Wuhan #coronavirus/CoVid-19 Rumination #7

By Rud Istvan

When ctm enabled the very first of my now several guest posts on this topic, it was partly because of my explicit analogies to climate change. As we delved further in subsequent posts, the climate analogies became less obvious. #6 was all about technical CoViD-19 antibody testing specificity and thrombosis, with no climate analogies at all. This #7 rumination returns to the original climate analogy theme, concerning the possible CoViD-19 therapy Ivermectin. (Much such stuff is now on various blogs, especially in Australia where it is a common anti-parasitic sheep dip.) I did some more basic research, which follows as #7.

Ivermectin is a semisynthetic derivative of a soil organism molecule originally found in Japan in 1981. So it is similar to many other ‘naturally occurring’ anti-somethings going back to Fleming’s penicillin blue mold in 1926, then its better semisynthetic derivative amoxicillin in 1972. Ivermectin is primarily an antiparasitic, and the original FDA approved indication was against African River Blindness in 1988. It has long been WHO classed as one of the three “wonder drugs” along with penicillin(s) and aspirin.

Old and off patent Ivermectin is now being toughted as a possible COVID-19 therapy. There are two adamantly irreconcilable sides, just as with climate change.

On the one side, Antiviral Research 178:104787 (2020) just published in vitro results that Ivermectin reduced Wohan coronavirus expression 5000x in 48 hours. Now that would be good news, since Ivermectin is another old generic drug with well-established safety profiles. BUT, no reason given as to why an old anti-parasitic (meaning against eukaryotic organisms) drug also has antiviral properties– just ‘is’ if to be believed. No replication study is yet available.

And on the same side, a newly ‘published’ Thailand study from 2014-2017 suggests Ivermectin has antiviral ‘nuclear transport inhibitory activity’. This would be encouraging, EXCEPT for the incontrovertible fact that Wuhan did NOT emerge until about 12/1019. So any virus, or just this virus? ‘Junk’ internet science is now on very public display. Like with climate science.

Does Ivermectin work against CoViD-19? We dunno yet. But the most recent ‘science’ at www.sciencedirect.org/antiviral research/faq/covid suggests maybe yes, it does, for reasons we dunno– while ONLY citing the Antiviral Research article cited above, so circular reasoning like in climate science is on full display.

Now on the other side, the FDA just issued a warning (see www. FDA.gov/product safety information/faq/covid) saying DO NOT use Ivermectin for CoVid-19—despite a decades long safety profile in humans and animals!

Now, that FDA false safety warning will surely discourage some properly designed clinical trials to sort out the truth. Just like the climate paleo hockey stick gang that got after Steve McIntyre, and then lost.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
April 26, 2020 10:20 pm

So there is no evidence it does not defeat Covid19.

Did FDA say why to not to use it? Or are they just warning against it because it “might not” defeat Covid-19 and want to spare people from false hopes? Are they afraid people will go for that and abandon other things?

I often wonder about things like that. Lots of times doctors and med people will “tell” patients and the public to not do something, or to do something, but not give the reason. They pull the Appeal To Authority on themselves and when I drill down, I find some nanny-protectiveness at the heart of the thing, not a genuine danger.

A good example of this is the constant drumming that old people are at high risk, presented as an aboslute, as if age in and of itself is a factor. What they don’t say is that older people are at risk because in many/some/most elders, the immune system is weakened. Well, what if you are old, but strong like bull?

Crispin in Waterloo
Reply to  windlord-sun
April 26, 2020 10:42 pm

I am not convinced that a “weakened immune system” is necessarily the main issue. Deaths are from a cytokine storm created by an over-reaction of the immune system to the foreign material. Perhaps older people have more resistance response to this critter and young people do not. After all, older people have survived more seasonal coronaviruses.

Has anyone demonstrated that “boosting the immune response” creates better outcomes? Isn’t the problem the same as in 1918: over-reaction immune systems?

Reply to  Crispin in Waterloo
April 26, 2020 11:04 pm

Nobody has discussed the idea that older people are most affected because they have a “better” (more) trained immune system. Young people, even after all these stupid vaccines, don’t have a so much over trained immunity.

Of course that would point to vaccination as a risk factor. The medical community would much prefer a discussion of non smoking as a risk factor than their unhealthy fetish, vaccination.

Joel O'Bryan
Reply to  niceguy
April 26, 2020 11:19 pm

The elderly are susceptible to many infections with increasing age, not just those few that get immunized for. This has nothing to do with vaccinations, and everything to do with aging-dependent decreased capacity in tissue regeneration/ replicative capacity in cycling cells (cycling cells are those going through mitosis, i.e. not in G0). Most of our organs and tissues have stem-cell like progenitor cells that when called upon provide a cascade of daughter cells to repair and replace damage tissues and cells. It is primarily tissue-specific stem-cell like progenitors that replace dead cells in epithelial and endothelia barriers. As we age, the replicative capacity is steadily diminished, we heal slower from injury. Lung injuries are constantly occurring through life with infections, eventually stem-cell capacity to regenerate enough cells allows for compromised barriers. Infections set in. Inflammatory processes get elevated, and immune system is constantly fighting the pathogen because there are “holes and gaps” in the barriers that then let pathogens get in.

The immune system is constantly taxed, and it too then begins to diminish in replicative capacity, to produce various kinds of white blood cells. Eventually the host succumbs because tissues cannot be repaired and replaced fast enough to keep up, including immune cells. Those immune cells that are left (mostly innate neutrophils and moncytes repsond the only way the know how – inflammation. Eventually sepsis, pneumonia, set in. The aging host dies.

Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
April 27, 2020 12:45 am

Thanks Joel. To sum, would you say that therefore it is a valid generalization that elders are at risk with few exceptions?

Mike From Au
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
April 27, 2020 1:50 am

Not exactly how i understand it, but close. I found the affinity the corona virus has for ACE2 receptors was very productive in my search.

Kiran Krishnan, molecular biologist, explains very well what Ace2 receptors do in the body and how the presence of ACE2 receptors in the body and their relative abundance based on how it is even more abundant in parts of the body which are damaged, and how the corona virus hijacks that abundance in damaged areas in the body.

From: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nue3zmEc9-s
“Coronavirus Update with Kiran Krishnan, Virology and Molecular Medicine Scientist
•Apr 1, 2020
“Join Dr. Tyna on the Pain-Free & Strong Podcast as she sits down with Kiran Krishnan, virology and molecular medicine expert & CSO of Microbiome Labs, to discuss how this virus works, how it binds, the ACE2 receptor, and why those with chronic inflammation may be at higher risk. “

Ron Long
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
April 27, 2020 3:47 am

Guys, it looks to me like the older persons have a tendency to accumulate co-morbidity factors, like obesity, untreated high blood pressure, diabitis, smoking damage, recent pneumonia, and excessive experience accumulation (OK, not that one). It appears to me that younger persons death from Covid-19 are also commonly associated with one or more co-morbidity factors. I’m 74 and in the robust category (utilized in the Reno 500 Heart-Diet Study, which I was a part of) and I do not have any co-morbidity factor. I think the quarantine guidelines should focus on co-morbidity factors and whether a particular culture supports social distancing and other preventive protocols, and not on age. Stay sane and safe.

Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
April 27, 2020 5:25 am

Thanks Joel. To sum, would you say that therefore it is a valid generalization that elders are at risk with few exceptions?

Generalisations are never applicable to individuals, they are generally, not individually applicable. That is why they are called generalisations.

I was brought up with self-contradictory mantra “you should never generalise” but I know what they meant: you should never apply generalisations to individuals.

Ron sums it up well. They should be referring to exactly what they are saying are risk factors, not trying to simplistically use age as an indicator … which inevitably gets misinterpreted as being a causal factor the proof of which is stamped on your ID card.

Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
April 27, 2020 9:48 am

April 27, 2020 at 5:25 am

Technically, the data there, actually very clearly and indisputably, confirm beyond any doubt like never before the most clear sharp medical Historical discover in human,history;
by the widest instant global spread medical response, in the consideration of the most wide spread experiment of global isolation of the world.

The excellent discovery, like put in stone for ever;

“The fatality or death rate is higher with the groups of:
a) Old age.
b) Chronic disease.
c) Underlining health condition.
d)Any combinations of “a” “b” ” c”.

The rediscovery of: “Water is wet”.
But this time scientifically confirmed and proved, beyond any doubt.
Definitely justifying any cost of any kind to any amount.


Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
April 27, 2020 10:27 am

In old-age the Thymus gland has deteriorated (it starts in the early teens). It stops being able to produce T cells. Consequently, the old are subject to immune-system disorders, infections and cancers.

Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
April 27, 2020 2:17 pm

Not to mention that the elderly are also frequently deficient in Zinc and Vitamin D.

Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
April 27, 2020 2:46 pm

“The elderly are susceptible to many infections with increasing age, not just those few that get immunized for”


But it didn’t seem to me Brett Crozier was at the head of a retirement home. Why are people in the military so susceptible?

Rich Martin
Reply to  niceguy
April 27, 2020 1:56 pm

For sure, the original SARS, when nice, ferret, chimps were treated with a vaccine and then “re-challenged” with SARS, many had horrible over the top immune response of the body attacking themselves.
The moral of the story…..there will NOT be a safe enough vaccine for SARS-2

And the only way out is through herd immunity. We must open up now and get herd immunity, or this SARS will hold us hostage for maybe 2 years. We need to be bold and brave and face this head on.

Reply to  Rich Martin
April 28, 2020 3:32 am

That’s the way I react to the flu vaccine. I’ll get sick 2-3 times a season and ended up in the hospital one year. It’s no fun being sick for 2-3 months of every winter. I finally stopped getting the flu vaccine – and stopped getting sick every season. I know now I’m not alone – it happens to other people. I won’t be getting any COVID vaccine, should they come out with one. These viruses are simply not stable enough to come up with vaccines for. The flu vaccine is only 60% effective at its best. It morphs too fast to come up with a real vaccine for it.

Reply to  Crispin in Waterloo
April 27, 2020 2:23 am

Would agree, this COVID19 possesses HIV/AIDS – 4 different strains within the S-spike, including gp-41 protein and Amino acid alterations which both increase infectious capability….may stay a while in the blood stream allowing repeated recurring infection…
This virus contains human gene segments which most likely have never been seen in such combination before….
No one knows how the body will react to this one…thank you China…

Reply to  Technetium99
April 27, 2020 7:12 am

Hasn’t the study claiming incorporation of HIV genetics in SARS-CoV-2 been withdrawn?

Is it even possible for this RNA virus to contain human gene segments?

Reply to  Scissor
April 27, 2020 7:44 am

Yes, it was withdrawn.

John Tillman
Reply to  Scissor
April 27, 2020 8:52 am

Human genes, ie protein-coding sequences, are encoded by double-stranded DNA, so, no they can’t be inserted into single-stranded riboviral RNA.

The ribose sugar in RNA has the oxygen molecule which DNA lacks. RNA also uses the nucleobase uracil instead of its methylated form thymine. The other three bases are the same.

Reply to  Scissor
April 27, 2020 10:22 am

The HIV AIDS is a disease.
The problem with it is that it ever persist with it’s own cycles, that are not within any condition of suppression.

