New medical data about COVID-19

[ian hacktorp]

 

[Grim Reaper 6]

25 minutes ago, bee said:

 

pic

 

[Grim Reaper 6]

32 minutes ago, hacktorp said:

 

 

[simplybill]

On 7/16/2020 at 9:48 PM, stereologist said:

Find the study and then we can talk.

stereologist:

I emailed Prof. Nahmias, asking for a link to his study. He responded with a link which led to the original study on Sneak Peek. You may need to create a password to enter the site.

This is the abstract of the study:

”Viruses are efficient metabolic engineers that actively rewire host metabolic pathways to support their lifecycle. Charting SARS-CoV-2 induced metabolic changes in lung cells could offer insight into COVID-19 pathogenesis while presenting new therapeutic targets. Here we show that the transcriptional response SARS-CoV-2 in primary lung epithelial cells and biopsies of COVID-19 patients is predominantly metabolic. This transcriptional signature was dominated by changes to lipid metabolism and the induction of IRE1 and PKR pathways of endoplasmic stress in a process regulated by several viral proteins. Transcriptional regulatory analysis of these changes reveals small clusters of transcription factors modulating key enzymes in each pathway. The upregulation of glycolysis and the dysregulation of the citric acid cycle was mediated by NFκB and RELA. While the upregulation of fatty acid and cholesterol synthesis showed a more complex control conditionally modulated by ER-stress activated PPARγ, C/EBP, and PPARα. Viral protein ORF3a appeared to interact with all three pathways suggesting both direct and indirect modulation of host metabolism. Finally, we show that PPARα-agonist fenofibrate reversed the metabolic changes induced by SARS-CoV-2 blocking viral replication. Taken together, our data suggest that elevated lipid metabolism may underlie aspects of COVID-19 pathogenesis, offering new therapeutic avenues in targeting this critical pathway on which the virus relies.“

————————————————————————————

This link should take you directly to the PDF (it’s 27 pages) :

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3650499&download=yes

If you’re unable to access the PDF there, try this one:

https://www.nahmias-lab.com/
 

 

Edited July 19, 2020 by simplybill

[Grim Reaper 6]

23 minutes ago, simplybill said:

stereologist:

I emailed Prof. Nahmias, asking for a link to his study. He responded with a link which led to the original study on Sneak Peek. You may need to create a password to enter the site.

This is the abstract of the study:

”Viruses are efficient metabolic engineers that actively rewire host metabolic pathways to support their lifecycle. Charting SARS-CoV-2 induced metabolic changes in lung cells could offer insight into COVID-19 pathogenesis while presenting new therapeutic targets. Here we show that the transcriptional response SARS-CoV-2 in primary lung epithelial cells and biopsies of COVID-19 patients is predominantly metabolic. This transcriptional signature was dominated by changes to lipid metabolism and the induction of IRE1 and PKR pathways of endoplasmic stress in a process regulated by several viral proteins. Transcriptional regulatory analysis of these changes reveals small clusters of transcription factors modulating key enzymes in each pathway. The upregulation of glycolysis and the dysregulation of the citric acid cycle was mediated by NFκB and RELA. While the upregulation of fatty acid and cholesterol synthesis showed a more complex control conditionally modulated by ER-stress activated PPARγ, C/EBP, and PPARα. Viral protein ORF3a appeared to interact with all three pathways suggesting both direct and indirect modulation of host metabolism. Finally, we show that PPARα-agonist fenofibrate reversed the metabolic changes induced by SARS-CoV-2 blocking viral replication. Taken together, our data suggest that elevated lipid metabolism may underlie aspects of COVID-19 pathogenesis, offering new therapeutic avenues in targeting this critical pathway on which the virus relies.“

————————————————————————————

This link should take you directly to the PDF (it’s 27 pages) :

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3650499&download=yes

If you’re unable to access the PDF there, try this one:

https://www.nahmias-lab.com/
 

 

Thanks for the links Bill, this is some great information and it is easy to open an account.

