FabSwingers.com forum: Israeli hospital claims may have found cure for COVID-19

By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago

https://www.ynetnews.com/health_science/article/rJoYyaYeO

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *atnip make me purrWoman
over a year ago

Reading

That's potentially great news

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago

"That's potentially great news"

It certainly is.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *inky_couple2020Couple
over a year ago

North West

Interesting. CD24 is a cytokine involved in modulating B cell response. B cells are the adaptive immune cells responsible for antibody production. Makes sense that giving a drug that mimics or boosts CD24 (I'm not clear which it is) will also boost antibody production and therefore more rapid clearance of the infection.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *mmabluTV/TS
over a year ago

upton wirral

Seen this sounds amazing Boris order some now

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

This is a very interesting development. Whose friendly with Israel on the world stage?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *inky_couple2020Couple
over a year ago

North West

"This is a very interesting development. Whose friendly with Israel on the world stage?"

It's not an Israeli specific invention. Merck, OncoImmune and others have been investigating this compound. I think the Israelis have just generated a good set of data in widespread trials.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The best cure is just turn the TV off

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *inky_couple2020Couple
over a year ago

North West

I'm sure switching the TV off would have cured my recently deceased family, yes. Silly me

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central

Good preliminary news. I hope that a research drug can be put through extensive clinical trials and be provided freely around the world, should published results demonstrate safety and efficacy.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"The best cure is just turn the TV off "

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ove2pleaseseukMan
over a year ago

Hastings

"The best cure is just turn the TV off "

Just getting over covid but don't have tv how dose that work ?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *agneto.Man
over a year ago

Bham

"The best cure is just turn the TV off "

This method is moving to clinical trials next week apparently. Don't hold out much hope.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ungblackbullMan
over a year ago

scotland

"Seen this sounds amazing Boris order some now"

Your mate Boris doesn't actually order stuff...In fact, not sure what the buffoon actually does.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 07/02/21 14:21:49]

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Is this similar to what they've been using in the UK with the Anti-inflammatory drugs or is this totally different?

I know the Anti-inflammatory drugs they have been using have had really high success rates in reducing severities of symptoms in severely unwell patients.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Seen this sounds amazing Boris order some now"

He'll only be knocked if he does and I don't actually think he's a member on here

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Interesting. CD24 is a cytokine involved in modulating B cell response. B cells are the adaptive immune cells responsible for antibody production. Makes sense that giving a drug that mimics or boosts CD24 (I'm not clear which it is) will also boost antibody production and therefore more rapid clearance of the infection."

I have to confess to being out of my depth here. How different is this compound to Interferon beta in the way that it works? I may be comparing apples and pears here, so apologies in advance if it’s a daft question.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ealthy_and_HungMan
over a year ago

Princes Risborough, Luasanne, Alderney

"Your mate Boris doesn't actually order stuff...In fact, not sure what the buffoon actually does."

nor does he it appears

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ir-spunk-alotMan
over a year ago

Southern England

Im sure i read about Israeli scientists have found a cure for cancer many years ago.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *riskynriskyCouple
over a year ago

Essex.

"Seen this sounds amazing Boris order some now

Your mate Boris doesn't actually order stuff...In fact, not sure what the buffoon actually does."

I know, if only we had Sturgeon...

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ch WellMan
over a year ago

Scotland

"Seen this sounds amazing Boris order some now

Your mate Boris doesn't actually order stuff...In fact, not sure what the buffoon actually does.

I know, if only we had Sturgeon...

Feel free to take her, please

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"I'm sure switching the TV off would have cured my recently deceased family, yes. Silly me

"
Because they would have died of the flu like my mother and 5 more in her care home did in 2017

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *inky_couple2020Couple
over a year ago

North West

"I'm sure switching the TV off would have cured my recently deceased family, yes. Silly me

Because they would have died of the flu like my mother and 5 more in her care home did in 2017 "

Incorrect. They would have died from infection with the SARS-CoV-2 virus, as evidenced by diagnosis and symptoms.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *inky_couple2020Couple
over a year ago

North West

Interferons are chemicals which help regulate the various other inflammatory compounds. CD compounds are found on the surfaces of various cell types, including cells involved in various different aspects of the immune system (remembering that the immune system also is involved in the normal cell regulatory process, not just in dealing with infection). CD compounds on cells are specific to the specific cell of and so different immune cells will display different CD compounds, depending on its role.

CD-24 and Interferon are not the same, but may potentially influence each other or have involvement in terms of regulation.

