The Truth about Corona Virus Situation and what every person

[boB]

On 19 Mar 2020 13:56:49 -0700, Winfield Hill <winfieldhill@yahoo.com>
wrote:

Rick C wrote...

Phil Hobbs wrote:

According to the googledocs paper, it works by preventing
the virus from acidifying the cytoplasm in order to break
host proteins down into amino acids to build more viruses.
10 micromolar solution suppresses virus growth completely.

I hope this does pan out.

It's safe to take, right? Doctors are free to prescribe it
off-label, are they not? For very sick patients, find out
very quickly if it works.

What is "it" ??

thanks
boB

 

[Phil Hobbs]

On 2020-03-19 16:56, Winfield Hill wrote:

Rick C wrote...

Phil Hobbs wrote:

According to the googledocs paper, it works by preventing
the virus from acidifying the cytoplasm in order to break
host proteins down into amino acids to build more viruses.
10 micromolar solution suppresses virus growth completely.

I hope this does pan out.

It's safe to take, right? Doctors are free to prescribe it
off-label, are they not? For very sick patients, find out
very quickly if it works.

Chloroquine is even safe for pregnant women and nursing mothers. AFAICT
the only side effect is retinopathy for some people who have been given
over _400_grams_ of the stuff over several years.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com

 

[Rick C]

On Thursday, March 19, 2020 at 6:06:23 PM UTC-4, David Brown wrote:

On 19/03/2020 22:37, Rick C wrote:
On Thursday, March 19, 2020 at 4:57:12 PM UTC-4, Winfield Hill
wrote:
Rick C wrote...

Phil Hobbs wrote:

According to the googledocs paper, it works by preventing the
virus from acidifying the cytoplasm in order to break host
proteins down into amino acids to build more viruses. 10
micromolar solution suppresses virus growth completely.

I hope this does pan out.

It's safe to take, right? Doctors are free to prescribe it
off-label, are they not? For very sick patients, find out very
quickly if it works.

That's not how things work. Giving patients drugs does not tell you if
they work - that's why drug testing is so complicated with double-blind
tests, comparative studies, etc. And that is why laymen - like Trump -
should not be making public statements about drug usage or testing.

Yeah, that's what you do when a drug company is bringing a drug to market and there is no rush other than for profits. In this situation we can take a few shortcuts and that study seems pretty clear. It will be repeated by others I'm sure and the drug companies are ramping up production. But still, we need doses for millions of people and the longer it takes the more people who will need to be dosed. It's hard to ramp up exponentially.

Not very many docs will prescribe such a drug. You don't know it
won't hurt a patient with this disease. They are saying ibuprofen is
contraindicated for this disease. The WHO is backing away from that
now, but the point is with a new disease we don't know the effects of
a drug. We have testing protocols specifically to keep people safe.

Chloroquine may also have bad side effects for ICU corona patients.
Hydroxychloroquine seems better, but the main use looks to be for
non-ICU hospital patients.

Where did you read that in the paper?

Knowing the drug is safe for other patients certainly speeds up safety
testing, but it does not eliminate it.

If we treat patients before they need to be in the ICU all the better, a win-win.

More importantly, if we do what we are supposed to do and not spread
this disease, we could be rid of it before any medicines are
available.

The big trouble is that elimination that way is very unlikely.
Countries might manage to get it close to zero spread while they are on
lockdown, but once things are opened again, there will be new outbreaks.

Yeah, but now that we know about it we will respond much more quickly and isolate any new infections. Once it is eliminated, it is eliminated. We only need to worry about being brought in from elsewhere.


> It has spread too far for containment to eliminate it.

That is not logical.

If we can't
get a vaccine, countries are going to have to be ready for quick
lockdowns every time a new outbreak flares up. Still, careful openness
with lots of testing at borders and the risk of new lockdowns would be a
lot better than continued lockdown for many months or years.

We already do this for any number of diseases. In the process we have essentially removed them from existence in many countries. This one spreads more rapidly, but that means we need travel restrictions.

It was only a couple of weeks ago people were still going out on cruise ships knowing there was a risk of this virus! We will have learned a lesson from this virus.

--

Rick C.