Thanks again Bill

[stereologist]

A potential drug for coronavirus treatment is being touted in the news in a very  few places. A quick check originally showed little information. Now it is clear that this is an in vitro experiment. Hundeds of other drugs also showed some efficacy in vitro.

https://www.financialexpress.com/lifestyle/health/coronavirus-treatment-researcher-claims-existing-drug-can-downgrade-covid-threat-to-common-cold-leve/2024507/

Quote

A widely used anti-cholesterol drug, fenofibrate, can “downgrade” the danger-level of coronavirus to that of a common cold, a Hebrew University (HU) academic has claimed after testing it on infected human tissue.

bolding mine

This story is way too early to even consider. We have to wait for a clinical trial to even think about this treatment.

[Helen of Annoy]

26 minutes ago, stereologist said:

A potential drug for coronavirus treatment is being touted in the news in a very  few places. A quick check originally showed little information. Now it is clear that this is an in vitro experiment. Hundeds of other drugs also showed some efficacy in vitro.

https://www.financialexpress.com/lifestyle/health/coronavirus-treatment-researcher-claims-existing-drug-can-downgrade-covid-threat-to-common-cold-leve/2024507/

bolding mine

This story is way too early to even consider. We have to wait for a clinical trial to even think about this treatment.

 Nearly everything works in vitro. Treating a patient with intention to have them survive the treatment is something completely else. (The damn hydroxychloroquine works in vitro too, but the dosage that would actually work against the virus in human body is just too high.)

 

Reminds me of this.   

 

[simplybill]

1 hour ago, stereologist said:

This story is way too early to even consider. We have to wait for a clinical trial to even think about this treatment.

 

1 hour ago, Helen of Annoy said:

Treating a patient with intention to have them survive the treatment is something completely else.

The study caught my attention because of early observations by researchers that obesity and diabetes were risk factors that contributed to a higher death rate among patients with those conditions (high cholesterol often accompanies obesity due to poor diet choices). This quote in particular was interesting to me:

“This new understanding of SARS CoV-2 may help explain why patients with high blood sugar and cholesterol levels are often at a particularly high risk to develop COVID-19,” they noted.“
 

While it may be years before a vaccine is marketable, it’s not too early to take preventative measures to reduce one’s susceptibility to acquiring the virus. I personally interpreted the findings of the study as a precautionary suggestion to reduce one’s cholesterol levels and lower the risk of diabetes by adjusting one’s diet and increasing one’s exercise level. These were actually goals that I set for myself last year, following my annual physical. My doctor ‘threatened’ to put me on statins and pre-diabetic meds. I took that as a personal challenge. (I did achieve my goals, by the way. I even wrote a blog post on UM because I was so excited seeing the results of this year’s physical). 

So rather than ignoring the study until all clinical tests are concluded, I would urge people to see the findings of the study as another reason to pursue a healthy lifestyle.

 

[Helen of Annoy]

18 minutes ago, simplybill said:

 

The study caught my attention because of early observations by researchers that obesity and diabetes were risk factors that contributed to a higher death rate among patients with those conditions (high cholesterol often accompanies obesity due to poor diet choices). This quote in particular was interesting to me:

“This new understanding of SARS CoV-2 may help explain why patients with high blood sugar and cholesterol levels are often at a particularly high risk to develop COVID-19,” they noted.“
 

While it may be years before a vaccine is marketable, it’s not too early to take preventative measures to reduce one’s susceptibility to acquiring the virus. I personally interpreted the findings of the study as a precautionary suggestion to reduce one’s cholesterol levels and lower the risk of diabetes by adjusting one’s diet and increasing one’s exercise level. These were actually goals that I set for myself last year, following my annual physical. My doctor ‘threatened’ to put me on statins and pre-diabetic meds. I took that as a personal challenge. (I did achieve my goals, by the way. I even wrote a blog post on UM because I was so excited seeing the results of this year’s physical). 

So rather than ignoring the study until all clinical tests are concluded, I would urge people to see the findings of the study as another reason to pursue a healthy lifestyle.

 

Healthy lifestyle can only be good, absolutely. Unless the frustration from pursuing it wrecks you  In my opinion, everything in moderation - even the moderation itself   

To be honest, good health and fitness make it more likely that your body will fight any sort of injury or infection with more success, but they don't miraculously protect from infectious diseases (I know, it wasn't your point either).

