# Do some people have protection against the coronavirus?



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

A microbiologist discussed this article with me at a luncheon yesterday, and it's interesting.

"One big mystery: Why do some people get very sick and even die from their illness, while other similar people show no symptoms and may not realize they've been infected at all?
We know some of the big factors that put people at higher risk of having a severe, even fatal, course of disease: being over 60; being overweight or obese; having one or more chronic diseases such as diabetes, cardiovascular disease, kidney or lung disease, and cancer; and being a person of color -- Black African American, Latino Latinx or Native American.

But might the opposite also be true: Could certain people actually have some type of protection?"









Do some people have protection against the coronavirus? | CNN


Why do some people get very sick and even die from Covid-19, while others show few if any symptoms? We know some of the big factors that put people at higher risk of having a severe course of disease, but could certain people actually have some type of protection?




www.cnn.com


----------



## TripleD (Feb 12, 2011)

I wished I knew. I've bringing up some nephews into the rental business. They have asked when was the last time I missed a day. I didn't know. One called my sister and she told him I was out two days in the 80s with mono.


----------



## TripleD (Feb 12, 2011)

On another note. Dad will be 77 this month. Other than three days in ICU for a bleeding ulcer in 95 he's never missed a day...


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> "One big mystery: Why do some people get very sick and even die from their illness, while other similar people show no symptoms and may not realize they've been infected at all?


It's no "big mystery".
It's normal variation in circumstances.



Irish Pixie said:


> Could certain people actually have some type of protection?"


Anyone can have protection:









Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and spread


Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) is caused by a newly discovered coronavirus (SARS-CoV). No effective prophylactic or post-exposure therapy is currently available.We report, however, that chloroquine has strong antiviral effects on SARS-CoV infection ...




www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov





*Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and spread*

*"Results*
We report, however, that chloroquine has strong antiviral effects on SARS-CoV infection of primate cells. These inhibitory effects are observed when the cells are treated with the drug either before or after exposure to the virus, suggesting both prophylactic and therapeutic advantage. In addition to the well-known functions of chloroquine such as elevations of endosomal pH, the drug appears to interfere with terminal glycosylation of the cellular receptor, angiotensin-converting enzyme 2. This may negatively influence the virus-receptor binding and abrogate the infection, with further ramifications by the elevation of vesicular pH, resulting in the inhibition of infection and spread of SARS CoV at clinically admissible concentrations.
*Conclusion*
Chloroquine is effective in preventing the spread of SARS CoV in cell culture. Favorable inhibition of virus spread was observed when the cells were either treated with chloroquine prior to or after SARS CoV infection. In addition, the indirect immunofluorescence assay described herein represents a simple and rapid method for screening SARS-CoV antiviral compounds."


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Opinion: Fauci Knew About HCQ In 2005 – Nobody Needed To Die


Dr. Anthony Fauci, whose “expert” advice to President Trump has resulted in the complete shutdown of the greatest economic engine in world history, has known since 2005 that chloroquine is an effec…



www.nw-connection.com






> There is a monstrous reputational risk for those who will be found to have dismissively waved off a treatment that could have been used from the very beginning, even back on February 15 when Dr. Fauci said that the risk from Coronavirus was “miniscule.” How many lives could have been saved if the heads of our multi-billion dollar health care bureaucracy had been advocating for HCQ treatment from day one? We’ll never know. Instead, their advice has been dangerous and deadly in every sense of that word.


----------



## SLADE (Feb 20, 2004)

It's an interesting article.
The two men I knew that died did have heart and lung issues. They both had exposure to quite a few people daily.

I'm glad we have intelligent doctors and scientist working on a cure and also our understanding of the disease.

African researchers may have helpful insights into how we deal with out breaks and hot spots.
Many of them have been in the field fighting just such out breaks.


----------



## Wolf mom (Mar 8, 2005)

"One big mystery: Why do some people get very sick and even die from their illness, while other similar people show no symptoms and may not realize they've been infected at all? 

I don't think that's much of a mystery - some people do the things necessary to take care of themselves - not only now, with the virus, but most of their lives.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

TripleD said:


> I wished I knew. I've bringing up some nephews into the rental business. They have asked when was the last time I missed a day. I didn't know. One called my sister and she told him I was out two days in the 80s with mono.





TripleD said:


> On another note. Dad will be 77 this month. Other than three days in ICU for a bleeding ulcer in 95 he's never missed a day...


The article indicates that all type of coronaviruses may cause antibody reaction to Covid 19. So if you and/or your dad have had colds and other more mild coronaviruses, they may provide some protection.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Wolf mom said:


> "One big mystery: Why do some people get very sick and even die from their illness, while other similar people show no symptoms and may not realize they've been infected at all?
> 
> I don't think that's much of a mystery - some people do the things necessary to take care of themselves - not only now, with the virus, but most of their lives.


I do agree that having no comorbidity can lessen the symptoms of Covid 19, and the article indicates that _any_ coronavirus may provide more protection if infected.

"It's T cells like those, which reacted to the SARS-CoV-2 virus, that Sette and his co-author Shane Crotty discovered -- quite by accident -- in the blood of people collected several years before this pandemic began. They were running an experiment with Covid-19 convalescent blood. Because they needed a "negative control" to compare against the convalescent blood, they picked blood samples from healthy people collected in San Diego between 2015 and 2018.

"There was no way these people had been exposed to SARS-CoV2. And when we ran those ... it turns out the negative control was not so negative: about half of the people had reactivity," Sette explained. "Shane and I pored over the data; we were looking at it from the right, from the left, from the top, from the bottom -- and it was really 'real'; this reactivity was real. So, this showed that people that have never seen this virus have some T-cell reactivity against the virus." That paper was published at the end of June in the journal Cell. Sette and Crotty note in their current summary article that they aren't the only ones to have seen this. "That has been now confirmed in different continents, different labs, with different techniques, which is one of the hallmarks of when you start to actually really believe that something is scientifically well-established because it's found independently by different studies and different labs," said Sette."


----------



## Oldmom (Jun 26, 2020)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Opinion: Fauci Knew About HCQ In 2005 – Nobody Needed To Die
> 
> 
> Dr. Anthony Fauci, whose “expert” advice to President Trump has resulted in the complete shutdown of the greatest economic engine in world history, has known since 2005 that chloroquine is an effec…
> ...











Number of covid deaths Per Million per Worldometer today: United States: 477. Ukraine 39, India 28, Greece 20, Indonesia 19, Morocco 10, Malaysia 4.

I'm sorry but.....INDIA, for goodness sakes! Maybe the meds don't work once they've stuck you in the hospital and shoved a ventilator down your throat, but it certainly seems to be helpful in a country with one of the BIGGEST slums in the world.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Here's a link specific to India and it's poor areas:

"More than half of residents living in Mumbai's crowded slums may have contracted coronavirus and are likely being infected at a much higher rate than those not living in slum areas, a new study has found.
The study released Tuesday raises questions over the level of testing in India, which has the third highest number of confirmed cases in the world after the United States and Brazil.
On Wednesday, India reported it had crossed 1.5 million reported coronavirus cases after more than half a million infections were recorded in just 12 days. It took nearly six months for India to reach its first 1 million confirmed cases."









