Coronavirus (COVID-19)

[mission27]

Just now, SlevinKelevra said:

 

you literally said yesterday you send it to Wall Street buddies.   MAybe you were just saying that for provocation, but if anyone (as idiotic as it would be) is moving the stock market because of this inane crap, then you're responsible for it.

 

Yes because folks on FF are trading in high enough volumes to move $20 trillion markets

But we are happy to add a disclaimer to our post every day that our rankings represent our opinions and are not meant to be construed as medical or investment advice.  We will continue to provide completely baseless investment advice in the Stock Investing thread as we have for the past half decade

[TVScout]

I don't remember if this has been posted already so...........

FWIW:

Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and spread

Quote

Background

Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) is caused by a newly discovered coronavirus (SARS-CoV). No effective prophylactic or post-exposure therapy is currently available.

Results

We report, however, that chloroquine has strong antiviral effects on SARS-CoV infection of primate cells. These inhibitory effects are observed when the cells are treated with the drug either before or after exposure to the virus, suggesting both prophylactic and therapeutic advantage. In addition to the well-known functions of chloroquine such as elevations of endosomal pH, the drug appears to interfere with terminal glycosylation of the cellular receptor, angiotensin-converting enzyme 2. This may negatively influence the virus-receptor binding and abrogate the infection, with further ramifications by the elevation of vesicular pH, resulting in the inhibition of infection and spread of SARS CoV at clinically admissible concentrations.

Conclusion

Chloroquine is effective in preventing the spread of SARS CoV in cell culture. Favorable inhibition of virus spread was observed when the cells were either treated with chloroquine prior to or after SARS CoV infection. In addition, the indirect immunofluorescence assay described herein represents a simple and rapid method for screening SARS-CoV antiviral compounds.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1232869/

[SlevinKelevra]

1 minute ago, mission27 said:

Yes because folks on FF are trading in high enough volumes to move $20 trillion markets

But we are happy to add a disclaimer to our post every day that our rankings represent our opinions and are not meant to be construed as medical or investment advice.  We will continue to provide completely baseless investment advice in the Stock Investing thread as we have for the past half decade

 

How about you just disclose your methods instead?  I mean it"s just a "joke" and for "memes" and not to be used for anything serious.  So what's the harm?  Think someone is going to upstage your circle-like ?

 

[mission27]

1 minute ago, SlevinKelevra said:

 

How about you just disclose your methods instead?  I mean it"s just a "joke" and for "memes" and not to be used for anything serious.  So what's the harm?  Think someone is going to upstage your circle-like ?

 

We have disclosed our methods and I'm not going to argue with you about whether you have a better method or not

[SlevinKelevra]

1 minute ago, mission27 said:

We have disclosed our methods and I'm not going to argue with you about whether you have a better method or not

ok, link me to the post where you give the equation/formula for the values shown in your spreadsheet.

I must have missed it.

 

[TVScout]

Very jargonish article that explains how problems with testing are leading to false positives WRT reinfection.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2196-x_reference.pdf

[mission27]

1 minute ago, SlevinKelevra said:

ok, link me to the post where you give the equation/formula for the values shown in your spreadsheet.

I must have missed it.

 

We have said numerous times it is based on looking at trailing averages of daily new cases over past N days vs. active cases N days ago

You can adjust those parameters however you'd like and come up with a model similar to the MoL in about 20 minutes.  Its really not that complicated.  The piece we are considering adding that is a bit complicated is an adjustment for testing but we aren't there yet

[theJ]

36 minutes ago, mission27 said:

 

If you want to call it entertainment that's one way to look at it.  I prefer to look at it as we are providing our opinion on the state of the outbreak in a useful format.  If people choose to follow what we are saying because they find it informative and it is laid out in a helpful format, ok.  If not fine.  Personally I've heard from a lot of people that it is helpful and don't want folks to think we are making a joke out of it.  However nothing we post should construed as advice, medical or otherwise.

I'd be happy to add a disclaimer to the effect of "These rankings represent the opinion of the MoL informed by our model and have not been vetted by any academic community,  government body, the WHO, or CDC.  They should not be taken as advice, medical or otherwise, and are purely meant to be entertaining and informative." 

Thank you.  For the record, i never called it entertainment.  I find you and TLO entertaining, as well as this whole conversion.

Also, this was entertaining:

34 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

I'm now spending my workday haggling over the disclaimer wording in a meme ranking post that I had historically ignored.

What the hell am I doing with my life.

 

[TLO]

57 minutes ago, mistakey said:

na, actually i called for mods/leaders to push back for rigor, but in the absence of anyone tolerating that (which still blows my mind) or @ramssuperbowl99 pretty decent compromise solution, yeah you probably should stop it if its the last resort, especially if the forum gains a reputation for these said rankings which webmaster could deem "bad for business" in rule #8. 