We need an actual therapy that kills this virus without killing the patient. Specific therapy that would give more chances for people with high blood sugar and cholesterol are certainly very much needed, but it doesn't kill or incapacitate the virus itself. It's good news there are ideas on how to help people with one specific set of chronic problems, but it won't work against the disease itself and on every patient. This is just my opinion, of course, may they prove me wrong, the sooner the better. 

[stereologist]

19 minutes ago, simplybill said:

 

The study caught my attention because of early observations by researchers that obesity and diabetes were risk factors that contributed to a higher death rate among patients with those conditions (high cholesterol often accompanies obesity due to poor diet choices). This quote in particular was interesting to me:

“This new understanding of SARS CoV-2 may help explain why patients with high blood sugar and cholesterol levels are often at a particularly high risk to develop COVID-19,” they noted.“
 

While it may be years before a vaccine is marketable, it’s not too early to take preventative measures to reduce one’s susceptibility to acquiring the virus. I personally interpreted the findings of the study as a precautionary suggestion to reduce one’s cholesterol levels and lower the risk of diabetes by adjusting one’s diet and increasing one’s exercise level. These were actually goals that I set for myself last year, following my annual physical. My doctor ‘threatened’ to put me on statins and pre-diabetic meds. I took that as a personal challenge. (I did achieve my goals, by the way. I even wrote a blog post on UM because I was so excited seeing the results of this year’s physical). 

So rather than ignoring the study until all clinical tests are concluded, I would urge people to see the findings of the study as another reason to pursue a healthy lifestyle.

 

Congratulations on making positive decisions for your health.

This is a new virus with many facets that have perplexed researchers. As we learn more about it we find there are ways in which we can possibly deal with infections in better ways.

What I thought was a bit odd was the inference that what is seen in vitro translates to in vivo. That is not how it usually turns out.

[+Desertrat56]

21 hours ago, Helen of Annoy said:

Healthy lifestyle can only be good, absolutely. Unless the frustration from pursuing it wrecks you  In my opinion, everything in moderation - even the moderation itself   

To be honest, good health and fitness make it more likely that your body will fight any sort of injury or infection with more success, but they don't miraculously protect from infectious diseases (I know, it wasn't your point either).

We need an actual therapy that kills this virus without killing the patient. Specific therapy that would give more chances for people with high blood sugar and cholesterol are certainly very much needed, but it doesn't kill or incapacitate the virus itself. It's good news there are ideas on how to help people with one specific set of chronic problems, but it won't work against the disease itself and on every patient. This is just my opinion, of course, may they prove me wrong, the sooner the better. 

That's not how virus' work.  The body has to create anti-bodies that kill the virus, no drug will do that.  So the research for the vaccine, which will trigger the body to create the correct anti-bodies is the way to go.  In the meantime the drugs that help (actually help) the person's ability to breathe (like asthma steroids) and anything that boosts and supports the person's immune system, which is dependent on the individual's needs, is the best therapy there is.

[L.A.T.1961]

Southampton, UK-based Synairgen has announced positive results from a clinical trial of SNG001, its wholly-owned inhaled formulation of interferon beta, in hospitalised COVID-19 patients.

The risk of developing severe disease (requiring ventilation or resulting in death) during the treatment period (day one to day 16) was significantly cut by 79% for patients receiving SNG001 compared to patients who received placebo.

http://www.pharmatimes.com/news/synairgens_sng001_shows_strong_promise_in_covid-19_trial_1345119

[+Desertrat56]

6 minutes ago, L.A.T.1961 said:

Southampton, UK-based Synairgen has announced positive results from a clinical trial of SNG001, its wholly-owned inhaled formulation of interferon beta, in hospitalised COVID-19 patients.

The risk of developing severe disease (requiring ventilation or resulting in death) during the treatment period (day one to day 16) was significantly cut by 79% for patients receiving SNG001 compared to patients who received placebo.

http://www.pharmatimes.com/news/synairgens_sng001_shows_strong_promise_in_covid-19_trial_1345119

This one at least is addressing actual virus response.  The first one mentioned besides the vaccines that makes sense.