More than half of India's Mumbai slum residents may have been infected with Covid-19, study suggests | CNN


More than half of residents living in Mumbai's crowded slums may have contracted coronavirus and are likely being infected at a much higher rate than those not living in slum areas, a new study has found.




www.cnn.com





It may tie back to the article in the OP why India (and it's poor areas in particular) may have a lower death rate, poverty equals poor hygiene and social distancing. Those things don't just equate to Covid 19, but all coronaviruses.


----------



## random (Jul 23, 2020)

Oldmom said:


> I'm sorry but.....INDIA, for goodness sakes! Maybe the meds don't work once they've stuck you in the hospital and shoved a ventilator down your throat, but it certainly seems to be helpful in a country with one of the BIGGEST slums in the world.


I've been trying to keep up with the published studies and articles, and that DOES seem to be a consistent point. When it is administered at onset of symptoms, it appears to help significantly. When administered after admission, as a last resort, it doesn't help at all.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

random said:


> I've been trying to keep up with the published studies and articles, and that DOES seem to be a consistent point. When it is administered at onset of symptoms, it appears to help significantly. When administered after admission, as a last resort, it doesn't help at all.


Would you mind linking the studies/articles? I try to keep up as well, and I could have missed those that you've read. Thank you.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> It may tie back to the article in the OP why India (and it's poor areas in particular) may have a lower death rate, poverty equals poor hygiene and social distancing. Those things don't just equate to Covid 19, but all coronaviruses.


It may be they aren't pushing other agendas too.


----------



## random (Jul 23, 2020)

Irish Pixie said:


> Would you mind linking the studies/articles? I try to keep up as well, and I could have missed those that you've read. Thank you.


I only have one in my history on this computer: Treatment with Hydroxychloroquine Cut Death Rate Significantly in COVID-19 Patients, Henry Ford Health System Study Shows (actual study is at https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S1201-9712(20)30534-8/fulltext )

I'll see if I can find any of the others.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

random said:


> I only have one in my history on this computer: Treatment with Hydroxychloroquine Cut Death Rate Significantly in COVID-19 Patients, Henry Ford Health System Study Shows (actual study is at https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S1201-9712(20)30534-8/fulltext )
> 
> I'll see if I can find any of the others.


Thank you. I have somewhere to go soon, but I will read it.


----------



## random (Jul 23, 2020)

Irish Pixie said:


> Thank you. I have somewhere to go soon, but I will read it.


Not a study but I also came across this article about the ICMR: Revised ICMR advisory on Hydroxychloroquine


----------



## rambler (Jan 20, 2004)

I think 5 years from now we might be surprised what we find could have or did or didn’t help or hinder in all of this.

I think we have had much more of a political and bureaucratic response to the pandemic than a scientific response.

that is unfortunate and will cost us in lives and in dollars.

Paul


----------



## Oldmom (Jun 26, 2020)

Irish Pixie said:


> Here's a link specific to India and it's poor areas:
> 
> "More than half of residents living in Mumbai's crowded slums may have contracted coronavirus and are likely being infected at a much higher rate than those not living in slum areas, a new study has found.
> The study released Tuesday raises questions over the level of testing in India, which has the third highest number of confirmed cases in the world after the United States and Brazil.
> ...


----------



## Oldmom (Jun 26, 2020)

Oldmom said:


> Sorry everyone - didn't realize there was an EDIT option - how wonderful!
> 
> They can have millions of CASES, what they don't have are the same percentage of deaths per million of their population. India has 28 deaths per million while US has 470. I don't believe they are socially distanced as 'Dharavi contains pockets where as many as 650,000 people are crammed into 2.5 square kilometers. In comparison, New York City has only around 95,605 people for 2.5 square kilometers.' New York itself has 1,685 deaths per million, so both area crowded areas. If it was herd immunity taking hold of the people in India, making them immune, gotta wonder why New Yorkers couldn't achieve the same.
> 
> ...


----------



## SLADE (Feb 20, 2004)

Voodoo doctors and faith healers.
*Hydroxychloroquine is trending again. It's still no cure for ...*
www.timesunion.com › cnet › article › Hydroxychloro...

5 days ago - On Monday, a contingent of physicians, clad in white coats and calling themselves "America's Frontline Doctors" held a summit on the steps of the ...


----------



## thesedays (Feb 25, 2011)

That's actually one of the things that's being researched.


----------



## Hiro (Feb 14, 2016)

From the only controlled experiment that we are privy to with the Wuflu, the Diamond Princess, it seems obvious some people are immune to either being infected or having symptoms. There were couples sharing a cruise ship cabin where one was infected and the other was not. Those are tight quarters with a shared bathroom and presumably no masking of husband and wife. There were shared crew meals in tight quarters, but only some got infected.

The other obvious evidence is the absence of pervasive spread among children, who (tips hat to IP) really do lick door knobs and such. Anyway, this virus is tailor made for a purpose by intention or accident to be very infectious (more infectious than even in its supposed host species) and be very dangerous for older people. It is quite fascinating it "originated" where it did, too. But, it must all be coincidental.


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

Hiro said:


> From the only controlled experiment that we are privy to with the Wuflu, the Diamond Princess, it seems obvious some people are immune to either being infected or having symptoms. There were couples sharing a cruise ship cabin where one was infected and the other was not. Those are tight quarters with a shared bathroom and presumably no masking of husband and wife. There were shared crew meals in tight quarters, but only some got infected.
> 
> The other obvious evidence is the absence of pervasive spread among children, who (tips hat to IP) really do lick door knobs and such. Anyway, this virus is tailor made for a purpose by intention or accident to be very infectious (more infectious than even in its supposed host species) and be very dangerous for older people. It is quite fascinating it "originated" where it did, too. But, it must all be coincidental.


It is strange indeed. We had a grade school football team hold a football camp back in the middle of June. One boy had a fever and his mother took him to the doctor. He tested positive. That led to checking the whole team and the coaches. In total 9 boys were positive but only the first boy had a symptom. That lead to checking all their family members and contacts. They were checked for 3 weeks and only one boy's mother tested positive 8 days later. How could that many boys living at home with parents and siblings only infect 1 person if it is so contagious?


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

🤥


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

SLADE said:


> Voodoo doctors and faith healers.


You're totally ignoring the 15 year old study that showed it was highly effective.


----------



## doc- (Jun 26, 2015)

random said:


> I only have one in my history on this computer: Treatment with Hydroxychloroquine Cut Death Rate Significantly in COVID-19 Patients, Henry Ford Health System Study Shows (actual study is at https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S1201-9712(20)30534-8/fulltext )
> 
> I'll see if I can find any of the others.


Did you read the study? No mention is made of how pts were selected to receive treatment. The difference between no treatment vs hydroxy- was only 6%. Getting both hydroxy- and azithro- was worse than getting just hydroxy-.

