Corona Virus Updates Part 6

originally posted by: Byrd

Thanks for the correction. I made a bad assumption there.

Meh, it's nothing. I just didn't want you to get raked over the coals by someone who would make a big deal of it. I'm glad you haven't had enough infections to know what a z-pack is.

originally posted by: Fowlerstoad
a reply to: drussell41

Hey, D41 -

A z-pack is just a course of azithromycin, an antibiotic to inhibit bacterial infections (that may also have some cross effect vs. RNA viruses). It is called a z-pack because it comes in a package that meters the dosages by day with instructions to help people take the proper dosage regimen, until it is all gone. You gave a great description of what a z-pack looks like

They chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine are a different class of drug entirely like what you said, but, when combined with azithromycin, seem helpful vs COVID-19 anecdotally, and now (slowly) being proven scientifically it seems.

Do you worry about what this will do for azithromycin's effectiveness against various bacteria? I do. If everyone gets prescribed it, we may lose one of our best antibiotics for some infections. Not saying that it shouldn't be prescribed if it works (at all!).....just saying this could be a really unfortunate consequence, couldn't it?

a reply to: Itisnowagain

That's ok, totally understand. Find me on Facebook or via my website if you would still like to try one.
Rainbows
Jane

a reply to: angelchemuel
I would like your website address please....pm me.....I don't have facebook.
Thank you.

New on the preprints server list: Evidence Supports a Causal Model for Vitamin D in COVID-19 Outcomes

This particular paper is generating quite a bit of discussion (positive) on Reddit, including from people who corresponded with some of the authors:
www.reddit.com...

PARTIAL ABSTRACT

We analyse global data for COVID-19 deaths and recoveries and show that outbreak severity displays a striking latitude relationship with a northern hemisphere bias. Transmission rates can be explained by seasonal weather conditions, but this does not account for observed variations in fatality rates. Many factors point to Vitamin D as a candidate explanation but historical controversy surrounding Vitamin D studies and the lack of a coherent framework for causal inference has hampered acceptance of this explanation despite a wealth of evidence in its favour. We analyse global COVID-19 data using Causal Inference, constructing two contrasting directed acyclic graph (DAG) models, one causal and one acausal, and set out clearly multiple predictions made by each model. We show that observed data strongly match predictions made by the causal model but largely contradict those of the acausal model. We explore historic evidence further supporting the causal model. We review biochemical mechanisms that may explain the various ways in which vitamin D acts

DISCUSSION:

Still in pre-print. Within the past 2-3 weeks, I've seen several papers about Vitamin D and Covid-19 outcomes. This paper says that the farther north you go, the more severe the reactions to Covid-19 and again associates this with Vitamin D levels (which your body generates when you go outside and wander around with that big, bright star overhead helping you get a tan.)

This goes along with the Irish study (you may remember that Ireland is far north and doesn't get as much sunshine as we get here in Texas) that is urging anyone over age 50 to start taking Vitamin D supplements (comments on this paper also mention that you shouldn't get too enthused about megadoses of Vitamin D, because it can harm you.)

a reply to: Byrd

It may also explain the higher rate of infection in African Americans, due to their higher rate of Vitamin D deficiency.
NIH.gov

originally posted by: Byrd
that's why they call the combination of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, in combination with an antibiotic, a "Z-Pack."

This is incorrect.

The z-pack is just the azithromycin. The drug combo the Doctro in NY is using is not both chloraquine and hydroxychloraquine, it is only hydroxychloraquine, combined with the z-pack (azithromycin) and zinc sulfate.

And again - he made it clear it is the Zinc that does the heavy lifting, not the drugs. The hydroxy is only used as a facilitator to get the zinc into the cells, and the z-pack is to handle any secondary bacterial infections.

Here's some encouraging news!! Who would have thought? Llamas!!!

Llama antibodies may hold key to fighting coronavirus

wUSA9

“This is one of the first antibodies known to neutralize SARS-CoV-2 (new coronavirus),” Jason McLellan, associate professor of molecular biosciences at UT Austin and co-author of the study, said in a statement.

They are hoping to be able to administer it directly as an inhaler.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: angelchemuel
I would like your website address please....pm me.....I don't have facebook.
Thank you.

Done
Rainbows
Jane

Numbers from around the world are taken from Worldometers for May 8th.

