Wuhan Coronavirus

[mugwump]

I'm a Chinese troll, PSM.

Sorry I ghosted, I don’t do 16 hour days very well anymore. We got dragged into data interchange efforts between ad hoc testing labs and the CDC, first with a Pharma, then a state govt, then two more state health services. Not our forte but we were asked if we could help. It’s been enlightening.

I’m just as baffled as everyone else with the lockdown strategy. When I was involved with these things long ago there was enormous time and effort put into strategizing how to keep everyone working. Sporting events, movie theaters, other large groups were always planned to be closed. All businesses and manufacturing, never. Madness.

The two extremes the nation has polarized into are both wrong IMO. This isn’t a disease catastrophe (although it’s turning into a medical system catastrophe) and it’s not a nothingburger. If I had to guess at this stage I’d say the CFR will shake out to be 0.4%-0.6% over 12-28 months. Not insignificant but not the body blow I feared from what we were seeing in Wuhan.

The HCS has been overwhelmed in very few places, unfortunately in media hubs. The HCS collapse we're facing now is due to underuse, not overuse. My daughter spent 12 days in the hospital with COVID...clots and disseminated coagulopathy (ironic because she was managing coagulopathy patients before being retasked into covid efforts) and then was furloughed from her job on the day of her release because her clinic is shut down. She’s 31 years old, a runner in outstanding shape, and has no comorbidities. It was terrifying. She's out of the woods for now and hopefully for good.

That’s why I think it’s middle ground. None of her friends or acquaintances who know her story are anxious to go out for a movie and a meal. Behavior would have changed without a lockdown and it will be slow coming back.

Current studies indicate brief casual contact with an infected person isn’t a serious contagion risk. Sustained exposure is needed. Think of having a convo over several minutes or public transport exposure as needed. The biggest transmission risk is within the household.

Regarding hydroxychloroquine...using the drug when the patient is seriously ill tells you nothing. Existing antivirals have to be administered when symptoms are mild or they don’t work at all. Studies are starting now to see if it works if administered early but they’ll take a long time.

That “Plandemic” video is total drek. I’m all for 1A but “the virus is ‘activated’ by wearing a mask”? There’s never been an effective vaccine against an RNA virus? The SARS2 virus has been in the influenza vaccine sine 2015? It’s ridiculous.

I’m thrilled we're not seeing a 1-2% CFR and everyone is now talking about how this is nothing, but remember where we were a month ago watching NYC. It’s significantly worse than seasonal flu but significantly less dangerous than the Spanish flu. Right on the cusp where everyone can apply their personal Rorschach test and be at least partially right.

[Pete]

Mugwump - I'll give your post a thumbs up.

Was just at Food Lion this morning.

Light foot traffic but the paper products and hand sanitizer are still missing. The rice section was still pretty much cleaned out. Spotty sections missing items. Meat was not loaded but still a pretty good selection.

As was noted a long time ago the regular workers/cashiers are still present.

Cashiers see the heaviest face to face volume of folks in unknown condition.

Rest homes continue to lead the numbers in death.

[Badger52]

Originally Posted by mugwump

I'm a Chinese troll, PSM.
....
Regarding hydroxychloroquine...using the drug when the patient is seriously ill tells you nothing. Existing antivirals have to be administered when symptoms are mild or they don’t work at all. Studies are starting now to see if it works if administered early but they’ll take a long time.

Indulge please, if you can, but I'm not fully grasping your use of the terms "mild" vs. "early" as used above. It would seem there has been evidence of at least positive results with moderate symptoms using the hydroxychloroquine regime, but you're saying only with "mild" symptoms. How do we know that if "studies" are only starting to see if administered early? It seems to be that "tests" have been conducted in the field but no one wants to collate them to use that information to make a determination.

So I'd appreciate you clarifying the terms as well as some info as to your background in this subject.

Originally Posted by mugwump

That “Plandemic” video is total drek. I’m all for 1A but “the virus is ‘activated’ by wearing a mask”? There’s never been an effective vaccine against an RNA virus? The SARS2 virus has been in the influenza vaccine sine 2015? It’s ridiculous.