This study was poorly done and poorly reported. That's why there is so much controversy over this topic-- the studies aren't well planned or well performed. The difference between treated vs untreated groups are small, making it more likely they're not "real differences" but just a matter of getting "6 heads & 4 tails" on a trial of 10 coin flips-- meaningless random variation. For every trial getting 6 heads, you'll get a trial with 4 heads...Those with an agenda only emphasize the 6 head trials.

RE: different susceptibility to complications from CoViD-- several genetic factors are obviously at work: male vs female, Type & quality of ACE receptors (accounts for difference in white vs black populations), blood type, age related vigor of immune response etc etc etc.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

poppy said:


> How could that many boys living at home with parents and siblings only infect 1 person if it is so contagious?


If it's so "highly contagious" and "deadly", why aren't *all* the Dr's and nurses getting infected and dying?


----------



## homesteadforty (Dec 4, 2007)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Anyone can have protection:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That article was written in 2005 long before Covid-19 developed. SARS-CoV and Covid-19 are similar in some ways but very different in others.

I does not say that Chloroquine is an effective treatment for SARS-CoV nor Covid-19... it can't say it's effective against Covid-19 as Covid-19 didn't exist at the time the article was written.

From the article:

"*Published* online *2005* Aug 22"

"*Background*
Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) is caused by a newly discovered coronavirus (SARS-CoV). *No effective prophylactic or post-exposure therapy is currently available.*

*Results*
We report, however, that chloroquine has strong antiviral effects on SARS-CoV infection of *primate cells*."

Something I found interesting was:

"Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) is an emerging disease that was *first reported in* Guangdong Province,* China*".



Bearfootfarm said:


> You're totally ignoring the 15 year old study that showed it was highly effective.


I'm not. I'm ignoring a 15 year old study that deals with a very different illness... it can't apply to Covid-19 as Covid-19 did not exist. I'm also saying that a, "strong antiviral effects on SARS-CoV infection of *primate cells*.", does not mean it applies to humans.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

homesteadforty said:


> That article was written in 2005 long before Covid-19 developed. SARS-CoV and Covid-19 are similar in some ways but very different in others.


They are close enough.
That's also stated in the articles posted.



homesteadforty said:


> *I'm not*. I'm ignoring a 15 year old study that deals with a *very different* illness..


You're also not Slade, and it's really not all that different.


----------



## Kstar (Jun 14, 2020)

There are many things we discover about certain diseases...who it is most likely to affect and who is most at risk. These are good things to know and it's possible they have some validity to them.

I'm thinking it all relies on the person's health and their immune system. 

From the reported deaths that doctors and media talk about, the one's they are seeing that often times have fatal complications are those that are elderly and also those that have some type of metabolic issue like diabetes, pre-diabetes, and obesity plays a part. Those that have respiratory problems like COPD or asthma are prone to complications. Some issues and heavy complications they have seen are blood clotting, stroke, and of course respiratory inflammation. 

Diet probably plays a huge role in this - doesn't matter what you weigh or how much you work out. If your diet is junk (overly processed and packaged foods that are treated terribly or made in the a lab) then your health is gonna be that way, too. We are duped into thinking so many unhealthy foods are actually healthy for us. If we all had a nutrient rich diet full of all the good vitamins and minerals many of us are deficient in, I don't think this thing wouldn't be so bad. Simple things like stress and fear (this whole thing is causing a lot of stress and fear, isn't it?) can lower your immune responses and impair your body. A lot of groups have been speaking against sugar being a culprit as it can put your cells into a coma like state to fighting off illnesses for up to one entire day, now that is a big impact and junk food sales for candy bars and stuff have still been making good money and people are buying more of it because they're what? Stressed. Searching for that "happiness" again in a difficult time.

I think there are people out there that may be able to develop an immunity like they would to anything else or may not get it as bad as others just like when your family gets the cold but you don't get it so bad or have mild symptoms. Some people have more good minerals and vitamins in their bodies than others.

Zinc has been hailed as a wonder in this COVID thing and with good reason! It helps to fight off illness. Remember the Zicam craze? Zinc, zinc, zinc. Chloroquine used with zinc, vitamin C, and vitamin D have been talked about a lot lately. Guess who those most susceptible to zinc deficiency are? Those who are Alcoholics/Sugarholics, Diabetics, on Hemodialysis. Those who have HIV/AIDS, rheumatoid arthritis, and nutrient malabsorption. Doesn't that make sense? Others at risk are pregnant women, lactating women, malnourished individuals, premature babies, those with IBS, those on certain medications, older adults 65+, etc. etc.. 

A lot of it sounds like immune system to me. 


Disclaimer: I am not a medical doctor, nor am I qualified to diagnose or treat any illness. My advice is not designed to replace a one-on-one relationship with a qualified health care professional and is not intended as medical advice. Do not use writings in this post to diagnose, treat, prevent, or cure any disease or condition.


----------



## SLADE (Feb 20, 2004)




----------



## po boy (Jul 12, 2010)

SLADE said:


>


Would aspirin treat a headache and pain in the toe? Asking for a friend?


----------



## SLADE (Feb 20, 2004)

This is all temporary amnesia so we forget who dropped the ball and put us in the position we find ourselves in.
Chasing magical cures is nothing more than quackery.
Be patient and let real doctors and researchers get us through this.


----------



## Oldmom (Jun 26, 2020)

No matter how many studies come out, the interviews by doctors in the field who are dealing directly with people who have gotten a positive test, been given the protocol and cured, is compelling. HCQ is safe, has been around for 60+ years, has been tested for its safety in pregnant women, and is given to Lupus and RA patients without requiring any heart studies beforehand. All the people given this drug before their travels to Malaria countries were not required to have heart studies. 
CDC approved.

The countries taking HCQ as a Malaria preventative have an incredibly lower number of deaths. So, assume it's anecdotal....the protocol costs about $20 and millions of doses were donated to the US from around the world. 

The idea that we cannot take a drug that's been around for 60 years - because they want us to get a vaccine that has absolutely NO track record beyond a couple months - is terrifying. The worst that will happen if you take HCQ is that it wont protect you, or if you take it early and doesn't work, you'll end up in the hospital anyway. 

Results matter and clearly the whole world is going to be infected with this virus to some extent. Deaths matter, cases don't. All I'm saying is that we should have the Right To Choose.


----------



## po boy (Jul 12, 2010)

SLADE said:


> This is all temporary amnesia *so we forget who dropped the ball* and put us in the position we find ourselves in.
> Chasing magical cures is nothing more than quackery.
> Be patient and let real doctors and researchers get us through this.


Well then, why don't we just buy the cure from the countries that did not drop the ball.


----------



## SLADE (Feb 20, 2004)

po boy said:


> Well then, why don't we just buy the cure from the countries that did not drop the ball.


We did buy a bunch of fake cure from India.


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

Some people live in a sterile environment which does not regularly challenge their immune system. Some people have a poor diet that lacks vitamins and nutrients essential to an effective immune system. Some people, actually a lot of people, are unwilling to manage their weight. Some people have done damage to their bodies with drugs, both illegal recreational drugs and doctor prescribed drugs. Some of the doctor prescribed drugs would not be necessary if they managed their weight. We have created a world in which it doesn't hurt to be stupid. That causes a lot of problems with immune health, with societal health, and economic health.


