Coronavirus COVID-19 Update: Hydroxychloroquine and Other Treatments

[GreenMachineX]

@MarkLA @Nelson Vergel
How much zinc do you guys eat from food? Do you think that taking extra is more important for prophylaxis like I’m suggesting with vitamin C, or if just keeping optimal levels like we should for vitamin D which is possible from food? In other words, I wonder if my >30mg from food daily is sufficient...

 

[Nelson Vergel]

@MarkLA @Nelson Vergel
How much zinc do you guys eat from food? Do you think that taking extra is more important for prophylaxis like I’m suggesting with vitamin C, or if just keeping optimal levels like we should for vitamin D which is possible from food? In other words, I wonder if my >30mg from food daily is sufficient...

To get 50 mg per day of zinc from food is almost impossible:

The RDA for adults is 11 mg per day.

Doses over 150 mg/day have been reported to lower iron and copper.

Here is very good information from the NIH:

Office of Dietary Supplements - Zinc

Zinc overview for health professionals. Research health effects, dosing, sources, deficiency symptoms, side effects, and interactions here.

ods.od.nih.gov

On the other hand, it is not too difficult to eat foods that can bring our copper intake to 2-3 mg per day (2000 mcg to 3000 mcg)

Office of Dietary Supplements - Copper

Copper overview for health professionals. Research health effects, dosing, sources, deficiency symptoms, side effects, and interactions here.

ods.od.nih.gov

Iron is even easier.


I do not take zinc long term. I have seen some data on higher mortality in HIV in the past with high intake of zinc. I have also seen some data on its inhibitory effect on 5 alpha reductase enzyme responsible for DHT formation.


Zinc is important for hormone production. But, like everything else, it seems to behave in an U-shape manner when it comes to dosage vs benefits.

Review: The role of zinc in the endocrine system - PubMed

Zinc is essential in the regulation of a variety of physiological and biochemical events in the organism. It plays a critical role in maintaining the cell membrane integrity, protein-carbohydrate-lipid metabolism, immune system, wound injury and in the regulation of a number of other biological...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[GreenMachineX]

@Nelson Vergel
Sounds like if I’m getting >30mg from zinc from food and supplement combination, I’m good for prophylaxis and increase if I become ill.

 

[Guided_by_Voices]

A question for the assembled brain trust. I remember before the HIV cocktail came out that it was known that some people seemed to be able to either resist or eliminate the HIV virus, and I remember hearing of a program that was looking at the profile of those people and trying to identify what made them able to fend off the virus. Does anyone remember if this was ever determined and what made some people resistant? I remember that selenium was one of the theories but I don't know if this was ever confirmed. I know that CV-19 is a somewhat different type of virus but it would be interesting to know.

 

[sammmy]

HIV non-progressors

 

[Guided_by_Voices]

Thanks Sammy. I had never heard the term nonprogressor before. It's disappointing the wiki doesn't address any of the usual-suspect controllable factors, although typical for wikipedia. I will search elsewhere with that term.

 

[sammmy]

If you mean supplements, Wikipedia does not address them because there isn't a single scientifically proven case where somebody stopped HIV with supplements. The non-progressors simply have a genetic mutation that interferes with the virus mechanisms of infection.

 

[Guided_by_Voices]

My question would be "Have any controllable factors actually been evaluated?". They don't appear to have been with CV-19. High-insulin and blood sugar have apparently been clearly shown to worsen outcomes so that is a start.

 

[Nelson Vergel]

88 studies enrolling or about to enroll for hydroxycloroquine and COVID-19.

ClinicalTrials.gov

clinicaltrials.gov

 

[Nelson Vergel]

The WHO said there’s no evidence serological tests can show whether a person has immunity or is no longer at risk of becoming reinfected.

World Health Organization officials said not all people who recover from the coronavirus have the antibodies to fight a second infection.

This raises concerns that patients don’t develop immunity after surviving Covid-19. WHO officials say it's unclear whether recovered coronavirus patients are immune to second infection

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/13/who...-patients-are-immune-to-second-infection.html

“Nobody is sure whether someone with antibodies is fully protected against having the disease or being exposed again,” he said.
“Plus some of the tests have issues with sensitivity,” he added. “They may give a false negative result.”