There is admittedly a lot to digest in that video. Do a couple things completely negate the entire interview? Do you have knowledge of the accusations made against Dr. Fauci & the pharmaceutical establishment? I'm genuinely curious because "trust" in the government is at an all-time high in a variety of things, and the censorship being directed at that particular item is pretty noticeable.

[Pete]

This has been hinted at here and there during the past number of weeks.

The people who did this mention it with strong cautions but there does seem to be a correlation between Covid symptoms and Vit D.

"Vitamin D levels may impact COVID-19 mortality rates, study claims"

https://www.foxnews.com/science/vita...ortality-rates

"A research team led by Northwestern University analyzed data from hospitals and clinics across China, France, Germany, Italy, Iran, South Korea, Spain, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States.

Patients from countries with high COVID-19 mortality rates, such as Italy, Spain and the United Kingdom, had lower levels of vitamin D compared to patients in countries that were not as severely affected, according to the study......."

and

"..."While I think it is important for people to know that vitamin D deficiency might play a role in mortality, we don't need to push vitamin D on everybody," said Northwestern's Vadim Backman, who led the research, in a statement. "This needs further study, and I hope our work will stimulate interest in this area. The data also may illuminate the mechanism of mortality, which, if proven, could lead to new therapeutic targets.".."

[PSM]

Originally Posted by mugwump

I'm a Chinese troll, PSM.

Then please put that in your profile.

It's helpful, especially when someone professes expertise in a field, to be able to look at their profile to see if their background underscores that expertise. I'm not sure how you've managed to skate so long without filling it out given the seriousness of the subjects that you bring to light.

[The Reaper]

I am satisfied with mugwump's contributions to this forum.

If he wishes to provide more personal info to the public board, he is welcome to.

He can send his CV to me or any of the staff if he wants admin vetting.

If there are PERSEC reasons he cannot, his unique viewpoints and links appear to me to be of sufficient value to waive the publicizing of his personal details.

Feel free to point out your concerns to the staff here. Once you have done that, your job is complete.

TR

[tom kelly]

I agree with TR re. Mugwump's postings. All information/intelligence needs to be evaluated, sourced and cross checked before verification. Another Admin. once posted that "Everything and Anything posted the on PS web site is read and scrutinized by anyone with access to the web. That being said, I can understand why someone would be vague and cautious about their security. I have thoughts and suspicions about Virus Research in various sectors of Government, Academe and Business. I worked for years in a chemical research lab and as a Sales Engineer for a number of Biotechnology Firms that put me in a position to visit with researchers, and managers that were involved and invested in the virus business. Their goal IMO was Profit and knowledge and the power that comes with it.

[mugwump]

Originally Posted by Badger52

Indulge please, if you can, but I'm not fully grasping your use of the terms "mild" vs. "early" as used above. It would seem there has been evidence of at least positive results with moderate symptoms using the hydroxychloroquine regime, but you're saying only with "mild" symptoms. How do we know that if "studies" are only starting to see if administered early? It seems to be that "tests" have been conducted in the field but no one wants to collate them to use that information to make a determination.

Early, as in "early in the course of the infection." Mild, as in "mild symptoms vs moderate or severe symptoms." Of the antivirals approved for use in infectious disease (peramivir, zanamivir, oseltamivir phosphate, baloxavir marboxil) all have to be administered early in the course of the infection when symptoms are mild or they just don't work.

If you're still confused over "mild" and "early" there are many rating scales in use by the FDA that big pharma is required to use. You can Google them, try 'CDISC rating scales'.

So I'd appreciate...some info as to your background in this subject.

Ha. Fair enough. I was on a phone when I wrote that 'drek' post and I was remiss in posting no support. But funny how a conspiracy theory is accepted here without pause but a counter-opinion requires vetting of me and not a 5-min Google search of the 'Plandemic' assertions.

