DonLever

USA Politics/Election Thread: Biden is President-Elect, Trump Refuses to Concede

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, coastal.view said:

your guarantees are worthless

not sure why you think offering such has any value

damn egotistical to suggest you can guarantee anything

 

you are silly

your views are not based in reality or science

i do want your outcome to in fact be realized

but it is faith based.. faith in trump .. who is a hopeless con and liar

 

have you tracked what is happening in nyc ?

explain what the outcome will be there

do you understand how bad it will be there ?

i do not think your imagination can picture how catastrophic it will be there

 

you can post anything you want on here

and i see you that you are aware of this and you do so

but proffering a personal guarantee as if that has any value at all

is completely absurd

 

Well then Superboy I guess what you're saying is just as useless this is the problem with left-wing lunatics like you you always think you are right.

  • Burr 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Shift-4 said:

I would like to remain optimistic that this doesn't happen too but just curious if you have done the math?

At current world wide death rates (around 4%) the US only needs an infection rate of 7.7% to get to 1,000,000 deaths.

Therefore, 1M deaths does not seem too far fetched. We are talking about a country with a lot of unhealthy people (nearly 40% obesity rate). This is also a country that's leadership was in denial about the problem until about 8 days ago. That's a lousy head start on the problem.

 

I'm personally very worried about my neighbours to the south.

I hope we don't see 1M. I hope we don't see six figures. But once you work the math there is reason for concern.

Well according to most Professionals in Canada we will Peak in 4 to 6 weeks so if that is the case and similar to the United States I find it very hard to believe they would reach a million death

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said:

Well according to most Professionals in Canada we will Peak in 4 to 6 weeks so if that is the case and similar to the United States I find it very hard to believe they would reach a million death

most professionals also expect infection rates well above 7.7%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Shift-4 said:

most professionals also expect infection rates well above 7.7%

Right but we also don't know if a vaccine will come in that time like honestly I think we all have to Fast Track that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said:

Right but we also don't know if a vaccine will come in that time like honestly I think we all have to Fast Track that

already being done, there's a vaccine trial underway in Seattle right now and apparently there are now 20 groups working on a vaccine (https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/20/who-officials-say-at-least-20-coronavirus-vaccines-are-in-development-in-global-race-for-cure.html). WHO is running a large clinical trial using existing drugs in 10 countries, with early results expected in 2 weeks (https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/18/who-to-launch-multinational-trial-to-jumpstart-search-for-coronavirus-drugs/). 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jimmy McGill said:

already being done, there's a vaccine trial underway in Seattle right now and apparently there are now 20 groups working on a vaccine (https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/20/who-officials-say-at-least-20-coronavirus-vaccines-are-in-development-in-global-race-for-cure.html). WHO is running a large clinical trial using existing drugs in 10 countries, with early results expected in 2 weeks (https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/18/who-to-launch-multinational-trial-to-jumpstart-search-for-coronavirus-drugs/). 

Thank you I hadn't heard this. I heard there was a group of scientist in Saskatchewan that were working on a vaccine?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ryan Strome said:

Thank you I hadn't heard this. I heard there was a group of scientist in Saskatchewan that were working on a vaccine?

yup, SK is one of them.

 

I'm more excited about the combination of chloroquine+antibiotics that seems to have had the biggest impact so far. Very small study in France showed drastic reductions in virus load after just 5 days. It has to be conducted on a bigger scale, which it is, but given that its based on existing approved drugs and works quickly, we should know very soon if that combination works. If it does, that will make the situation in-hospital far far easier to deal with and take the edge of this thing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jimmy McGill said:

yup, SK is one of them.

 

I'm more excited about the combination of chloroquine+antibiotics that seems to have had the biggest impact so far. Very small study in France showed drastic reductions in virus load after just 5 days. It has to be conducted on a bigger scale, which it is, but given that its based on existing approved drugs and works quickly, we should know very soon if that combination works. If it does, that will make the situation in-hospital far far easier to deal with and take the edge of this thing. 

If you are talking about the malaria drug us doctors are not agreeing with Trump just saying

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ryan Strome said:

If you are talking about the malaria drug us doctors are not agreeing with Trump just saying

Trump overplayed it but it is one of the drugs being tested. You have to be very careful with chloroquine, you can easily kill someone with it if you get the dosage wrong. 

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jimmy McGill said:

Trump overplayed it but it is one of the drugs being tested. You have to be very careful with chloroquine, you can easily kill someone with it if you get the dosage wrong. 

But it isn't a cure that's what I think a lot of people are misunderstanding. At least from what I've read but I know you are an intelligent person so if you want to fill me in on some more I'm all ears.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ryan Strome said:

But it isn't a cure that's what I think a lot of people are misunderstanding. At least from what I've read but I know you are an intelligent person so if you want to fill me in on some more I'm all ears.

no its a treatment thats reduced the viral load in a small number of patients - here's the background. IF it can be replicated on a large scale it would be very helpful. But its not the kind of thing that you would want people trying to do outside of a hospital.

 

Chloroquine for COVID-19: Cutting Through the Hype

President Donald Trump has touted the drug as a treatment but scientists still don’t know for sure that it is effective in patients. A number of clinical trials aim to find out.

Chris Baraniuk 
Mar 20, 2020
2.5K

ABOVE: © ISTOCK.COM, OLLAWEILA

On March 16, SpaceX founder Elon Musk tweeted that the anti-malaria drug chloroquine was “maybe worth considering” as a treatment for COVID-19. He got 13,000 retweets. By March 19, President Donald Trump was touting chloroquine at a press conference. He even announced that the Food and Drug Administration had fast-tracked its approval for COVID-19. The FDA denied that this was the case a short time later.

While some of the hype has been fuelled by a document generated outside the scientific literature, chloroquine’s potential in treating COVID-19 is gaining traction in the medical community. 

The drug has a long track record in medicine, having been used since the 1940s as an antimalarial. The modern drug is made from the bark of the Cinchona plant, which was taken as an herbal remedy by indigenous Peruvians four centuries ago to treat fever. And there are some early indications it could work against SARS-CoV-2 infections.

There’s often a huge gap between how it works in the lab cells and how it works in the body.

—Jeremy Rossman, University of Kent

For instance, a study in France published on March 20 in the International Journal of Antimicrobial Agentsdescribed the treatment of 42 patients hospitalized with COVID-19, 26 of whom received a version of chloroquine called hydroxychloroquine and 16 of whom received routine care. Of the 20 patients who took the antimalarial and completed the study, six also received azithromycin, an antibiotic. All six of these patients were free of SARS-CoV-2 by the fifth day post-treatment, while seven of 14 patients who took hydroxychloroquine alone were negative for the virus, and two of 16 control patients were no longer infected.

Small-scale experiments in which chloroquine has been given to COVID-19 patients in China and Australiahave also shown encouraging results as far as shortening the course of the disease.

Larger clinical trials will be necessary to determine how effective the drug is. Researchers at the University of Minnesota have embarked on a study including 1,500 people to probe the drug’s effectiveness further in preventing the development of COVID-19 after people are exposed to SARS-CoV-2. The results could be available in a matter of weeks, Jakub Tolar, the dean of the University of Minnesota Medical School and vice president for clinical affairs, tells Reuters, and might indicate whether it’s worth launching a larger trial.

A small trial of 1,500 people would be a pragmatic step towards verifying the drug’s efficacy, says Jeremy Rossman, a virologist at the University of Kent, who praises the approach. 

A number of other chloroquine experiments on humans are in the works. According to clinicaltrials.gov, researchers at the University of Oxford plan to give it as a prophylactic to 10,000 health care workers and others at high risk of contracting SARS-CoV-2. In Norway, doctors expect to begin administering the drug to hospitalized patients. And in Thailand, clinicians are preparing for a clinical trial comparing various combinations of antivirals, including chloroquine.

Chloroquine’s mechanism of action

If chloroquine is shown to be effective against SARS-CoV-2, it will not be via the same mechanism by which the drug functions as an antimalarial. That’s because malaria is caused not by a virus but by a microparasite of the Plasmodium genus. Chloroquine makes it toxic for the parasite to digest its host’s hemoglobin. 

Chloroquine might have entirely different effects against a virus, such as, for example, disrupting the virus’s ability to enter a cell. 

See “Are We Headed for a New Era of Malaria Drug Resistance?

Nabil Seidah, a molecular biologist at the Montreal Clinical Research Institute (IRCM), and colleagues examined chloroquine’s effect on SARS-CoV back in 2005. Seidah is currently experimenting with drugs including chloroquine as potential SARS-CoV-2 treatments and using material sent to him by pharmaceutical firms.

His 2005 study reported “strong antiviral effects” in animal cells in vitro. Seidah tells The Scientist that the mechanism by which chloroquine disrupts infection by a coronavirus remains unclear.

Chloroquine can raise the pH of endosomes, vesicles inside cells that are hijacked as points of entry by viruses. Endosomes have a slightly acidic pH, which helps facilitate this process. Seidah explains that chloroquine can raise endosomic pH slightly, which prevents fusion and stops the virus from entering the cell. Seidah says chloroquine may also block enzymes involved in the fusion between the virus and lung cells or stymie the viral replication process. 

Whatever the mechanism, Seidah says, it’s likely a combination of drugs of some kind that will, ultimately, be needed to treat COVID-19.

“Chloroquine alone will not solve the problem,” he says.

Rossman says he would expect chloroquine to inhibit SARS-CoV-2 in the lab, based on what is known about its ability to raise endosomic pH. “But there’s often a huge gap between how it works in the lab cells and how it works in the body,” he says.

The drug is potentially dangerous when used at high doses or for prolonged periods. It can cause permanent blindness and even death. Rossman and Seidah agree that larger clinical trials are a must before chloroquine is considered safe and effective as a treatment for COVID-19. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

no its a treatment thats reduced the viral load in a small number of patients - here's the background. IF it can be replicated on a large scale it would be very helpful. But its not the kind of thing that you would want people trying to do outside of a hospital.

 

Chloroquine for COVID-19: Cutting Through the Hype

President Donald Trump has touted the drug as a treatment but scientists still don’t know for sure that it is effective in patients. A number of clinical trials aim to find out.

Chris Baraniuk 
Mar 20, 2020
2.5K

ABOVE: © ISTOCK.COM, OLLAWEILA

On March 16, SpaceX founder Elon Musk tweeted that the anti-malaria drug chloroquine was “maybe worth considering” as a treatment for COVID-19. He got 13,000 retweets. By March 19, President Donald Trump was touting chloroquine at a press conference. He even announced that the Food and Drug Administration had fast-tracked its approval for COVID-19. The FDA denied that this was the case a short time later.

While some of the hype has been fuelled by a document generated outside the scientific literature, chloroquine’s potential in treating COVID-19 is gaining traction in the medical community. 

The drug has a long track record in medicine, having been used since the 1940s as an antimalarial. The modern drug is made from the bark of the Cinchona plant, which was taken as an herbal remedy by indigenous Peruvians four centuries ago to treat fever. And there are some early indications it could work against SARS-CoV-2 infections.

There’s often a huge gap between how it works in the lab cells and how it works in the body.

—Jeremy Rossman, University of Kent

For instance, a study in France published on March 20 in the International Journal of Antimicrobial Agentsdescribed the treatment of 42 patients hospitalized with COVID-19, 26 of whom received a version of chloroquine called hydroxychloroquine and 16 of whom received routine care. Of the 20 patients who took the antimalarial and completed the study, six also received azithromycin, an antibiotic. All six of these patients were free of SARS-CoV-2 by the fifth day post-treatment, while seven of 14 patients who took hydroxychloroquine alone were negative for the virus, and two of 16 control patients were no longer infected.

Small-scale experiments in which chloroquine has been given to COVID-19 patients in China and Australiahave also shown encouraging results as far as shortening the course of the disease.

Larger clinical trials will be necessary to determine how effective the drug is. Researchers at the University of Minnesota have embarked on a study including 1,500 people to probe the drug’s effectiveness further in preventing the development of COVID-19 after people are exposed to SARS-CoV-2. The results could be available in a matter of weeks, Jakub Tolar, the dean of the University of Minnesota Medical School and vice president for clinical affairs, tells Reuters, and might indicate whether it’s worth launching a larger trial.

A small trial of 1,500 people would be a pragmatic step towards verifying the drug’s efficacy, says Jeremy Rossman, a virologist at the University of Kent, who praises the approach. 