-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Rick C]

On Thursday, March 19, 2020 at 6:27:01 PM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

On Thu, 19 Mar 2020 23:06:09 +0100, David Brown
david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:



The big trouble is that elimination that way is very unlikely.
Countries might manage to get it close to zero spread while they are on
lockdown, but once things are opened again, there will be new outbreaks.

There will be reservoirs of active viruses here and there for a long
time. A group of, say, 200 people in some small town could pass it
around for many incubation periods. Somebody could make a bad batch of
ice cubes and freeze them for months or something.

If it will grow exponentially in a suceptable population, it would
just take one seed to start it back up. We can't lock down for years,
or people would starve.

I am so glad you are not in charge of anything important.

--

Rick C.

-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Phil Hobbs]

On 2020-03-19 15:55, bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:

On Thursday, March 19, 2020 at 3:24:37 PM UTC-4, Phil Hobbs wrote:
On 2020-03-19 13:12, bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, March 19, 2020 at 12:50:26 PM UTC-4,
jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Thu, 19 Mar 2020 12:40:07 -0400, Phil Hobbs
pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

On 2020-03-19 05:37, Winfield Hill wrote:
skybuck2000@hotmail.com wrote...

The truth in the Netherlands is as follows ...
(ICU=Intensive Care Unit)

1. Less than 300 free intensive care units / beds are
available on a population of 17 million. The rest are
already occupied, in total there are 1150 ICU units.

We're moving to total isolation, to stop any further
spreading beyond those already infected. This isn't a good
long-term solution, and new spreading centers will start
once we relax the isolation. But what we haven't been
hearing much about is new therapeutics, custom-designed to
help severely-compromised Covid-19 victims survive, without
the use of ICU beds. Once we have that, we can safely
cease the isolation approach. The therapeutics will be
easier to manufacture, and only relatively-small quantities
will be required, compared to a vaccine, which must be
population-wide. There are 50 companies working on
therapeutics, and several claim to already have working
results.



Looks like chloroquine plus azithromycin knocks the Wu flu
dead.


https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vTi-g18ftNZUMRAj2SwRPodtscFio7bJ7GdNgbJAGbdfF67WuRJB3ZsidgpidB2eocFHAVjIL-7deJ7/pub






https://www.mediterranee-infection.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Hydroxychloroquine_final_DOI_IJAA.pdf

Hope it pans out on a large scale!

Absolutely. Strange that an anti-malarial would work against a
virus.

Too strange to be true because it isn't. The articles keep
shooting their mouths off about it being "effective"- but not a
single quantifiable measure of that so-called effectiveness.

If you took time to read the articles I posted, you'd know that
they're based on actual hospital results.

The first page was about all I could stomach of that crap paper. If
it's not a double blind controlled trial, you don't have any results.
There's a reason that methodology is the gold standard of testing.

I could tell that you hadn't actually read it. (No huge surprise.)

It was a small study of hospital patients, but *everyone who was given
hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin* was free of coronavirus in 5 days
or less.

That's quite a few standard deviations from the usual course, even in a
smallish group.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com

 

On Thu, 19 Mar 2020 23:06:09 +0100, David Brown
<david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:

The big trouble is that elimination that way is very unlikely.
Countries might manage to get it close to zero spread while they are on
lockdown, but once things are opened again, there will be new outbreaks.

There will be reservoirs of active viruses here and there for a long
time. A group of, say, 200 people in some small town could pass it
around for many incubation periods. Somebody could make a bad batch of
ice cubes and freeze them for months or something.

If it will grow exponentially in a suceptable population, it would
just take one seed to start it back up. We can't lock down for years,
or people would starve.

It has spread too far for containment to eliminate it. If we can't
get a vaccine, countries are going to have to be ready for quick
lockdowns every time a new outbreak flares up. Still, careful openness
with lots of testing at borders and the risk of new lockdowns would be a
lot better than continued lockdown for many months or years.


Yes, if the US and every other affected country puts its affected
areas into lock down NOW, all the infected patients will be free of
the virus in less than two months. Or we can let it drag out for
many months.

Our choice.

