Jump to content
45Doll

NIH on Chloroquine with... SARS in 2005?

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, USRifle30Cal said:

Lol, I am not confused in the slightest....

The problem however is the person that thinks they are the smartest person in the room - far too often isn't - even though they think and pontificate like they are. 

Find a mirror, go stand in front of it look at your reflection and read the above statement.

 

From a johns hopkins white paper....

SARS-CoV-2 Genetics Updated April 16, 2020 Key Findings for Public Health •

The outbreak was initiated from either a single introduction into humans or very few animal-to-human transmission events. •

SARS-CoV-1 and SARS-CoV-2 use the same cellular receptor, ACE2, which could be used as a starting point for creating therapeutics for SARS-CoV-2. Background Coronaviruses, including the pneumonia-causing novel coronavirus currently known as SARS-CoV-2, are enveloped, nonsegmented, positive-sense RNA viruses. Coronavirus genomes have some of the largest genomes among RNA viruses, with approximately 25-32 kilobases.1 The typical CoV genome includes a 5’-cap, 5’-untranslated region (UTR), open reading frames, a 3’-UTR, and 3’-poly(A) tail. The first two thirds of the genome typically codes for nonstructural proteins from 2 open reading frames that form the replicase complex. The last third of the genome encodes primarily structural proteins.2 There are 4 conserved structural proteins across CoVs: the spike (S) protein, membrane (M) protein, envelope (E) protein, and nucleocapsid (N) protein.1 The S protein is responsible for binding to host cell receptors and viral entry to host cells. The M, E, and N proteins are part of the nucleocapsid of viral particles. SARS-CoV-2 Naming In a paper published early in the pandemic,3 viral sequences collected from the earliest patients were assessed and compared to known viral sequences. Sequence analysis of 11 samples found that SARS-CoV-2 is in the same species as SARS-CoV; the 2 viruses are 94.6% similar in amino acid sequence (80% nucleotide sequence similarity) across the genome.3 However, other studies from early in the outbreak do not consider the viruses to be the same species, as they differ by more than 10% in the replicase genes.4 In February, the Coronavirus Study Group (CSG) of the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses officially named the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2. The CSG analyzed viral genomes from several patients and assessed phylogenetic (evolutionary) relationships between the new virus and known coronaviruses. The committee found that the genome of viruses isolated from patients was similar enough to SARS genomes to be considered a variant of SARS, not an entirely novel virus. While the clinical presentation, epidemiologic patterns, and host range of SARS-CoV-2 may differ from the original SARS-CoV, it is the genetic similarity between the 2 viruses that is used to conclude they are the same species. For this reason, the CSG has named SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2 as variants of the species known as Severe acute respiratory syndrome– related coronaviruses. The name SARS-CoV-2 is distinct from the name of the disease, which the WHO has officially designated COVID-19.

(end)

Given the fact that they are so closely related and share quite a lot, while genetically they are related they are different to a degree.

Given that HC and C, were considered for sars-cov, it is not unreasonable to think you couldn't apply it to sars-cov2.

Additionally, usage of it as a last resort is not the place to use it, some have determined.  It has better results when used earlier...

By then clotting is tje major cause of organ failure, or so has been reported.

Stop being intentionally obtuse..... and a dolt.

I work with young folks like you daily, and they far often than not make asses of themselves.  No matter how much paper you hang or letters you place after your name, it cannot give you common sense.

Now go find some blocks and play, adults are speaking 

Stop pretending like you understand what they are talking about. You don't.

94.6% similar in DNA isn't as similar as you think. I mean, we share 99% of our DNA with chimps. Would you say we are similar enough to chimpanzees to just say we are basically the same? Hell no. And that's just one variant. There are now multiple variants of COVID-19. And they even point out that other studies have found variations less similar to SARS-CoV-1.You completely ignored the unhighlighted sections since they don't prove your point and are cherry picking statements that do.