Considering it in a simple way the main problem is;
it being a constant chronic disease,
where the immune system functions in overload constantly, as it has to continually constantly produce both,
the virus and the antibody in considerable quantity.


Tom in Florida
Reply to  Crispin in Waterloo
April 27, 2020 4:52 am

Over reactive immune system response as a detriment is well known, especially with lung centered infections. The over reaction can create excess fluid to accumulate in the lungs creating a severe pneumonia condition. It is ironic that my Rheumy and I were discussing this in a general way back at my Jan 2 visit. My dilemma now is whether I should continue my immune suppressant medication or not. Do I stop and risk an over reaction or do I continue and risk an under reaction? To add to the dilemma, I use the VA and this doctor has retired without a replacement. Being over 65 and positive for latent TB, I have been going with no medication since Feb. I just had my annual chest x-ray and lung eval and those showed no changes. So far so good.

Reply to  Crispin in Waterloo
April 27, 2020 8:20 am

trial i n 4k hospital staff using the BCG vax that boosts immune responses is underway in Aus presently
again older off patent and still used but only for kids in poor nations now
once it was used in all kids as a standard vax. has a LOT of uses and is known to be a flu preventative
but modern fluvax earns em more money every yr…

Reply to  windlord-sun
April 26, 2020 11:11 pm

Well, what if you are old, but strong like bull?

Men are generally stronger than women. Men are at greater risk from this coronavirus.

Reply to  commieBob
April 27, 2020 8:29 am

actually no- male babies die more often and women live longer than men on the avg
it seems to be the XX saving women
or so its been posited by those who looked at the whys

Tapio Rantanen
Reply to  commieBob
April 27, 2020 9:08 am

Men really are at greater risk to get a serious or fatal Covid-19, a well-known fact. There is a perfect explanation for that, something Rud Istvan might consider as a future topic in this series.

SARS-CoV-2 uses spike protein to gain entry via ACE2 into human cells. However, this needs a priming or activation by a host cell transmembrane protease serine 2 (TMPRSS2). Transscription of the TMPRSS2 gene needs androgen receptor activity, no other TMPRSS2 gene activator is known. So, presence of male sex hormones in some quantity may be one of the important factors. In the market there is an old protease inhibitor, camostat mesylate, capable of inhibiting TMPRSS2 activity. Studies in Covid-19 are ongoing.

Izaak Walton
Reply to  windlord-sun
April 26, 2020 11:41 pm

The FDA has stated do not us Ivermectin intended for animals as a possible treatment for humans.
It says nothing about not using human grade Ivermectin. If I had to guess I would say that medicines
intended for animals are probably less pure than medicines intended for humans and thus would have a greater risk of unwanted sideeffects. It does not say not to use Ivermectin but rather says to
a) only use Ivermectin intended for humans
b) use caution and not to self-medicate.
This is not a “fake safety warning” but common sense.

Reply to  Izaak Walton
April 27, 2020 12:43 am

Thanks Izaak. I should have looked that up myself. Maybe the author should have included it also.

Reply to  Izaak Walton
April 27, 2020 2:22 am

No, they specifically say to not use Ivermectin – any kind – for CoViD-19 treatment or prevention. It has not been granted a compassionate use exemption, so any MD that prescribes it (the human formulation) will lose their prescribing license.

It does also say to not use any formulation intended for animal use. Which is not a purity issue – the dosages and carrier are designed for that animal. (The carrier determines the release rate.)

Crispin in Waterloo
Reply to  Writing Observer
April 27, 2020 3:22 am

“Compassionate use” is an exemption for the use of a medicine that is not approved for anything.

Ivermectin is approved for human disease conditions. When it is applied for a different disease condition other than those listed by the FDA it is called “off-label use”. You will recall this term being used when it came to the successful use chloroquine in China, Korea and France (not to mention hydroxychloroquine in NYC) as reported in the Nature publication in early March. It was written by James M Today, and Gregory J Rigano.

Page 6 “As of February 26, 2020, the UK government has added chloroquine to the list of medicines that cannot be exported from the UK.”

P6 “In early February, Changqing Kangle Pharmaceutical was requested by the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology to promptly increase the manufacturing and production of the active pharmaceutical ingredients chloroquine phosphate despite slowed production during the Chinese New Year.”

How long does it take the somnolent UK to ban the export of a medicine? It means the Chinese, Brits and who knows who else were aware by early February that there was an effective treatment available using a cheap drug already on the shelf. It had already been demonstrated to be effective at standard dosage (1-10 microMoles chloroquine). For malaria it is 1.6-12.5 uM by tablets or intravenous drip. It had been known for years that chloroquine was effective against SARS-1 including DOI:10.1186 / 1743-422X-2-69, Vincent MJ et al, US CDC, Biology Journal, 2005, 2.

For the CDC to come out saying “this is anecdotal” is extraordinary. Trump could have cited the CDC’s own published articles. The similarity of SARS-Cov-1 and -2 was already in print by 4 Feb on Sciencealert (Aylin Woodward article) which cites Ian Jones from Reading, UK.

It notes it spread from a seafood market (not a “wet market” for land animals) in Wuhan, implying it was a cluster, not a source.

Note that the 4 Feb article cites two articles published on 3 Feb showing the two SARS-Cov strains were very similar, hence the interest in drugs already proven to be helpful. It took the UK 3 weeks to organise an export ban.

The statements by the CDC are particularly odd in these circumstances. They should read more.

Reply to  Crispin in Waterloo
April 27, 2020 6:15 am

“Age-related regression of the thymus is associated with a decline in naïve T cell output. This is thought to contribute to the reduction in T cell diversity seen in older individuals and linked with increased susceptibility to infection, autoimmune disease, and cancer” https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3791471/

Reply to  Crispin in Waterloo
April 27, 2020 6:19 am

More complex…. parallel exporting, and “hoarding” (plus sale restrictions over the counter)

Crispin in Waterloo
Reply to  Crispin in Waterloo
April 27, 2020 6:29 am

Auto-correct error in the reference above:

All research from this section is from: US CDC, Vincent MJ , Bergeron E , Benjannet S , et al. Chloroquine IS A potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus Infection and Spread of[J]. Virology Journal, 2005, 2 (.1):69. The DOI: 10.1186/1743-422X-2-69

Not “Biology Journal”

Virol J. 2005; 2: 69.
Published online 2005 Aug 22. doi: 10.1186/1743-422X-2-69
PMCID: PMC1232869
PMID: 16115318
Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and spread
Martin J Vincent,1 Eric Bergeron,2 Suzanne Benjannet,2 Bobbie R Erickson,1 Pierre E Rollin,1 Thomas G Ksiazek,1 Nabil G Seidah,2 and Stuart T Nicholcorresponding author1
Author information Article notes Copyright and License information Disclaimer

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 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.

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.

Electronic supplementary material
The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1743-422X-2-69) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Keith Harrison
Reply to  Crispin in Waterloo
April 27, 2020 6:35 am

Some good references and analysis of chloroquinine studies,


Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  Crispin in Waterloo
April 27, 2020 7:39 pm

That study, from Vincent et al, is an in vitro effect on monkey cells.
This is nothing like being known to be a safe and effective treatment for humans with an illness.
In live mice it failed to slow viral replication.
Along with a bunch of other compounds which killed the SARS virus in vitro only.
It is not proving to be efficacious in humans with COVID, based on a growing list of preliminary indications.
Putting a halt in shipments does not prove a drug works, or that anyone knows it works, only that it might, or that it is possible, which is more than enough reason to not ship the supply out of a country.
And ascwell, CQ is being actively disowned by early advocates in favor of the less toxic HCQ.
Many are saying without zinc any trials are designed to fail.
The story of CQ…I mean HCQ…I mean zinc ionophores…I mean only with early treatment and with both plus an antibiotic… is rapidly evolving. Only the steadfast non evidenced advocacy is not.
I really do apologize for the snark, calling an in vitro result a proven cure is strongly akin to claiming that CO2 is known to cause the Earth to heat up because it is known to absorb certain wavelengths of photons.s
A tiny fraction of 1% of drugs that have an effect on vitro have that same effect in humans.

Reply to  Crispin in Waterloo
April 28, 2020 3:50 am

They’re always using drugs off label. Black box labeled antipsychotics on the elderly in particular. For delirium, not psychoses, too. Delirium may seem like psychoses, but it’s not the same thing, and when an elderly patient is very ill, adding antipsychotics is an added burden on their liver and kidneys – but that’s what they did to my mother who had a kidney infection – and it scared the living daylights out of me. If COVID doesn’t kill us, the psychiatrists will….

Reply to  Writing Observer
April 27, 2020 8:26 am

standard dose of ivomec for anything from a chicken to a guineapig or dog etc is 1ml per 10kg bodyweight
the amt of ingredient per 100ml is clearly stated on the packs
the sheep variant is prob the best option cattle dose is stronger mix.
small dermally applied doses is at worst not going to work for covid but have you scabies n worm free;-)

Jeffery P
Reply to  Izaak Walton
April 27, 2020 9:56 am

From the horse’s mouth:


Summary – do not self-medicate with drugs intended for animals. Use ivermectin under a physician’s care and don’t use the stuff out in the barn.

Reply to  windlord-sun
April 26, 2020 11:49 pm

The UK’s Covid-19 latest update:

Reply to  windlord-sun
April 27, 2020 6:02 am

“Age-related regression of the thymus is associated with a decline in naïve T cell output. This is thought to contribute to the reduction in T cell diversity seen in older individuals and linked with increased susceptibility to infection, autoimmune disease, and cancer” https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3791471/

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  windlord-sun
April 27, 2020 7:18 am

Strong like bull not good enough.
Must be like Russian peasant: Strong, like bull, smart, like tractor.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Nicholas McGinley
April 27, 2020 9:32 am

The phrase is interesting. It sounds like a Russian idiom I have heard before.

Reply to  windlord-sun
April 27, 2020 7:52 am

I love the tin-foil hat brigade.

The reason Ivermectin is not FDA approved is simple the required dose for covid19 use is 100 times the historical dose use and 10 times higher than ever tested in any human. It isn’t safe you need to work that sort of dose from the ground up starting again in animals.

Reply to  LdB
April 27, 2020 8:41 am

where did you get that?
your usa drug is as follows
Ivermectin dosage guidelines based on body weight:
15 to 24 kg: 3 mg orally one time
25 to 35 kg: 6 mg orally one time
36 to 50 kg: 9 mg orally one time
51 to 65 kg: 12 mg orally one time
66 to 79 kg: 15 mg orally one time
80 kg or more: 0.2 mg/kg orally one time
from here
3mg would be around 3ml liquid
so on the low side but still works

then from here
The drug is “safe at relatively high doses, widely available, and relatively cheap, too,”

th ONLY real issue is in people with liver function problems it appears

John Tillman
Reply to  ozspeaksup
April 27, 2020 8:58 am

My brother once accidentally hugely ODed on Ivermec without consequence.

Curious George
Reply to  LdB
April 27, 2020 9:05 am

I love “the required dose” of a banned substance.