--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

The cork popped merrily, and Lord Peter rose to his feet.
"Bunter", he said, "I give you a toast. The triumph of Instinct over Reason"

 

[David Brown]

On 19/03/2020 22:37, Rick C wrote:

On Thursday, March 19, 2020 at 4:57:12 PM UTC-4, Winfield Hill
wrote:
Rick C wrote...

Phil Hobbs wrote:

According to the googledocs paper, it works by preventing the
virus from acidifying the cytoplasm in order to break host
proteins down into amino acids to build more viruses. 10
micromolar solution suppresses virus growth completely.

I hope this does pan out.

It's safe to take, right? Doctors are free to prescribe it
off-label, are they not? For very sick patients, find out very
quickly if it works.

That's not how things work. Giving patients drugs does not tell you if
they work - that's why drug testing is so complicated with double-blind
tests, comparative studies, etc. And that is why laymen - like Trump -
should not be making public statements about drug usage or testing.

Not very many docs will prescribe such a drug. You don't know it
won't hurt a patient with this disease. They are saying ibuprofen is
contraindicated for this disease. The WHO is backing away from that
now, but the point is with a new disease we don't know the effects of
a drug. We have testing protocols specifically to keep people safe.

Chloroquine may also have bad side effects for ICU corona patients.
Hydroxychloroquine seems better, but the main use looks to be for
non-ICU hospital patients.

Knowing the drug is safe for other patients certainly speeds up safety
testing, but it does not eliminate it.

More importantly, if we do what we are supposed to do and not spread
this disease, we could be rid of it before any medicines are
available.

The big trouble is that elimination that way is very unlikely.
Countries might manage to get it close to zero spread while they are on
lockdown, but once things are opened again, there will be new outbreaks.
It has spread too far for containment to eliminate it. If we can't
get a vaccine, countries are going to have to be ready for quick
lockdowns every time a new outbreak flares up. Still, careful openness
with lots of testing at borders and the risk of new lockdowns would be a
lot better than continued lockdown for many months or years.

Yes, if the US and every other affected country puts its affected
areas into lock down NOW, all the infected patients will be free of
the virus in less than two months. Or we can let it drag out for
many months.

Our choice.

 

[Phil Hobbs]

On 2020-03-19 19:12, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

On Thu, 19 Mar 2020 18:35:42 -0400, Phil Hobbs
pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

On 2020-03-19 16:56, Winfield Hill wrote:
Rick C wrote...

Phil Hobbs wrote:

According to the googledocs paper, it works by preventing
the virus from acidifying the cytoplasm in order to break
host proteins down into amino acids to build more viruses.
10 micromolar solution suppresses virus growth completely.

I hope this does pan out.

It's safe to take, right? Doctors are free to prescribe it
off-label, are they not? For very sick patients, find out
very quickly if it works.



Chloroquine is even safe for pregnant women and nursing mothers. AFAICT
the only side effect is retinopathy for some people who have been given
over _400_grams_ of the stuff over several years.

The ideal strategy would be to let commerce resume, let susceptable
people get it and become immune, let it burn itself out, and treat the
minority of people who are in serious danger.

Especially if there's a good, widely-available treatment for the small
minority of younger people who get into real trouble. Otherwise the
moral question is a bit more nuanced, I think.

Some social-distancing propaganda would help a bit if the hospitals do
indeed get overloaded.

That would be a bit late of course, given the longish delay between
exposure and severe illness. A bit of modelling would help folks decide
when to do that, perhaps.

I'm doing a bit of binge-reading about the 1918 'flu. So far the best
is the first 60% of Laura Spinney's "Pale Rider: The Spanish Flu of 1918
and How It Changed The World", i.e. up to the point where she stops
telling the story and starts propounding, um, well,
_less_well_supported_ psychology and public policy.

I'm about a third of the way through Alfred Crosby's "America's
Forgotten Pandemic: The Influenza of 1918." He has an interesting focus
on some of the individuals directing the response in addition to the
history of the pandemic itself.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com

 

[Phil Hobbs]

On 2020-03-19 18:56, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

On Thu, 19 Mar 2020 12:40:07 -0400, Phil Hobbs
pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

Looks like chloroquine plus azithromycin knocks the Wu flu dead.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vTi-g18ftNZUMRAj2SwRPodtscFio7bJ7GdNgbJAGbdfF67WuRJB3ZsidgpidB2eocFHAVjIL-7deJ7/pub
https://www.mediterranee-infection.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Hydroxychloroquine_final_DOI_IJAA.pdf
Hope it pans out on a large scale!

