Covid-19 / SARS-Cov2 - naučne/medicinske informacije i analize

[𝓑𝓪𝓫𝔂]

8 minutes ago, Angelia said:

Baby, ja stvarno nemam pojma sta je tebe Tramp spopao toliko.

Dosta ljudi prati te cifre i na osnovu njih donosi zakljucke i komentarise, moja ideja je bila obavestiti ljude da cifre nisu tacne.

Odoh ja u prodavnicu - to je verovatno zato sto se ceo svet urotio protiv Trampa  ili ti je tesko za poverovati da ljudi imaju zivot i ne misle o Trampu po ceo dan.

TDS je veliki problem....

 

Andjo, ja nemam ni tri godine ni tri vijuge da ne vidim sta ko i zasto pise... a najbolje je ono izmedju redova, uvek. 

[wwww]

 

[Angelia]

58 minutes ago, Baby said:

 

Andjo, ja nemam ni tri godine ni tri vijuge da ne vidim sta ko i zasto pise... a najbolje je ono izmedju redova, uvek. 

Aha  u svakom slucaju lepo si me nasmejala, malo je nezgodno to izmedju redova, tamo samo prazno nista....probaj da citas u redovima, lakse je.

[𝓑𝓪𝓫𝔂]

6 minutes ago, Angelia said:

Aha  u svakom slucaju lepo si me nasmejala, malo je nezgodno to izmedju redova, tamo samo prazno nista....probaj da citas u redovima, lakse je.

 

Ti si u redovima worldmeter nasla da oni laziraju podatke pretenciozno? 

 

Zbog? 

 

Preterujes. Pises kao da tebi direktno isporucuju iz mrtvacnice sa obdukcija koliko je ljudi umrlo u PA od virusa i onda optuzujes. 

Da li je bitno uopste posle 100k umrlih jer 1% gore ili dole? 

 

Ja bre nemam pojma u mojoj zgradi da li neko ima virus ili ne, jer nam to ne saopstavaju, a ti sve znas sta se desava u drzavi. Svaka cast! 

 

Da dodam: kada su neki mediji izasli sa imenima umrlih odmah se javila gomila koja je rekla da su imena izmisljena. 

Edited May 29, 2020 by Baby

[Angelia]

9 minutes ago, Baby said:

 

Ti si u redovima worldmeter nasla da oni laziraju podatke pretenciozno? 

 

Zbog? 

 

Preterujes. Pises kao da tebi direktno isporucuju iz mrtvacnice sa obdukcija koliko je ljudi umrlo u PA od virusa i onda optuzujes. 

Da li je bitno uopste posle 100k umrlih jer 1% gore ili dole? 

 

Ja bre nemam pojma u mojoj zgradi da li neko ima virus ili ne, jer nam to ne saopstavaju, a ti sve znas sta se desava u drzavi. Svaka cast! 

 

Da dodam: kada su neki mediji izasli sa imenima umrlih odmah se javila gomila koja je rekla da su imena izmisljena. 

Gde si procitala pretenciozno? i nije 1% nego vise od 5%.

Jbga sta da ti kazem, citam dosta vesti....

[𝓑𝓪𝓫𝔂]

1 minute ago, Angelia said:

Gde si procitala pretenciozno? i nije 1% nego vise od 5%.

Jbga sta da ti kazem, citam dosta vesti....

 

3 hours ago, Angelia said:

Kompanija ima svoje razloge zasto to radi.

I nisam nista drvlje i kamenje, razlika od 5% i vise nije bas zanemarljiva a nisam ni proveravala ostale, jednostavno su trebali da stave upozorenje da im se podaci ne poklapaju sa zvanicnim.  Umesto toga su to zakopali u dugackom textu gde su za to krivi izvori.

PA recimo postavlja zvanicne podatke u 1.20 pm EST, a oni u 11 am imaju 20 umrlih za Philly, onda Philly objavi da imaju 10 i cifre se ne promene.

 

Netacno da ima 5%, citas pogresne vesti. Eno par postova iznad je @wwww iznela koliko je po worldmeteru koliko po hopkinsu, za celu US je razlika oko 1 i nesto postotak. 