Reply to  windlord-sun
April 27, 2020 8:11 am

your FDA is as warped and twisted a setup as can be imagined
our aussie version the TGA is less venal/mercenary, but about as stupid
Ivermectin is already approved in usa as a scabies med at a stupid price for pills doc scripted only
in Aus its sold at chemists OTC as a wormer for kids
its used widely for scabies in Aboriginal populations, and seems to have a bonus of knocking the bugs causing ear infections off as well(from memory on that)
if you dont want to ingest it you can simply apply dermally(as in backline practice for sheep cows etc)
couple of ml rubbed in weekly should be about right for most humans

Michael S. Kelly
Reply to  ozspeaksup
April 28, 2020 3:14 pm

The argument that “we don’t know how it works and it is therefore suspect is completely specious. Get a copy of The Physician’s Desk Reference, the doctor’s bible on medications in the U.S. Pharmacopoeia. Pick a drug at random, then scroll down to the part where it describes the mechanism by which it does what it does. Nine times out of ten, the entry will begin with a mealy mouth “The mechanism by which X does this is not well understood.” In many cases, the PDR will flat out admit that we have no idea how or why it works. Aspirin was in this category until about 1971, despite being in use for thousands of years.

Mark A Luhman
Reply to  windlord-sun
April 27, 2020 2:22 pm

I will put my tin foil hat on for the moment. Have you noticed that any drug that does not have a patent on seem to be on the FDA your should not us list. It looks to me the FDA is more interested in keeping drug companies profits up rather than helping people.

Reply to  Mark A Luhman
April 27, 2020 4:24 pm

There’s no money in testing off patent drugs for new diseases. It costs a lot of money to get a drug approved for a new disease. This money can’t be recouped, so nobody does it.
No conspiracy needed.

Alex Reid
Reply to  windlord-sun
April 27, 2020 5:07 pm

Strong like a bull?? Dunno – but I can’t recall ever having “the flu” and I’m now at age 88 !!
Had the occasional cold every five or ten years and even a brief bout of Pneumonia about 50 years ago.
Maybe this is what they call “Strength in the Herd”. Can’t recall my parents suffering much from colds.
Perhaps Flu research should be looking at genetics.

Joel O'Bryan
April 26, 2020 11:05 pm

I have 3 packages of Ivermectin in my cabinet, in the form of monthly-given chewable treats for my dog’s as heartworm preventative. The Ivermectin treats (brandname- Heartgard Plus because it also has another anti-worming drug) actually don’t “prevent heartworm” per se.

Well the first thing I did when ivermectin was mentioned as a Covid-19 therapies was to go refresh something I’d probably learned 2 decades ago in microbiology, but forgotten about Ivermection’s mode of action against helminths and insect parasites like Lice.

Ivermectin working as a head lice treatment that works primarily through binding selectively and with high affinity to glutamate-gated chloride channels in invertebrate nerve and muscle cells2
This leads to an increase in the permeability of the cell membrane to chloride ions with hyperpolarization of the nerve or muscle cell, resulting in paralysis and death of the parasite
Compounds of this class may also interact with other ligand-gated chloride channels, such as those gated by the neurotransmitter gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA)

With this cartoon figure to show what we know about the molecular biology of Ivermectin mode of action on nerve cell glutamate-gated chloride ion channels in invertebrates like the louse and helminths (parasitic worms). In biochemistry speak, it’s a non-competitive agonist activating those Cl- ion channels.

comment image

So Ivermectin kills the little buggars, and not vertebrates (animals with a backbone), before immature heartworm larvae can mature and hurt my dog should they have become infected in the previous 30 days from a mosquito bite. It does this by paralyzing their tiny little insect muscles by interfering with signal transduction at synapses, a nerve agent IOW.

But Ivermectin has a pretty good safety record with human use. That’s because Ivermectin has a very low binding affinity to glutamate-gated ions Cl- ion channels of vertebrates. Because this, I agree with the FDA that there is nothing to indicate a mode of action for efficacy against a viral infection It could be there, but the likely dosing of Ivermectin to see any significant effects vs a cornoa virus in vivo would probably have to be be above the established safe dosing in humans.

April 26, 2020 11:19 pm

Maybe, one has to take some kind of penicillin, if going to stay in hospital, and need some kind of penicillin which is effective in some particular hospital or you could get some kind of hospital disease, ie:

“In the United States, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimated roughly 1.7 million hospital-associated infections, from all types of microorganisms, including bacteria and fungi combined, cause or contribute to 99,000 deaths each year.”

Joel O'Bryan
Reply to  gbaikie
April 26, 2020 11:29 pm

If you’re going in hospital for an elective procedure, the best prophylaxis you can do is brush and floss your teeth very well for two weeks prior and then rinse with hydrogen peroxide each night for 3 or 4 nights before bed prior to admittance for your procedure. Our gums thus periodontal disease are key pathways for opportunistic bacteria to get to the bloodstream and then get to your new knee joint or hip joint etc and settle in and make your life hell with then strong antibiotics needed to fight the bastards that came in through your gums.

Keep your gums healthy. It’ll reduce a lot of systemic inflammation caused by bacteria steadily leaking into your circulation throughout your life.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
April 27, 2020 1:05 am

Our bodies are awash with all kinds of things. Even mites that live in the follicles of our eyelashes.

Tom in Florida
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
April 27, 2020 4:57 am

Good advice, my wife runs a dental office and we are well aware of this but most people are not. Many patients with heart issues and joint replacements must pre-med prior to dental work being done for that exact reason.

April 26, 2020 11:56 pm

Normally I don’t like to link to this guy because he frequently rambles all over the place and sometimes jumps to conclusions, but he does provide some very good links to research. He claims ivermectin potentiates the transport of ATP into extracellular space via P2x4 receptors:

Anti-Parasitic Agent (Ivermectin) Abolishes Coronavirus Particles

In that article he links to a study that showed ginsenosides in red ginseng have the same effect.

Ginsenosides Act As Positive Modulators of P2X4 Receptors

April 27, 2020 12:00 am

Must watch video about NYC.
Youtube already censored, watch here while you can


Reply to  terry
April 27, 2020 12:03 am

Meant facebook already censored

Reply to  terry
April 27, 2020 4:39 am

After watching the nurse TicToc videos and reading the MD’s comment below, what’s said in your link doesn’t surprise me a bit. There are some really noble doctors out there, but there’s no doubt in my mind that there are also some who would rather let patients die than go off protocol or increase risk of infection.

Yesterday, an ED doc says “if they don’t do well with 6 liters by NC, we tube them. Not risking exposing staff to aerosolization with higher flow O2.” oy…


Reply to  terry
April 27, 2020 7:36 am

It’s credible and at least partly would explain why outcomes in NYC are so bad.

April 27, 2020 12:00 am

*touted, not toughted.

Rud Istvan
Reply to  Dergy
April 27, 2020 7:00 pm

Yup. My late night bad.

April 27, 2020 12:15 am

Which part of “ demonstrated to limit infection by RNA viruses” ……….“with this broad spectrum activity believed to be due to the reliance by many different RNA viruses on IMPα/β1 during infection (Caly et al., 2012; Jans et al., 2019).” allows you to dismiss this work with “ just ‘is’ if to be believed.” ? Also how does a incomplete citation of the Thailand studies done in 2014-2017 and the fact that the Wuhan virus emerged only in 12/1019 (presumably 12/2019 but ?) provide any basis to challenge the findings of the article in question? Especially as they cite reports that “SARS-CoV proteins have revealed a potential role for IMPα/β1” as SARS-CoV and COVID-19 have been shown to be closely related corona viruses, though I suppose if you failed to note the potential mechanism cited earlier, it being repeated likely made no impression.
This article is clearly mistaken in its details and its judgements!CMT where are you ?

Reply to  PADPhD
April 27, 2020 7:42 am

If you are going to argue technical details, then you need to get basic details correct. COVID-19 is the disease. The virus that causes this disease is SARS-CoV-2.

Reply to  Scissor
April 27, 2020 1:40 pm

In fact I wasn’t arguing technical details. I was arguing that the criticisms proffered ,”we dunno”etc were inapt as the paper detailed their rationale as noted in the quoted details. And a quibble regarding the name of the disease and virus causing it refutes my contention that Istvan’s analysis /conclusion “‘Junk’ internet science is now on very public display.” is sadly/ badly misguided how?

April 27, 2020 12:44 am

can’t wait to see if people will be just as keen to discuss every facet of the next coronavirus and the next and the next…while we lockdown the world’s economies, of course.

AUDIO: 13m02s: 26 Apr: 3AW Australia: Luke Grant: “Effects of the lockdown are worse than the virus”: The real dangers of COVID-19 could still be ahead of us
Is it really better to be safe than sorry? A leading UK pathology professor warns us that the ramifications of a country going into lockdown could cause more damage than Coronavirus.
Professor John Lee is a writer for the UK Spectator, a retired professor of pathology and a former NHS consultant and he joined Luke Grant on Australia Overnight to give some perspective on the further reaching effects of COVID-19.
“The trouble with it is that they (government) have erred on the side of better ‘safe than sorry’… it’s a general principle of medicine, that when you’re giving a treatment to people, first do no harm.”

Professor Lee shines light on the fact that nations have overestimated the dangers of, and underestimated the danger of a population going into lockdown.
“The lockdown has side effects. From the economic side effects, from direct health side effects… people aren’t accessing health care, to health problems that were storing up for the future like people not coming in for their cancer screenings, not presenting themselves early enough when they have got chest pains for heart attacks.”

Professor Lee also touches on the murky origins of Coronavirus and if we may ever have a cure for the deadly disease.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  pat
April 27, 2020 1:03 am

“pat April 27, 2020 at 12:44 am

Professor John Lee is a writer for the UK Spectator, a retired professor of pathology and a former NHS consultant…”

I, sort of, stopped reading there. NHS and “consultant” don’t mix, until after the bill is paid. The NHS started to become awash with “managers” and “consultants” in the 90’s. Little attention was given to actual health care. You may as well go talk to a pig farmer about your prolapsed navel!

Phil Rae
Reply to  Patrick MJD
April 27, 2020 2:36 am

A “consultant” in old-style British medical parlance is a senior medical doctor in a hospital setting with typically 10-15 years of frontline experience who has “served his time” and usually specialised in some medical topic. So please don’t dismiss a medical consultant- it’s NOT at all the same thing as a “management consultant”!

Reply to  pat
April 27, 2020 3:14 am


I reserve the right to add a few digits as it will be found that a strict lockdown (as applied in France, Italie, Spain, Germany, Norway, UK, etc. versus what Sweden did) had not had any significant effect on the SARS-COV2’s related deaths toll.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Petit_Barde
April 27, 2020 4:23 am

“I reserve the right to add a few digits as it will be found that a strict lockdown (as applied in France, Italie, Spain, Germany, Norway, UK, etc. versus what Sweden did) had not had any significant effect on the SARS-COV2’s related deaths toll.”

You know what? You couldn’t have said that back in January.

We did not know how deadly the Wuhan virus was when it first appeared, so criticizing actions that took place then with the knowledge we have now, is pointless. If the Wuhan virus killed 10 percent of those infected, you wouldn’t be complaining about a lockdown now, you would want it even tighter.

