Forum Replies Created

Viewing 10 posts - 11 through 20 (of 38 total)
  • Author
    Posts
    • Wed, Oct 06, 2021 - 02:56pm

      #12
      The Finn

      The Finn

      Status Bronze Member (Offline)

      Joined: Sep 14 2020

      Posts: 70

      count placeholder0

      ZeroHedge

     

    https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/merck-charging-us-40-times-what-it-costs-make-govt-financed-covid-pill

     

    • Wed, Oct 06, 2021 - 05:42am

      #16
      The Finn

      The Finn

      Status Bronze Member (Offline)

      Joined: Sep 14 2020

      Posts: 70

      count placeholder0

      The grand plan

    Good morning and thank you for all the comments!

    It all makes sense in the health-as-a-service context.
    Vaccinating recovered, children and so on – everything.

    We can summarize that the world is being cluster-fucked because someone wants to try out a new business model.

     

    • Tue, Oct 05, 2021 - 08:50am

      #2
      The Finn

      The Finn

      Status Bronze Member (Offline)

      Joined: Sep 14 2020

      Posts: 70

      count placeholder3

      Is Molnupiravi the game changer being touted?

    Amazing post @SDHodges, thank you!

    I just add a link here, so that this older thread is also remembered..

    https://www.peakprosperity.com/forum-topic/molnupiravir-anti-viral-a-cancerous-remdeivir/

     

    • Tue, Oct 05, 2021 - 08:44am

      #4
      The Finn

      The Finn

      Status Bronze Member (Offline)

      Joined: Sep 14 2020

      Posts: 70

      count placeholder0

      Antiviral agent Ivermectin

    Thanks guys!

    I had not seen this table before. I also had not seen anyone linking to it. Therefore I am also very surprised if indeed the update was published as early as July 8,2021. If anyone has better info, I would love to hear.

    Of course it is far from full victory, but there are a few take-aways…

    So, according to NIH:

    1. Ivermectin is an antiviral agent

    2. Dose 0.2–0.6 mg/kg as a single dose or as a once-daily dose for up to 5 days.

    3. Few adverse events. Generally well tolerated.

    4. Conditions advertised by MSM not listed as adverse events

    5. Not bad Drug-Drug Interaction Potential list

    6. Administering IVM with food increases its bioavailability

    We will win this.

     

    • Mon, Oct 04, 2021 - 07:29am

      #2
      The Finn

      The Finn

      Status Bronze Member (Offline)

      Joined: Sep 14 2020

      Posts: 70

      count placeholder7

      Molnupiravir anti viral comment

    There was an interesting comment by strych10 on ZeroHedge article.

    https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/game-changer-merck-releasing-phenomenal-test-results-experimental-covid-pill

    I hope nobody minds… I think this is meant to be shared wide… Here it goes…

     

    Now that I’ve had time to look at this and not just glance at the structure (link #1 below) and guess here’s what’s interesting/of concern here. I’ll try not to make this overly long (I’ll fail).

    This is a synthetic analog of cytosine (link #2 below), a nucleoside base of RNA and DNA. If you see a DNA/RNA code it’s the C. In this case Merck is has knocked the amidogen (NH2) group off of the cytosine and replaced it with a Imino group (HN) that has a single bond to a hydroxyl group (OH).

    Now, the point of this is that Molnupiravir’s method of action is to induce RNA errors in the viral genome, errors that rapidly build up until the viral genome essentially “collapses”.

    The way this is accomplished is what’s a bit concerning without some serious long term safety data and this is where I’m going to be very cautious about stating what Molnupiravir is and is not. But why some things here are potentially concerning without some serious transparency from Merck and the FDA.

    Some people may remember AZT because Fauci. There are some tenuous connections here. AZT is a synthetic analog of thymidine where the 3′ hydroxyl group on the ribose ring has been knocked out and replaced with a azido (N3) group (Link #3). So, regardless of what you might read on Wikipedia (I checked what it says and it’s all wrong) AZT is not a reverse transcriptase inhibitor, it’s a chain terminator. If inserted into a growing DNA strand (because thymidine is only in DNA, it’s replaced by uracil in RNA) the chain will stop at the first 3′ junction of a AZT molecule. This is accomplished by replacing the expected OH group with something that DNA polymerase and reverse transcriptase cannot deal with, ending the synthesis process at this point.