Me too, but there might be a political problem:

Why Hasn’t Tony Fauci Been at the Coronavirus Press Conferences?
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/03/tony-fauci-at-coronavirus-press-conferences.html
Quoting...

One person who has expressed a more skeptical view of chloroquine is
task force member and immunologist Anthony Fauci, the veteran face of
the country’s response to disease outbreaks. But Fauci has not
appeared at a press conference since Tuesday, when Trump said he had
become a major television star.

Fauci for the past two days had been saying that chloroquine is not a
miracle cure and that we still need to determine its safety.

Speaking to Laura Ingraham on Fox News on Tuesday, Fauci said, "We
have to be careful, Laura, that we don’t assume something works based
on an anecdotal report that’s not controlled. And I refer specifically
to hydroxychloroquine. There’s a lot of buzz out there on the internet
on the social media about that."

On Wednesday, he reiterated this message in an interview with CNN’s
Chris Cuomo, saying he supported large-scale clinical trials but was
against "just throwing the drug out there, which is not a good idea."

This would not be the first time Fauci has contradicted the
president’s messaging during this crisis. Trump has described the
testing regime as "perfect"; Fauci last week admitted to Congress that
the government’s approach to testing "is a failing."

Fauci’s repeated contradictions of the president have earned him a
reputation as a truth teller in a government that has repeatedly
deceived the public about the severity of the pandemic and the
effectiveness of the response.

That’s why, on Thursday, it was curious to see Fauci absent from the
podium for a second day in a row. Figures including Obama national
security adviser Susan Rice, Clinton press secretary Joe Lockhart,
constitutional scholar Laurence Tribe, and The View co-host Joy Behar
all wondered on Twitter why Fauci was not appearing.

End Quote...

So, who are you going to believe and/or trust? Fauci or Trump?


Certainly not leftist kremlinology. Read the papers.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com

 

[Rick C]

On Thursday, March 19, 2020 at 7:19:52 PM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

On Thu, 19 Mar 2020 15:56:58 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com
wrote:

On Thu, 19 Mar 2020 12:40:07 -0400, Phil Hobbs
pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

Looks like chloroquine plus azithromycin knocks the Wu flu dead.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vTi-g18ftNZUMRAj2SwRPodtscFio7bJ7GdNgbJAGbdfF67WuRJB3ZsidgpidB2eocFHAVjIL-7deJ7/pub
https://www.mediterranee-infection.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Hydroxychloroquine_final_DOI_IJAA.pdf
Hope it pans out on a large scale!

Me too, but there might be a political problem:

Why Hasn’t Tony Fauci Been at the Coronavirus Press Conferences?
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/03/tony-fauci-at-coronavirus-press-conferences.html
Quoting...

One person who has expressed a more skeptical view of chloroquine is
task force member and immunologist Anthony Fauci, the veteran face of
the country’s response to disease outbreaks. But Fauci has not
appeared at a press conference since Tuesday, when Trump said he had
become a major television star.

Fauci for the past two days had been saying that chloroquine is not a
miracle cure and that we still need to determine its safety.

Speaking to Laura Ingraham on Fox News on Tuesday, Fauci said, "We
have to be careful, Laura, that we don’t assume something works based
on an anecdotal report that’s not controlled. And I refer specifically
to hydroxychloroquine. There’s a lot of buzz out there on the internet
on the social media about that."

On Wednesday, he reiterated this message in an interview with CNN’s
Chris Cuomo, saying he supported large-scale clinical trials but was
against "just throwing the drug out there, which is not a good idea."

We don't have enough people really ill from C19 to have large-scale
clinical trials. We already know the drug is safe, so it's unlikely to
do any harm. Get a dozen sick people to volunteer and see what
happens.

Some adventurous doctors should do that now. It's available and legal
to prescribe.