And if we get a new Corona virus in circulation, we better do the very same thing we did this time, until we know how dangerous it is. The good news is we will be much better prepared the next time, and shutdowns might not be necessary, or might be limited to a short duration, if we can get on top of the infection quickly, and we are setting up the infrastructure to do that now.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  pat
April 27, 2020 4:11 am

“Is it really better to be safe than sorry? A leading UK pathology professor warns us that the ramifications of a country going into lockdown could cause more damage than Coronavirus.”

Well, we are going to find that out pretty soon, aren’t we. Handwringing won’t get the economy started any faster.

Btw, Trump should continue to hold his Wuhan virus presentations every day because the American people want to see him and hear from him on this issue, but Trump should kick all the badgering reporters out of the room and not take any more questions from them during the presentation. The American people need facts not arguments between the partisan reporters and the president The reporters can submit their questions to the White House press office instead. And if the reporters don’t like it, they only have themselves and their partisan politics to blame for the move.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
April 27, 2020 8:44 am

I may be misremembering but at the time of the Falklands War the UK Govt spokesman gave out the results of the skirmishes and the Brtish deaths in action without allowing any media questions.
I think that the PM , Mrs Thatcher , was all too aware that any setback would produce so many calls for rethink of strategy that surrender to the Argentinians would be inevitable.
The latter did indeed have considerabe initial and devastating success with Exocet missiles on the landing force and at that point one can imagine the BBC in particular submitting question after question about a policy of appeasement (ie surrender) to stop any further loss of life.
However the PM persisted with her policy and eventually the superior ability of our ground forces prevailed once beachheads had been established.
Perhaps Trump could learn from that example.

April 27, 2020 1:01 am

time to round up the scaremongerers –

Neil Ferguson, Faculty of Medicine, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, (510,000 Brits, 2.2m Americans could die);
Marc Lipsitch, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health (70% of global population could get infected, 2% could die, equals 109 million fatalities); and
Paul Kelly, ANU Medical School, Australia (150,000 Australians could die) – and hold them accountable for the economic lockdowns they inspired.

good old CAGW institutions all of them.

Ed Zuiderwijk
April 27, 2020 1:55 am

The problem with such drugs, in particular hydroxyquinine, is that they are championed by the current potus. And therefore, in the eyes of all bien pensants there can’t be anything in it. But now suppose one of these drugs does actually help and that you have lost a loved one to the plage, can you then sue the FDA for delaying its deployment with politically motivated pseudo-science? I guess there’s a Paul somewhere who will tell you to go for it.

Reply to  Ed Zuiderwijk
April 27, 2020 3:32 am

go for his uv inside and wash you insides with bleach. he cannot be wrong being potus!
both these items work as you would expect on viruses outside the body. unfortunately one disrupts human Dan and the other just kills inside the body.

75% alcohol works against virus but should you replace 75% of blood with alcohol?

Reply to  ghalfrunt
April 27, 2020 8:36 am

I’m not sure how people are drawing these conclusions about what the President said unless they wildly misrepresent his statement.

Bill Bryan, Under Secretary for Science and Technology at DHS, said at the press briefing, “Our most striking observation to date is the powerful effect that solar light appears to have on killing the virus, both surfaces and in the air. We’ve seen a similar effect with both temperature and humidity as well, where increasing the temperature and humidity or both is generally less favorable to the virus.”

Bryan talked about the half-life of the coronavirus on surfaces like door handles and stainless steel surfaces, saying that when they “inject” UV rays into the mix along with high temperatures and increased humidity that the virus dies quickly.

“The virus does not survive as well in droplets of saliva, and that’s important because a lot of testing being done is not necessarily being done, number one, with the COVID-19 virus and number two, in saliva or respiratory fluids,” Bryan continued. “And thirdly, the virus dies the quickest in the presence of direct sunlight under these conditions.” …

“We’ve tested bleach, we’ve tested isopropyl alcohol on the virus, specifically in saliva or in respiratory fluids, and I can tell you that bleach will kill the virus in five minutes,” Bryan said. “Isopropyl alcohol will kill the virus in 30 seconds, and that’s with no manipulation, no rubbing. Just bring it on and leaving it go. You rub it and it goes away even faster.”

“Bryan added, “We’re also looking at other disinfectants, specifically looking at the COVID-19 virus in saliva.”

Immediately following Pres Trump said, “So, I’m going to ask Bill a question that probably some of you are thinking of if you’re totally into that world, which I find to be very interesting. So, supposing when we hit the body with a tremendous, whether it’s ultraviolet or just very powerful light, and I think you said that hasn’t been checked, but you’re going to test it. And then I said supposing you brought the light inside the body, which you can do either through the skin or in some other way. And I think you said you’re going to test that too. Sounds interesting. And then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in a minute, one minute. And is there a way we can do something like that by injection inside or almost a cleaning? Because you see it gets in the lungs and it does a tremendous number on the lungs, so it’d be interesting to check that, so that you’re going to have to use medical doctors with, but it sounds interesting to me. So, we’ll see, but the whole concept of the light, the way it kills it in one minute. That’s pretty powerful.”

Nowhere in his rhetorical question to Under Secretary Bryan did Trump advise people to ingest Lysol or any other disinfectant.


Reply to  Bill Marsh
April 27, 2020 12:54 pm

gfront has a long history of taking everything Trump says out of context.
The TDS is strong with this one.

Reply to  ghalfrunt
April 27, 2020 8:45 am

light therapies using UV and infrared and other variant already IN use for cancers and other issues
you need to get u to speed before dissing it
or is it a case of TDS?

and as for the ridicule of Trump over injecting antiseptic cleaning items?
well GO OOK at Merks PPSV23 pnumonia vax
it USES PHENOL and IS injected
explains the high adverse event complaints too
but its legal and been used on idiots who dont read the data daily

Reply to  ghalfrunt
April 27, 2020 10:33 am

You are a dishonest person

Paul C
Reply to  ghalfrunt
April 27, 2020 1:50 pm

Trump seems to be very up to date with proposed/experimental treatrments. The AYTU Bioscience Healight https://irdirect.net/prviewer/release/id/4302840

April 27, 2020 1:58 am

Australia has had 83 Covid19 deaths.
just before ABC Australia shifted to 24/7 Covid panic mode, the following, by a rural reporter, slipped through. compare to todays Covid hysteria:

11 Feb: ABC Australia: Flu season which struck down 310,000 Australians ‘worst on record’ due to early outbreaks
ABC Sunshine Coast By Tara Cassidy
Researchers are warning little can be done to prevent future severe flu seasons, if a pattern of prolonged, year-round outbreaks continue.
Last year, Australia experienced its worst flu season on record, with more than 310,000 people presenting to hospital and health services nationwide.
The figure is seven times greater than Australia’s previous 18-year average…

World Health Organisation (WHO) influenza researcher, Ian Barr, said such aggressive seasons were generally a “one-in-every-10-year occurrence”, but early flu outbreaks had seen Australia go through two in just three years.
He said it is an issue that is hard to predict and one difficult to address with vaccines.
“Definitely in terms of influenza seasons 2019 was the biggest Australia has had … it was very unusual,” Dr Barr said…

He believes international travellers played a significant role, but said other factors were also at play.
“The whole business of influenza is a numbers game, so if you get enough people coming back to Australia with infections from overseas, that can happen,” Dr Barr said.
“We put it down to higher tourist numbers, more Australians travelling overseas, climate conditions…

Queensland Health Minister, Stephen Miles, said the intense season put a major strain on hospital and health services nationwide, which would have to incorporate early outbreaks into future planning.
“Certainly the levels we saw, it took a very high toll on the community and the health system,” he said.
“We had a record number of summer cases and that elongated the impact on our hospitals through more months of the year, as well as many of our own staff ended up catching the flu…

“There’s a lot of mysteries still about the flu and that’s why we have a lot of people allocated to researching and working on it.
“Every year the virus is different and the way it impacts us is different, we do our best to predict it.
“It just demonstrates how serious a virus the flu is and how important it is to get vaccinated and stop it spreading even more.”
But WHO’s Dr Barr said he does not believe vaccinations would have much impact where early outbreaks of influenza are concerned, stating 2019 was one of their most successful vaccination years to date.
“I wouldn’t say the vaccine had too much of an impact on that [severe season last year], the season was already in the starter gates and running before most vaccines were even given out,” he said.
“Given the significant number of cases in March and April — the vaccine isn’t even available during that time, and it normally takes a couple of weeks after being vaccinated to reach peak immunity.
“I wouldn’t say this was a vaccine issue.”

According to Dr Barr, vaccines are created based on strains circulating in the northern hemisphere, which meant it would be difficult to bring forward a release date in Australia.
He said current vaccines only last three to six months, so early immunisation would also mean they may not last through the peak months of July and August…
“There’s a lot of work and money being invested in trying to improve influenza vaccines, we’re taking a number of different approaches, but these things take time.”

While 2019 saw the highest number of influenza cases across the country, 2017 still holds the record for the highest number of flu-related deaths, with over 1,100 cases.
Last year there were over 900 influenza linked deaths in Australia.

the media very rarely reported on the 1,100 deaths in 2017 or the 900 deaths in 2019 . although last year people were returning from Hong Kong and Bali with this flu, for which there was no flu shot, no planes were stopped, and the country was not only not locked down, the flu season was largely ignored (much as it is every year in most countries).

Reply to  pat
April 27, 2020 8:54 am

thanks Pat
I knew it had been a bad yr hospitals were stretched and as an early victim in march It knocked me rotten for 3 weks and lost me a short term job as well

April 27, 2020 3:38 am

Youtube: 1h12m58s: 20 Apr: Perspectives on the Pandemic | Dr. John Ioannidis Update: 4.17.20 | Episode 4
posted by Journeyman Pictures
In this long-awaited follow-up to his interview in late March, Dr. John Ioannidis discusses the results of three preliminary studies, (including his latest, which shows a drastically reduced infection fatality rate); the worrisome effects of the lockdown; the Swedish approach; the Italian data; the ups and downs of testing; the feasibility of “contact tracing”, and much more.
Watch previous episodes of Perspectives on the Pandemic here (LINKS)
Here are the links to his studies (LINKS)…

Ioannidis involved:

7 Apr: JAMA Internal Medicine: Viewpoint: What Other Countries Can Learn From Italy During the COVID-19 Pandemic
Authors: Stefania Boccia, MSc, PhD1; ***Walter Ricciardi, MD, MPH, MSc; John P. A. Ioannidis, MD, DSc

***23 Mar: UK Telegraph: Why have so many coronavirus patients died in Italy?
The country’s high death toll is due to an ageing population, overstretched health system and the way fatalities are reported
By Sarah Newey
“The age of our patients in hospitals is substantially older – the median is 67, while in China it was 46,” Prof Ricciardi says. “So essentially the age distribution of our patients is squeezed to an older age and this is substantial in increasing the lethality.”
A study in JAMA this week found that almost 40 per cent of infections and 87 per cent of deaths in the country have been in patients over 70 years old…

But Prof Ricciardi added that Italy’s death rate may also appear high because of how doctors record fatalities.
“The way in which we code deaths in our country is very generous in the sense that all the people who die in hospitals with the coronavirus are deemed to be dying of the coronavirus.

