Covid-19 miscellany

[Swammerdami]

So a virus is VERY different from a nematode or a botfly larva.

Yes. However the reproduction of viruses is very similar to the growth and reproduction of living cells (indeed it is those living mechanisms which the virus subverts for its own growth), and it is those growth mechanisms which many medicines attack.

There ARE scientific papers showing that some anti-bacterials appear to be effective against some viruses. (Trausti even linked to one showing an anti-larval to be effective against a virus.) I am not qualified to say whether research into such uses is likely to be useful. But I'll guess many of the glib answers in this thread come from people with the same lack of qualification.

NB: I am NOT advocating the use of Ivermectin to treat Covid-19! I just get tired of the "left-wing's" frenzied delight for half-truths and exaggeration.

 

[untermensche]

So a virus is VERY different from a nematode or a botfly larva.

Yes. However the reproduction of viruses is very similar to the growth and reproduction of living cells (indeed it is those living mechanisms which the virus subverts for its own growth), and it is those growth mechanisms which many medicines attack.

There ARE scientific papers showing that some anti-bacterials appear to be effective against some viruses. (Trausti even linked to one showing an anti-larval to be effective against a virus.) I am not qualified to say whether research into such uses is likely to be useful. But I'll guess many of the glib answers in this thread come from people with the same lack of qualification.

NB: I am NOT advocating the use of Ivermectin to treat Covid-19! I just get tired of the "left-wing's" frenzied delight for half-truths and exaggeration.

The reproduction of viruses is not similar to the reproduction of living cells.

If they were antivirals would kill the person.

There is a large family of nucleoside analogue reverse transcriptase inhibitors, because DNA production by reverse transcriptase is very different from normal human DNA replication, so it is possible to design nucleoside analogues that are preferentially incorporated by the former. Some nucleoside analogues, however, can function both as NRTIs and polymerase inhibitors for other viruses (e.g., hepatitis B).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nucleoside_analogue

 

[Elixir]

I'm afraid I must side with Trausti in this sub-debate.

While the right-wing and GOP maintain their undisputed title as The Party that Lies, I also see many examples of exaggerations and half-truths by the left when attacking the right.

"Not FDA-approved for this usage" is NOT synonymous with "Useless or dangerous for this usage," but you'd never know that when listening to some complaints. Medicines often attack specific growth or reproduction mechanisms present in bacteria, eukaryotes, and even viroplasm, so it isn't a big surprise that some anti-bacterials (and perhaps even "de-wormers") can fight virus infections.

As for Ivermectin not being appropriate for humans, Trausti links to an NPR article which makes that drug appear to be a very important treatment for a major African sickness.

I am not qualified to study cases for and against Ivermectrin; nor will I take the time to research contradictory rants on the 'Net. I personally will follow official guidelines. I agree that it is laughable that some Trumpists think vaccines are a Bill Gates plot and end up talking poisonous doses of Ivermectrin instead! On the other hand, Trausti links to claims, including some by Rachel Maddow, that appear to be exaggerations.

Please! To preserve a reputation as the Party that Prefers Truth, liberals should avoid half-truths and exaggerations.

Flawed ivermectin preprint highlights challenges of COVID drug studies

"The study’s withdrawal from a preprint platform deals a blow to the anti-parasite drug’s chances as a COVID treatment, researchers say."
The paper summarized the results of a clinical trial seeming to show that ivermectin can reduce COVID-19 death rates by more than 90%1 — among the largest studies of the drug’s ability to treat COVID-19 to date. But on 14 July, after internet sleuths raised concerns about plagiarism and data manipulation, the preprint server Research Square withdrew the paper because of “ethical concerns”.

... The paper’s irregularities came to light when Jack Lawrence, a master’s student at the University of London, was reading it for a class assignment and noticed that some phrases were identical to those in other published work. When he contacted researchers who specialize in detecting fraud in scientific publications, the group found other causes for concern, including dozens of patient records that seemed to be duplicates, inconsistencies between the raw data and the information in the paper, patients whose records indicate they died before the study’s start date, and numbers that seemed to be too consistent to have occurred by chance.

While this doesn't disprove or refute claims of ivermectin's efficacy against COVID, there is no disputing that poison control centers are taking the brunt of the effect of right wing anti-vax propaganda that offers it as a miracle cure and preventative.
By the end of this year (per article) some 33,000 people will have participated in ivermectin trials...

FWIW, I am impressed by the lack of reporting of deaths among the de-wormed.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

I'm afraid I must side with Trausti in this sub-debate.

While the right-wing and GOP maintain their undisputed title as The Party that Lies, I also see many examples of exaggerations and half-truths by the left when attacking the right.