So much gross ignorance, so little time.

--

Rick C.

++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

On Thu, 19 Mar 2020 15:56:58 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote:

On Thu, 19 Mar 2020 12:40:07 -0400, Phil Hobbs
pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

Looks like chloroquine plus azithromycin knocks the Wu flu dead.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vTi-g18ftNZUMRAj2SwRPodtscFio7bJ7GdNgbJAGbdfF67WuRJB3ZsidgpidB2eocFHAVjIL-7deJ7/pub
https://www.mediterranee-infection.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Hydroxychloroquine_final_DOI_IJAA.pdf
Hope it pans out on a large scale!

Me too, but there might be a political problem:

Why Hasn’t Tony Fauci Been at the Coronavirus Press Conferences?
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/03/tony-fauci-at-coronavirus-press-conferences.html
Quoting...

One person who has expressed a more skeptical view of chloroquine is
task force member and immunologist Anthony Fauci, the veteran face of
the country’s response to disease outbreaks. But Fauci has not
appeared at a press conference since Tuesday, when Trump said he had
become a major television star.

Fauci for the past two days had been saying that chloroquine is not a
miracle cure and that we still need to determine its safety.

Speaking to Laura Ingraham on Fox News on Tuesday, Fauci said, "We
have to be careful, Laura, that we don’t assume something works based
on an anecdotal report that’s not controlled. And I refer specifically
to hydroxychloroquine. There’s a lot of buzz out there on the internet
on the social media about that."

On Wednesday, he reiterated this message in an interview with CNN’s
Chris Cuomo, saying he supported large-scale clinical trials but was
against "just throwing the drug out there, which is not a good idea."

We don't have enough people really ill from C19 to have large-scale
clinical trials. We already know the drug is safe, so it's unlikely to
do any harm. Get a dozen sick people to volunteer and see what
happens.

Some adventurous doctors should do that now. It's available and legal
to prescribe.



--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

The cork popped merrily, and Lord Peter rose to his feet.
"Bunter", he said, "I give you a toast. The triumph of Instinct over Reason"

 

[Rick C]

On Thursday, March 19, 2020 at 7:12:47 PM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

On Thu, 19 Mar 2020 18:35:42 -0400, Phil Hobbs
pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

On 2020-03-19 16:56, Winfield Hill wrote:
Rick C wrote...

Phil Hobbs wrote:

According to the googledocs paper, it works by preventing
the virus from acidifying the cytoplasm in order to break
host proteins down into amino acids to build more viruses.
10 micromolar solution suppresses virus growth completely.

I hope this does pan out.

It's safe to take, right? Doctors are free to prescribe it
off-label, are they not? For very sick patients, find out
very quickly if it works.



Chloroquine is even safe for pregnant women and nursing mothers. AFAICT
the only side effect is retinopathy for some people who have been given
over _400_grams_ of the stuff over several years.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

The ideal strategy would be to let commerce resume, let suceptable
people get it and become immune, let it burn itself out, and treat the
minority of people who are in serious danger.

Some social-distancing propaganda would help a bit if the hospitals do
indeed get overloaded.

You are repeating Trump's process of initially denying there was any problem then gradually talking about how the problem is being addressed. Now you are actually acknowledging that this is becoming a widespread problem and needs to be addressed.

You do still fail to understand anything about the nature of this disease. Anyone who suggests we should let this disease run the course through any portion of the population has no understanding of the disease.

Perhaps we should start with allowing children to be infected since they are in the lowest risk of death group. Run that idea by the parents in your neighborhood.

--

Rick C.

+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Friday, March 20, 2020 at 9:27:01 AM UTC+11, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

On Thu, 19 Mar 2020 23:06:09 +0100, David Brown
david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:

The big trouble is that elimination that way is very unlikely.
Countries might manage to get it close to zero spread while they are on
lockdown, but once things are opened again, there will be new outbreaks.

Small ones. A lock down in a confined area should be all that is necessary to contain each one.

There will be reservoirs of active viruses here and there for a long
time. A group of, say, 200 people in some small town could pass it
around for many incubation periods. Somebody could make a bad batch of
ice cubes and freeze them for months or something.