Also to answer Lorna, CD24 is not specifically an anti inflammatory molecule, no. It helps stimulate the B cell response so might help boost antibodies against the infection at an earlier stage, if given early in the disease. It takes many days to to naturally mount a B cell response, especially to a novel infection that the patient will have no or little prior exposure to.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

CD-24 and Interferon are not the same, but may potentially influence each other or have involvement in terms of regulation.

Thats intresting thanks.

As you know we think the fact that someone very close to us Didn't get sick with covid because they had that medication as routine as part of another condition so this all makes a bit more sense to me now.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Seen this sounds amazing Boris order some now

Your mate Boris doesn't actually order stuff...In fact, not sure what the buffoon actually does."

Heads the administration that gets the second greatest percentage of a country’s population vaccinated in world, as of 6th February.

How terrible of him.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *naswingdressWoman
over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

"Seen this sounds amazing Boris order some now

Your mate Boris doesn't actually order stuff...In fact, not sure what the buffoon actually does.

Heads the administration that gets the second greatest percentage of a country’s population partially vaccinated in world, in an unauthorised experiment, with the potential for vaccine evading variants, as of 6th February.

How terrible of him.

Fixed it for you.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Seen this sounds amazing Boris order some now

Your mate Boris doesn't actually order stuff...In fact, not sure what the buffoon actually does.

How terrible of him.

Fixed it for you."

And natural viral mutations are his fault how, exactly?

Every administration and every vaccine developer is facing that same issue and it is apolitical.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *naswingdressWoman
over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

"Seen this sounds amazing Boris order some now

Your mate Boris doesn't actually order stuff...In fact, not sure what the buffoon actually does.

How terrible of him.

Fixed it for you.

And natural viral mutations are his fault how, exactly?

Every administration and every vaccine developer is facing that same issue and it is apolitical.

He could follow the directions of the vaccinations. One of the risks of not doing so may be selection of virus that evades the vaccine.

And less spread means less mutations, by definition. If he hadn't fucked up many, many times, B117 might not have come up in Kent.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *asIsaCouple
over a year ago

harrow

"Seen this sounds amazing Boris order some now

Your mate Boris doesn't actually order stuff...In fact, not sure what the buffoon actually does.

How terrible of him.

Fixed it for you.

And natural viral mutations are his fault how, exactly?

Every administration and every vaccine developer is facing that same issue and it is apolitical.

He could follow the directions of the vaccinations. One of the risks of not doing so may be selection of virus that evades the vaccine.

And less spread means less mutations, by definition. If he hadn't fucked up many, many times, B117 might not have come up in Kent."

What a lot of total nonsense !

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *naswingdressWoman
over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

"Seen this sounds amazing Boris order some now

Your mate Boris doesn't actually order stuff...In fact, not sure what the buffoon actually does.

How terrible of him.

Fixed it for you.

And natural viral mutations are his fault how, exactly?

Every administration and every vaccine developer is facing that same issue and it is apolitical.

He could follow the directions of the vaccinations. One of the risks of not doing so may be selection of virus that evades the vaccine.

And less spread means less mutations, by definition. If he hadn't fucked up many, many times, B117 might not have come up in Kent.

What a lot of total nonsense ! "

What's incorrect about what I've said, please?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The more people vaccinated even with a single dose will provide greater herd immunity. The greater immunity will reduce the spread. The lesser the spread the lesser the chance of the virus mutations.

At least that’s what I read.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Seen this sounds amazing Boris order some now

Your mate Boris doesn't actually order stuff...In fact, not sure what the buffoon actually does.

How terrible of him.

Fixed it for you.

And natural viral mutations are his fault how, exactly?

Every administration and every vaccine developer is facing that same issue and it is apolitical.

He could follow the directions of the vaccinations. One of the risks of not doing so may be selection of virus that evades the vaccine.

And less spread means less mutations, by definition. If he hadn't fucked up many, many times, B117 might not have come up in Kent."

And one of the risks of sticking to the advised vaccination schedule may have meant worse spread since the programme began, with one variant or another, of domestic origin or not, being part of that with consequences we don’t know.

There’s risk either way. Stick to the schedule and fewer but more vulnerable get a high level of protection against most variants. Break the schedule to get some level of protection to a much greater number and potentially limit the spread of most variants. It’s not a decision I’d want to make.

Maybe the Kent variant wouldn’t have appeared; maybe it still would have? Is there any solid data to prove either? If not, what justifies the supposition that ‘Boris fucked up’ on that count? And we’d still have got SA and Brazilian variants regardless.

