Posted on 05/20/2020 7:59:22 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
About the best information in this report from the Twin Cities local NBC affiliate on Donald Trumps use of hydroxychloroquine is this comment from Dr. David Boulware: The hype is probably overblown on both sides. Before Trump began taking the malaria drug as prophylaxis against potential exposure to COVID-19, the White House reached out to the University of Minnesota researcher, who is overseeing a study of the drug among 2800 health-care workers taking the drug. Boulware briefed the presidents team on potential issues, but noted that none of his study subjects have seen any serious side effects.
Comments suggesting that Trump is risking death are therefore absurdly overblown, but so too are claims that its effectiveness has been established. Boulware notes that the chemical does appear to attack the virus, but thats no guarantee that it will work similarly in the human body. Whether what works in a Petri dish, does that actually translate to humans? he poses, and says we may know within a month:
Dr. Boulware is overseeing a clinical trial at the U to determine whether hydroxychloroquine is effective in preventing the coronavirus. They currently have about 1500 front line medical workers and first responders nationwide taking part. The participants take a safe dose once or twice a week, and researchers are checking whether those people contract COVID-19.
The U will be the first to publish results of such a study, Boulware said. They expect to see preliminary data in about a month. But he adds they still want to get about 3000 participants and will finish the study sooner with more participants.
Boulware says lab experiments have found the drug can prevent the coronavirus from infecting cells. But they need to find out if the same is true for people who take the pill.
Whether what works in a Petri dish, does that actually translate to humans? It is really unknown. But thats what were looking for, Boulware said.
As for dangers, all drugs have them, Boulware points out. So far, though, he has seen no seriously adverse reactions in his study, although they already know that it is contraindicated by preexisting heart disease:
Boulware said they do not select anyone for hydroxychloroquine clinical studies who have pre-existing heart issues. And he said of the 2800 participants in three separate trials, none has experienced serious or life-threatening side effects.
If you give it to everyone on earth, some people are going to have severe side effects and may have problems. For the vast majority of people, theyll tolerate quite well, Boulware said. Theres been a lot of information in the press. Is it dangerous? Does it work? The hype is probably overblown on both sides.
In other words, at the very least it cant hurt, as long as it doesnt replace more effective therapeutic strategies. Does it help? There is scientific data to suggest that it might, as Boulware says, but whether it does and how much it helps wont be known for sure until his study and others are complete.
What seems lost in all of this hyperpartisan strum und drang over hydroxychloroquine is that we should all hope it works. Its cheap, readily available, in the public domain, and the potential for mass production is therefore high (even if the profit margin would be lower than for new meds). We already know the side effects and contraindications. Rooting one way or the other wont impact the determination of the drugs effectiveness, but rooting against it is quite perverse, especially if its all about Trump. Even if people dont like Trump, shouldnt we hope that the US president is at least potentially getting some extra protection in this crisis? And shouldnt we all hope that such a handy drug could make a dent in the pandemic?
Except for the researchers, of course, who need to have emotional distance from their subject matter in order to be effective. Boulwares study wont be the last word on this approach, but it could be one of the most substantial to date once the study is complete. Boulware isnt rooting one way or the other, which is precisely what wed expect and hope to see. If this is effective, Boulware tells KARE11, we should use it. If not, then Trump and everyone else should stop using it for COVID-19 prevention or treatment. The rest of us should take this same wait-and-see attitude, and stop freaking out over a drug that has been in wide use for decades.
Someone’s research funds are about to disappear.
The people in the study are taking hydroxychloroquine once or twice a week. President Trump said that he is taking it on a daily basis. I hope that taking it only once or twice a week is not sabotaging the test by not giving it va frequently enough. I wonder why no one in the study is taking it daily which is what we have been reading about for quite a while. I remember when Cuomo got hydroxychloroquine for New York and we hoped that the Efficacy of the treatment would be known about 10 days later. We have actually never heard anything about that study
As always, where is the Zinc?
Are these people unable to use a search engine?
I can and have read several medical research article on how HCQ works, and it is not as you describe it.
how does it work? I’ve read that it is the zinc that keeps the virus from spreading via replication of infected cells or something?
Actually, the articles I read agree with Mrs. Don-o.
HCQ is a Zinc ionophore.
We already know this.
How Does Chloroquine / Hydroxychloroquine Work?
Acids and Bases
These drugs have interesting biochemical properties that may also be effective against other viral infections. Viruses are sensitive to pH changes, and the antiviral effects of inhibiting pH-dependent steps (increasing endosomal, virus vacuole pH) required for viral replication is one mechanism of their action. Trials of several viruses including flaviviruses, retroviruses, and coronaviruses have been successful using this approach (8,9).
When the Coronavirus infects the cell, it injects a messenger RNA into the cell for ribosomes to translate it. These ribosomes will translate RNA into a protein called RNA-dependent RNA polymerase. This enzyme is inhibited by high intracellular levels of zinc . This is the hypothesized mechanism as to which zinc ionophores, such as hydroxychloroquine and natural alternatives, work to prevent the widespread replication of COVID-19.
Zinc Ionophore
Chloroquine is also a zinc ionophore (10). An ionophore chauffeurs zinc in and out of the cell. Zinc is known to inhibit viral RNA polymerase (13). It essentially limits the ability of the virus to replicate itself and overwhelm the cell. Zinc is not a novel substance that only comes into play with COVID-19, but rather an essential mineral integral to cellular processes throughout the body. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) states:
Institutes of Health (NIH) states:
Zinc is involved in numerous aspects of cellular metabolism. It is required for the catalytic activity of approximately 100 enzymes [1,2] and it plays a role in immune function [3,4], protein synthesis [4], wound healing [5], DNA synthesis [2,4], and cell division [4]. Zinc also supports normal growth and development during pregnancy, childhood, and adolescence [6-8] and is required for proper sense of taste and smell [9].
How effective would HCQ have to be before we declare that it works?
RE: How effective would HCQ have to be before we declare that it works?
It isn’t 100% for sure,like any other drug out there. But the cure rate is quite high. Physicians report AT MINIMUM,above 80%. Zelenko’s report is the most astounding — In the upper 90’s.
But the Media will of course, always focus on the failed cases, not the successes.
ZINC?
If the study comes out positive for the treatment, it will never see the light of day.
RE: If the study comes out positive for the treatment, it will never see the light of day.
I believe it WILL be reported. You just won’t see it at the top of your Google or Bing search results, and you’ll have to comb through the results to find it.
These search engines only put the bad and derogatory news about Hydroxychloroquine at the top of their search results (repeated by more than one media company, often sourcing one another). I should know, I report about it almost everyday since March 2020.
Edit to add — if the study comes out NEGATIVE, you will see the results from these search engines Gleefully putting the news at the TOP of their search results.
There are other sources. The left doesn’t control ALL the money...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.