***“On re-evaluation by the National Institute of Health, only 12 per cent of death certificates have shown a direct causality from coronavirus, while 88 per cent of patients who have died have at least one pre-morbidity – many had two or three,” he says…

April 27, 2020 3:40 am

All this talk of using antibiotics against virus (totally ineffective) or subsequent bacterial infection, has massive problems.

Overuse of antibiotics (usually self prescribed) has led to most being ineffectual against bacteria – the bacteria have become resistant. Self prescribing helps these pathogens along the path of immunity. The antibiotics need to be preserved for the future.

About Antibiotic Resistance
Antibiotic resistance is where the bacteria that cause infections become resistant to antibiotics. It is a global catastrophe that threatens the lives of millions of people around the world if we don’t act now.
We are often exposed to bacteria that can be harmful to our health. This could be during medical procedures, such as dental work to organ transplantation, cancer therapy to hip or knee replacements. It can also happen when we injure ourselves, even through a simple scratch, or are exposed to a contaminated environment. As bacteria become increasingly resistant to the effects of antibiotics so the number of deaths will increase because of this. Resistance is a global health disaster that is already killing 700,000 people a year, and it is predicted to cause 10 million deaths per year by 2050 if the current situation is not improved


Reply to  ghalfrunt
April 27, 2020 10:47 am

Stop feeding them to livestock then…

Reply to  ghalfrunt
April 27, 2020 12:21 pm

Based on your earlier comment you are dishonest


Keith Harrison
April 27, 2020 4:25 am

Readers may be interested in this analysis of ivermectin:


Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  Keith Harrison
April 27, 2020 8:23 am

Another on from that same site back in 2009 talks about why so many drugs fail in clinical trials.
Every drugs tried in people has worked in vitro and then shown to be safe, and often both safe and effective, in animals, or it would never have been tested in people to begin with.

And yet the vast majority fail in trials.
Many fail at the final phase of testing.

Viruses and animals have been in a biochemical war for hundreds of millions of years.
Both are very good at it.
Viruses exist in huge numbers and reproduce rapidly, or they would not cause disease in people.
The ones that do so, are very good at what they do.
For every layer of our incomprehensibly complex immune system, the viruses that cause disease in us have found a workaround, and perhaps more than one.

Also, viruses are not even exactly alive, while our cells are alive, which means we have to try to hit the with something that is more harmful to them than the far more complex cells, tissues, and organs that they infect.
Which is one very important reason why killing viruses in a person is much harder than killing them on a surface.
And we are far more than a lump of separate cells, which is likely a very important reason why it is harder to have an effect in a living animal than in a lump of cells, which is what a cell culture is.

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  Nicholas McGinley
April 27, 2020 8:24 am
Reply to  Keith Harrison
April 28, 2020 10:30 pm

The article says:

This illustrates a quandary for clinical researchers. To test a drug, you’d want to give each subject the same dose. But in the real world, even though patients may vary by a factor of three in body weight, they all get the same size pill. In one clinical trial I was involved with, people argued endlessly whether the dose, calculated for the patient’s weight, should be 20 or 25. It was ridiculous, because in a clinical trial the clinical staff just give all the patients the same amount of drug, even though their weights varied by two-fold. Their reasoning makes sense: in the real world, the patient is never going to titrate their dose.

That makes no sense to me. Medical science hasn’t advanced to the point where a patient can be weighed, and the dose can be based on that weight?

Here, from RxList.com, is the recommended dosage for treating strongyloidiasis with ivermectin:

Table 1: Dosage Guidelines for STROMECTOL (ivermectin) for Strongyloidiasis
Body Weight (kg) Single Oral Dose
Number of 3-mg Tablets
15-24 1 tablet
25-35 2 tablets
36-50 3 tablets
51-65 4 tablets
66-79 5 tablets
≥ 80 200 mcg/kg

Apparently, at least someone is aware of this cutting-edge dosing procedure and actually believes physicians can do it.

April 27, 2020 4:46 am

Its looking more and more that the Swedes were correct 75 cases and falling. The whole lockdown will in the end prove to have been one of the biggest mistakes in human history. Lockdowns will only delayed later infections in Australia and NZ wait until winter.

Reply to  Eliza
April 27, 2020 6:13 am

Lockdowns will only delayed later infections in Australia and NZ wait until winter.

Delay is all it was ever supposed to do. Why on earth countries like NZ with low pop. density want to spread out a non existent problem is beyond reason. Horse-face still gets applauded by the Guardian though because female leaders are great.

David Joyce
April 27, 2020 6:22 am

The optimist in me says “The FDA banned it, it *must* work!” But, the pessimist in me says “No, the FDA has banned a few dangerous products in its history…” I guess we’ll just have to wait and see. But our wait will be an FDA satisfyingly long one.

Justin Burch
April 27, 2020 6:26 am

In one of Trump’s news conferences he said he regrets ever mentioning the antimalaria drug. Because he mentioned it might work, ever person suffering from Trump derangement syndrome is now determined to prove the rug doesn’t work so they can prove him wrong. I heard he is no longer going to do those updates. After the fiasco about “injecting bleach or Lysol” (which of course he never said) it’s not worth doing them. Insane partisanship, especially from the press, continues unabated and gets in the way of progress.

Reply to  Justin Burch
April 27, 2020 12:23 pm

They suffer from TDS and are not interested in giving information to the public. Trump is right to call them out when they do fake news.

April 27, 2020 7:34 am

Meanwhile your government tax dollars at work:


A pathetic use of government force on a doctor who was giving FREE vitamin C injections to front line medical staff and others.

They ignore that intravenous vitamin C has been shown to help with almost all the viral and bacterial infections known going back to the 1940s and Dr Klenner’s work treating polio.


Brooks Hurd
Reply to  TRM
April 27, 2020 8:03 am

Since when did the FBI and certain government officials begin practicing medicine?

April 27, 2020 7:34 am

Senescence of the immune system with age is a null hypothesis that will take some challenging to overturn but there may be another challenge developing for the young-
It’s just too early with any of it to be overreacting with anecdotal witch doctoring but time is of the essence with some reasonable scientific discipline to get answers.

April 27, 2020 7:39 am

“Wuhan did NOT emerge until about 12/1019. ”

ChiCom19 has been around for a millenia?

John Tillman
Reply to  MarkW
April 27, 2020 9:36 am


April 27, 2020 7:49 am

Effective dose of ivermectin from cell culture experiments is 10x higher than approved dose in patients. But even with that IC50 from lab experiment is unlikely to be reached in patients.

So just forget about it except somebody proves a combinatorial approach with other drugs at reasonable plasma concentrations.


Reply to  Ron
April 27, 2020 7:55 am

I think you will find it’s 100 times the normal dose and it’s 10 times higher than the maximum ever tested in a human. The issue I have seen given for it’s refusal is it needs to go back for full testing at that dose.

Nicholas McGinley
April 27, 2020 8:10 am

“So any virus, or just this virus?”

This is of course one big reason to wonder why anyone should expect any of these repurposed drugs to work against this virus.
In vitro tests tell very little about what may work in a living animal, let alone what might be safe, or what concentration might be achievable.
And activity in animals seldom translates to efficacy and safety in people.

Ivermectin kills viruses in vitro…at a concentration that represent an amount of drug many times the fatally toxic dose for a person.

Let’s consider the malaria drug that is used for RA and lupus, both autoimmune conditions that cause terrible problems for the people that have these ailments.
HCQ was being looked at as a possible treatment for such diseases within a few years of being approved for use as an antimalarial.
The reason is simple enough to understand: When a large number of people take something, at least some of them will have other conditions and ailments at the time they are taken.
So it did not take long after this drug was used widely, that reports came in of people that said their RA or lupus symptoms (and some but not all other autoimmune conditions) had improved greatly when they took HCQ, and doctors and researchers checked it out.

This is why the sentiment expressed by the quoted sentence at top is applicable to not just ivermectin, but any drugs which has been in widespread usage for a long time.

CQ and HCQ have been tested expensively in humans and animals as antivirals. For a couple of decades at least.
They have not been found to work.
Sometimes people who did not get the drug had less virus after a period of time than people getting the drug.

But probably much more significantly, millions of people have apparently taken these drugs for many decades.
If they worked against viral infections and illnesses in any sort of general way, it would have been impossible for this not to have been seen and noted.
Viral pneumonia is a leading cause of death all over the world, as are many sorts of viral illnesses.
It is 100% for sure that many people that were very sick with viral disease have taken these drugs.
So if these drugs kill a virus, it is apparently only this one.
And how likely is that?

All of the drugs tested for activity against SARS in this study killed the virus in vitro.
A couple had activity in the mouse model they used.
One is interferon alpha, the other a drug which is an interferon inducer.


The closest previously known virus strain to infect humans was SARS1.
These drugs were tested in animal models for activity against SARS, and failed to have any effect on viral replication:

The fact is, many drugs have an effect in vitro that do not show up in animals or people.
It is extremely common.
Viruses are hard to kill.
Even the best direct acting antivirals do not work for everyone who takes them, or against every strain of the same virus, or unless taken in combinations, or work well enough to actually help a sick person.

Anyone paying close attention is seeing that one country after another, one hospital after another, are stopping usage.
And one study after another is showing little reason to think that this will be the one virus these drugs inhibit in a person.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Nicholas McGinley
April 27, 2020 10:04 am

There is a long history of physicians trying to find a chemical that will cure sick people. In the early days of syphilis, toxic chemicals like mercury compounds were even tried. The ‘trick’ was to use something that was generally toxic to living organisms, and then find a dosage that a human would tolerate, but that would kill the pathogen. Sometimes things even worked out in the manner hoped for. But, for most known toxins like mercury and arsenic compounds, a dosage that kills a pathogen in a petri dish, usually is not tolerated by a living host. Thus, the search for natural antibiotics such as the penicillins, and the need for testing for side-effects in the general population.

Matthew R Marler
April 27, 2020 8:21 am

Now on the other side, the FDA just issued a warning (see www. FDA.gov/product safety information/faq/covid) saying DO NOT use Ivermectin for CoVid-19—despite a decades long safety profile in humans and animals!

Now, that FDA false safety warning will surely discourage some properly designed clinical trials to sort out the truth. Just like the climate paleo hockey stick gang that got after Steve McIntyre, and then lost.

One of the problems here is that you can not expect the drug to have the same safety and pharmacokinetic profile in infected patients that it has in the populations for which safety has been established. Most compounds that work in vitro do not work in vivo, so the extrapolation from the lab to the whole human should always be suspect. Before scientists establish a safe and effective dosing regimen in whole infected humans, there shouldn’t be a clinical trial, and certainly not widespread use. It’s not uncommon to kill sick and elderly people by giving too high a dose of a drug that is “safe” in healthy young adults. Since most people with COVID-19 will survive, use of ivermectin could easily do more harm than good.

Nick Schroeder
April 27, 2020 8:33 am

By reflecting away 30% of the ISR the atmospheric albedo cools the earth much like that reflective panel behind a car’s windshield.

For the greenhouse effect to perform as advertised “extra” energy must radiate upwards from the surface. Because of the non-radiative heat transfer processes of the contiguous atmospheric molecules such ideal BB upwelling “extra” energy does not exist.