I’m not for a second suggesting he’s nailed every decision, it obvious he hasn’t; I just think it’s a bit hair-trigger to dismiss something, albeit contrary to guidelines, without firm evidence. I believe WHO may also have admitted there could be merit in it, although I only caught the headline so the actual story may differ a little.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *naswingdressWoman
over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

That's a bit of a backtrack from "greatest vaccination levels", and I'll take it.

If we'd closed the borders last year, the UK wouldn't have B117 or likely any others, or if we did we could knock it out flat and quickly. Tens of thousands would still be alive.

Scrambling to find something where if you squint at it, looks like a success, is tiresome.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

That statement still stands; as a percentage, only Israel have done better. Nothing backtracked at all, but good effort at trying claim a victory that wasn’t there.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *naswingdressWoman
over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

"That statement still stands; as a percentage, only Israel have done better. Nothing backtracked at all, but good effort at trying claim a victory that wasn’t there."

The only victory I care about is that people stop dying, the NHS stop being overwhelmed, and the economy stop being trashed (and all the other knock on effects).

But it is galling that some are so blinded that they think that this catastrophe is remedied by a huge unauthorised experiment (which may have benefits but also may be a monumental mistake).

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *exybreeksMan
over a year ago

East Calder

Fingers crossed! Sample size of 5 isn't exactly a good population to draw any conclusions from but further testing will come.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Sentiments which I share and which I expect every normal person does too.

But each of those is a roll of the dice.

If fewer deaths is the goal, some form of protection as fast as possible for more people would seem better than greater protection for a smaller number.

Will that stop pressure on the NHS? Who can tell? Maybe there’d be fewer critical cases? Maybe semi-protection in conjunction with new variants would mean more hospital-worthy but non-critical cases and no alleviation in pressure would occur.

It just comes down a choice with no concrete risk mitigation on either side.

I don’t disagree that borders were probably open too long, but we’re far from unique in that respect. Trying not to tank the economy is important, as you rightly say, but shutting the door hard and fast would undoubtedly hit it. Acting fast doesn’t necessarily equate to recovering fast or avoiding a long economic low; acting slowly doesn’t equate to adaptation to conditions or lessening of impact. There’s no having the cake and eating it.

I don’t think there’s any argument that some aspects couldn’t have been better, but what were don’t have is the knowledge of what the trade-offs would have been had some decisions been made sooner or alternative ones made instead.

We can look to other countries but with their own nuances, we can’t take it as gospel their choices would have worked either better or worse overall here.....not with absolute certainty.

As comparatively good or bad it is, all we can do is play the hand we have and with the bias of evidence so far leaning more towards acting sooner rather than later, risks as they are, it would seem prudent to me to take the ‘experiment’ rather than wait an undetermined amount of time for what may end up being diminishing returns on confirmation.

This might seem like a chapter-and-verse nitpick, but that’s not the spirit it’s done in. This whole situation is a million shades of grey in its complexity; I guess I feel it too often gets boiled down, albeit understandably, to black and white....which misses the picture. I do object to the insinuation I’m blinded, but if that’s your opinion then I will respect its yours to have.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Fingers crossed! Sample size of 5 isn't exactly a good population to draw any conclusions from but further testing will come."

Where was the sample size, five? If you’re referring to the treatment in Israel, 30 patients were treated with the compound.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ob198XaMan
over a year ago

teleford

"The best cure is just turn the TV off "

Some folk need a tv dropped on their head, night knock some sense into them

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *exybreeksMan
over a year ago

East Calder

"Fingers crossed! Sample size of 5 isn't exactly a good population to draw any conclusions from but further testing will come.

Where was the sample size, five? If you’re referring to the treatment in Israel, 30 patients were treated with the compound. "

I must have misread something, still sample size of 30 is still rubbish. Even L'Oréal uses about 80 people for its sample

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Fingers crossed! Sample size of 5 isn't exactly a good population to draw any conclusions from but further testing will come.

Where was the sample size, five? If you’re referring to the treatment in Israel, 30 patients were treated with the compound.

I must have misread something, still sample size of 30 is still rubbish. Even L'Oréal uses about 80 people for its sample"

Even so, the results are even better than the claims made by L’Oréal!! Not sure of the circumstances that brought about this particular mini-trial, but I know it was only allowed to last for 5 days, possibly (and I’m speculating here) because they needed to be able to try something more mainstream to save the lives of the 30 if this particular treatment wasn’t effective.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *inky_couple2020Couple
over a year ago

North West

It was a phase I clinical trial. They're only ever carried out on very small numbers. Any such treatment has the potential to cause as many problems as it solves - any immune modulator can quite easily cause serious issues. All drugs in phase I are given to a small and very controlled group.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago

"The best cure is just turn the TV off "

Wow.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

Post new Message to Thread