Spain - Pop: 44.6 M
260,117 Positive tests…….. or 1 out of 179 Spaniards
10.11% Deaths (26,299)

Italy - Pop: 60.4 M
217,185 Positive tests….. or 1 out of 278 Italians
13.90 % Deaths (30,201)

UK – Pop: 66.6 M
211,364 Positive tests….. or 1 out of 315 UKers
14.78 % Deaths (31,241)

France – Pop: 67.0 M
174,791 Positive tests….. or 1 out of 383 French
14.86 % Deaths (25,987)

Sweden – Pop: 10.2 M
25,265 Positive tests….. or 1 out of 405 Swedes
12.56 % Deaths (3,175)

Denmark – Pop: 5.8 M
10,218 Positive tests….. or 1 out of 568 Danes
5.10 % Deaths (522)

US - Pop: 330 M
1,308,582 Positive tests.... or 1 out of 252 Americans
5.95 % Deaths

US death rates (2017):
1. Heart Disease …………….…………647,457 annual or 1,773 daily average
2. Cancer ……………………..……….….599,108 annual or 1,641 daily average
3. Accidents (unintentional injuries): 169,936 annual or 465 daily average
7. Diabetes:………………………………….83,564annual or 228 daily average

COVID-19 ………………………………………. 77,902 (69 Day) or 1129 daily average


*** SURPASSED *****

8. Influenza and Pneumonia …………55,562 annual or 152 daily average
9. Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis:..50,633 annual or 138 daily average
10. Intentional self-harm (suicide):..47,173 annual or 129 daily average
X. Auto accidents ………………….………37,461 annual or 102 daily average
X. H1N1 2009 ESTIMATED (8,868 – 18,638) for 1 year or 24 – 50 daily average

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: Byrd

It may also explain the higher rate of infection in African Americans, due to their higher rate of Vitamin D deficiency.
NIH.gov

Indeed. That was mentioned in the comments I was reading.

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: Byrd

It may also explain the higher rate of infection in African Americans, due to their higher rate of Vitamin D deficiency.
NIH.gov

Not rate of infection, but rate of mortality. As a layman I can only speculate why blacks die more often, nothing I can do about it.

We have 0 to little knowledge about rate of infection of the populace at large, because all the emphasis has been on rate of death, which ultimately does not matter.

Numbers Update for Europe, and Elsewhere (w/o France) (No BNO) :







www.worldometers.info...

originally posted by: Salander

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: Byrd

It may also explain the higher rate of infection in African Americans, due to their higher rate of Vitamin D deficiency.
NIH.gov

Not rate of infection, but rate of mortality. As a layman I can only speculate why blacks die more often, nothing I can do about it.

We have 0 to little knowledge about rate of infection of the populace at large, because all the emphasis has been on rate of death, which ultimately does not matter.

Thanks. I was terribly sleepy when I typed that, and it shows. Rate of mortality (and morbidity.)

originally posted by: drussell41
Do you worry about what this will do for azithromycin's effectiveness against various bacteria? I do. If everyone gets prescribed it, we may lose one of our best antibiotics for some infections. Not saying that it shouldn't be prescribed if it works (at all!).....just saying this could be a really unfortunate consequence, couldn't it?

My understanding from reading about it is that antibiotics are not recommended to treat viral infections simply because they don't work on viruses and the more they are used, the more they promote the creation of antibiotic-resistant strains of bugs. So yes, I share your concern.

It's also my understanding that some people are ignorant of this and I've had friends of mine tell me they wouldn't take no for an answer from the doctor and badgered the doctor until the doctor finally prescribed the antibiotic for a viral infection, which they are not supposed to do, partly because of the threat it can help breed antibiotic-resistant superbugs.

Like taking sugar pills or any other placebo it might have a placebo effect, but at least sugar pills won't breed antibiotic-resistant superbugs. The doctors should probably prescribe placebos for those irrational people, instead of antibiotics.

Can you take a Z pack for a cold?

The Z pack is a 5-day antibiotic treatment that does not work on the common cold. Viral infections cause the common cold, but the Z pack only works on bacterial infections. People should only use the Z pack under a doctor’s supervision, as taking antibiotics unnecessarily could do more harm than good...

The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have issued a safety warning about the drug, noting that the antibiotic may cause abnormal changes in the electrical activity of the heart.

This could lead to potentially fatal complications in some cases...

Does using the Z pack add to antibiotic resistance?

Overusing antibiotics threatens the safety of the population by contributing to antibiotic resistance.

Bacteria constantly adapt, which is how they continue to infect the human body. The more often bacteria interact with drugs such as antibiotics, the more they must adapt. This makes them stronger.

Antibiotic overuse may eventually lead to antibiotic resistance. This essentially means that the bacteria have become immune to the antibiotics. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimate that each year in the U.S., antibiotic-resistant bacteria cause more than 23,000 deaths.