There is no “extra” energy for the GHGs to “trap” and “back” radiate and no greenhouse warming.

With no greenhouse effect what CO2 does or does not do is moot.


For the Covid-19 to perform as advertised it had to spread exponentially.
Just as RGHE must have BB upwelling from the surface. (NOT possible!!)

Exponential is some “experts” brain fart, a model stacked on assumptions much like RCP 8.5.

The data is clearly second order.

And the ECDC data shows that Covid-19 flames out on its own after 3 to 4 weeks.

Much like a typical season flu bug.

Reply to  Nick Schroeder
April 27, 2020 8:49 am

Most countries were already showing some curving over of daily case numbers before any direct restrictions were put in place. That is normal evolution of an epidemic. ie the initial exponential like growth rapidly becomes sub exponential.

If you wish to challenge that you need to try a little harder than just saying “brain fart”.

You need to do something non trivial processing to detect whether it is happening or not. Monckton’s graphs are incapable of revealing whether it happens or not.


April 27, 2020 8:38 am

“Because he mentioned it might work, ever person suffering from Trump derangement syndrome is now determined to prove the rug doesn’t work so they can prove him wrong. “

Sadly, that’s about the size of it. Plus all the vested interests in medical and pharma industries are out to prove that a cheap, freely available drug is no good and we must by 4 billion courses of treatments of their new, expensive, patented anti-viral.

The EU DISCOVER project to test possible treatments has explicitly designed the HCQ tests to exclude exactly what Dr Didier Raoult of Marseilles said is effective.

Along with Rud Istvan’s climate analogy, it seems “wear a face mask” is the new “change a few light bulbs”.

Matthew R Marler
Reply to  Greg
April 27, 2020 3:18 pm

Greg: The EU DISCOVER project to test possible treatments has explicitly designed the HCQ tests to exclude exactly what Dr Didier Raoult of Marseilles said is effective.

Do you have a reference for that?

Matthew R Marler
Reply to  Greg
April 27, 2020 4:01 pm

Greg: exactly what Dr Didier Raoult of Marseilles

I have not read his very latest but in what I did read, a paper he posted on the web, he was unclear on some details, such as the actual age, sex, and comorbidity distribution in his study; the rate and distribution of adverse reactions; any other special details about the training and protocols used by his staff.

April 27, 2020 8:43 am

Rud ==> I have remained mostly silent through all this madness — but have been carefully collecting materials for a future — post pandemic — piece to be titled Modern Scientific Controversies: The Quinine Wars”.

Those who have been watching closely will have noticed the signs of a Science War that erupted almost instantly with personal attacks on Didier Raoult, anti-Trump insanity slopping over into an anti HCQ movement, involvement of major health and medical institutions advocating (on spurious grounds) against HCQ treatment — all the while WHO includes HCQ in the worldwide study SOLIDARITY and major hospitals are adopting HCQ treatment as a first-line approach.

We’ll all know in a few months, certainly by summer, what seems to work and what doesn’t and under what circumstances. So far, it appears that nothing really works once a patient is in crisis — some small percentage recover, the majority die no matter what is tried.

All in all, most people who contract Covid-19 are asymptomatic or have mild unrecognized symptoms — a small number get seriously ill or die. It is only the old (like me) and already ill (co-morbidities) that are at grave risk. [There are always those rare few cases of young healthy persons who die — even from the most innocuous infections of any kind).

Reply to  Kip Hansen
April 27, 2020 8:56 am

Kip, according to an international survey, 60% of doctors in Spain ( Italy 25% ) said they had used HCQ treatment. If you compare to France, Spain has 2x as many cases, 2x as many cured patients yet the SAME number of deaths.

Outside of Raoult’s team, it seems that there is very little use of HCQ France and and MD cannot prescribe it without and existing order from a specialist. They allowed but banned it at the same time.

The medical bureaucracy in France is killing people by the 10s or thousand.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Greg
April 27, 2020 10:13 am

According to Eschenbach’s most recent world graph, Spain has a higher death rate per 10 million than France does. That does not support your claim. In fact, it may indicate just the opposite of your claim.

Reply to  Clyde Spencer
April 27, 2020 10:50 am

“Your claim. In fact, it may indicate just the opposite of your claim.”
Remember Willis’ little to rule of quoting what someone says, not what you think they said?

How do you think you can refute any claim I made about cases ( which Willis ignores as useless ) and actual deaths by comparing to Willis’ per capita figures.

I’m certainly willing to be challenged but at least do the work to make a credible claim, not a “may indicate” based on incompatible figures.

Better still go look at the numbers and see whether you have a valid point to make.

John Tillman
Reply to  Greg
April 27, 2020 12:09 pm

Here are Worldometers’ numbers as of the moment:

Country Cases Deaths Recoveries Death/Case Ratio

Spain 229,422 23,521 120,832 10.25%
France 165,842 23,293 45,513 14.05%

Dunno how comparable the two nations’ reporting standards are.

Reply to  Greg
April 27, 2020 2:02 pm

thanks John, that seems close to the figures from the source I was looking at.

So almost identical numbers of deaths but nearly three times more recoveries in Spain.

Before drawing an firm conclusions you’d need to dig into who is counting what, in particular where care home deaths are included and the death with / death from controversy. But with spanish recovery figures being so much higher, it demands closer inspection.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Greg
April 28, 2020 1:03 pm

It is meaningless to compare absolute numbers of anything when countries have different populations. They have to have a common denominator to have comparative meaning.

Curious George
Reply to  Kip Hansen
April 27, 2020 9:25 am

There are subtle nuances. The hydroxychloroquine is rumored to be most effective in the early stages of Covid-19. So Nevada limits its use to hospitals only.

Let’s ban ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine. That leaves aspirin. Aspirin used to be prescribed in Soviet medicine for anything.

Reply to  Curious George
April 27, 2020 10:52 am

It’s not a rumour. Raoult specifically recommended early use ( before ICU ) , that can and does include early hospital use.

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  Greg
April 27, 2020 1:19 pm

He declared the cure before he had treated a single patient:
“Before Raoult had even begun his clinical trial, in late February, he appeared in the press to promote the idea of chloroquine as a treatment, researchers with First Draft News found.”


I do not speak French, but this is supposed to be the video of him doing exactly that:

Shortly before declaring he knew the cure based on zero evidence, he was mocking the idea of being the least bit concerned about the virus.

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  Greg
April 27, 2020 1:25 pm

He declared the cure before he had treated a single patient:
“Before Raoult had even begun his clinical trial, in late February, he appeared in the press to promote the idea of chloroquine as a treatment, researchers with First Draft News found.”


I do not speak French, but this is supposed to be the video of him doing exactly that:

Shortly before declaring he knew the cure based on zero evidence, he was mocking the idea of being the least bit concerned about the virus.

His advocacy, in no uncertain terms, prior to having anything like enough evidence for such a position, meant he had from the get go painted himself into a corner, professionally and reputationally speaking.
I would be willing to bet he will insist he is correct no matter what results are forthcoming.

I know who that reminds me of.
Anyone who has left themselves no way to back off from an unfounded opinion, can be counted on to never back away from that opinion, at least not publicly, no matter what subsequent evidence shows.
He is now locked into biased advocacy.

Reply to  Nicholas McGinley
April 27, 2020 3:13 pm

Didier Raoult doesn’t like clinical trials. He systematically oppose randomized trials for infection treatment.

He does off label prescriptions plus observational studies. Very different.

Reply to  Nicholas McGinley
April 27, 2020 3:50 pm

“meant he had from the get go painted himself into a corner, professionally and reputationally speaking.
I would be willing to bet he will insist he is correct no matter what results are forthcoming.”

That would apply at least equally to all vaxxers, esp. those who denied the overwhelming evidence that the hep B vaccine causes MS.

Reply to  Greg
April 27, 2020 3:08 pm

Didier Raoult essentially said it’s game over, end of story, move along, when China published a “study” (a report, letter… not actually a study) about chloroquine effectiveness.

And he did minimize the Wuhan crisis at the beginning, basically saying: a few Chinese people die and it’s a huge story here.

Reply to  Kip Hansen
April 27, 2020 9:27 am

It’s becoming more apparent to me is that the really dangerous thing about this illness is being intubated. There’s a high risk of fatal ventilator induced lung injury (VILI, or VALI), and/or permanent/fatal organ/brain damage from the toxic drugs used to make patients comatose. That is injury and death distinct and apart from virus pathology. So the prudent course of action is to avoid intubation at all costs.

David Joyce
Reply to  Kip Hansen
April 27, 2020 9:31 am

Hate to be fatalistic, but I think that people who are going to die from this are going to die from this, despite interventions. The data are still sketchy, but the high death toll of people on ventilators, as well as the country by country worldwide death rate statistics all point in the same direction. In the case of the latter, the important variables seem to be climate (Southern Hemisphere and warm places in the Northern Hemisphere), whether you commonly wear masks (Japan), and perhaps whether BCG vaccinations are still being given. The quality of the country’s health care system does not really leap out at you from the data.

Reply to  David Joyce
April 27, 2020 11:42 am

It points to the fact that they do not have sufficient understanding of what the illness or how to treat it. If the pathology is not ARS then the high pressure forced ventilation is not the right treatment.

It seems clear already that there has been a lot of inappropriate medicine going on.

Then there is the refusal in many countries to let doctors use HCQ, which while not a miracle cure does seem to a significant help in preventing patients go into critical condition where they don’t even know what to do about it.

On the face of it Spain has one of the best recovery rates and they used it extensively.

Reply to  Greg
April 27, 2020 11:59 am

Looks like some progress is being made:

A team from UChicago Medicine’s emergency room took dozens of COVID-19 patients who were in respiratory distress and gave them HFNCs instead of putting them on ventilators. The patients all fared extremely well, and only one of them required intubation after 10 days.

UChicago Medicine doctors see ‘truly remarkable’ success using ventilator alternatives to treat COVID-19


Reply to  Kip Hansen
April 27, 2020 11:22 am

There are multiple facets to covid. There is the front end where you need to help your immune system supplemented with anti virus meds. Then there is the backend where your bodies immune systems goes crazy and the body goes into sepsis shock in couple different manners.

When you see vitamin c IV treatment you know some one understands and is following the basic HAT sepsis protocol modified for covid.

As for the front end, the entire Indian heath services is going on vitc, give, zinc, and hydrocloroqine.



Reply to  terry
April 27, 2020 3:18 pm

In that video, the doctor mentions that hydroxychloroquine changes the ACE2 receptor so that the virus’ ability to bind to it is reduced. If true that is extremely significant. I would like to know where he gets that information.

Reply to  icisil
April 27, 2020 3:50 pm

Looks like he might be right. CQ + NH4Cl impairs terminal glycosylation of ACE2.

Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and spread

Reply to  terry
April 27, 2020 5:39 pm

Clyde Spencer, you asked me a while back what I based my suspicion on that healthcare workers were using HCQ as prophylaxis. It’s mentioned in this video that they’re doing that in India, so my suspicion is confirmed.

Reply to  Kip Hansen
April 27, 2020 12:43 pm

Those actually interested in real-world clinical data about HCQ treatments (as opposed to vague extrapolations from dicey, squishy numbers not tied to actual treatments of actual patients) can refer to Todaro’s daily synopsis of publications re HCQ .