[Helen of Annoy]

25 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

That's not how virus' work.  The body has to create anti-bodies that kill the virus, no drug will do that.  So the research for the vaccine, which will trigger the body to create the correct anti-bodies is the way to go.  In the meantime the drugs that help (actually help) the person's ability to breathe (like asthma steroids) and anything that boosts and supports the person's immune system, which is dependent on the individual's needs, is the best therapy there is.

There are drugs that can in fact kill some viruses. Unlike bacteria, viruses are harder to kill or we simply didn't find the ways to do that. But it's not unrealistic to search for anti-viral therapy for SARS-2. Or at least therapies that will help bodies fight the symptoms if not the cause of the disease itself.  

Anti-bodies are certainly the way to go, and from what I was reading lately, there's good chance T-cells that "remember" SARS-2 are lasting, though anti-bodies may not be present, so the immunity should be possible. 

Yes, steroids are used and they're working, to some extent. There's a reason why they're not trumpeted as some sort of definitive cure - they're not the definitive cure and they too come with a bag of side-effects. 

The best therapy would be anti-viral that kills SARS-2 dead. Combined with existing vaccine. I know, I know... but one can dream, right?  

[+Desertrat56]

15 minutes ago, Helen of Annoy said:

There are drugs that can in fact kill some viruses. Unlike bacteria, viruses are harder to kill or we simply didn't find the ways to do that. But it's not unrealistic to search for anti-viral therapy for SARS-2. Or at least therapies that will help bodies fight the symptoms if not the cause of the disease itself.  

Anti-bodies are certainly the way to go, and from what I was reading lately, there's good chance T-cells that "remember" SARS-2 are lasting, though anti-bodies may not be present, so the immunity should be possible. 

Yes, steroids are used and they're working, to some extent. There's a reason why they're not trumpeted as some sort of definitive cure - they're not the definitive cure and they too come with a bag of side-effects. 

The best therapy would be anti-viral that kills SARS-2 dead. Combined with existing vaccine. I know, I know... but one can dream, right?  

Then Senarigen mentioned by L.A. T.1961 is the first mention I have seen of anyone developing an interferon drug, which is what you are talking about.  And there are a lot mentioned in this thread like HQC that are NOT cures, though they are touted as such and it only makes sense to me that this is a red herring or some kind of manipulation to get people who don't understand thinking the virus can be "cured" with some existing drug, which you know is not the case.  I suspect someone is making money somehow off of these invalid claims.

Edited July 20, 2020 by Desertrat56

[Helen of Annoy]

18 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

Then Senarigen mentioned by L.A. T.1961 is the first mention I have seen of anyone developing an interferon drug, which is what you are talking about.  And there are a lot mentioned in this thread like HQC that are NOT cures, though they are touted as such and it only makes sense to me that this is a red herring or some kind of manipulation to get people who don't understand thinking the virus can be "cured" with some existing drug, which you know is not the case.  I suspect someone is making money somehow off of these invalid claims.

Interferon beta is a steroid, it obviously does help with breathing issues, but it doesn't kill the bug. 

It's absolutely great that it helps people stay alive, but it would be even better if there was a substance to kick the virus out the body completely, so it doesn't flare up later (it seems this b****** is doing that) and/or cause inflammation in other organs.  

Steroids do wonders but in prolonged use they also do a lot of damage that cannot be repaired. Fortunately, SARS-2 only requires short time therapy. Relatively short time, if it doesn't pop back up. Etc. 

 

HQC is snake oil, to sum my opinion on it up. I think I posted today, in some other thread, the official European Medicines Agency reminder of deadly serious HQC side-effects. It's not a substance that should be advertised recklessly, especially since according to EMA the benefits in COVID-19 patients were not proven.   

 

[L.A.T.1961]

4 minutes ago, Helen of Annoy said:

Interferon beta is a steroid, it obviously does help with breathing issues, but it doesn't kill the bug. 

It's absolutely great that it helps people stay alive, but it would be even better if there was a substance to kick the virus out the body completely, so it doesn't flare up later (it seems this b****** is doing that) and/or cause inflammation in other organs.  