----------



## Oldmom (Jun 26, 2020)

po boy said:


> Well then, why don't we just buy the cure from the countries that did not drop the ball.


We did - India was kind enough to sell us some, even though they were using it for their own people. Other Pharma companies like Bayer and Sandoz donated it to national stockpile, where it sits. You have to find a doctor willing to prescribe it for you, and it would be off-label. The American Association of Physicians and Surgeons is suing the FDA to allow its prescription for c+ patients and as a preventative.


----------



## SLADE (Feb 20, 2004)

Oldmom said:


> We did - India was kind enough to sell us some, even though they were using it for their own people. Other Pharma companies like Bayer and Sandoz donated it to national stockpile, where it sits. You have to find a doctor willing to prescribe it for you, and it would be off-label. The American Association of Physicians and Surgeons is suing the FDA to allow its prescription for c+ patients and as a preventative.


They sold it when threatened by the the head cheese of the US.
India is now stopping it's use as a treatment for covid 19.


----------



## po boy (Jul 12, 2010)

SLADE said:


> We did buy a bunch of fake cure from India.


I know it's difficult, but the question was about buying a known cure from those countries that were so successful.


----------



## SLADE (Feb 20, 2004)

po boy said:


> I know it's difficult, but the question was about buying a known cure from those countries that were so successful.


The countries that slowed the virus did not do it with fake cures as suggested by the talking head of the US.
They did it by locking down their country and keeping it locked down.


----------



## po boy (Jul 12, 2010)

SLADE said:


> The countries that slowed the virus did not do it with fake cures as suggested by the talking head of the US.
> They did it by locking down their country and keeping it locked down.


Well, the ball was dropped by 8 states that made up about 90,000 deaths in the US. That 16% (of states) were responsible for 55% of our total deaths. They didn't listen to the experts.


----------



## doc- (Jun 26, 2015)

Torture the numbers long enough and you can get them to confess to anything....

One quarter of US deaths occurred in nursing homes in NY, thanks to a politically motivated policy decision by those in charge of the govt...Eliminate data from NY and the US data looks awfully good.

Be careful extrapolating data from other countries. India, for instance-- doses of hydroxyquinone used in malaria prophylaxis are a hundred time smaller than doses used to treat CoV:. Indians are also universally given BCG vaccine as kids-- known to be a general boost to the immune system, protecting them from many things besides TB. You just can't compare apples and oranges.

If hydroxyquinone does make a difference, it's very small, and the rate of undesirable side effects makes that risk/benefit ratio even smaller.

Don't lose any sleep over this argument. It's all politics, not science.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Bearfootfarm said:


> If it's so "highly contagious" and "deadly", why aren't *all* the Dr's and nurses getting infected and dying?


Because PPE works.


----------



## wdcutrsdaughter (Dec 9, 2012)

SLADE said:


> This is all temporary amnesia so we forget who dropped the ball and put us in the position we find ourselves in.
> Chasing magical cures is nothing more than quackery.
> Be patient and let real doctors and researchers get us through this.


Have you considered that relying on another person for your own health is quackery?



PS Bill Gates isn't a doctor.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

wdcutrsdaughter said:


> Have you considered that relying on another person for your own health is quackery?
> 
> 
> 
> PS Bill Gates isn't a doctor.


where do you get your health care?


----------



## wdcutrsdaughter (Dec 9, 2012)

Lisa in WA said:


> where do you get your health care?


How is that any of your business?


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

wdcutrsdaughter said:


> How is that any of your business?


As much my business to ask as was your previous question to Slade.


----------



## wdcutrsdaughter (Dec 9, 2012)

Lisa in WA said:


> As much my business to ask as was your previous question to Slade.


My question to Slade was because it seemed in the comment I was responding to there was blame being put on another person for "the situation we are in". 
IMO the reality is everyone is responsible for their own immunity and not the doctor you see or the president or the head of the health department or anyone else. Depending on someone else to keep you healthy is quackery. 

Your question is much more personal and nothing I will share on a public forum. 
😊


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

Oh, calm down.
You misinterpreted what I was asking.
Apparently you were born knowing how to be “responsible For your own immune system” and needed no advice or help from anyone.
Cool.


----------



## wdcutrsdaughter (Dec 9, 2012)

I'm completely calm, thanks.
I didn't misinterpret anything. 
I said I am not discussing my health care with you, sorry.
Wonder why you are so interested?


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

Quackery and delusion are fascinating. 
Especially when spiced with a little hypocrisy.


----------



## Mish (Oct 15, 2015)

I thought I remembered hearing something about blood type. It's interesting too.

Blood type and COVID-19? | MIT Medical

"And, in fact, these researchers, like the researchers in China and New York City, found a higher risk for severe illness among individuals with Type A blood and a protective effect for Type O. Type A blood was associated with a 45 percent increased risk of having respiratory failure, while Type O was associated with a 35 percent reduction in risk.

The reason behind this association remains unclear. The authors of the NEJM study hypothesize that different combinations of A and B antigens may change how the immune system produces infection-fighting antibodies or have some other, unknown effect on how the body responds to infection. Or, they suggest, perhaps the genes associated with blood type also have some effect on the ACE2 receptor, the protein that allows the SARS-CoV-2 virus to infect human cells."


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

Mish said:


> I thought I remembered hearing something about blood type. It's interesting too.
> 
> Blood type and COVID-19? | MIT Medical
> 
> ...


I’ve seen this too. My husband, both daughters and I are O blood type. 
so hoping it’s true.


----------



## Mish (Oct 15, 2015)

Lisa in WA said:


> I’ve seen this too. My husband, both daughters and I are O blood type.
> so hoping it’s true.


And of course I'm type A


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

Mish said:


> And of course I'm type A


☹


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Nevada said:


> Because PPE works.


We were repeatedly told they didn't have what they needed.
Did someone lie?


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

Mish said:


> I thought I remembered hearing something about blood type. It's interesting too.
> 
> Blood type and COVID-19? | MIT Medical
> 
> ...



That may indeed be a factor. Some medical people also say a deficiency of vitamin D is also a factor and it makes sense. Vitamin D is very important to the immune system. It is also known that the darker your skin, the less vitamin D your body makes from sunlight. That could explain why blacks are hit harder by the virus. Add to that that we get less sunlight in the cold months and people in nursing homes get virtually none. it could explain why so many die.


----------



## random (Jul 23, 2020)

doc- said:


> Did you read the study? No mention is made of how pts were selected to receive treatment. The difference between no treatment vs hydroxy- was only 6%. Getting both hydroxy- and azithro- was worse than getting just hydroxy-.


As stated, I cited the ONE study that I had available in my computer's history. Frankly, I also took no position on it. My point was that there are studies as well as a lot of field reporting from doctors showing it may help, and so far every one of those indicates that it only helps if given early. There are studies and reports showing it doesn't help, but every one of those I've seen were in cases where it was given too late, like the VA study. And the study in the Lancet that showed it was actually harmful has been retracted, and the company behind it has shut down due to being discovered using falsified data.