It is not unreasonable to imagine that treatment for one may work for the other. It IS unreasonable to assume it will be without testing. And giving just a few patients with no background info the drug and them not dying is not proof enough to call it a cure. Politicians, bloggers, etc. taking one doctor's anecdotal experience and touting it as a cure is irresponsible.

Either take into account the whole study or ignore it all together. You can't pick one or two statements from it and ignore the rest of the body of text which doesn't support your opinion. That's a damned joke of pretending to use studies to backup your arguments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Greenday said:

Because this isn't SARS and is not remotely relevant.

 

13 hours ago, Greenday said:

They already know. They also know it'd have to be studied instead of just claiming it works and recklessly dosing it on people.

SARS-COV-1 was the 2003 virus

SARS-COV-2 is today's virus.

They are not the same. What part confuses you?

I one post you say that is is not "remotely relevant", and in another post you type that they are both coronaviruses (SARS-COV). Nobody said they are the same, they are similar.  Either you are such a narcissist that cannot accept that you are wrong, or you are much less intelligent than you think you are. 

 

Forgot to add:

 

assclown.png

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, JC_68Westy said:

I one post you say that is is not "remotely relevant", and in another post you type that they are both coronaviruses (SARS-COV). Nobody said they are the same, they are similar.  Either you are such a narcissist that cannot accept that you are wrong, or you are much less intelligent than you think you are. 

If you say SARS, colloquially you are referring to a disease from 17 years ago. That is not the same disease. Similar is not the same as same. Tiny genetic differences less than a percentile, can make huge differences.

  • FacePalm 1

Share this post


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

If you say SARS, colloquially you are referring to a disease from 17 years ago. That is not the same disease. Similar is not the same as same. Tiny genetic differences less than a percentile, can make huge differences.

You said "Because this isn't SARS and is not remotely relevant"

 

assclown.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, JC_68Westy said:

You said "Because this isn't SARS and is not remotely relevant"

Fact #1: It's not SARS (formally known as SARS-COV-1).

Fact #2: A drug that works SARS-COV-1 does not mean it will work for SARS-COV-2 as they are not the same.

So just because a drug works for SC1 is not proof it's a miracle drug for SC2 as you and others want to tout with no proof.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Greenday said:

Fact #1: It's not SARS (formally known as SARS-COV-1).

Fact #2: A drug that works SARS-COV-1 does not mean it will work for SARS-COV-2 as they are not the same.

So just because a drug works for SC1 is not proof it's a miracle drug for SC2 as you and others want to tout with no proof.

I have never stated any opinion on either side of the issue. I do not have the education, qualifications, training, etc to speak on the topic in any constructive manner.  You, on the other hand, seem to think you are an expert on every topic posted on this forum yet fail to ever post anything of real value.

 

assclown.png

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Greenday said:

Stop pretending like you understand what they are talking about. You don't.

94.6% similar in DNA isn't as similar as you think. I mean, we share 99% of our DNA with chimps. Would you say we are similar enough to chimpanzees to just say we are basically the same? Hell no. And that's just one variant. There are now multiple variants of COVID-19. And they even point out that other studies have found variations less similar to SARS-CoV-1.You completely ignored the unhighlighted sections since they don't prove your point and are cherry picking statements that do.

It is not unreasonable to imagine that treatment for one may work for the other. It IS unreasonable to assume it will be without testing. And giving just a few patients with no background info the drug and them not dying is not proof enough to call it a cure. Politicians, bloggers, etc. taking one doctor's anecdotal experience and touting it as a cure is irresponsible.

Either take into account the whole study or ignore it all together. You can't pick one or two statements from it and ignore the rest of the body of text which doesn't support your opinion. That's a damned joke of pretending to use studies to backup your arguments.

It is amazing that you now nothing about me - yet your proclamation that I don't understand what they are talking about, speaks volumes of your maturity.  Alright then...  as others have said, it just might be the time for the ban hammer - or at least a lengthy time out.

I wasn't using a study, I was using a white paper from Johns Hopkins that states.