So if antibiotic-resistant bacteria already cause more than 23,000 deaths a year, more prescriptions to treat viruses where we are told they don't even work seems like it not only won't help, but could cause that 23,000+ deaths a year figure to go up.

There's also this FDA safety warning, which if it doesn't even work on viruses should make you think:
FDA Drug Safety Communication: Azithromycin (Zithromax or Zmax) and the risk of potentially fatal heart rhythms

I guess the Z-pack interest related to COVID-19 is partly thanks to Trumps comment about it, but we don't know that it will do anything for COVID-19 virus with any confidence, according to Dr. Vinetz in this article:

www.yalemedicine.org...

President Trump has also pointed to the antibiotic azithromycin (also known as a Z-Pak) as a potential treatment.

“There’s no strong or even moderate evidence for azithromycin as a medicine to help the immune system,” Dr. Vinetz says. Several days later, the same French research team released a second study showing results similar to the first. But Dr. Vinetz says both studies were too small and poorly designed to offer anything besides anecdotal evidence.

The demand for azithromycin soared after Trumps comment, but if it really isn't effective on viruses as we've always been told, increased use might actually increase the death rate from superbugs (antibiotic-resistant bacteria).

a reply to: Arbitrageur

The z-pack is Rx'd because of the secondary BACTERIAL infections that happen once the pneumonia sets in. There's about a 20% co-infection rate so they start the antibiotics as soon as things are looking bad to prevent any bacterial infection making things worse. I agree it's probably going to cause problems with creating bacteria that are immune to it. They are overused as it is. I'm very anti antibiotic but in these cases I'm on the fence because it looks like the secondary infections are making things much worse. Rock and a hard place.

I keep hearing from people we have to stay locked down..

I asked a question in probably the wrong thread that I think people need to consider before deciding one way or the other.

What do we do when thanks to lack of revenue cops aren't getting paid, or firefighters, or paramedics, or snap benefits run dry.

How are essential workers and benefits to people not working going to be paid with minimal or zero revenue coming in... or dont consider it on the federal level (yea I know we already printed 5 trillion out of thin air) but what about the city level or state level that dont have their own printing press.

At some point (most likely sooner rather than later) benefits are going to go bye bye, houses will be lost, homeless problem will explode, and the problems will just continue to snow ball.

Or we can open up risk an explosion of cases, or stay locked down and risk an explosion of cases from lack of support in the infrastructure. (no skilled people where they need to be)

Least that's how my mind sees it... both carries risk 1 carries risk with the possibility of people coming out the other side still able to care for themselves and their families.

originally posted by: Irishhaf
I keep hearing from people we have to stay locked down..

I asked a question in probably the wrong thread that I think people need to consider before deciding one way or the other.

What do we do when thanks to lack of revenue cops aren't getting paid, or firefighters, or paramedics, or snap benefits run dry.

How are essential workers and benefits to people not working going to be paid with minimal or zero revenue coming in... or dont consider it on the federal level (yea I know we already printed 5 trillion out of thin air) but what about the city level or state level that dont have their own printing press.

At some point (most likely sooner rather than later) benefits are going to go bye bye, houses will be lost, homeless problem will explode, and the problems will just continue to snow ball.

Or we can open up risk an explosion of cases, or stay locked down and risk an explosion of cases from lack of support in the infrastructure. (no skilled people where they need to be)

Least that's how my mind sees it... both carries risk 1 carries risk with the possibility of people coming out the other side still able to care for themselves and their families.

I have avoided papers on this topic because it would cause topic drift and brawls.

However, there are papers on this topic in a number of places, including www.medrxiv.org...

Vetted papers here: cepr.org...

And here: bfi.uchicago.edu...

And a few over here: www.apa.org...

There are more than two choices, here... but again, there's a much better place to discuss this. The intent of this thread (as I understand it) is for medical research only. You might even start your own thread on scientific research on economic and social impacts (but beware... probably the best spot is the Mud Pit because it will cause brawls, IMHO)

a reply to: Byrd

The intent of this thread (as I understand it) is for medical research only.

That’s what you and others have tuned it into.
But if you look at the opening post it mentioned no restrictions to medical research.
In fact the opening post mention economic collapse along with political Issues as it relates to the virus outbreak.

It believe it was created for general updates about general covid-19. Medical research is part of the updates for sure. But not exclusive.

1 confirmed and 1 probable cases in Aotearoa/New Zealand today. Both are linked to a cluster in old peoples home in Auckland, one of which is a health care worker.
Kia kaha world.