Todaro and his group have a new paper (23 April) “A two-step strategy to reopen America” that promotes HCQ/AZ/Zinc treatment.

It is NOT valid medical science to pretend to know the effectiveness of a treatment from anecdotal evidence such as “I hear Spain is using a lot of HCQ, let’s look at their death rate.” That type of approach is non-science.

In real medicine, one has to treat patients and look at outcomes — not hypothetical patients, not just any old patients, but cohorts of assumed-equal patients with exact recorded treatments and exact recorded outcomes. When the cohorts are different, such as a study treating only advanced patients in crisis, then one mustn’t confuse those results with the results of studies of the treatment of patients caught in early stages of infection.

The results of treatments with real data about real patients are beginning to mount up, giving us a good idea of what works and what doesn’t.

Reply to  Kip Hansen
April 27, 2020 2:12 pm

Thanks Kip that’s a useful resource, though I did not say “I hear Spain is using a lot” , I said “according to an international survey” and gave the figures.

Neither did I “pretend” anything. I said:
“On the face of it Spain has one of the best recovery rates and they used it extensively.”

If you want to challenge something I said please don’t distort and misreport it in order to ridicule what I did not say. Next you be claiming I recommended people mainline fish tank cleaner to avoid getting COVID.

Reply to  Greg
April 27, 2020 4:27 pm

Greg ==> This comment is not addressed to you, but to the general readership…..I was referring to w.’s looking at national death rates. And various analyses by others of differences between national figures of various sorts.

(Why you would think my comment was in response to you is a mystery to me. Isn’t this a post from Rud Istvan? I addressed him above with another question…)

BTW, if I was addressing you, I would have begun my comment with: “Greg ==>”, as is my long-standing custom and as I did with this reply to you. I do try not to be ambiguous.

Matthew R Marler
Reply to  Kip Hansen
April 27, 2020 3:35 pm

Kip Hansen: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1O6Cls-Oz2ZAgJuyDbnICEGjMvQPEyM-aaXARUomR9Ww/edit

Thank you for the link.

In real medicine, one has to treat patients and look at outcomes — not hypothetical patients, not just any old patients, but cohorts of assumed-equal patients with exact recorded treatments and exact recorded outcomes. When the cohorts are different, such as a study treating only advanced patients in crisis, then one mustn’t confuse those results with the results of studies of the treatment of patients caught in early stages of infection.

I concur. Real clinical trials are the fastest, not slowest, ways to answer the most important questions: (1) will the drug work on these patients (perhaps with comorbidities), with this disease, treated by this team? (b) What is the incidence of adverse reactions, aka “side effects”? (every drug that works in most people produces adverse reactions in at least a few others.) Otherwise you end up comparing different patient groups (of different ages or other health status), different infection levels, and different health care teams; then you can’t evaluate what difference the drug made.

Reply to  Matthew R Marler
April 27, 2020 4:02 pm

Another problem is that we really don’t have much in the way of historical data. Much less data broken out by the various cohorts.

Only 3 million known cases throughout the entire world.
There are guesses, but no solid method of determining how many asymptomatic cases there are/were.
There is no single standard for reporting whether a death was COVID19 related or not. I’ve read reports that have claimed that the numbers are vastly over stated, and read reports that claim they are vastly understated.
There isn’t a single standard to determine how to determine when someone has recovered from the virus either. Especially given the a few instances of those who had been declared recovered who later tested positive again. Are they recovered but became infected again, or were they never actually recovered in the first place. Third possibility, they were recovered, but the virus was hiding someplace in the body and was able to emerge and re-infect.
Finally we do not know what the diverting of medical resources to treat this disease has done to the rest of the world. My wife was scheduled to get a colonoscopy this year. As those are considered “elective” it’s been put off. Not just for social distancing reasons, but so the masks and gowns can be reserved for hospitals.

Reply to  MarkW
April 27, 2020 4:33 pm

MarkW ==> With the broad world-based SOLIDARITY trial (and other distributed studies) we will have a “pretty good idea” about what treatments work and to what extent in just a few months, by the end of summer certainly. We won’t have perfect data, we won’t have precise numeric data — but we will have useable pragmatic data that will guide treatment in the future while the purists work out the double-blinded long-term studies.

Rud Istvan
Reply to  Kip Hansen
April 27, 2020 5:39 pm

Kip, I very much look forward to your dispassionate overview (s). Me, thanks to 2009 swine flu scars, am very much still mentally in the front line trenches with admittedly NO objective overview.

April 27, 2020 9:05 am

i see whre the loopy massive dose quote came from] 10×4
doesnt make sense
it would be outright stupid to drop a full strength cow dose mix into a sample to see what it did if you were looking for real human application
youd use the known safe dose at max levelas at most
something off about that- to me

Jeffery P
April 27, 2020 9:51 am

I guess the FDA does not know about 1/5 prescriptions in the US are “off label?” Doctors are usually intelligent and are smart enough to make decisions which medications may work best for their patients.

Older drugs that are well-known with well-documented side effects are excellent candidates for off-label use. After all, medicine is a science and doctors use trial and error to determine which works best for an individual.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Jeffery P
April 27, 2020 10:21 am

On the other hand, it has been my experience that a typical practitioner is prone to prescribe something that has shown utility for what the doctor thinks you have (rarely confirmed by laboratory) and then follows up with “Try this for a month, and if it doesn’t get better, come back to see me and I’ll prescribe something else.” That is, there is a strong element of Trial and Error. That might be justified for early research on an unknown problem, but does not represent the epitome of the Scientific Method.

Reply to  Clyde Spencer
April 27, 2020 11:45 am

Yes, I was quite shocked when my GP tried to suggest diagnosis by prescription as a method. I told him I was not going to take pharma drugs on a speculative basis.

Quacks are by and large pill pushers these days anyway. To be avoided as much as necessary.

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  Greg
April 27, 2020 12:41 pm

As far as I have ever been able to determine, all psyche meds for conditions like ADD and ADHD and depression disorders, are given on a “Try this and see if it helps” basis.
It is extremely difficult for any clinical trials that compare these drugs to a placebo to show any significant benefit over placebo.

Rud Istvan
Reply to  Nicholas McGinley
April 27, 2020 6:12 pm

A not ordinarily shared here or elsewhere personal med anecdote. My (female) significant other has suffered for several years from anxiety disorder, subset PSTD, caused by a near death (literally) anaphylactic shock experience. CtM knows the details.
We have gone thru two psychiatrists prescribing 3 different meds, all of which eventually failed at increasing doses. Also two primary care physicians, since the first also mis prescribed the third drug (hint, similar names are not similar drugs) and when she overdosed on the final mis prescribed wrong eventually overdosed one, exhibited stoke symptoms ’confirmed’ by the ambulance EMTs I called but thankfully not by the resulting hospital ER neurologists.

So, I then took matters into my own hands well over a year ago since all docs had failed. Found after a month of research a small overseas clinical trial where curcuminoids were more potent than fluoxetine (Prozac) in treating anxiety. Problem was low bioavailability, solved by doubling bioavailbility with piperine (main ‘spice’ in black and white pepper).

So, several months ago (specidically, Oct last year)I switched her to my OTC stuff from her doc prescription stuff. Well, for first time in 2 plus years we got to visit my son and family in Chicago and then my daughter and family in Colorado for Thanksgiving week.

Only two ‘crisis’ days in the almost two travel weeks, easily treated by prescription clonasipam (mildest and least addictive benzodiasipam ‘tranquilizer’).

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  Nicholas McGinley
April 27, 2020 10:14 pm

There is apparently an entire field of medicine, plus a smattering of doctors in all manner of areas of practice, who never seem to have met a single person whom they did not want to prescribe anywhere from one to a whole list of drugs to.
From what I have been able to determine, support groups and behavior modification are, for most people with a subjective emotional or mental difficulty, at least as effective as the drugs that are commonly handed to them.

I am especially dubious of the sudden finding, at some point in the mid to late 1980s or so, that school age boys who do not sit quietly with their hands folded in front of them all day, have a mental disease.
Not to say that there are no people who have serious problems that are perhaps best remedied with a pharmaceutical…there almost certainly are such people.

There is more to it than just doctors being overzealous in their usage of such drugs, and among these are the constant fear of a lawsuit. Once someone mentions to a doctor an emotional or mental problem, they are at risk if they do not do anything, and the easiest thing to do is wrote a prescription.

But too many doctors want to spend no more than a few minutes with a person before whipping out their prescription pads.
Happy to know your wife was able to find relief from her symptoms.
I started taking a dose of liquid turmeric a while back, but I did so for the possible beneficial effect on inflammation response.
I have always used a lot of black pepper. But I think I started using it liberally because when I was a small child my dad told me it would “put hair on my chest”. It never did though…even at my age I have almost all of my hair on the top of my head, not much anywhere else. I only need to shave my face a few times a week. But I loves me some pepper…especially on beef.

Jeffery P
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
April 27, 2020 1:49 pm

My father had a doctor who prescribed asthma medication without testing for asthma, so I hear ya.

I have not personally encountered a physian like that. I will not use a doctor who does not answer my questions and explain why medicine X instead of Y or Z.

Everybody’s chemistry is a little different. Some do well on medicine Y instead of X or Z. Sometimes the doctor starts with the least expensive option. Your insurance may not cover the newest, most expensive option unless you trier the cheaper options first.

Michael Carter
April 27, 2020 12:08 pm

“Lockdowns will only delayed later infections in Australia and NZ wait until winter.”

Yup, this will be most interesting

But – it is all good. Anything that stops tourists coming here is a bonus. NZ is back to the calm clean place I grew up in. Long may it continue

All the blow-ins who came to my local town to sup at the tourism trough are now leaving. BNB’s are empty. Life is good

Wokes in Wellington now have to admit it is the primary producers and manufacturing that ultimately drives this country. Back into woke-holes you go

Reply to  Michael Carter
April 27, 2020 12:29 pm

A new version of “build a wall.” 🤓

April 27, 2020 12:30 pm

Chinese studies show that it is not excess ACE2 that causes complications, but rather its deficiency. By combining with ACE2, the virus inactivates it, which must cause narrowing of blood vessels in the lungs. Therefore, people who take medicines for hypertension should not stop the treatment during illness.
” An April 2020 study of patients hospitalized in Hubei Province in China found a death rate of 3.7% for hospitalized patients who had hypertension and were on Angiotensin Converting Enzyme inhibitors or Angiotensin Receptor Blockers versus 9.8% for hospitalized patients with hypertension not on such drugs, suggesting that the drugs are not harmful and may help against the coronavirus. [38]

Despite lack of conclusive evidence, some have advocated for and others for the cessation of ACE inhibitor or ARB treatment in COVID-19 patients with hypertension.[39] However, multiple professional societies and regulatory bodies have recommended continuing standard ACE inhibitor and ARB therapy.”