There are several older studies showing the efficacy of HCQ against coronavirus in general, as have been cited on this thread. The medicine has been in general usage for decades, it is a known quantity that may have some benefit. Why not just leave it to the individual and their doctor to make a decision on whether to use it for treatment?

This is directed at nobody in particular, lest it come across as such: I find it ironic that the people who come across as most against the use of HCQ, which if properly administered is pretty safe and MAY have some benefit, are the same people who seem to be most in favor of masks, for which you could say the exact same. Why is one good and the other bad?


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

poppy said:


> That may indeed be a factor. Some medical people also say a deficiency of vitamin D is also a factor and it makes sense. Vitamin D is very important to the immune system. It is also known that the darker your skin, the less vitamin D your body makes from sunlight. That could explain why blacks are hit harder by the virus. Add to that that we get less sunlight in the cold months and people in nursing homes get virtually none. it could explain why so many die.


I hope so. I have an upcoming hospital stay next month and I’m worried about getting Covid while there.
I’ve been taking vitamin D supplements for years now and I rarely even catch a cold. I’m a light skinned natural redhead and while we are supposed to be better at synthesizing vitamin D, I’ve always worn tons of sunscreen so was tested as deficient in vitamin D years ago.


----------



## doc- (Jun 26, 2015)

random said:


> As stated, I cited the ONE study that I had available in my computer's history. Frankly, I also took no position on it. My point was that there are studies as well as a lot of field reporting from doctors showing it may help, and so far every one of those indicates that it only helps if given early. There are studies and reports showing it doesn't help, but every one of those I've seen were in cases where it was given too late, like the VA study. And the study in the Lancet that showed it was actually harmful has been retracted, and the company behind it has shut down due to being discovered using falsified data.
> 
> There are several older studies showing the efficacy of HCQ against coronavirus in general, as have been cited on this thread. The medicine has been in general usage for decades, it is a known quantity that may have some benefit. Why not just leave it to the individual and their doctor to make a decision on whether to use it for treatment?
> 
> This is directed at nobody in particular, lest it come across as such: I find it ironic that the people who come across as most against the use of HCQ, which if properly administered is pretty safe and MAY have some benefit, are the same people who seem to be most in favor of masks, for which you could say the exact same. Why is one good and the other bad?





random said:


> As stated, I cited the ONE study that I had available in my computer's history. Frankly, I also took no position on it. My point was that there are studies as well as a lot of field reporting from doctors showing it may help, and so far every one of those indicates that it only helps if given early. There are studies and reports showing it doesn't help, but every one of those I've seen were in cases where it was given too late, like the VA study. And the study in the Lancet that showed it was actually harmful has been retracted, and the company behind it has shut down due to being discovered using falsified data.
> 
> There are several older studies showing the efficacy of HCQ against coronavirus in general, as have been cited on this thread. The medicine has been in general usage for decades, it is a known quantity that may have some benefit. Why not just leave it to the individual and their doctor to make a decision on whether to use it for treatment?
> 
> This is directed at nobody in particular, lest it come across as such: I find it ironic that the people who come across as most against the use of HCQ, which if properly administered is pretty safe and MAY have some benefit, are the same people who seem to be most in favor of masks, for which you could say the exact same. Why is one good and the other bad?


Actually, the Lancet paper that was retraced said it worked....The drug is safe enough, IF it really did any good....but the good it does has been shown to be small at best and many papers show it does not work at all. 

It can take a year or two to plan a good, double blind study with good control groups and organized subject selection. They've only had 4 or 5 months experience with this one, so the "studies" aren't really much more than anecdotal. 

.We've been looking for treatments for viral infections for 80 yrs now, since they were first discovered. VERY poor results. What makes anyone think they'll come up with some miracle in the next few months for this one?


----------



## Mish (Oct 15, 2015)

doc- said:


> We've been looking for treatments for viral infections for 80 yrs now, since they were first discovered. VERY poor results. What makes anyone think they'll come up with some miracle in the next few months for this one?


That's what I keep thinking, too. I'm not sure why everyone believes we're going to tame this particular unicorn. We'll see I guess.


----------



## random (Jul 23, 2020)

doc- said:


> Actually, the Lancet paper that was retraced said it worked....The drug is safe enough, IF it really did any good....but the good it does has been shown to be small at best and many papers show it does not work at all.
> 
> It can take a year or two to plan a good, double blind study with good control groups and organized subject selection. They've only had 4 or 5 months experience with this one, so the "studies" aren't really much more than anecdotal.
> 
> .We've been looking for treatments for viral infections for 80 yrs now, since they were first discovered. VERY poor results. What makes anyone think they'll come up with some miracle in the next few months for this one?


We may be thinking of two different Lancet papers then, the one I recall was pretty negative. I would not at all disagree that we don't have the time for a good double-blind study, nor do I think we'll ever be in a good place to actually do one. My biggest point is that HCQ is generally safe and of _possible_ benefit, and should be a treatment decision made _between a doctor and patient_, NOT by blanket governmental decrees.

As for your last point: IMO We're NOT going to get any sort of miracle cure or vaccine or whatever. The thing has to run its course, and will do so, one way or another.


----------



## random (Jul 23, 2020)

And as to my earlier promise for more studies and papers - I couldn't find much in my history so I did some digging, here's a few more:









Early Outpatient Treatment of Symptomatic, High-Risk COVID-19 Patients That Should Be Ramped Up Immediately as Key to the Pandemic Crisis


Abstract. More than 1.6 million Americans have been infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), and more than 10 times that numb




academic.oup.com













Hydroxychloroquine and Zinc With Either Azithromycin or Doxycycline for Treatment of COVID-19 in Outpatient Setting - Full Text View - ClinicalTrials.gov


Hydroxychloroquine and Zinc With Either Azithromycin or Doxycycline for Treatment of COVID-19 in Outpatient Setting - Full Text View.




clinicaltrials.gov







https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2012410



This appears to be a pretty good list of studies on the topic:








COVID-19 early treatment: real-time analysis of 2,359 studies


COVID-19 early treatment: real-time analysis of 2,359 studies




c19study.com


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

doc- said:


> Actually, the Lancet paper that was retraced said it worked....The drug is safe enough, IF it really did any good....but the good it does has been shown to be small at best and many papers show it does not work at all.
> 
> It can take a year or two to plan a good, double blind study with good control groups and organized subject selection. They've only had 4 or 5 months experience with this one, so the "studies" aren't really much more than anecdotal.
> 
> .We've been looking for treatments for viral infections for 80 yrs now, since they were first discovered. VERY poor results. What makes anyone think they'll come up with some miracle in the next few months for this one?



I mostly agree but this virus could lead to effective new treatments. With the number of labs working on this virus worldwide, it dwarfs any previous research. Hopefully this will lead to much more understanding of virus' and perhaps lead to a treatment/cure that works on most or all of them. Zinc has been shown to work on at least some coronaviruses to some degree. Over the counter Cold-Eese is a zinc tablet and has been on the market for decades to shorten time of the common cold and I know people who swear by it.