    Now, let me state this very clearly: Merck’s new drug Molnupiravir is NOT a chain terminator and has no relation to AZT other than that both are potentially incorporated into DNA and both change the structure of a nucleo-tide/side. However, differences aside Molnupiravir has a somewhat similar issue in that it’s possible it can be picked up by DNA polymerase and incorporated into a growing DNA chain when cell division is underway. In this case it’s NOT going to stop the DNA chain from continuing to lengthen. But it MAY have serious mutagenic effects on that DNA chain because it’s designed to have them in RNA.

    If this is the case, which we can’t really know at this point without a ******** more data, that would be bad. If these errors cannot be fixed by one of the systems that protects DNA integrity then whatever the induced mutations are would be passed on from mother to daughter cell. That means that all cells that are “downstream” from the affected cell would carry these mutations. Exactly how bad this would be depends on what mutations occur, where in the genome and in which cells. If it happens to a minority of rapidly dividing cells that might not be a problem, or it might be. OTOH, if it’s in slowly dividing cells you could end up with a very serious problem that goes undetected for quite some time, like years.

    And this is not something to be taken lightly. This compound used to be called EIDD-2801 and PubChem lists it as hazardous (link #4 below). On top of that a guy named Rick Bright left BARDA (the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority) where he was the director; alleging that EIDD-2801 is potentially mutagenic, that this isn’t studied well enough, and that Ridgeback Biotherapeutics pressured BARDA into continuing to fund EIDD-2801 research over concerns that it was mutagenic (Bright’s concerns I believe). These concerns stem from the fact that EIDD-2801 was abandoned previously by a company known as Pharmasset Inc, over worries about mutagenic effects.

    This whole little ****show led to accusations that Bright was illegally retaliated against by HHS and that this whole thing is cronyism (Link #5).

    I dunno about cronyism, but what I do know is that in June 2021 the FedGov agreed with Merck that FedGov would buy $1.2B worth of Molnupiravir if Merck was granted an EUA on the drug, and here we are just a few months later with Merck claiming that it’s fantastic and asking for an EUA.

    None of which answers the question of why the compound is listed as H372, not a warning a “Danger!” label for “Causes damage to organs through prolonged or repeated exposure. Specific target organ toxicity, repeated exposure Category 1” (Link #6) Which, btw, is a scale where 1 means “most severe hazard”.

     

    1) https://www.guidetopharmacology.org/GRAC/LigandDisplayForward?ligandId=10737

    2) https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/cytosine

    3) https://www.sciencesnail.com/science/azt-mechanism-of-action-and-organic-synthesis

    4) https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/eidd-2801

    5) https://www.science.org/news/2020/05/emails-offer-look-whistleblower-charges-cronyism-behind-potential-covid-19-drug

    6) https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ghs/#_prec

    Before CoV-2 it was often bemoaned that it was an average of 12 years and a billion dollars to get through FDA clinicals.

    That might not be necessary here since I believe this compound has been around something like 40 years. Of course, it’s never been studied for this purpose in humans that I know of.

    Could it be like IVM and be a happy coincidence and be safe at the dosages/frequencies given? Sure, it could be. I mean, chemo isn’t meant to kill you but it IS poison. It sucks but the idea is to kill the cancer before the cancer kills you.

    EIDD-2801 was previously known to have wide spectrum effect on cancer, bacteria and viruses. It just wasn’t considered safe. It makes sense that someone bothered to look at it, the question is what they really found and if what they found is what’s really there. Might they have found a safe and effective use for it? Yes.

    Did they? I have no idea. There’s really no way to even start to know unless the Merck data package they’re giving the FDA is made public, which I highly doubt it will be.

    At this point, while it’s contrary to FDA’s normal policy I would strongly advocate that the FDA should make any and all data publicly available for all drugs it considers for an EUA.

     

    Wow. What a summary! Well done strych10!