If it will grow exponentially in a suceptible population, it would
just take one seed to start it back up. We can't lock down for years,
or people would starve.

You only have to impose lock downs where there has been a new outbreak, and we should have an effective vaccine within a year. Eighteen months if none of the new approaches actually works.

<snip>

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

On Thu, 19 Mar 2020 18:35:42 -0400, Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

On 2020-03-19 16:56, Winfield Hill wrote:
Rick C wrote...

Phil Hobbs wrote:

According to the googledocs paper, it works by preventing
the virus from acidifying the cytoplasm in order to break
host proteins down into amino acids to build more viruses.
10 micromolar solution suppresses virus growth completely.

I hope this does pan out.

It's safe to take, right? Doctors are free to prescribe it
off-label, are they not? For very sick patients, find out
very quickly if it works.



Chloroquine is even safe for pregnant women and nursing mothers. AFAICT
the only side effect is retinopathy for some people who have been given
over _400_grams_ of the stuff over several years.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

The ideal strategy would be to let commerce resume, let suceptable
people get it and become immune, let it burn itself out, and treat the
minority of people who are in serious danger.

Some social-distancing propaganda would help a bit if the hospitals do
indeed get overloaded.



--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

The cork popped merrily, and Lord Peter rose to his feet.
"Bunter", he said, "I give you a toast. The triumph of Instinct over Reason"

 

On Thursday, March 19, 2020 at 6:34:12 PM UTC-4, Phil Hobbs wrote:

On 2020-03-19 15:55, bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, March 19, 2020 at 3:24:37 PM UTC-4, Phil Hobbs wrote:
On 2020-03-19 13:12, bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, March 19, 2020 at 12:50:26 PM UTC-4,
jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Thu, 19 Mar 2020 12:40:07 -0400, Phil Hobbs
pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

On 2020-03-19 05:37, Winfield Hill wrote:
skybuck2000@hotmail.com wrote...

The truth in the Netherlands is as follows ...
(ICU=Intensive Care Unit)

1. Less than 300 free intensive care units / beds are
available on a population of 17 million. The rest are
already occupied, in total there are 1150 ICU units.

We're moving to total isolation, to stop any further
spreading beyond those already infected. This isn't a good
long-term solution, and new spreading centers will start
once we relax the isolation. But what we haven't been
hearing much about is new therapeutics, custom-designed to
help severely-compromised Covid-19 victims survive, without
the use of ICU beds. Once we have that, we can safely
cease the isolation approach. The therapeutics will be
easier to manufacture, and only relatively-small quantities
will be required, compared to a vaccine, which must be
population-wide. There are 50 companies working on
therapeutics, and several claim to already have working
results.



Looks like chloroquine plus azithromycin knocks the Wu flu
dead.


https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vTi-g18ftNZUMRAj2SwRPodtscFio7bJ7GdNgbJAGbdfF67WuRJB3ZsidgpidB2eocFHAVjIL-7deJ7/pub






https://www.mediterranee-infection.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Hydroxychloroquine_final_DOI_IJAA.pdf

Hope it pans out on a large scale!

Absolutely. Strange that an anti-malarial would work against a
virus.

Too strange to be true because it isn't. The articles keep
shooting their mouths off about it being "effective"- but not a
single quantifiable measure of that so-called effectiveness.

If you took time to read the articles I posted, you'd know that
they're based on actual hospital results.

The first page was about all I could stomach of that crap paper. If
it's not a double blind controlled trial, you don't have any results.
There's a reason that methodology is the gold standard of testing.

I could tell that you hadn't actually read it. (No huge surprise.)

It was a small study of hospital patients, but *everyone who was given
hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin* was free of coronavirus in 5 days
or less.

That's quite a few standard deviations from the usual course, even in a
smallish group.

LOL- how do you know what the standard deviation is?