Steroids do wonders but in prolonged use they also do a lot of damage that cannot be repaired. Fortunately, SARS-2 only requires short time therapy. Relatively short time, if it doesn't pop back up. Etc. 

 

HQC is snake oil, to sum my opinion on it up. I think I posted today, in some other thread, the official European Medicines Agency reminder of deadly serious HQC side-effects. It's not a substance that should be advertised recklessly, especially since according to EMA the benefits in COVID-19 patients were not proven.   

 

Even thought the Interferon beta does not kill the virus if the patient survives then they will have immunity for a period. 

IF 79% effective it is likely as good as an inoculation shot for preserving life? 

[+Desertrat56]

1 minute ago, L.A.T.1961 said:

Even thought the Interferon beta does not kill the virus if the patient survives then they will have immunity for a period. 

IF 79% effective it is likely as good as an inoculation shot for preserving life? 

No, not really because like Helen pointed out, steroids have side effects.  It can be good short term, like it is for any other option, to keep the patient alive long enough for the immune system to take over, but like I said before, there is no drug that can kill a virus in a human body, the body has to do that.  You can kill virus' all day long in vitro (in a pitre dish) but that never translates to a drug that will work in the body without killing the body as well (like chlorine bleach, you don't want to drink that or shoot it into your body with a hypodermic).

The interferon research is more useful than any of the others though, except creating an actual vaccine, in my opinion.

[Helen of Annoy]

1 hour ago, L.A.T.1961 said:

Even thought the Interferon beta does not kill the virus if the patient survives then they will have immunity for a period. 

IF 79% effective it is likely as good as an inoculation shot for preserving life? 

Not as good as the inoculation, because inoculation would prevent the disease entirely. This therapy is and will likely be meant only for people who are already in the intensive care, which means they suffered pain, fear, stress and physical damage. Interferon will help a lot of them survive, but it won't restore their health.

And while almost 80% is admirable, there're still 20% of patients who would want to live too. 

Nothing beats vaccine, in other words. 

 

1 hour ago, Desertrat56 said:

No, not really because like Helen pointed out, steroids have side effects.  It can be good short term, like it is for any other option, to keep the patient alive long enough for the immune system to take over, but like I said before, there is no drug that can kill a virus in a human body, the body has to do that.  You can kill virus' all day long in vitro (in a pitre dish) but that never translates to a drug that will work in the body without killing the body as well (like chlorine bleach, you don't want to drink that or shoot it into your body with a hypodermic).

The interferon research is more useful than any of the others though, except creating an actual vaccine, in my opinion.

Yes, the vaccine is the best solution, because we skip the getting ill from that particular disease part. 

Since it's always possible that not everyone will be inoculated, even if the vaccine is available, having decent therapies is extremely important. 

And we don't know yet if SARS-2 has any unpleasant surprises in years that follow the initial infection. There are plenty of viruses that keep living in us after the initial symptoms are gone, until the day we die, and wait for their chance to pop back up with different set of symptoms. 

[stereologist]

https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/934154?src=WNL_trdalrt_200721_MSCPEDIT&uac=389284HY&impID=2469368&faf=1

Quote

While a wide range of symptoms can accompany the coronavirus, the CDC says a large majority of patients in a recent study exhibited one of three symptoms: fever, cough, and shortness of breath.

The CDC study published on Thursday involved 164 people in 16 states who had confirmed cases of the coronavirus between January 14 and April 4.

Researchers found that 96% of patients had a fever, cough, or shortness of breath. Around 45% had all three of those symptoms.

 

The most common symptom was cough (84%) followed by fever (80%).

 

[atalante]

A new study says about 1 in 5 previously healthy young adults have lingering effects of covid-19.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6930e1.htm?s_cid=mm6930e1_w

[SHaYap]

Rumors finally hits home... 

Quote

https://www.cnn.com › health

We're only just beginning to learn how the coronavirus affects ...

 

1:11

2 days ago · We're only just beginning to learn how Covid-19 affects the brain. By Dr. Minali Nigam ...