Maybe the mods didn’t find it necessary to push academic rigor for a model that explicitly states that there are arbitrary smugness and taylor swift quote adjustments. Your (and slevin or whatever his name is) reaction has given way more weight to these rankings than was ever intended. 

[mistakey]

Just now, TLO said:

Maybe the mods didn’t find it necessary to push academic rigor for a model that explicitly states that there are arbitrary smugness and taylor swift quote adjustments. Your (and slevin or whatever his name is) reaction has given way more weight to these rankings than was ever intended. 

ah the ol "i definitely want people to take my "opinions" seriously but in order to have an out ill throw my comedic shtick in there so i can claim victory when challenged" argument

[Shanedorf]

7 minutes ago, TVScout said:

I don't remember if this has been posted already so...........

FWIW:

Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and spread

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1232869/

They left out the most important part of that sentence !

"Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and spread in cell culture"

We've talked about this one on a couple of occasions and let me re-iterate some additional context to what they are actually saying
Let's start with the fact that the paper was published in 2005, 15 years before SARS-COV2 was identified. So the paper is talking about non-COVID19 viruses from the same family - but not the current virus.

"We report, however, that chloroquine has strong antiviral effects on SARS-CoV infection of primate cells" 

Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine show anti-viral effects vs SARS-COV2 in cell culture ( aka test tubes or in vitro). And since they are already-approved drugs, its a potentially faster path to a treatment. So these were some of the first drugs tested out.

But having activity in a test tube is a Grand Canyon away from saying this is a viable therapeutic for humans vs corona. What has been seen in the human clinical studies is that the dose needed to achieve the anti-corona effects is much higher than what many humans can safely take. Anywhere between 25-33% of the patients who were given this med at anti-corona dose levels showed potentially fatal heart arrhythmia.

When you do an experiment in a cell culture/test tube, what you are learning is
qualitative: Does it kill the virus ?
quantitative: What dose is required to achieve that killing ? 

Then the next step is to see how much you'd have to dose a human in order to have enough of the drug deep in the lung tissues to show an effect. And unfortunately, the doses required are much higher than acceptable given the known side effects.

So for a large portion of the population, this is just not an acceptable risk/reward equation. Chloroquine / hydroxychloroquine may be used in some cases, they are not worthless. But unfortunately, they are not the answer we're looking for given the known safety issues

[mistakey]

https://news.yahoo.com/emergency-room-doctor-near-death-054816082.html

Quote

 

The immune system normally uses proteins called cytokines as weapons in fighting a disease. For unknown reasons in some COVID-19 patients, the immune system first fails to respond quickly enough and then floods the body with cytokines, destroying blood vessels and filling the lungs with fluid.

The doctors tried a drug called Actemra, which was designed to treat rheumatoid arthritis but also approved in 2017 to treat cytokine storms in cancer patients.

"Our role was to quiet the storm," said Dr. Samuel Youssef, a cardiac surgeon. "Dr. Padgett was able to clear the virus" once his immune system was back in balance.

 

 

[TLO]

1 minute ago, mistakey said:

ah the ol "i definitely want people to take my "opinions" seriously but in order to have an out ill throw my comedic shtick in there so i can claim victory when challenged" argument

You are fighting a losing argument here. You’re asking for a disclaimer on our numbers which have, all along, always said that there are adjustments for smugness and taylor swift while including a picture of a goat. If you can show a time where the comedic shtick of the MoL has wasn’t included in the rankings, then maybe you’d have an argument. But you can’t, and you don’t. It’s like you haven’t read any of our posts here in the better part of the last decade.

we find the numbers fun and easy to track as a baseline. There’s literally nothing more to it than that. If you want to get riled up over it, that’s more than up to you. 
 

[mistakey]

https://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/local-doctor-tries-new-coronavirus-drug-treatment/2219465/

doctors adding invermectin to their experimental drug cocktails in a florida hospital - seems to be working as well

[mistakey]

1 minute ago, TLO said:

You are fighting a losing argument here. You’re asking for a disclaimer on our numbers which have, all along, always said that there are adjustments for smugness and taylor swift while including a picture of a goat. If you can show a time where the comedic shtick of the MoL has wasn’t included in the rankings, then maybe you’d have an argument. But you can’t, and you don’t. It’s like you haven’t read any of our posts here in the better part of the last decade.

we find the numbers fun and easy to track as a baseline. There’s literally nothing more to it than that. If you want to get riled up over it, that’s more than up to you. 
 

i actually didnt ask you to put the disclaimer in there.  if you wanted to provide numbers all i thought responsible is in colloquial terms "put up or shut up" especially if it was just a meme (although your buddy said it wasnt a joke and thought it was very helpful - might want to get the messaging straight).  but, ya'll didnt take kindly to that.