"Not FDA-approved for this usage" is NOT synonymous with "Useless or dangerous for this usage," but you'd never know that when listening to some complaints. Medicines often attack specific growth or reproduction mechanisms present in bacteria, eukaryotes, and even viroplasm, so it isn't a big surprise that some anti-bacterials (and perhaps even "de-wormers") can fight virus infections.

As for Ivermectin not being appropriate for humans, Trausti links to an NPR article which makes that drug appear to be a very important treatment for a major African sickness.

I am not qualified to study cases for and against Ivermectrin; nor will I take the time to research contradictory rants on the 'Net. I personally will follow official guidelines. I agree that it is laughable that some Trumpists think vaccines are a Bill Gates plot and end up talking poisonous doses of Ivermectrin instead! On the other hand, Trausti links to claims, including some by Rachel Maddow, that appear to be exaggerations.

Please! To preserve a reputation as the Party that Prefers Truth, liberals should avoid half-truths and exaggerations.

Flawed ivermectin preprint highlights challenges of COVID drug studies

"The study’s withdrawal from a preprint platform deals a blow to the anti-parasite drug’s chances as a COVID treatment, researchers say."
The paper summarized the results of a clinical trial seeming to show that ivermectin can reduce COVID-19 death rates by more than 90%1 — among the largest studies of the drug’s ability to treat COVID-19 to date. But on 14 July, after internet sleuths raised concerns about plagiarism and data manipulation, the preprint server Research Square withdrew the paper because of “ethical concerns”.

... The paper’s irregularities came to light when Jack Lawrence, a master’s student at the University of London, was reading it for a class assignment and noticed that some phrases were identical to those in other published work. When he contacted researchers who specialize in detecting fraud in scientific publications, the group found other causes for concern, including dozens of patient records that seemed to be duplicates, inconsistencies between the raw data and the information in the paper, patients whose records indicate they died before the study’s start date, and numbers that seemed to be too consistent to have occurred by chance.

While this doesn't disprove or refute claims of ivermectin's efficacy against COVID, there is no disputing that poison control centers are taking the brunt of the effect of right wing anti-vax propaganda that offers it as a miracle cure and preventative.
By the end of this year (per article) some 33,000 people will have participated in ivermectin trials...

FWIW, I am impressed by the lack of reporting of deaths among the de-wormed.

And lets not forget that mainstream science cannot prove that the earth is not flat. There are lots of things that mainstream science cannot prove which is why we can still intelligently claim, believe, hold and question whether the earth is indeed a sphere.

/right-wing stupidity, posturing

 

[Shadowy Man]

And lets not forget that mainstream science cannot prove that the earth is not flat. There are lots of things that mainstream science cannot prove which is why we can still intelligently claim, believe, hold and question whether the earth is indeed a sphere.

/right-wing stupidity, posturing

Off-topic: mainstream science can indeed prove that the earth isn’t flat. Flat earthers just don’t believe in science.

On-topic: the use of ivermectin amongst anti-vaxxers shows the lies about their reasons for not taking the vaccine because it’s not FDA approved and I bet these people don’t know the long term effects of using ivermectin. The true reasons seem to be purely political.

 

[Elixir]

And lets not forget that mainstream science cannot prove that the earth is not flat. There are lots of things that mainstream science cannot prove which is why we can still intelligently claim, believe, hold and question whether the earth is indeed a sphere.

/right-wing stupidity, posturing

Off-topic: mainstream science can indeed prove that the earth isn’t flat. Flat earthers just don’t believe in science.

On-topic: the use of ivermectin amongst anti-vaxxers shows the lies about their reasons for not taking the vaccine because it’s not FDA approved and I bet these people don’t know the long term effects of using ivermectin. The true reasons seem to be purely political.

All that, yeah. Still, I am unable to find any truly compelling evidence of lots of de-wormed patients getting sick from COVID. There are some anecdotal accounts:

Payne, the Oklahoma hospitalist, said he worries many people are being encouraged to take ivermectin as a “suitable alternative” to vaccination. At one point this summer, he said, about a quarter of his patients arriving at Stillwater Medical Center with covid-19 had been taking the medication. The lack of evidence that ivermectin protects against the coronavirus is a common topic in his evening calls with the families of severely ill covid-19 patients.

If anyone would take the bet, I'd bet that sheep dip will go the way of hydroxychloroquine, and within a year or two will be quietly dismissed as ineffective without any repercussions for the misinformation/disinformation peddlers who have made it a fad among the right wing sheeples.

 

[blastula]

Well done. You’ve not refuted anything I wrote; because you can’t: Ivermectin as a Broad-Spectrum Host-Directed Antiviral: The Real Deal?