 

In February, the Coronavirus Study Group (CSG) of the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses officially named the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2. The CSG analyzed viral genomes from several patients and assessed phylogenetic (evolutionary) relationships between the new virus and known coronaviruses. The committee found that the genome of viruses isolated from patients was similar enough to SARS genomes to be considered a variant of SARS, not an entirely novel virus. While the clinical presentation, epidemiologic patterns, and host range of SARS-CoV-2 may differ from the original SARS-CoV, it is the genetic similarity between the 2 viruses that is used to conclude they are the same species.

 

Once again you cannot admit you are wrong - very wrong - so wrong, that you have neither the maturity nor the smarts to see it and/or admit it.

 

 

 

  • Agree 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Greenday said:

If you say SARS, colloquially you are referring to a disease from 17 years ago. That is not the same disease. Similar is not the same as same. Tiny genetic differences less than a percentile, can make huge differences.

In February, the Coronavirus Study Group (CSG) of the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses officially named the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2. The CSG analyzed viral genomes from several patients and assessed phylogenetic (evolutionary) relationships between the new virus and known coronaviruses. The committee found that the genome of viruses isolated from patients was similar enough to SARS genomes to be considered a variant of SARS, not an entirely novel virus. While the clinical presentation, epidemiologic patterns, and host range of SARS-CoV-2 may differ from the original SARS-CoV, it is the genetic similarity between the 2 viruses that is used to conclude they are the same species.

 

Just read the above and admit you are wrong.........it hurts I am sure.  Also why do you discount that is does work in circumstances and those circumstances need to be investigated further - let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater..

Be considered a variant of SARS, not an entirely novel virus.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Greenie seems to think that it is unreasonable as a starting point to employ a medicine used with some success against a coronavirus against another closely related coronavirus. 

What's the alternate plan? Just pull out random meds willy-nilly and try them? I have some Preparation-H you could rub all over yourself but you would disappear. 

 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, JohnnyB said:

download (1).jpg

Here's what I see: "You've chosen to ignore content by Greendy. Options "   Until someone quotes him!!!! Don't waste your time on a troll. Many here have been nice and tried to use reason and common sense with certain individuals. He just keeps coming back with the same CNN crap.

image.jpeg.ed086e8a4d5ec80d250173b37553f0a2.jpeg

  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, USRifle30Cal said:

It is amazing that you now nothing about me - yet your proclamation that I don't understand what they are talking about, speaks volumes of your maturity.  Alright then...  as others have said, it just might be the time for the ban hammer - or at least a lengthy time out.

I wasn't using a study, I was using a white paper from Johns Hopkins that states.

 

In February, the Coronavirus Study Group (CSG) of the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses officially named the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2. The CSG analyzed viral genomes from several patients and assessed phylogenetic (evolutionary) relationships between the new virus and known coronaviruses. The committee found that the genome of viruses isolated from patients was similar enough to SARS genomes to be considered a variant of SARS, not an entirely novel virus. While the clinical presentation, epidemiologic patterns, and host range of SARS-CoV-2 may differ from the original SARS-CoV, it is the genetic similarity between the 2 viruses that is used to conclude they are the same species.

 

Once again you cannot admit you are wrong - very wrong - so wrong, that you have neither the maturity nor the smarts to see it and/or admit it.

 

 

 

I honestly stopped reading his post when he tried to compare animals with genomes over 3 billions bases long with a virus that has maybe 30k. 

 

7 hours ago, Greenday said:

If you say SARS, colloquially you are referring to a disease from 17 years ago. That is not the same disease. Similar is not the same as same. Tiny genetic differences less than a percentile, can make huge differences.

Or they can have no difference at all, or differences so small that it only relates to infection methods and different immune system responses.. leaving the replication components widely the same.. The fact is, most differences between viral "species" is the relative effectiveness or affinity for binding with host cell receptors. Replication machinery, the stuff most antivirals go after, is relatively unchanged.  

There are roughly 3 million SNP's in the human genome.... and you're harping over 1,000 base difference between SARS1 and SARS2.