Reply to  ren
April 27, 2020 12:41 pm

“This has led some to hypothesize that decreasing the levels of ACE2, in cells, might help in fighting the infection. On the other hand, ACE2 has been shown to have a protective effect against virus-induced lung injury by increasing the production of the vasodilator angiotensin 1–7.[33] Furthermore, according to studies conducted on mice, the interaction of the spike protein of the coronavirus with ACE2 induces a drop in the levels of ACE2 in cells through internalization and degradation of the protein and hence may contribute to lung damage.[33][34]”

Reply to  ren
April 27, 2020 12:43 pm

It makes sense that staying on ACEi and ARBs is a smart move if infected and showing symptoms. But IMO it makes no sense prior to infection if switching to a non-ACE2 upregulating hypertension drug can be done safely.

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  icisil
April 27, 2020 1:05 pm

There are several very good reasons that ACEi and ARBs are widely prescribed all over the world.
They are perhaps the safest and best tolerated of all drugs that control blood pressure.
Prior to their discovery and becoming widely available, people used to hate the side effects of BP medications.
Managing any change in a HBP medication has to be done very carefully by a doctor that knows exactly what they are doing.
Probably one of the worst mistakes a layperson can make is telling or insisting on a treatment to their doctor.
Doing “medicine by ignorance” is a terrible idea.
Perhaps the only thing more reckless would be taking medical advice from a layperson commenting on the internet about their opinions.
There exists not one shred of evidence that these drugs are dangerous to be taking if you get this disease.
The risk of dying from this disease is very low for anyone who is not elderly.
The elderly are the people who are at the most risk from going off any medication that is giving them good control of HBP.
And uncontrolled or poorly controlled blood pressure puts an elderly person at terrible risk if they get COVID.

Reply to  Nicholas McGinley
April 27, 2020 1:57 pm

ACEi are not used much in E Asian countries like Japan and Taiwan; ARBs are used more so, but not as much as calcium channel blockers. So insinuating that ACEi/ARB are the only ways to control BP is just nonsense.

Reply to  icisil
April 27, 2020 4:28 pm

“So insinuating that ACEi/ARB are the only ways to control BP is just nonsense.”

Good thing he never said anything even close to that.

Reply to  icisil
April 27, 2020 5:11 pm

Yeah he actually did. It’s his usual speel whenever I mention the possibility, and possible prudence, of switching off of ACEi/ARB to something else. For some reason he feels very threatened by the idea and fights it constantly.

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  icisil
April 27, 2020 8:27 pm

Everyone can read what I said.
Except Icisil.
He hallucinate all sorts of gibberish whenever he reads one of my comments.

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  icisil
April 27, 2020 9:29 pm

“ACEi are not used much in E Asian countries like Japan and Taiwan…”
Interestingly, a metanalysis was published several weeks ago that looked at 5 million people in Japan, Germany, South Korea, and the US, and found that nearly half, 48%, of people who were started in a blood pressure medication got an ACE inhibitor. Another 17% started with a thiazide diuretic.
Which leaves 35% of all people in these countries starting on a blood pressure medication divided up amongst the other three classes of drugs, one of those three being ARBs.
The difference between you and me, Icisil, is I know exactly what I am talking about, and I am not full of crap.
You should try it sometime.

Reply to  icisil
April 28, 2020 5:10 am

ACEi are less than 10% of HT drugs prescribed in Japan.

comment image

Current use of antihypertensive drugs in Japanese patients with hypertension: Analysis by age group

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  icisil
April 28, 2020 6:59 pm

Take a look at what I said and what you are now focusing on.
I said nothing about any particular country.
I said nothing about “insinuating that ACEi/ARB are the only ways to control BP”

You invented that in your head, and now you are inventing some hallucinations about one particular country.
You are insane, did you know that?
I literally said none of the things you claimed, and anyone can see that.
I pointed out a recent study of countries right across the world that found that overall, nearly half of all new prescriptions were for one of the ones that you said are not much used.
You point to a small study of people who were treated only in hospitals using one particular sort of insurance.
And still you cannot look at what I originally said, and address that if you must.
It is more true to say you are claiming based on zero evidence, that one kind of drugs is dangerous, when in fact they are safe and effective, and for most people have the least side effects.
So how on earth a small study of hospital patients in one country has any bearing on what was being discussed, I can only suggest you take up with your psychiatric team.
Every day are more and more opinions and studies backing up exactly what I said.
Here is another:
““When you just look at viral pneumonia in general, before COVID, then the ACE inhibitors and ARBs had a positive effect” on pulmonary outcomes, he said. In the new numbers suggesting a survival benefit, “we see an even more profound effect . . . , which is very positive,” he said.”

You just make shit up, and it is sickening, and you ought to stop.

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  icisil
April 28, 2020 7:05 pm

Two retrospective studies from China found no link to higher mortality, with one even suggesting lower death risk.
“New data gathered from China’s Hubei Province, home to the city of Wuhan, provide additional reassurance that renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors don’t appear to increase mortality among patients with hypertension hospitalized due to COVID-19, researchers report in two retrospective analyses.

One, a single-center study published yesterday in JAMA Cardiology, showed no differences in disease severity or death based on whether patients were or weren’t taking ACE inhibitors or ARBs. The other, a multicenter study released early online last week by Circulation Research, takes this positive news one step further—in propensity matched, adjusted analyses, use of RAAS inhibitors was linked to a 63% lower risk of mortality compared with no use, though investigators urged caution in interpreting this striking result.”

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  ren
April 27, 2020 12:47 pm

Thought experiments are a dangerous way to decide to discontinue a drug that is treating something like hypertension.
Hypertension is itself a known k!ller.
It used to be widely referred to as “The silent k!ller”.
Uncontrolled HBP causes strokes, congestive heart failure, and such things as aneurisms, which used to k!ll a large number of not-very-old people.
Widespread usages of highly effective treatments for hypertension are perhaps the single biggest reason for greatly increased lifespans in recent decades.
They do not have blood pressure cuffs in every doctors office in the world for nothing.

Carl Friis-Hansen
April 27, 2020 12:53 pm

From today there is mandatory gag wearing in all German states, in shops trains, etc.
Fees for not being gagged are as high as EUR150 in the state of Bayern.
At the same time German schoolchildren are about to go to school again (still with limitations and gagged).
Also, German doctors dressing in Adam and Eve costume in protest over limited supply of protective gear.

Meanwhile Californians are sunbathing side by side on the beaches, getting some vitamin D in the brilliant Californian sun.

Volvo in Sweden has taken up production again, after having had supply issues and a brief scare that the SARS Cov2 could be many times more aggressive than most seasonal flues – which it turned out not to be.

Yes, sorry I am a Dane living in Sweden, thus I have difficulties not to relax a bit about the whole issue.

Reply to  Carl Friis-Hansen
April 27, 2020 3:19 pm

Do you think the Germans will bring black those black sedans from WW2, pick up the non mask wearing plebes and ship them off on some train?

Reply to  Derg
April 27, 2020 7:38 pm

Hi Derb, – This response you made to a fellow WUWT’s comment is not that clever when read. He contributed information about Germany in 2020, not +/- 75 years ago.

Reply to  gringojay
April 27, 2020 7:40 pm

Sorry Derg for misspelling your name …

John F. Hultquist
April 27, 2020 1:57 pm

I’ve got Ivermectin in the fridge.
It is common with folks that own horses.
They tell me they do not like the taste thereof.
Guess I’ll not try it.
Wait. Hold my beer and watch this!

Rich Martin
April 27, 2020 1:58 pm

11.) And in his worst mistake Dr. Fauci relied on corrupt W.H.O rules to lock down the United States and destroy the US economy. Meanwhile, this delays the herd immunity that is needed to prevent a future outbreak of this deadly virus.

April 27, 2020 2:09 pm

FDA is working for Big Pharma. Off patent drugs that have been around for many years are cheap because nobody has a monopoly on pricing like patented drugs. Big Pharma wants to sell patented drugs or vaccines as treatment. FDA which receives much of its revenue from Big Pharma not to mention other conflicts of interest such as a cushy job after retirement make it a captured agency like CDC and NIAID.

A more corrupt system has never existed.

Reply to  Pft
April 27, 2020 3:02 pm

If politicians were honest, that corrupt system would not exist. It is a global phenomena !

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  Pft
April 27, 2020 10:47 pm

“It’s all the (gosh darn) money…the money and the drugs!
What’s it all mean?
What’s it leadin’ ta’?”

April 27, 2020 2:29 pm

Medicare has a database on all medicare patients, including age, sex, medical conditions, prescriptions, smoking, weight etc. This database records all the medicare patients who have the diagnosis of Covid 19 and their treatments. For example who has taken Hydroxychloroquin, their outcomes such as death, days in the icu, and those not requiring hospitalization . If the government would throw this open to statistical analysis we would quickly have a much more granular understanding of risk factors, treatments that should be pursued etc. If there is some treatment that is dramatically detrimental or beneficial, it will jump out if we use the analytic tools at our disposal. Unfortunately there is a huge cost to get access. We should call for this information to be opened up and let many fertile minds take a look.

April 27, 2020 2:51 pm

If an off-patent drug works in the use it is put to, they re-patent it for that new treatment!
At a much larger price!

Reply to  JohnM
April 27, 2020 4:30 pm

It costs a lot of money to get a drug approved for a new disease. Shouldn’t a company be given a chance to re-coup that money?

April 27, 2020 3:48 pm

Rud, I’m surprised that the WHO reports bo evidence that exposure provides protection.

It would seem a simple matter to check to see how many recovered patients show up later as a new diagnosis.

Authorities would need to keep track of name and address to allow patient tracking but it seems highly likely they would already be doing this.

If there was a statistical difference between infection and reinfection this would be strong evidence. That data must exist.

James F. Evans
April 27, 2020 4:09 pm

If something works, even if exotic, great!

But, ZINC, isn’t exotic, it’s essential.

And it works,.. it’s essential to the human immune system.

There is a body of evidence which suggests zinc deficiency may be a factor in the severity of the disease.

Zinc, not only is it essential to the immune system, it makes it stronger.

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  James F. Evans
April 27, 2020 10:38 pm

There is a longish list of minerals and vitamins in which a significant number of people are deficient, and without the proper amount of, optimum health will not occur.
For example, every time an immune cell needs to bind to an antigen, it must first have a molecule of vitamin D attach to it. Numerous other processes and cellular communications simply can not occur with a molecule of vitamin D being present to initiate the interaction.
Zinc is of course important. At atom of zinc is required in many hundreds of separate transcription factors and receptors.
But no one is doing themselves any favors by overlooking the fact that having a bunch of extra of one particular micronutrient or vitamin, will do nothing to compensate for an insufficiency of any of the others.
Nearly every food item has some zinc in it, and many have a lot.
This is because no living thing can do with out it.
Beef, chicken, and nuts are very high in zinc.
Also whole grains, many types of seafood, beans and lentils, mushrooms, oatmeal, yogurt and plenty of others.
A decent steak or burger or some chicken has well over the MDR of zinc.
Anyone who does not eat some nuts every day is forgoing the one single food item that studies have shown lowers the incidence of cancer, all cause mortality, and in the case of almonds, the only food item with a positive correlation with weight control in large studies of foods and health.

Nicholas McGinley
April 27, 2020 10:16 pm

Mods, I seem to have one or more comment in moderation.
Thank you.

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights