Thread on testing & treatment research for COVID-19
- Thread starter dailybuck777
- Start date
Science | AAAS
www.sciencemag.org
was this just people in the FDA and Euro FDA hoping that Remedesivir would work because they wanted to hope something works against Covid as the outlook was so bleak. Or is the darker side that a whole lot of people profited from making this drug 'approved' and such they ram rodded it through for profit.
A variation of the first. The attitude is there is nothing else, the drug isn't demonstrably harmful, so it's better than nothing (albeit not much). In a less dire situation, remdesivir would not have been approved.
i get that opinion also. there were a few studies that showed it did a little something (but appears very little). The issue i have a little is that it appears the Remdesivir studies were not much conclusive than the HCQ studies and yet massive journal articles and all out attacks on HCQ and yet everybody was super positive about Redesevir. And when you look at some of the initial data studies, there was hardly any difference between the two of them. Which makes me think that $$$ was behind the huge marketing campaigns against HCQ and for Resmevider.
Can't comment on the financial considerations of the decisions. If there were any, it's not reflected in the performance of GILD's stock price.
Then primary differences between HCQ and remdesivir are: the remdesivir studies were forward looking, controlled, double-blind, whereas those of HCQ were observational; and remdesivir has thusfar not demonstrated any significant risk while HCQ has been known to be deadly in enough circumstance.
Taiwan Counts 200th Day Of No New Local Coronavirus Infections—Here’s How They Did It
The country of more than 23 million people has only recorded 550 infections since the start of the pandemic.
www.forbes.com
not yet peer reviewed
www.birmingham.ac.uk
Cellular immunity to SARS-CoV-2 found at six months in non-hospitalised individuals - University of Birmingham
Cellular (T cell) immunity against SARS-CoV-2 is likely to be present within most adults six months after primary infection, a new pre-print from the UK Coronavirus Immunology Consortium (UK-CIC) suggests.
not yet peer reviewed
Cellular immunity to SARS-CoV-2 found at six months in non-hospitalised individuals - University of Birmingham
Cellular (T cell) immunity against SARS-CoV-2 is likely to be present within most adults six months after primary infection, a new pre-print from the UK Coronavirus Immunology Consortium (UK-CIC) suggests.
Other studies have found SARS T-cell immunity still going strong 17 years later.
Based on everything I have seen and read, my estimate is 25-35% of people have natural immunity. Combine with another 25-40% of people being asymptomatic and I think easily over 50-65% of population this has zero effect on.
And now combine that with the millions who have already had it with limited effect.