I also read in another source they're not administering it to the very seriously ill people, so that sort of introduces a major bias and selects for best results. Then controlled double blind trial have been conducted in France, before this current fiasco, and the result showed "some" promise.
You'll be buying Trum ViriCure water next.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com

 

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Thu, 19 Mar 2020 12:40:07 -0400, Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

Looks like chloroquine plus azithromycin knocks the Wu flu dead.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vTi-g18ftNZUMRAj2SwRPodtscFio7bJ7GdNgbJAGbdfF67WuRJB3ZsidgpidB2eocFHAVjIL-7deJ7/pub
https://www.mediterranee-infection.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Hydroxychloroquine_final_DOI_IJAA.pdf
Hope it pans out on a large scale!

Me too, but there might be a political problem:

Why Hasn’t Tony Fauci Been at the Coronavirus Press Conferences?
<https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/03/tony-fauci-at-coronavirus-press-conferences.html>
Quoting...

One person who has expressed a more skeptical view of chloroquine is
task force member and immunologist Anthony Fauci, the veteran face of
the country’s response to disease outbreaks. But Fauci has not
appeared at a press conference since Tuesday, when Trump said he had
become a major television star.

Fauci for the past two days had been saying that chloroquine is not a
miracle cure and that we still need to determine its safety.

Speaking to Laura Ingraham on Fox News on Tuesday, Fauci said, "We
have to be careful, Laura, that we don’t assume something works based
on an anecdotal report that’s not controlled. And I refer specifically
to hydroxychloroquine. There’s a lot of buzz out there on the internet
on the social media about that."

On Wednesday, he reiterated this message in an interview with CNN’s
Chris Cuomo, saying he supported large-scale clinical trials but was
against "just throwing the drug out there, which is not a good idea."

This would not be the first time Fauci has contradicted the
president’s messaging during this crisis. Trump has described the
testing regime as "perfect"; Fauci last week admitted to Congress that
the government’s approach to testing "is a failing."

Fauci’s repeated contradictions of the president have earned him a
reputation as a truth teller in a government that has repeatedly
deceived the public about the severity of the pandemic and the
effectiveness of the response.

That’s why, on Thursday, it was curious to see Fauci absent from the
podium for a second day in a row. Figures including Obama national
security adviser Susan Rice, Clinton press secretary Joe Lockhart,
constitutional scholar Laurence Tribe, and The View co-host Joy Behar
all wondered on Twitter why Fauci was not appearing.

End Quote...

So, who are you going to believe and/or trust? Fauci or Trump?


--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

 

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Thu, 19 Mar 2020 19:00:17 -0400, Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

On 2020-03-19 18:56, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
So, who are you going to believe and/or trust? Fauci or Trump?

Certainly not leftist kremlinology. Read the papers.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs

I did. They look very real and quite hopeful. Of course reality and
science have never stood in the way of politics and executive egos.

Let's say that testing drags on for several (use your imagination)
reasons. If an untested drug is available, would you sign a waver of
liability and agree to hold the developers, manufacturers, and doctors
free and harmless if something goes wrong when you take it? With all
my pre-existing conditions, I certainly would, because if I catch the
bug, the odds of my survival are minimal.

Flame bait:
"Hospitals made $21B on Wall Street last year, but are patients seeing
those profits?"
<https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/hospitals-made-21b-wall-street-last-year-are-patients-seeing-n845176>
....and that's just the non-profit hospitals.

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

 

[mpm]

On Thursday, March 19, 2020 at 12:50:26 PM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> Keep drinking those Gin and Tonics!

Best idea I've heard all day!

 

[Phil Hobbs]

On 2020-03-19 20:08, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

On Thu, 19 Mar 2020 19:43:03 -0400, Phil Hobbs
pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

On 2020-03-19 19:12, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Thu, 19 Mar 2020 18:35:42 -0400, Phil Hobbs
pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

On 2020-03-19 16:56, Winfield Hill wrote:
Rick C wrote...

Phil Hobbs wrote:

According to the googledocs paper, it works by preventing
the virus from acidifying the cytoplasm in order to break
host proteins down into amino acids to build more viruses.
10 micromolar solution suppresses virus growth completely.

I hope this does pan out.

It's safe to take, right? Doctors are free to prescribe it
off-label, are they not? For very sick patients, find out
very quickly if it works.



Chloroquine is even safe for pregnant women and nursing mothers. AFAICT
the only side effect is retinopathy for some people who have been given
over _400_grams_ of the stuff over several years.