My credentials, because I have deep respect for COL Reaper: I dont have a CV, I've never bothered with web sites for my businesses, and I have so many interlocking NDAs I can only talk in general. I have a biology degree (BS) and a K-12 teaching ticket from a third-rate state University. I worked my way through college digging holes for light poles along the Edens Expressway in Chicago. When I was a teen, as I've told several people here privately--COL Moroney and Bill Hersey are the only names I remember--I was an IV methamphetamine addict. A friend of my grandfather--Uncle Ray, no relation and a Guadalcanal Marine--took me in and at times literally beat sense into me. I've been paying that blessing forward ever since.

Relevant experience: 4.5 years as a high school biology teacher in an inner city school. Loved the kids, loved the job, got a tenure exception after 6 months, hated my (mostly) lazy co-workers, and couldn't support my family. After that, forty years in clinical research, including 5.5 years as a money-grubbing employee of a horrible Fortune 100 Big Pharma where my primary focus was antibiotics: third generation cephalosporins, macrolides, and quinolones. I started at the bottom as a CRA (clinical research associate--I was told I'd never be promotable), poring over medical records of cases contributing to New Drug Applications for accuracy and completeness) and left as Director of Development, Antibiotics. Through blind luck, the company's CEO had a 2-year associate degree in textile science from an Iowa community college and couldn't give a toss about degrees. I told him in an open meeting his pet drug was a dog (it was) and should be killed. He looked into it for 3 months, killed the drug had me promoted. During my remaining tenure, I devised two complete Drug Development Plans (preclinical animal testing, Phase I, II, and III protocols with accompanying schedules and budgets) and both programs led to drug approvals after I left the company (couldn't go farther in R&D without an MD and I refused to work in Marketing where they wanted to shift me).

After I left pharma I started a Phase I Clinical Pharmacology Research Unit in London with four physicians associated with Guy's, St Thomas, and Barts hospitals (public/private partnership). I was a Guest Lecturer of pharmacology at Guy's Medical School (mostly in the use of computer technology for Phase I trials but also for coagulopathies caused by 3G cephalosporins, i.e moxalactam) and their sister CPRU at Johns Hopkins (entirely ceremonial, I did bugger all there except visit and eat soup). I sold out of that business and developed a software system that manages recruitment, protocol design and scheduling, automated data collection and analysis from non-invasive blood pressure devices, EEGs, ambulatory 12-lead ECGs, etc. at Phase I research centers. When you hear that Phase I studies for COVID vaccines and therapies are being completed and analyzed at warp speed, our software is a major contributor. Most of big pharma uses our package and it's what got me to the table during the H5N1 years.

I've also built and sold businesses that developed software control systems for gene sequencing systems, chain of custody sample management, real time QTc analysis of ambulatory ECG data streams, and step-forward randomization assignment in multi-center emergency treatment clinical trials. Right now I'm on a team with Big Pharma money grubbers--employees, furloughed with pay from their jobs who volunteered to get trained in handling inherently dangerous viral samples and accession/testing procedures--who are setting up a COVID testing lab to increase local test capacity for county/township nursing homes. The company bought the testing devices and supplies out of their own pocket, is receiving no compensation, and isn't advertising it, but feel free to insert your conspiracy theory here.__________________________________ I'm working pro bono to get the results into the state public health and CDC data systems.

In forty years I've written more clinical research protocols than I can count, I've testified to Congress twice (bleeds associated with moxalactam; ethical considerations of Phase I subject recruitment), FDA advisory panels numerous times, and the UK's MHRA once (the role of Phase I contract research). I've discovered and reported clinical research fraud, been solicited for bribes (Southern Europe) and seen just about every statistical game in the book used to manipulate clinical data and put lipstick on a pig. My bullshit spidey sense is strong.

I came here because my step-son's career goal was Special Forces and his CSM, who loved the kid and is my friend to this day, said it was a good place to glean info. I left here in 2015 (and I remember now that I deleted my profile, sorry but I was effing livid) after a the final camel/straw comment about junkies not deserving rescue. My son had died of an overdose earlier that year, medically discharged with an AKA, TBI, and 90% hearing loss. He became addicted to prescription opiates and had just failed his third rehab stint.