 

~

https://www.nst.com.my › world

Brain problems linked to even mild Covid-19 infections: Study

8 Jul 2020 · PARIS: Potentially fatal Covid-19 complications in the ... "Doctors need to be aware of possible neurological effects, as early diagnosis can improve patient outcomes.".

 

https://www.france24.com › 20...

How Covid-19 can damage the brain - France 24

11 Jul 2020 · Not only does Covid-19 damage the lungs, heart and kidneys, it can also cause ... The study also called for further investigations into the effects of Covid-19 on the brain.

 

~

www.sciencemag.org

From 'brain fog' to heart damage, COVID-19's lingering ...

15 hours ago · Some COVID-19 survivors are still sick months later. ... Despite the novelty of SARS-CoV-2, its long-term effects have precedents: Infections with other pathogens are ...

 

~

~

[stereologist]

This is the problem we are all facing as people spread VD, viral disinformation, about the pandemic.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/vaccine-expert-coronavirus-predition_n_5f2e7be5c5b6b9cff7f256ea

Quote

Hotez, who has long rejected and contested the anti-vaccine movement, noted how Russian intelligence officers have reportedly been part of a disinformation campaign to sow doubt about vaccines in development for the virus.

Anti-science campaigners were fueling further deaths with their stances against social distancing and the wearing of face masks to mitigate its spread, Hotez argued.

He warned the White House will step up its attacks on scientists, as it did with Dr. Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, who has countered the government’s narrative on the crisis.

What  this VD is doing is killing people. VD is being spread from the top down. It is the president of the US and the presidents of other countries attacking science, and attacking the basic strategies to stop the pandemic.

Intelligence reports have shown it is coming from within each of the affected countries and sometimes from external agents.

 

Edited August 10, 2020 by stereologist

[stereologist]

There seems to be more research going into AKI, acute kidney injury, due to COVID-19.

https://www.medscape.org/viewarticle/934315?src=mkm_driv_cust_mscpedu_covid_200812-934315-aki-link&faf=1&uac=389284HY

Quote

The largest study to date focusing on AKI finds high rates in persons hospitalized with COVID-19, with poor outcomes. National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) scientists call for more research to better understand the phenomenon.

As a new report shows that more than a third of US patients hospitalized with COVID-19 developed AKI and nearly 15% of these needed dialysis, experts in the field are calling for more robust research into multiple aspects of this increasingly important issue.

Among 5449 patients admitted to 13 Northwell Health New York-based hospitals between March and April, 36.6% (1993) of them developed AKI.

Acute kidney injury was strongly linked to the occurrence of respiratory failure and was rarely a severe disease among patients who did not require ventilation: The rate of kidney injury was 89.7% among ventilated patients compared with 21.7% among other patients.

Acute kidney injury in COVID-19 was also linked to poor prognosis: 35% of persons who developed AKI had died by time of publication.

 

[SHaYap]

New strain isolated "D164G"

Ten times more contagious... 

Quote

https://www.cell.com › cell › pdf

Tracking Changes in SARS-CoV-2 Spike: Evidence that ... - Cell Press

by B Korber · Cited by 55

Tracking Changes in SARS-CoV-2 Spike: Evidence that D614G Increases. Infectivity of the COVID-19 Virus. Bette Korber,1,2,10,* Will M.

 

https://www.news-medical.net › ...

D614G Mutation - News Medical

30 Jul 2020 · In the case of a novel coronavirus, D614G mutation in the viral ... Although there is no evidence showing that D614G mutation is associated with increased COVID -19 ...

 

---

https://www.news-medical.net › ...

Study reveals changes in transmissibility of SARS-CoV-2 due ...

5 Aug 2020 · ... manner – but without higher coronavirus disease (COVID-19) mortality rates. ... Study reveals changes in transmissibility of SARS-CoV-2 due to D614G spike mutation.

 

https://www.who.int › volumesPDF

Variant analysis of SARS-CoV-2 genomes - World Health ...

by T Koyama · 2020 · Cited by 21 · Related articles

about 20% of patients develop severe COVID-19 requiring ... of the SARS-CoV-2 genome exist and that the D614G clade has become the most ... investigated mutations within the recep-.

~