----------



## TripleD (Feb 12, 2011)

I have no clue on this my doctor nor his registered nurses take a flu shot. He told me back in March not do a service call on a house .I had to ask his opinion on it. The tenant was tested positive. I did it anyway... opinions vary.


----------



## random (Jul 23, 2020)

TripleD said:


> I have no clue on this my doctor nor his registered nurses take a flu shot. He told me back in March not do a service call on a house .I had to ask his opinion on it. The tenant was tested positive. I did it anyway... opinions vary.


That sounds like a HIPPA violation. Dispatch isn't even allowed to tell fire/EMS if we're going to a house with someone infected.


----------



## TripleD (Feb 12, 2011)

random said:


> That sounds like a HIPPA violation. Dispatch isn't even allowed to tell fire/EMS if we're going to a house with someone infected.


How is it a HIPPA violation. It wasn't her doctor. She said she was tested positive???


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Mildred Geraldine "Gerri" Schappals is one of the few people in the world who has survived both. The 102-year-old New Englander lived through a severe bout of the flu during the 1918 pandemic as a baby. And now, a century later, punctuated by two bouts of cancer, Schappals also has recovered from covid-19 in the pandemic of 2020. 

She is an anomaly, and not just because of her age. The elder Schappals was not particularly health-conscious throughout her life, yet she seems to have a bulletproof immune system. She credits that to the 1918 flu pandemic, her daughter said.

Julia Schappals cannot recall a single time when her mother got sick with a respiratory ailment like the cold or flu. In fact, Gerri Schappals had disdain for anyone who did get sick.

"I really think that having the 1918 flu strengthened everything about me," she said. "I never had colds or illnesses until I got cancer, and even then I pulled through. It's either that or Mother Nature thinks I died in 1918, so she ignores me."

- - -












Advice from a woman who survived covid-19, the 1918 flu - and cancer


We are in a pandemic today that the world hasn't seen the likes of in 102...




www.stamfordadvocate.com


----------



## TripleD (Feb 12, 2011)

TripleD said:


> How is it a HIPPA violation. It wasn't her doctor. She said she was tested positive???


Maybe I didn't spell it out well enough. If I can't get up with my doctor, lawyer, banker, CPA, and bail bondsman I make changes...


----------



## random (Jul 23, 2020)

TripleD said:


> How is it a HIPPA violation. It wasn't her doctor. She said she was tested positive???


My apologies, I thought you were saying that a doctor told you she was infected. I misunderstood what you were saying.


----------



## random (Jul 23, 2020)

TripleD said:


> How is it a HIPPA violation. It wasn't her doctor. She said she was tested positive???


My apologies, I completely misunderstood what you were saying. I re-read it and I understand better now.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

doc- said:


> Actually, the Lancet paper that was retraced said it worked....The drug is safe enough, IF it really did any good....but the good it does has been shown to be small at best and many papers show it does not work at all.
> 
> It can take a year or two to plan a good, double blind study with good control groups and organized subject selection. They've only had 4 or 5 months experience with this one, so the "studies" aren't really much more than anecdotal.
> 
> .We've been looking for treatments for viral infections for 80 yrs now, since they were first discovered. VERY poor results. What makes anyone think they'll come up with some miracle in the next few months for this one?


I agree, the studies are all over the place on the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine.

Purely anecdotal, but I was on hydroxychloroquine years ago and developed permanent vision changes. My rheumatologist grilled me on the side effects and adverse reactions prior to prescribing it, it's not a safe drug for everyone.


----------



## random (Jul 23, 2020)

unintended double post - gotta love satellite internet


----------



## random (Jul 23, 2020)

Irish Pixie said:


> I agree, the studies are all over the place on the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine.
> 
> Purely anecdotal, but I was on hydroxychloroquine years ago and developed permanent vision changes. My rheumatologist grilled me on the side effects and adverse reactions prior to prescribing it, it's not a safe drug for everyone.


How long were you on it? From everything I've read, vision problems are a known side-effect of long-term use.

As for not being safe for everyone, that's pretty much the case with every drug. People taking it without consulting with their doctor are taking a severe risk. But at the same time I think that if a doctor thinks it's the right course of action and the patient agrees, it shouldn't be restricted. Elected officials and bureaucrats are not in the right place to make that call.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

po boy said:


> Well, the ball was dropped by 8 states that made up about 90,000 deaths in the US. That 16% (of states) were responsible for 55% of our total deaths. They didn't listen to the experts.


The virus was already in those states and spreading rapidly before the experts ordered a shut down.


----------



## po boy (Jul 12, 2010)

Danaus29 said:


> The virus was already in those states and spreading rapidly before the experts ordered a shut down.


the experts were way behind.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

po boy said:


> the experts were way behind.


Even the ones in China. They don't know how long it was being spread there before they accumulated one cluster of people presenting the same serious symptoms.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

random said:


> How long were you on it? From everything I've read, vision problems are a known side-effect of long-term use.
> 
> As for not being safe for everyone, that's pretty much the case with every drug. People taking it without consulting with their doctor are taking a severe risk. But at the same time I think that if a doctor thinks it's the right course of action and the patient agrees, it shouldn't be restricted. Elected officials and bureaucrats are not in the right place to make that call.


It's restricted because there are serious side effects associated with it, and family doctors aren't as familiar with them as specialists.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> It's restricted because there are *serious side effects* associated with it, and *family doctors aren't as familiar* with them as specialists.


They know more than the self-appointed internet specialists.
There are more "serious side effects" associated with ETOH, which many purposely ignore.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Bearfootfarm said:


> They know more than the self-appointed internet specialists.
> There are more "serious side effects" associated with ETOH, which many purposely ignore.


Apparently you're very familiar with alcohol and it's serious side effects. There are programs for that, there is no shame in asking for help.


----------



## Oldmom (Jun 26, 2020)

Irish Pixie said:


> It's restricted because there are serious side effects associated with it, and family doctors aren't as familiar with them as specialists.


Here are the CDC guidelines I was checking out when first reports came out: say that people taking at higher doses over period of time may have eye problems, and they recommend people on it long term - 5 years - have regular eye tests. 
Safe for children, pregnant and nursing women. They recommend making sure your doctor checks for any drug interactions. 



https://www.cdc.gov/malaria/resources/pdf/fsp/drugs/hydroxychloroquine.pdf?ftag=MSF0951a18


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Oldmom said:


> Here are the CDC guidelines I was checking out when first reports came out: say that people taking at higher doses over period of time may have eye problems, and they recommend people on it long term - 5 years - have regular eye tests.
> Safe for children, pregnant and nursing women. They recommend making sure your doctor checks for any drug interactions.
> 
> 
> ...


Regular eye exams are how permanent vision changes are always found, and they can occur in much less than 5 years.

You have listed the CDC guidelines for hydroxychloroquine for malaria. What are the CDC guidelines for Covid 19?


----------



## Oldmom (Jun 26, 2020)

Irish Pixie said:


> Regular eye exams are how permanent vision changes are always found, and they can occur in much less than 5 years.
> 
> You have listed the CDC guidelines for hydroxychloroquine for malaria. What are the CDC guidelines for Covid 19?