 

Your assessment follows no real science.

It also questions why this was not brought up before... It's like a leading doctor who discovered that Tamiflu was effective for Type A flu, and just never bothered to mentioned maybe we should see if it's effective for type B.... 

Dr. Fauci knew it showed effectiveness in SARS(1), there is no reason WAY BACK IN FEB he wouldn't get a new study up and running IMMEDIATELY, and discuss publicly that a prior study is being used to direct new treatment options... It appears Trump had more sense than he on the topic... which is pathetic. 

 

 

  • Agree 2
  • Informative 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, JackDaWack said:

I honestly stopped reading his post when he tried to compare animals with genomes over 3 billions bases long with a virus that has maybe 30k. 

 

Or they can have no difference at all, or differences so small that it only relates to infection methods and different immune system responses.. leaving the replication components widely the same.. The fact is, most differences between viral "species" is the relative effectiveness or affinity for binding with host cell receptors. Replication machinery, the stuff most antivirals go after, is relatively unchanged.  

There are roughly 3 million SNP's in the human genome.... and you're harping over 1,000 base difference between SARS1 and SARS2.

 

Your assessment follows no real science.

It also questions why this was not brought up before... It's like a leading doctor who discovered that Tamiflu was effective for Type A flu, and just never bothered to mentioned maybe we should see if it's effective for type B.... 

Dr. Fauci knew it showed effectiveness in SARS(1), there is no reason WAY BACK IN FEB he wouldn't get a new study up and running IMMEDIATELY, and discuss publicly that a prior study is being used to direct new treatment options... It appears Trump had more sense than he on the topic... which is pathetic. 

 

 

I *was* a fan of fauci...now i question his motives....

 

Something stinks.....

  • Like 3
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, USRifle30Cal said:

I *was* a fan of fauci...now i question his motives....

 

Something stinks.....

Pharma lobbyists own his ass.  That's my guess.  I don't know how, but I've always been a pretty good judge of people based on body language.  That dude is a weasel, a very short weasel.

"Hey, Tony, hold off on that inexpensive effective HCQ treatment for a while, so we can do some trials on more profitable patented shit.  The check is in the mail"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Scorpio64 said:

Pharma lobbyists own his ass.  That's my guess.  I don't know how, but I've always been a pretty good judge of people based on body language.  That dude is a weasel, a very short weasel.

"Hey, Tony, hold off on that inexpensive effective HCQ treatment for a while, so we can do some trials on more profitable patented shit.  The check is in the mail"

Plausible and possible 

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Scorpio64 said:

Pharma lobbyists own his ass.  That's my guess.  I don't know how, but I've always been a pretty good judge of people based on body language.  That dude is a weasel, a very short weasel.

"Hey, Tony, hold off on that inexpensive effective HCQ treatment for a while, so we can do some trials on more profitable patented shit.  The check is in the mail"

Or, better yet instead of an effective treatment, a vaccine, that since the Corona Virus is so dangerous, has to be mandatory, and maybe yearly like the flu shot that many get! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/4/2020 at 9:04 PM, Greenday said:

Already proven not as effective as claims were made and side effects of the higher doses than traditionally used made it too dangerous to use.

I do not believe there have been any randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind studies indicating either way for Hydroxycloroquine.  Maybe I missed that, but studies I have seen have been observational or retrospective studies (like the VA, where it appears that more people were dying, but the HCX was administered only to the sickest patients).  Based on the evidence (again, nothing objective yet) it appears to help if it is administered under the right indicatations (sounds like early is better) and in conjunction with Zinc and Azithromycin.  Remdesivar also looks good and so far the randomized, controlled studies have produced statistically significant results to indicate that.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Handyman said:

Greenie seems to think that it is unreasonable as a starting point to employ a medicine used with some success against a coronavirus against another closely related coronavirus. 