You are hyping it up before it is proven. You all did the same thing with HCQ. One of these days you'll get it right and scream bias, but the reason you get all the negative feedback is it is not proved and people are using it on their own. FFS, just wait for the science to do its work. Stop being political.

If you go back a few pages I wrote that I don’t have an opinion either way on its effectiveness. I’ve simply pointed how ignorant and misinformed and gullible some here are on the topic.

The actual ignorant/ stupid/ science denying/ brainwashed/ cultist ones are the ones who make considerable effort to get the horse dewormer that's unproven for covid instead of simply taking an easily accessible, robustly proven vaccine.

Jonestown for covid.

View attachment 35174

 

[untermensche]

Here's the source of that very telling graph:

#COVID19 cases/deaths now 68% & 115% higher per capita in red counties since July 1st

https://acasignups.net/21/08/31/covid19-casesdeaths-now-68-115-higher-capita-red-counties-july-1st

The second wave of this pandemic is being driven by the appearance of the delta variant and by Trump supporting deluded and deadly fools.

 

[lpetrich]

So a virus is VERY different from a nematode or a botfly larva.

Yes. However the reproduction of viruses is very similar to the growth and reproduction of living cells (indeed it is those living mechanisms which the virus subverts for its own growth), and it is those growth mechanisms which many medicines attack.

A virus is a replication-system parasite, using its host cell's replication system to reproduce itself.

But that's about the extent of the similarity.

Let's look at phylogeny again. I checked this summary of the conventional wisdom: Viruses at the Tree of Life Web

• Double-stranded RNA Viruses (monophyly uncertain)
• Single-stranded Negative Sense RNA Viruses (monophyly uncertain) -- measles, mumps, Ebola
• Single-stranded Positive Sense RNA Viruses (monophyly uncertain) -- coronaviruses (COVID-19, common cold, etc.), rubella, dengue, yellow-fever virus
• Single-stranded DNA Viruses (non-monophyletic)
• Double-stranded DNA Viruses (non-monophyletic) -- chickenpox, herpes, smallpox
• DNA-RNA Reverse Transcribing Viruses (monophyly uncertain) -- AIDS

The authors of that page seem fairly sure that DNA viruses had multiple origins, but are less sure about RNA viruses.

Cellular organisms, however, fit onto one tree. There is no evidence of multiple origins of them. There are some things that would be clear giveaways, like some carrier of heredity that is not a nucleic acid, but we haven't found any.

Here's a summary. The highest-level branching is between the two prokaryote branches, Bacteria and Archaea.

Bacteria includes many familiar bacteria, including all known pathogenic (disease-causing) ones and nearly all photosynthetic ones. Cyanobacteria or "blue-green algae" are among them. Archaea look much like Bacteria, and they include methanogens (methane producers).

The third major branch is Eukarya, and it originated as a mishmash of organisms from the previous two big branches. Its major branches are:

• unikonts: (opisthokonts: (fungi, (choanoflagellates, animals)), Amoebozoa)
• Archaeplastida: (green algae: (Chlorophyta, Streptophyta: (stoneworts, land plants)), red algae, glaucophytes)
• SAR: (Stramenopiles: (diatoms, kelp, etc.), Alveolata: (ciliates, dinoflagellates, etc.), Rhizaria (foraminifera, radiolaria, etc.))
• Lots of others

Among animals, we have

• Porifera: sea sponges
• Placozoa: little flat blobs
• Ctenophora: comb jellies
• Eumetazoa: (Cnidaria: (sea anemones, hydras, jellyfish, ...), Bilateria: (bilaterally symmetric))

Looking at Bilateria,

• Protostomia: (Ecdysozoa: (molting animals), Spiralia: (mollusks, annelids, flatworms, etc.))
• Deuterostomia: (Chordata: (vertebrates, sea squirts, amphioxus), (Hemichordata, Echinodermanta: (starfish, sea urchins, sea cucumbers, etc.)))
• some others

Ecdysozoa:

• Panathropoda: (arthropods, onychophorans: (velvet worms), tardigrades: ("water bears"))
• Cycloneuralia: (nematodes, Nematomorpha, etc.)

 

[lpetrich]

I checked on ivermectin and river blindness -  Onchocerciasis It is caused by a nematode:
Onchocerca volvulus - Onchocercidae - Rhabditida

So that's what human ivermectin doses can be good for. Nematodes. Just like horse and sheep ivermectin doses.


Ivermectin – Old Drug, New Tricks? - ScienceDirect - "IVM is not active against flukes or tapeworms, but does have activity against various arthropods, including lice, mites, and some ticks."