There are no CDC guidelines for Covid 19.


----------



## Oldmom (Jun 26, 2020)

I like the idea that medications that have been around long enough to no longer be under Patent, have been around long enough to have acknowledged side-effects; aspirin, tylenol, statins, etc. One of the Statins - fenofibrate - is also being investigated as a potential remedy for the terrible lung effects that covid has - to give the body enough time to fight the virus by allowing the lungs to stay clear - study being done in Israel and at Mt. Sinai in NY I believe. 

One of the problems I have with vaccines - especially new ones - is that there is no track record to see what those long term side effects are. To top it off, if there ARE terrible side effects, vaccine manufacturers are virtually exempt from liability in the US. You can't sue pharma companies if five years down the road you're sterile or your toes fall off. The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 gave them immunity. You have to file a claim with Vaccine Injury program - and no one with injured kids has anything nice to say about them. Vaccine makers have nothing to lose - we can lose everything. Scary stuff.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Oldmom said:


> There are no CDC guidelines for Covid 19.


There are no CDC guidelines because it is off label for use with Covid 19, and is restricted due to safety issues. I did find this regarding hydroxychloroquine from the FDA: FDA cautions use of hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine for COVID-19


----------



## TripleD (Feb 12, 2011)

Irish Pixie said:


> Apparently you're very familiar with alcohol and it's serious side effects. There are programs for that, there is no shame in asking for help.


Nobody can drink all day unless you start in the morning. Lol


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> Apparently you're very familiar with *alcohol and it's serious side effects*.


It's quite well documented.
Everyone should be familiar.


----------



## Oldmom (Jun 26, 2020)

Irish Pixie said:


> There are no CDC guidelines because it is off label for use with Covid 19, and is restricted due to safety issues. I did find this regarding hydroxychloroquine from the FDA: FDA cautions use of hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine for COVID-19


Well, hopefully with all the drug trials that are being fast-tracked citizens will be able to choose which drug they wish to take - whether it is the HCQ Protocol, the vaccine, or old drugs that are being re-purposed like the statins - off label use.


----------



## random (Jul 23, 2020)

Irish Pixie said:


> It's restricted because there are serious side effects associated with it, and family doctors aren't as familiar with them as specialists.


The restrictions I'm referring to are new as of this year. If what you're saying were really the case, they should have already been in place. The restrictions are being put in place NOT by medical professionals, but by politicians, who know even LESS about it than the "family doctor".

Also, GPs often treat malaria, right? So should it be restricted_ by decree from elected officials_ for that as well, given how dangerous it is?


Irish Pixie said:


> There are no CDC guidelines because it is off label for use with Covid 19, and is restricted due to safety issues. I did find this regarding hydroxychloroquine from the FDA: FDA cautions use of hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine for COVID-19


You are aware that treatment of RA and SLE is also off-label use for HCQ? Off-label use is a VERY common practice in the medical community.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

random said:


> The restrictions I'm referring to are new as of this year. If what you're saying were really the case, they should have already been in place. The restrictions are being put in place NOT by medical professionals, but by politicians, who know even LESS about it than the "family doctor".
> 
> Also, GPs often treat malaria, right? So should it be restricted_ by decree from elected officials_ for that as well, given how dangerous it is?
> 
> You are aware that treatment of RA and SLE is also off-label use for HCQ? Off-label use is a VERY common practice in the medical community.


I thought malaria transmission in the US was eliminated? Or quite rare. Even so, it's not restricted for use in malaria. 

Hydroxychloriquine is not off label for Lupus and RA- "Both drugs are approved to treat malaria, lupus, and rheumatoid arthritis but must still be assessed in clinical trials before being declared a safe and effective COVID-19 treatment. Doctors in the United States have wide latitude to prescribe drugs “off-label,” meaning for conditions beyond their initial FDA approval.”1 HCQ may or may not pan out to be a successful therapeutic agent in the treatment for COVID-19 infections. However, it appears likely that many health care providers may begin using this drug without knowledge of accepted dosage regimens and toxicity." From: Hydroxychloroquine and “off-label” utilization in the treatment of oral conditions

And even if it were off label, it's not restricted for either disease as it is for Covid. Which I stated in my prior post.


----------



## random (Jul 23, 2020)

Interesting, I swear that I had just read it was still off-label for those before posting. I DO try to verify such things. Looks like it was approved for those in 56.

But you and I both know that off-label uses, even "unapproved" ones, are common.

Regardless, you are continually avoiding my primary point, which is (a) that many of the restrictions are being put in place by people in government with no medical training and (b) (most importantly) the decision to be made between a doctor and patient, _as the FDA Commissioner says it should be_ FDA chief: Hydroxychloroquine use a decision between doctor and patient


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

random said:


> Interesting, I swear that I had just read it was still off-label for those before posting. I DO try to verify such things. Looks like it was approved for those in 56.
> 
> But you and I both know that off-label uses, even "unapproved" ones, are common.
> 
> Regardless, you are continually avoiding my primary point, which is (a) that many of the restrictions are being put in place by people in government with no medical training and (b) (most importantly) the decision to be made between a doctor and patient, _as the FDA Commissioner says it should be_ FDA chief: Hydroxychloroquine use a decision between doctor and patient


I never said that drugs weren't used "off label", not ever. And I'm not avoiding anything, the absolute fact is the *FDA* added restrictions to the use of hydroxychloroquine for Covid 19.


----------



## random (Jul 23, 2020)

That statement would appear to run counter to what the FDA Commissioner said in the article I cited: _“A doctor and a patient need to assess the data that’s out there, FDA does not regulate the practice of medicine, and that in the privacy of the doctor-patient relationship is where that decision should be made.”_, which is my main point.

I did some more searching and I came up with a few statements and warnings, but no _restrictions_:









FDA cautions use of hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine for COVID-19


Does not affect FDA-approved uses for malaria, lupus, and rheumatoid arthritis




www.fda.gov













Coronavirus (COVID-19) Update: FDA Revokes Emergency Use Authorization for Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine


COVID-19 Update: FDA Revokes Emergency Use Authorization




www.fda.gov













Hydroxychloroquine or Chloroquine for COVID-19: Drug Safety Alert


FDA is concerned that hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine are being used inappropriately to treat non-hospitalized patients for coronavirus disease (COVID-19) or to prevent that disease.




www.fda.gov





If you have information that I have not seen or cannot find, please share.


----------



## po boy (Jul 12, 2010)

random said:


> That statement would appear to run counter to what the FDA Commissioner said in the article I cited: _“A doctor and a patient need to assess the data that’s out there, FDA does not regulate the practice of medicine, and that in the privacy of the doctor-patient relationship is where that decision should be made.”_, which is my main point.
> 
> I did some more searching and I came up with a few statements and warnings, but no _restrictions_:
> 
> ...