     

    • Tue, Sep 28, 2021 - 01:08pm

      #24
      The Finn

      The Finn

      Status Bronze Member (Offline)

      Joined: Sep 14 2020

      Posts: 70

      count placeholder2

      Ivermectin

    Information:

     

    Ivermectin for COVID-19: real-time meta analysis of studies

    https://ivmmeta.com/

    Database of all ivermectin COVID-19 studies

    https://c19ivermectin.com/

    Mectizan (ivermectin) – Source of Hope

    https://vimeo.com/370322208

    For river blindness they take it once a year.

     

    P.S. How neat that johnnybob, Bill in La Mesa and Disco Bear you have all joined on the same day – Dec 16, 2020.

     

    • Thu, Sep 23, 2021 - 10:27am

      #5
      The Finn

      The Finn

      Status Bronze Member (Offline)

      Joined: Sep 14 2020

      Posts: 70

      count placeholder0

      Reply To: Hey Pfizer!

    Thank you very much @silberhof for the excellent translated summary!

    https://www.peakprosperity.com/forum-topic/press-conference-from-pathological-laboratory-in-reutlingen/

    I have one question. On the video soon after 2:04 they were discussing the size of the “object”. I take it that they were referring to the object and not the dots they were pointing there at the same time. I think I heard them mentioning 40 microns and 0,5 millimetres. There is a discrepancy as 40 microns would be 0,04 millimetres. Was there confusion or did you understand it better? Which one is it?

    Viele Grüße

     

    • Thu, Sep 23, 2021 - 02:18am

      #8
      The Finn

      The Finn

      Status Bronze Member (Offline)

      Joined: Sep 14 2020

      Posts: 70

      count placeholder1

      Why the insurers will not stop this?

    Thank you very much for all the answers and ideas so far!

    This is a fundamental issue as the US is probably the place where the players have calculated this out. The rest of the western world is then following from the medical perspective what the US does, even though their health care structure and calculations are totally different. In public healthcare countries they do not calculate.

    I pulled some raw numbers:

    Hospitalizations 2,920,532 Total New Admissions (CDC).

    ICU admission was estimated to take 2.3 days from hospital admission and ICU patients were estimated to spend an average of 18.9 days in critical care. (Google)

    The median charge amount for a COVID-19 hospitalization ranged from USD 34,662 for patients ages 23 to 30, to USD 45,683 for people ages 51 to 60. (Houston Chronicle)

    Covid-19 hospitalization costs so far would then be 3 million * 40 thousand = USD 120 billion.

    The Health & Medical Insurance industry market size in the US, measured by revenue, of the Health & Medical Insurance industry is USD 1.1 trillion in 2021. (IBISWorld)

    Person is admitted to the hospital for – if they’re Medicare – typically, the diagnosis-related group lump sum payment would be $5,000. But if it’s COVID-19 pneumonia, then it’s $13,000, and if that COVID-19 pneumonia patient ends up on a ventilator, it goes up to $39,000. (USA TODAY News)

    So it seems that the US government is indeed paying for most of it and the total Covid-19 costs are rather small anyway. Are we missing something?

     

    • Sat, Mar 27, 2021 - 12:49pm

      #5
      The Finn

      The Finn

      Status Bronze Member (Offline)

      Joined: Sep 14 2020

      Posts: 70

      count placeholder3

      JAMA/Columbia Ivermectin Study 3-4-21

    Great comments, thank you!

    There is a full paper on it:

    Ivermectin sales in Valle del Cauca, Colombia, patterns of AEs, and other background re López-Medina et al.2021

    https://osf.io/6m3ch/

     

    • Sat, Mar 27, 2021 - 12:34pm

      #29
      The Finn

      The Finn

      Status Bronze Member (Offline)

      Joined: Sep 14 2020

      Posts: 70

      count placeholder1

      Ivermectin is effective for COVID-19

    Review Article

    Global trends in clinical studies of ivermectin in COVID-19
    Morimasa Yagisawa, Ph.D., Patrick J. Foster, M.D., Hideaki Hanaki, Ph.D. and Satoshi Omura, Ph.D.

    http://jja-contents.wdc-jp.com/pdf/JJA74/74-1-open/74-1_44-95.pdf

    Satoshi Omura – Nobel Lecture

    A splendid gift from the Earth: The origins & impact of Avermectin

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCFkN5ZAVzc

    These are long, but take your time. They are so worth it.

     

Viewing 10 posts - 11 through 20 (of 38 total)