The ideal strategy would be to let commerce resume, let susceptable
people get it and become immune, let it burn itself out, and treat the
minority of people who are in serious danger.

Especially if there's a good, widely-available treatment for the small
minority of younger people who get into real trouble. Otherwise the
moral question is a bit more nuanced, I think.

Right. Is the life of an otherwise vigorous 20-year-old any more
valuable than the life of a sick and frail 85 yo? Is any life worth a
few billion dollars?



Some social-distancing propaganda would help a bit if the hospitals do
indeed get overloaded.

That would be a bit late of course, given the longish delay between
exposure and severe illness. A bit of modelling would help folks decide
when to do that, perhaps.

Propaganda is cheap, so do it now. Make companies put up signs and
stuff. Wipe the tables and handrails with bleach.

A good idea anyway. I have a spray bottle with diluted bleach on my desk.

I still don't see how this is much different from a mild seasonal flu.
We've never panicked like this or suggested extreme measures before,
in years when flu killed hundreds of times more people.

AFAICT the difference is the apparent huge mortality rate of the Chinese
epidemic. Based on the running metric

deaths
mortality = -------------------
deaths + recoveries

at one point Wuhan was indicating 20% or so--Black Death levels.
Seasonal influenza isn't reported that way.

Massive overestimates of mortality are common when only the seriously
ill are counted.

I'm doing a bit of binge-reading about the 1918 'flu. So far the best
is the first 60% of Laura Spinney's "Pale Rider: The Spanish Flu of 1918
and How It Changed The World", i.e. up to the point where she stops
telling the story and starts propounding, um, well,
_less_well_supported_ psychology and public policy.

We liked

The Great Influenza: The Story of the Deadliest Pandemic in History
by John M. Barry

Which we want to re-read now, but can't find. I think I loaned it to
someone a while ago. Astoundingly, Amazon still has two, so I ordered
another copy.

I'll try to find one.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs


--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com

 

[Whoey Louie]

On Thursday, March 19, 2020 at 4:18:09 PM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:

On Thursday, March 19, 2020 at 3:30:58 PM UTC-4, Phil Hobbs wrote:
On 2020-03-19 12:50, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Thu, 19 Mar 2020 12:40:07 -0400, Phil Hobbs
pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

On 2020-03-19 05:37, Winfield Hill wrote:
skybuck2000@hotmail.com wrote...

The truth in the Netherlands is as follows ...
(ICU=Intensive Care Unit)

1. Less than 300 free intensive care units / beds are
available on a population of 17 million. The rest are
already occupied, in total there are 1150 ICU units.

We're moving to total isolation, to stop any further
spreading beyond those already infected. This isn't
a good long-term solution, and new spreading centers
will start once we relax the isolation. But what we
haven't been hearing much about is new therapeutics,
custom-designed to help severely-compromised Covid-19
victims survive, without the use of ICU beds. Once we
have that, we can safely cease the isolation approach.
The therapeutics will be easier to manufacture, and
only relatively-small quantities will be required,
compared to a vaccine, which must be population-wide.
There are 50 companies working on therapeutics, and
several claim to already have working results.



Looks like chloroquine plus azithromycin knocks the Wu flu dead.


https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vTi-g18ftNZUMRAj2SwRPodtscFio7bJ7GdNgbJAGbdfF67WuRJB3ZsidgpidB2eocFHAVjIL-7deJ7/pub

https://www.mediterranee-infection.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Hydroxychloroquine_final_DOI_IJAA.pdf

Hope it pans out on a large scale!

Absolutely. Strange that an anti-malarial would work against a virus.

According to the googledocs paper, it works by preventing the virus from
acidifying the cytoplasm in order to break host proteins down into amino
acids to build more viruses. 10 micromolar solution suppresses virus
growth completely.

I hope this does pan out. But there are many, many substances that look good in vitro and don't pan out for many reasons in vivo. That's one reason why it's so expensive to bring a drug to market. People think a drug is designed, tested and BAM, on the market, easy peasy. But there are an awful lot more duds than successes.

--

Rick C.

- Get 2,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

Do you believe me now that Covid is growing exponentially?
I told you so.