Seems like ivermectin is mainly recommended for ecdysozoans: nematodes and arthropods.
Arthropoda:

• Mandibulata: (Pancrustacea: (insects, crustaceans), Myriapoda: (centipedes, millipedes))
• Chelicerata: (horseshoe crabs, arachnids)

Insects (6-legged): lice, flies
Arachnids (8-legged): mites, ticks

Liver flukes and tapeworms are in Platyhelminthes (flatworms), and that's outside of Ecdysozoa, and that means that ivermectin won't work very well on anything outside of Ecdysozoa.


If ivermectin doesn't work on tapeworms, then it's not surprising that it doesn't work on viruses.

 

[TomC]

I checked on ivermectin and river blindness -  Onchocerciasis It is caused by a nematode:
Onchocerca volvulus - Onchocercidae - Rhabditida

So that's what human ivermectin doses can be good for. Nematodes. Just like horse and sheep ivermectin doses.


Ivermectin – Old Drug, New Tricks? - ScienceDirect - "IVM is not active against flukes or tapeworms, but does have activity against various arthropods, including lice, mites, and some ticks."

Seems like ivermectin is mainly recommended for ecdysozoans: nematodes and arthropods.
Arthropoda:

• Mandibulata: (Pancrustacea: (insects, crustaceans), Myriapoda)
• Chelicerata: (horseshoe crabs, arachnids)

Insects (6-legged): lice, flies
Arachnids (8-legged): mites, ticks

Liver flukes and tapeworms are in Platyhelminthes (flatworms), and that's outside of Ecdysozoa, and that means that ivermectin won't work very well on anything outside of Ecdysozoa.

Lots of medicine turns out to be effective for uses other than what was originally intended. I don't have a problem with advances in treatment. If Ivermectrin turned out to be an effective Plan B, great!

But it hasn't been studied enough to have any reason to believe that. There's no obvious reason to think it is. It's not an antiviral.

The problem I'm having is with ill-informed people, who can't tell a nematode from a retro-virus, deciding that they don't need a vaccine because they can just dose up with Ivermectrin.
Tom

 

[Elixir]

Lots of medicine turns out to be effective for uses other than what was originally intended. I don't have a problem with advances in treatment. If Ivermectrin turned out to be an effective Plan B, great!

I'm absolutely positive that ivermectin can be used to prevent or terminate pregnancy. It's just a matter of dosage and how it's administered. I'm betting that a full tube of de-wormer paste injected directly into the uterus would do the job.
Texas Special! Who needs Plan B?

In case the sarcasm escapes anyone, I am NOT in favor of people dosing themselves with medications not shown to be effective for specific things.
I am doubly wary of anything being pushed by the anti-science right wing morons who brought us hydroxycholorquine, bleach, UV light bulbs and straight up denial that COVID is anything more than a Democrat hoax.
We have effective vaccines that cut mortality down to a negligible rate, and have been taken for that specific purpose by literally BILLIONS of people with negligible deleterious side effects.
There is no excuse for taking off-label ivermectin.

 

[untermensche]

With any drug the issue is always risk vs benefit.

The same with the vaccine.

To take any drug that has no efficacy against COVID is getting nothing but risk.

Medical treatments today are base on protocols.

Ivermectin is not in any legitimate protocol.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

If you go back a few pages I wrote that I don’t have an opinion either way on its effectiveness. I’ve simply pointed how ignorant and misinformed and gullible some here are on the topic.

The actual ignorant/ stupid/ science denying/ brainwashed/ cultist ones are the ones who make considerable effort to get the horse dewormer that's unproven for covid instead of simply taking an easily accessible, robustly proven vaccine.

Jonestown for covid.

View attachment 35174

I’m thinking that chart needs a bit more info, such as number of counties per option and a range.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Extraordinary ignorance.

The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2015

Extraordinary ignorance? The kind that confuses parasitic infestations with viral infections?
Tom

WTF is going on here? There are plenty of studies regarding the effectiveness, or not, of ivermectin with Covid. I don’t have a strong opinion either way. But this contagious stupidity that ivermectin doesn’t have antiviral properties is bewildering. Here’s one on the use of ivermectin and dengue virus: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30452439/. So yes, extraordinary ignorance. It’s not like this information is hidden and unavailable from public view.

So far the only study that found any benefit has been found to be fraudulent.

And just because something works in a test tube doesn't mean it works in a person. As XKCD said, a handgun kills diseases in a petri dish.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The media really is the enemy of the people.

Internet 101: Be very wary of screenshots of news. The part of the article omitted by that screenshot:

He said of the calls that were about ivermectin, 70% were by people who had ingested the veterinary version of the medicine.

