment to something else (since it couldn’t possibly still be Covid 🧐)

In the process, push through political agenda that otherwise would not have been passed. Crazy.

 

  • Sun, Apr 18, 2021 - 04:26am   (Reply to #2)

    #3
    RandomMike

    RandomMike

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Mar 12 2020

    Posts: 205

    count placeholder4

    Merck: “anti-virals must be given early!”

Carrying ‘giving early” to an extreme and describing my N of one for the past year, all thru this I have taken Swanson’s Elderberry syrup within minutes of first noticing a sore/strange throat. And maybe 1/4 or 1/5 of an HCQ tablet within minutes of noticing the type of severe impending headache feeling I get when serious sickness approaches.

Strangely, both remedies have worked so far, although recently I’ve been doing 14mg of that which should not be mentioned every two weeks, and not needed them much.

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)

Login or Register to post comments