Earlier this week, WHO officials said not all people who recover from the coronavirus have the antibodies to fight a second infection, raising concern that patients may not develop immunity after surviving Covid-19.

“With regards to recovery and then reinfection, I believe we do not have the answers to that. That is an unknown,” Ryan said Monday.

A preliminary study of patients in Shanghai found that some patients had “no detectable antibody response” while others had a very high response, Kerkhove said Monday. Whether the patients who had a strong antibody response were immune to a second infection is “a separate question,” she added. WHO warning: No evidence that antibody tests can show coronavirus immunity

Coronavirus: Double warning over antibody tests
18 April 2020
Double warning over virus antibody tests

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-52335210

Speaking in Geneva, the World Health Organization's (WHO) Dr Maria van Kerkhove cast doubt on the benefit of rapid serology tests due to a lack of evidence around coronavirus immunity.

She said: "There are a lot of countries that are suggesting using rapid diagnostic serological tests to be able to capture what they think will be a measure of immunity.

"Right now, we have no evidence that the use of a serological test can show that an individual has immunity or is protected from reinfection."
She added: "These antibody tests will be able to measure that level of seroprevalence - that level of antibodies but that does not mean that somebody with antibodies means that they are immune."

Dr van Kerkhove said it was "a good thing" that so many tests are being developed, but she added: "We need to ensure that they are validated so that we know what they say they attempt to measure they are actually measuring."
The first problem with antibody tests is there aren't any that work at scale, but even if they did there are potential issues.

There are no guarantees that if you have antibodies against the coronavirus that you are completely immune.

And even if your antibodies do protect you from becoming sick, then you may be able to harbour the virus in your body and pass it to others.

There will be many challenges before immunity passports - when if you pass the antibody test you can go back to life as normal - will be practical.
This is the problem with a virus that has only been around for a couple of months - there is still too much we do not understand.
However, the main appeal of antibody testing is to find out how many people have really been infected with the virus.

Her colleague Dr Michael Ryan said antibody testing also raised ethical questions.
"You might have someone who believes they are seropositive [have been infected] and protected in a situation where they may be exposed and in fact they are susceptible to the disease," he said.

Meanwhile, unions representing doctors and nurses have raised concerns about revised coronavirus guidance that allows some personal protective equipment to be reused at hospitals in England.

It comes following warnings that some hospitals could run out of the gowns used in intensive care units this weekend.

The UK announced 847 new coronavirus-related deaths in hospitals in its latest figures on Friday, taking the total to 14,576.

 

[sammmy]

WHO once again show they are nothing more than incompetent bureaucrats. Let's not forget that exactly WHO underestimated the virus in January and advised against locking borders (when it was obvious even to me, a non specialist, that it is sufficiently infections and deadly to cause a pandemic).

First, antibodies ARE protective against the virus - we use antibodies plasma as cure remember. Second, faulty non verified antibody tests should not be used as a claim that some people do not have antibodies, although it might be true.

 

[Rock H. Johnson]

Just a observation as I do not want to feed disinformation or conspiracy theories.

There is a chance that this COVID-19 drama will again make us question the theory behind antibodies as it was with HIV.

 

[Rock H. Johnson]

WHO once again show they are nothing more than incompetent bureaucrats. Let's not forget that exactly WHO underestimated the virus in January and advised against locking borders (when it was obvious even to me, a non specialist, that it is sufficiently infections and deadly to cause a pandemic).

First, antibodies ARE protective against the virus - we use antibodies plasma as cure remember. Second, faulty non verified antibody tests should not be used as a claim that some people do not have antibodies, although it might be true.

I have been reading your posts on immunity and I understand because of your own constitution you studied this thoroughly and still are.
Maybe you can answer a question of mine about antibodies.
If "First, antibodies ARE protective against the virus - we use antibodies plasma as cure remember." why is this not as easy with the HIV virus?
Why is it possible that while the basic idea behind antibody theory is that if you have antibodies from a virus you are immune to that virus, there is no more active virus present and you cannot be reinfected, with HIV they changed this. With HIV you can have both the active virus and the antibodies against it. Why is there still no HIV vaccine if there are HIV antibodies which ARE protective against the virus? There are also people who cannot produce antibodies but do generate immunity to the viruses they have had.