U r correct,
Can someone tell me what drugs are being used randomly to treat COVID, Not studies or trials.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

My error. It's a state by state regulation, not FDA. Here's the link: https://www.nashp.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/State-covid-drug-chart-3-27-2020.pdf

ETA:
However, "In fact, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) *revoked its emergency use authorization* (EUA) of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19 in June. The agency based this decision, in part, on recent results from a large, randomized clinical trial, the gold standard of drug testing, which found no benefit for decreasing the likelihood of death or speeding up recovery." https://www.newsweek.com/ohio-bans-...reatment-state-highest-days-new-cases-1521646


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> ETA:
> However, "In fact, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) *revoked its emergency use authorization* (EUA) of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19 in June. The agency based this decision, in part, on recent results from a large, randomized clinical trial, the gold standard of drug testing, which found no benefit for decreasing the likelihood of death or speeding up recovery."


They really didn't "add" any restrictions.
They went back to what it was before they said it was good.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Bearfootfarm said:


> They went back to what it was before they said it was good.


The EUA was a green light to take a look at it. Revoking the EUA 'means 'don't look at it.' When a medication trial demonstrates no benefit but deadly side effects, it's no longer ethical to continue the study. That should be obvious to anyone.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Nevada said:


> The EUA was a green light to take a look at it. Revoking the EUA 'means 'don't look at it.' When a medication trial demonstrates *no benefit but deadly side effects*, it's no longer ethical to continue the study. That should be obvious to anyone.


That's not what happened at all.
They are simply following the statutes regarding EUA's.



> Today, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) revoked the emergency use authorization (EUA) that allowed for chloroquine phosphate and hydroxychloroquine sulfate donated to the Strategic National Stockpile to be used *to treat certain hospitalized patients* with COVID-19 *when a clinical trial was unavailable, or participation in a clinical trial was not feasible. *


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Nevada said:


> The EUA was a green light to take a look at it. Revoking the EUA 'means 'don't look at it.' When a medication trial demonstrates no benefit but deadly side effects, it's no longer ethical to continue the study. That should be obvious to anyone.


Yup. I agree.


----------



## random (Jul 23, 2020)

Again, then, I have to ask, how did HCQ suddenly become so deadly after 60 years of continuous use? If it's so deadly, why is it approved in the first place?

If you look at the list of studies I provided, the majority appear to be positive, especially when given early. The drug is very well-known to the medical community.

I think we've beaten the subject to death, though. It is clear that we're not going to agree. 

@Irish Pixie, in particular (since you and I interacted the most), I want to thank you for keeping this debate cordial.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

random said:


> If it's so deadly, why is it approved in the first place?


Because it's effective for some serious disporers, which makes the risk/reward is attractive. But you wouldn't want to use it with no expectation of reward.

Doctors often use medications that they know cause damage to the body. We've had lengthy discussions about statins here at HT. Doctors know that statins can cause liver and other damage to the body, yet still prescribe it. So why would they do that? Because the risk of cardiovascular disease is more serious, even deadly, so that makes statins worth the risk. Are there safe alternatives to statins? Yes, but you'll have to give up steak, hamburgers, fries, pizza.& doughnuts.

So back to the topic; no, HCQ isn't more dangerous than it's been in the past, but it's not effective for preventing or treating COVID-19. Simply put, the science shows that HCQ can't prevent COVID-19, and if you get it your survival chances are better without HCQ.

Trust me, I've looked into it. If I believed it worked I'd be taking it. That's one of the reasons I priced it the last time I was in Mexico.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

Nevada said:


> Trust me, I've looked into it. If I believed it worked I'd be taking it. That's one of the reasons I priced it the last time I was in Mexico.


Just curious.
why would anyone trust you on this?
you are not a doctor And as far as anyone here knows you have no special expertise in medicine.


----------



## po boy (Jul 12, 2010)

I think it depends on when it is given, the dose given, and if it's given with zinc. Yale Professor Harvey Risch, M.D., Ph.D. spells out how it should be used.
The VA trial was done on the wrong patients to get the results they wanted. I haven't reviewed any other. My computer is slow.

My sister will be 72 in two weeks, in a nursing home, is diabetic, has cancer, and had COVID Pneumonia. She was in ICU for several days and my family was asked if we would authorize a ventilator if needed. WE declined. She is out of ICU and doing great.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Lisa in WA said:


> Just curious.
> why would anyone trust you on this?
> you are not a doctor.


Would it matter? Nobody believes me about oil & gas engineering, refrigeration, or even server administration. I suspect my opinions would get no more respect around here if I were an MD.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

Nevada said:


> Would it matter? Nobody believes me about oil & gas engineering, refrigeration, or even server administration. I suspect my opinions would get no more respect around here if I were an MD.


Point being That you aren’t a medical expert and yet you ask people here to “trust“ you about medical issues. 
Seems like we have a few doctor wannabes here these days.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

po boy said:


> She was in ICU for several days and my family was asked if we would authorize a ventilator if needed. WE declined.


You believe in hydroxychloroquine but don't believe in ventilators?


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Lisa in WA said:


> Point being That you aren’t a medical expert and yet you ask people here to “trust“ you about medical issues.
> Seems like we have a few doctor wannabes here these days.


I didn't ask anyone to trust my medical opinion. Read it again.

I only asked that you trust that I looked into the use of hydroxychloroquine.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

Nevada said:


> I didn't ask anyone to trust my medical opinion. Read it again.
> 
> I only asked that you trust that I looked into the use of hydroxychloroquine.


I don’t think the English works like you think it does, doc.


----------



## po boy (Jul 12, 2010)

Nevada said:


> You believe in hydroxychloroquine but don't believe in ventilators?


There are a lot of things I believe in and a lot I don't. In this instance, my sister wouldn't want it because of the other health issues. 

FYI
I am not there, getting the updates from one of my sisters. That sister has a son in the same nursing home that's partially paralyzed from an accident 25 years ago and he was put on a ventilator two days after my other sister was diagnosed.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

Nevada said:


> You believe in hydroxychloroquine but don't believe in ventilators?


More often than not, by the time a ventilator becomes a necessity your spouse is home going thru the back of the closet looking for your best suit.


----------



## po boy (Jul 12, 2010)

GTX63 said:


> More often than not, by the time a ventilator becomes a necessity your spouse is home going thru the back of the closet looking for your best suit.


Yes, in my sister's case she is not happy in the nursing home and would like to get back out on her own and didn't have the confidence that she would be better if and when she got off the ventilator.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

random said:


> Again, then, I have to ask, how did HCQ suddenly become so deadly after 60 years of continuous use? If it's so deadly, why is it approved in the first place?
> 
> If you look at the list of studies I provided, the majority appear to be positive, especially when given early. The drug is very well-known to the medical community.
> 
> ...


Thank you, and same to you. Most posters are cordial during a discussion, there are only a few that don't even try. And I agree that this thread is done.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> Most posters are cordial during a discussion, there are *only a few* that don't even try.


It's always someone else...


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Bearfootfarm said:


> It's always someone else...


That is how they work. Spend someone else's money. Blame someone else.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

Nevada said:


> Would it matter? Nobody believes me about oil & gas engineering, refrigeration, or even server administration. I suspect my opinions would get no more respect around here if I were an MD.


Your right!


----------