Note how much that changes the meaning of your article.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

But we have sensibly regulated gun ownership, and even knives are quite tightly controlled, so people largely settle their disputes with fists.

Note that this means right and wrong have little to do with it. In a society such as yours strong and weak is pretty apparent and the weak simply must submit.

That would be true of social interactions that include at least one psychopath, but as such interactions are rare, it's not particularly relevant.

I can't recall the last time anyone demanded my submission to their greater physical strength; But if someone were to do so, they would committing a crime, and both I and they would expect passers-by, the police, and any other citizens to whom I might appeal for help, to support me against them.

Which is one reason why people don't habitually try to strongarm each other around here.

It's called "civilisation"; You should try it some time.

Interactions aren't random. Most wrongdoing is from a small subset of the population and you're setting up a situation to favor them.

 

[bilby]

For fucks sake people, will you stop trying to decide for yourselves, and defer to the people you pay very handsomely to do the research you are incompetent to do, and to make the decisions you are incompetent to make.



I have studied Molecular Biology at university level. I have an above average ability to understand the situation. And I am using that ability to decide to defer completely to the people who have been paid to spend their entire working lives studying the various aspects of this situation.

I am not going to try to balance the advice of the CDC, TGA, FDA, NHS, or ATAGI, against that of shock-jocks, tabloid reporters, random celebrities, and former Presidents of the United States.

There is no balance. None of that latter group of non-experts (including myself) is able to add the slightest useful insight or recommendation to those provided by the experts.

Welcome to modern civilisation. You are NOT COMPETENT to make your own decisions in a modern technological civilisation, unless and except where that decision happens to fall into your specific area of expertise. You cannot learn enough in a decade of hard work dedicated to nothing else, to be competent to overrule expert consensus. You sure as crap can't learn enough in two years of watching YouTube videos and listening to podcasts about horse dewormer.

It's a sad, but undeniable, truth that most of modernity is forever going to remain a mystery to us all. You will never be able to make a silicon chip, and design an airliner wing, and pilot a ship through the Great Barrier Reef, and play the violin, and speak perfect Cantonese, and be a chess grand master, and be a master boilermaker, and decide the best vaccination and treatment protocols for a novel respiratory disease.

You might, if you devote several decades to it, be able to do one or two of these things, but nobody can do them all (and this is a minuscule subset of the vast list of expert skills needed in our world today). And to pretend that you can, when you could instead simply employ someone who can, is childish and stupid.

This is a society. Its strength is that its individual members do not have to be able to do everything, or even most things, themselves.

Individualism - the idea that one can survive or even thrive without vast assistance from others - is batshit insane. Self-reliance implies a sub-paleolithic standard of living. Even the most skilled survivalists cannot live alone in the wilderness for long. And even they depend on knowledge acquired by experts other than themselves.

You are not qualified to make up your own mind. No matter how uncomfortable it makes you feel, you cannot ever improve your situation by discarding the advice of genuine experts in favour of your own opinions, or those of confident sounding non-experts.

The only skill that every member of a modern society really needs, is the ability to identify the difference between an expert and a non-expert; And as that is a difficult and surprisingly uncommon skill, we even have expert bodies (institutions, professional organisations, government departments, etc) to whom we can outsource most of that work.

Discard their advice, and you will inevitably harm yourself and/or others. Even though it might make you feel empowered.

You're not empowered. You can never be empowered. You're just being stupid and petulant, which most infants quickly learn isn't the same thing at all.

 

[Swammerdami]

The reproduction of viruses is not similar to the reproduction of living cells.

If they were antivirals would kill the person.

Protein synthesis — the most energy-intensive part of growth and reproduction is similar; indeed the host is subverted to do the synthesis. Why are some medicines effective against some growths, but not others? I don't know, but suspect it is a complicated matter. To extrapolate from your claim, if it were correct, anti-cancer drugs would kill the person.

There is a large family of nucleoside analogue reverse transcriptase inhibitors, because DNA production by reverse transcriptase is very different from normal human DNA replication, ...

Coronavirus is a Class IV virus.

 

[untermensche]

If you go back a few pages I wrote that I don’t have an opinion either way on its effectiveness. I’ve simply pointed how ignorant and misinformed and gullible some here are on the topic.

The actual ignorant/ stupid/ science denying/ brainwashed/ cultist ones are the ones who make considerable effort to get the horse dewormer that's unproven for covid instead of simply taking an easily accessible, robustly proven vaccine.

Jonestown for covid.

View attachment 35174

I’m thinking that chart needs a bit more info, such as number of counties per option and a range.

I posted a link to the entire blog right below that post.