A number of other chloroquine experiments on humans are in the works. According to clinicaltrials.gov, researchers at the University of Oxford plan to give it as a prophylactic to 10,000 health care workers and others at high risk of contracting SARS-CoV-2. In Norway, doctors expect to begin administering the drug to hospitalized patients. And in Thailand, clinicians are preparing for a clinical trial comparing various combinations of antivirals, including chloroquine.

Chloroquine’s mechanism of action

If chloroquine is shown to be effective against SARS-CoV-2, it will not be via the same mechanism by which the drug functions as an antimalarial. That’s because malaria is caused not by a virus but by a microparasite of the Plasmodium genus. Chloroquine makes it toxic for the parasite to digest its host’s hemoglobin. 

Chloroquine might have entirely different effects against a virus, such as, for example, disrupting the virus’s ability to enter a cell. 

See “Are We Headed for a New Era of Malaria Drug Resistance?

Nabil Seidah, a molecular biologist at the Montreal Clinical Research Institute (IRCM), and colleagues examined chloroquine’s effect on SARS-CoV back in 2005. Seidah is currently experimenting with drugs including chloroquine as potential SARS-CoV-2 treatments and using material sent to him by pharmaceutical firms.

His 2005 study reported “strong antiviral effects” in animal cells in vitro. Seidah tells The Scientist that the mechanism by which chloroquine disrupts infection by a coronavirus remains unclear.

Chloroquine can raise the pH of endosomes, vesicles inside cells that are hijacked as points of entry by viruses. Endosomes have a slightly acidic pH, which helps facilitate this process. Seidah explains that chloroquine can raise endosomic pH slightly, which prevents fusion and stops the virus from entering the cell. Seidah says chloroquine may also block enzymes involved in the fusion between the virus and lung cells or stymie the viral replication process. 

Whatever the mechanism, Seidah says, it’s likely a combination of drugs of some kind that will, ultimately, be needed to treat COVID-19.

“Chloroquine alone will not solve the problem,” he says.

Rossman says he would expect chloroquine to inhibit SARS-CoV-2 in the lab, based on what is known about its ability to raise endosomic pH. “But there’s often a huge gap between how it works in the lab cells and how it works in the body,” he says.

The drug is potentially dangerous when used at high doses or for prolonged periods. It can cause permanent blindness and even death. Rossman and Seidah agree that larger clinical trials are a must before chloroquine is considered safe and effective as a treatment for COVID-19. 

So yeah it's a treatment not a cure I'm not sure if it is even a treatment. Do we know what this time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, coastal.view said:

i'm hearing what you are saying

but you are usually a bit more direct

 

false profit

so what you are really saying

is he is a bankrupt multiple times ?

 

:towel:

False profit. Well played, coastal. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ryan Strome said:

So yeah it's a treatment not a cure I'm not sure if it is even a treatment. Do we know what this time?

its definitely treatment potential, if you can knock down the virus load then you can cut into the number of severe cases, that would be a huge help. 

 

Its unfortunately that Trump had to talk about it, now people aren't sure about what to think. #trumpeffect 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ryan Strome said:

Well then Superboy I guess what you're saying is just as useless this is the problem with left-wing lunatics like you you always think you are right.

thank you for your thoughtful and detailed response

regarding the situation in nyc

many will benefit from your knowledge and understanding

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

its definitely treatment potential, if you can knock down the virus load then you can cut into the number of severe cases, that would be a huge help. 

 

Its unfortunately that Trump had to talk about it, now people aren't sure about what to think. #trumpeffect 

if this has any real value

i'm sure we will hear about it as soon as that in confirmed

just refer to reliable sources

and avoid misinformation emanating from the house of whiteness down south

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, coastal.view said:

if this has any real value

i'm sure we will hear about it as soon as that in confirmed

just refer to reliable sources

and avoid misinformation emanating from the house of whiteness down south

exactly. I wasn't even thinking about Trump when discussing the WHO studies, thankfully it has nothing to do with that idiot. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, coastal.view said:

thank you for your thoughtful and detailed response

regarding the situation in nyc

many will benefit from your knowledge and understanding

Well I was just using your own stupidity. Not surprised you couldn't understand that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...