As a side note--and I do know that many/most of you know the score--try to be a bit more kind with your judgement of drug abusers. You don't know their stories and there are a lot of young men struggling--now more than ever as they're isolated and they've lost their support groups.

Well that's an hour I won't get back. And sorry Badger, I think you're a good guy but I have to fight to not be a pr*ck and I have really thin skin even after 40 years of being the only "Mr." in rooms full of MD/PhDs. It's not a very attractive trait but it is what it is.

[mugwump]

Originally Posted by Badger52

There is admittedly a lot to digest in that video. Do a couple things completely negate the entire interview? Do you have knowledge of the accusations made against Dr. Fauci & the pharmaceutical establishment? I'm genuinely curious because "trust" in the government is at an all-time high in a variety of things, and the censorship being directed at that particular item is pretty noticeable.

Are you aware of the accusations against Trump regarding collusion with Putin, financial ties to China, and the fact he's a Lizard Person?

The woman is embittered and has an axe to grind. Her one claim to fame was a Science paper that showed a mouse virus caused chronic fatigue syndrome (myalgic encephalomyelitis) and prostate cancer. She warned of nationwide contamination of the US blood supply and a wave of CFS and prostate cancer. She was forced to remove one figure and two tables from the paper and then the whole thing was retracted without consent after the results couldn't be replicated in a controlled trial. Her technique was shown to be incorrect and sloppy and that her findings were due to contaminated cell lines. She was initially lauded for participating in the follow-up study that disproved her theory but then was pretty much ostracized when she first agreed that the study disproved her case and then moved the goalposts and said the disproving study had an incorrect design, even though she participated in the design and approved it.

https://science.sciencemag.org/conte.../1694.full.pdf

As far as the Fauci "accusations" go, he's been an internal critic of the patent process since its inception and he's given his proceeds to charity (he received $45,000 total over 1997-2005, donated before this erupted, not after). The $8.9M figure the interview throws around was royalty payment to 916 researchers over ten years. The whole program stinks IMO but Fauci isn't at fault.

"Dr Anthony Fauci told the BMJ that as a government employee he was required by law to put his name on the patent for the development of interleukin 2 and was also required by law to receive part of the payment the government received for use of the patent. He said that he felt it was inappropiate to receive payment and donated the entire amount to charity."

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC545012/


Her claim that she was pivotal in HIV research and the CDC was sitting on her research and big pharma colluded with the CDC is just BS. The Pateur Institute published the first HIV paper in May 1983, Gallo et al in May 1984, and her PhD dissertation dribbled along in May 1986. There's no evidence anyone sat on her work for even a couple months and even if they had there's no way Fauci was responsible for "millions of deaths" (that was Ronald Reagan's legacy--look up Everett Bork's comments on this, the best Surgeon General we've had in 100 years). I was working with the leading HIV centers at the time--my rifle 3G parenteral cepahlosporin was in multicenter clinical trials for Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia in AIDS patients--and I was pretty up on this stuff at the time. Her dissertation in 1986 contributed to nothing that I'm aware of.

It's not a "couple things" that negate the interview. It's virtually every point.

[Old Dog New Trick]

Thanks mugwump (thumbs up) only twenty minutes to read but not wasted.

Keep up the good work.

And sorry for your loss, we have all lost more than we found.

[mugwump]

Regarding hydroxychloroquine (HCQ): I think it helps and I'm not aware of a single ICU doc who can't prescribe it. It's the top drug being used in COVID patients (~30% of polled docs use it).

It's untrue that there have been no retrospective analyses of HCQ administation. The problem is that pooling "observational" studies (i.e. anecdotal accounts) from docs in the trenches produces little useful data. Some studies claiming benefit excluded patient deaths (WTF? why?) and many studies changed the goalposts mid-study.

The problem is with assumptions. Docs and politicians were screaming for ventilators ("I need 30,000 ventialtors and I need them now!") and it now looks like vents were execution machines. Over 99% of patients over the age of 60 who were vented in NYC died. You literally had a better chance of of surviving a GSW to the head than getting placed on a vent if you were over 60.

Proning and O2 support are now the gold standard most places with non-invasive high pressure O2 support the preferred device when proning/O2 isn't enough (think CPAP with integrated O2). Vents, when used, are set for low pressure and low inspiration 'pause' rates.

Look back at questions in this thread. I can't remember if I chipped in on the "CPAP is not indicated" bandwagon (it's still not BTW unless you have O2 to go along with it) because someone got in ahead of me, but that was the conventional wisdom because NI ventilators spew aerosols around the whole room and it's an infection risk.

Hosp administrators in NYC were urging *early* invasive vent use "to get a head of the infection curve" even when the patient didn't really need it at that time because they often crashed and the admins were trying to protect the *staff* (invasive vents don't spew virus) over treating the patient. A lot of people died IMO for that reason.

People now think the disease causes micro-clots in the lungs and it's that causing hypoxia, and not pneumonia, causing the damage. My daughter had clots in her legs from this disease and nearly lost a leg.

So it infects the lungs but kills by destroying the heart and circulatory system. Even the first deaths in WA state in Jan were all attributed to heart/circ system effects and not pulmonary effects.

[mugwump]

So what's the point?

HCQ causes QTc prolongation, a heart arrhythmia that can lead to death. It's a known side effect and in healthy peeps isn't often a problem. But when the virus is attacking the heart/circ system endothelium? What about then? No one knows.

Folks were *sure* that invasive vents were the bee's knees just 3 weeks ago and not the guillotines they turned out to be.

You're replacing the service weapon for the Army: is "I used it a few times and it seems to work" good enough?

The left is desperately hoping it doesn't work, the right that it does. Both want "neener neener" rights. The PETAL network will answer the question.

https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news...ovid-19-begins

Until then, no one is going to stick their neck out.

Costa Rica is teaming with the Chinese to admin HCQ early in the disease state and as prophylaxis in HCworkers it looks like it may be working. Per usual with the Chinese, the study is crap and will only produce anecdotal results but they appear to have low disease incidence when it's used prophylactically. But who knows, they have low background rates anyway.

[Badger52]

Originally Posted by mugwump

Well that's an hour I won't get back. And sorry Badger, I think you're a good guy but I have to fight to not be a pr*ck and I have really thin skin even after 40 years of being the only "Mr." in rooms full of MD/PhDs. It's not a very attractive trait but it is what it is.

Fine bidness. I very much appreciate the indulgence and thanks for taking the time with your views on several questions, e.g. the video, stages of the disease, etc. Was not aware of the personal aspects and you'll not get trivializing of substance abuse issues out of me - I know & deal with too many of the cast-offs from a local VAMC.
Drive on sir.

[Pete]

Originally Posted by mugwump

... The PETAL network will answer the question....

I would think it's a rigged study with an outcome fixed before it's finished.

As far as I read it's only HCQ.

Everything I've read said it works best along with Zinc and Zpacs.

Any reason why the study dropped the other two?

A lot of time tin foil hat stuff is based on good reasons.

[Badger52]

Originally Posted by Pete

I would think it's a rigged study with an outcome fixed before it's finished.

As far as I read it's only HCQ.

Everything I've read said it works best along with Zinc and Zpacs.

Any reason why the study dropped the other two?

A lot of time tin foil hat stuff is based on good reasons.

My reading in the last few weeks is the same regarding a "cocktail" of sorts with those other 2 (zinc & Azithromicin) also administered (and mugwump this is not a dig at your citing of the ongoing study). But it does seem that, whether from Chicoms teaming with Costa Rica or physicians across the US, anything not done by NIH/CDC gets treated as "anecdotal" and that word gets used in a dismissive manner. It may be an incorrect impression but the administration spends a lot of time on messaging to the peasants.