Forum Replies Created
Where might this fit in? Perusing writeups about the UK mutation, I ran across this article from The Indian Express, written by one of India’s top (at least according to the article) virologists, Dr. Shahid Jameel. My concern has been that if this virus was lab created in gain of function research, how might mutations develop and what danger would they pose. Reading Dr. Jameel’s article, this paragraph definitely caught my eye:
The N501Y mutation in one of the key contact residues in the receptor binding domain (RBD) of the spike protein increases its affinity for the ACE2 receptor. The P681H mutation in the cleavage site between the S1 and S2 domains of the spike protein promotes entry into susceptible cells, and increases transmission in animal models of infection.
The N501Y change is also associated with increased infectivity and virulence in animal models. Both these mutations were earlier observed independently, but have come together in the UK variant viruses. The result is a virus that spreads faster than before.
well ya… but the reason doesn’t in any way support a conclusion that the MN governor decided HCQ was a valid treatment:
Walz initially limited how hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine could be prescribed to ensure patients with lupus, rheumatoid arthritis and other chronic medical conditions who relied on the drug didn’t face shortages.
“(W)e no longer need to limit the use of chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine because these medicines have not been proven to be effective treatments for COVID-19 and are no longer in high demand,” Walz’s latest order states. (The Breitbart article you linked apparently left out the governor’s statement as to why he lifted the ban.)
Well, well. I guess the FDA is covering its ass. I hardly doubt its “softened stance” has anything to do with Trump taking HCQ and much more to do with the possibility that the HCQ protocol is going to prove effective.
Here’s what CNN had to say today: “On Monday, a study of more than 1,400 COVID-19 patients in New York was published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, the largest such examination to date, which found that hydroxychloroquine gave no benefits to COVID-19 patients and instead significantly increased their risk of cardiac arrest.” (I didn’t read the study, but I suspect it is another study where the HCQ was given too late.)
No matter, this prompted Dr. William Schaffner, an infectious disease expert and longtime adviser to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to pronounce: “The nail has virtually been put in the coffin of hydroxychloroquine,”
Is the “mainstream” just pushing its book? If so, and if studies end up proving the HCQ protocol as an effective treatment, the “mainstream” (I do hate that word, what’s a better one?) will once again have egg on its masked, but previously “do not wear a mask” face.
I will pay more attention to studies outside the US as I believe it might be rigged in the US.
At the risk of getting piled on, I would also appreciate an errata section. This is one of the few sites I go to for the best information. But Chris has enough to do so perhaps it could be taken on by members. It would be a useful tool for sorting out the biases that are inherent in any site. (I appreciate PP very much but there does seem to be a something of an Eeyore bias here.) You might notice I have been on this site since 2008. I quit coming here for quite a while because whenever I pushed against the orthodoxy on the site, I got pounded by the faithful. (PS. that 51K+ posts under my UN is a mystery to me. I posted maybe 50 times, probably much less since I joined in 2008. Just wanted to make that clear.)