Only if Trump says something optimistic about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fauci is director of NSAID, which is funded by the ugly twins - Bill and Melinda.  The scarf lady is on the board of another "group" also funded bt the ugly twins.  He, and she, are frauds.  He loves to extend the lockdown as long as he can while still getting a fat paycheck.

 

And before I forget, eff you Greenie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, leahcim said:

  Remdesivar also looks good and so far the randomized, controlled studies have produced statistically significant results to indicate that.

The problem with Remdesivir is the side effects.   Hey, you reduced your symptoms of Covid-19 by 3 days!   Congrats!  Now you need new kidneys, possibly a liver, but hey, you saved 3 days of symptoms!  

Before someone pipes up with "...But HCQ causes heart issues", I'll remind that person that HCQ is so well tolerated it's ok to give to PREGNANT women for christ sakes.   In a 50 year retrospective study of HCQ, they could find NO, as in ZERO deaths attributed to HCQ cardiac QT Elongation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, USRifle30Cal said:

image.png.c5fbe96392079fca9ab3a093c692cbf8.png

 

Tell me why he used "five" years - what aren't they saying?  Why?  What do they know?  What are they telling the president?  What is being hidden?  Why is it being hidden? etc.

 

 

I can't speak to his particular instance, only that he's probably hearing from Fauci "Longer, longer, but I can't give you a date".

Fauci is compromised.    He needs to go.   Once  "gain of function" was banned in the US, Fauci's NIAID funded the bat lady to do the research in China.  The bug got free.  He's on record as stating "it's not man made" which was debunked thoroughly here: https://medium.com/@yurideigin/lab-made-cov2-genealogy-through-the-lens-of-gain-of-function-research-f96dd7413748\

This means Fauci is looking for cover.  What he did was most probably illegal.  You can't fund elsewhere what is banned here.  He needs cover and Biden will give it to him.  How does he do that?  Whisper in Trump's ear to continue the pain.   More pain, no Trump in November.   The left hails him as a hero, if he slays the Trump dragon, he'll go down in the history books as the man who saved us from Corona.   If Trump stays in power?  Hard to say, but iron bracelets aren't out of the question.

 

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Malsua said:

Fauci is compromised.    He needs to go.  

Agreed.  At the very least the "Doctors in Black" video explains quite well how Fauci is a walking conflict of interest.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Malsua said:

I can't speak to his particular instance, only that he's probably hearing from Fauci "Longer, longer, but I can't give you a date".

Fauci is compromised.    He needs to go.   Once  "gain of function" was banned in the US, Fauci's NIAID funded the bat lady to do the research in China.  The bug got free.  He's on record as stating "it's not man made" which was debunked thoroughly here: https://medium.com/@yurideigin/lab-made-cov2-genealogy-through-the-lens-of-gain-of-function-research-f96dd7413748\

This means Fauci is looking for cover.  What he did was most probably illegal.  You can't fund elsewhere what is banned here.  He needs cover and Biden will give it to him.  How does he do that?  Whisper in Trump's ear to continue the pain.   More pain, no Trump in November.   The left hails him as a hero, if he slays the Trump dragon, he'll go down in the history books as the man who saved us from Corona.   If Trump stays in power?  Hard to say, but iron bracelets aren't out of the question.

 

 

 

 

10 minutes ago, tomk62 said:

Agreed.  At the very least the "Doctors in Black" video explains quite well how Fauci is a walking conflict of interest.  

I go back to my comment about humans playing God - they may have just really ended humanity on this world - 

 

We are at a very dark precipice and only some luck may be able to save us from a larger breakdown of civilization and life as we thought we knew it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still am interested on how Ft. Detrick plays into this.  Apparently a L4 lab shut down due to plumbing issues...which just happened to stock all variants of the supposed Covid.  And then some woman was caught smuggling samples, which quickly got squashed as a story.

 

Then the bat angle..with pictures of a woman enjoying bat soup, but they forgot that the restaurant had Indonesian signage in the background, not Chinese (and yes, they are vastly different).

 

Much more under the hood here.

  • Like 1

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...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...