I have not studied immunology deep enough to answer these questions and maybe my questions are too simplistic, but I think in the light of what happens with this novel coronavirus they are actual.
Maybe if you do not feel the need to answer these to me then maybe someone else can shed some light on this?

Thank you in advance.

 

[sammmy]

Antibodies do not work against rapidly mutating viruses like HIV or Flu. That is why, even if you had the same strain of flu, you are not protected against it the next year. That is also why you need a flu shot every year.

COVID-19 is not rapidly mutating, and there is anecdotal evidence that blood plasma with antibodies from a person that got over it is very helpful to neutralize the virus.

There were trials of 'broadly neutralizing antibodies' against HIV but none is successful so far.

 

[charile12]

Antibodies do not work against rapidly mutating viruses like HIV or Flu. That is why, even if you had the same strain of flu, you are not protected against it the next year. That is also why you need a flu shot every year.

COVID-19 is not rapidly mutating, and there is anecdotal evidence that blood plasma with antibodies from a person that got over it is very helpful to neutralize the virus.

There were trials of 'broadly neutralizing antibodies' against HIV but none is successful so far.

WHO credibility is close to zero

 

[sammmy]

Yes I believed in WHO before, but they got it wrong so many times with COVID-19 that nobody should listen to them anymore and Trump is actually right about cutting their funding.

The bad thing is that most countries listen to WHO as if they are God Almighty on contagious diseases and did not lock borders for travelers coming from China. The result is what we are having now ...

 

[Nelson Vergel]

Good to see that I take all of them.

Vitamins to Prevent Coronavirus Infection?

Dr. Seheult's daily regimen to optimize his immune system and minimize COVID-19 risk. In the absence of good clinical data that is specific to SARS-CoV-2, Dr. Seheult discusses supplements, sleep, and his daily disinfection routine when removing PPE, getting in his car, and returning home from...

www.excelmale.com

 

[sammmy]

A fine example of medical doctors abusing statistics 101: Study finds no benefit, higher death rate in patients taking hydroxychloroquine for Covid-19

It is an observational restrospective study i.e. they did not randomize the patients between different treatment groups. It is very possible that patients in a more serious condition chose Hydroxychloroquine, hence the higher death rates can be attributed to their condition not to the drug.

It is a basic Statistics 101 rule that observational studies do NOT prove cause and effect, yet medical people keep violating that with almost every "publication". They were criticizing the french study because it wasn't randomized and double-blind, I hope someone will apply that to this study as well. Otherwise, it will be an obvious case of favoritism.

 

[Nelson Vergel]

I think hydroxychloroquine may be helpful before people show symptoms pre or post exposure. We will have an answer as large placebo controlled studies are currently enrolling.

Here is my lecture on the drug that I did today.

Hydroxychloroquine and COVID-19 Update

 

[DragonBits]

More deaths, no benefit from drug touted by Trump to treat coronavirus, study finds

Researchers analyzed medical records of 368 male veterans hospitalized with confirmed coronavirus infection at Veterans Health Administration medical centers who died or were discharged by April 11.

About 28% who were given hydroxychloroquine plus usual care died, versus 11% of those getting routine care alone. About 22% of those getting the drug plus azithromycin died too, but the difference between that group and usual care was not considered large enough to rule out other factors that could have affected survival.

Hydroxychloroquine made no difference in the need for a breathing machine, either.

Researchers did not track side effects, but noted a hint that hydroxychloroquine might have damaged other organs. The drug has long been known to have potentially serious side effects, including altering the heartbeat in a way that could lead to sudden death.

More deaths, no benefit from drug touted by Trump to treat coronavirus, study finds

The nationwide study was not a rigorous experiment, but with 368 patients, it's the largest look so far at hydroxychloroquine.

www.cbsnews.com