 

Zasto to rade?

 

[Angelia]

6 minutes ago, Baby said:

 

 

Netacno da ima 5%, citas pogresne vesti. Eno par postova iznad je @wwww iznela koliko je po worldmeteru koliko po hopkinsu, za celu US je razlika oko 1 i nesto postotak. 

 

Zasto to rade?

 

Nemam pojma, ja se nisam bavila njihovom motivacijom. Nisam proveravala celu US, navela sam za PA, a tu je razlika skoro 6%.

 

Sad vec pocinjes da smaras, nemam pojma zasto ti nije jasno da neko moze da ponudi informaciju koju je video bez nikakvog daljeg komentara.

[𝓑𝓪𝓫𝔂]

6 minutes ago, Angelia said:

Nemam pojma, ja se nisam bavila njihovom motivacijom. Nisam proveravala celu US, navela sam za PA, a tu je razlika skoro 6%.

 

Sad vec pocinjes da smaras, nemam pojma zasto ti nije jasno da neko moze da ponudi informaciju koju je video bez nikakvog daljeg komentara.

 

Ok Andjo, posto tvoja mora biti zadnja bez presedana, ostavljam te ovde (da te ne smaram vise) jer odgovor koji je razlog zasto oni iznose netacne podatke necu dobiti.

PA malecan u odnosu na sta oni rade - prikupljaju podatke iz celog sveta. A ti slobodno pucaj u postara. 

[Eddard]

Ok, ajd sad dosta.

[wwww]

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/368/6493/808

Case clustering emerges as key pandemic puzzle

Quote

When 61 people met for a choir practice in a church in Mount Vernon, Washington, on 10 March, everything seemed normal. For 2.5 hours the chorists sang, snacked on cookies and oranges, and sang some more. But one of them had been suffering for 3 days from what felt like a cold—and turned out to be COVID-19. In the following weeks, 53 choir members got sick, three were hospitalized, and two died, according to a 12 May report by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) that meticulously reconstructed the tragedy.

 

Many similar “superspreading events” have occurred in the COVID-19 pandemic. A database by Gwenan Knight and colleagues at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (LSHTM) lists an outbreak in a dormitory for migrant workers in Singapore linked to almost 800 cases; 80 infections tied to live music venues in Osaka, Japan; and a cluster of 65 cases resulting from Zumba classes in South Korea. Clusters have also occurred aboard ships and at nursing homes, meatpacking plants, ski resorts, churches, restaurants, hospitals, and prisons. Sometimes a single person infects dozens of people, whereas other clusters unfold across several generations of spread, in multiple venues.

 

Quote

Other infectious diseases also spread in clusters. But COVID-19, like two of its cousins, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), seems especially prone to attacking groups of tightly connected people while sparing others. It's an encouraging finding, scientists say, because it suggests that restricting gatherings where superspreading is likely to occur will have a major impact on transmission and that other restrictions—on outdoor activity, for example—might be eased.

 

 

Quote

“If you can predict what circumstances are giving rise to these events, the math shows you can really, very quickly curtail the ability of the disease to spread,” says Jamie Lloyd-Smith of the University of California, Los Angeles, who has studied the spread of many pathogens.

 

Most of the discussion around the spread of SARS-CoV-2 has concentrated on the average number of new infections caused by each patient. Without social distancing, this reproduction number (R) is about three. But in real life, some people infect many others and others don't spread the disease at all. In fact, the latter is the norm, Lloyd-Smith says: “The consistent pattern is that the most common number is zero. Most people do not transmit.”

 

That's why in addition to R, scientists use a value called the dispersion factor (k), which describes how much a disease clusters. The lower k is, the more transmission comes from a small number of people. In a seminal 2005 Nature paper, Lloyd-Smith and co-authors estimated that SARS—in which superspreading played a major role—had a k of 0.16. The estimated k for MERS, which emerged in 2012, is about 0.25. In the flu pandemic of 1918, in contrast, the value was about one, indicating that clusters played less of a role.

 

Quote

Estimates of k for SARS-CoV-2 vary. In January, researchers at the University of Bern simulated the epidemic in China for different combinations of R and k and compared the outcomes with what had actually taken place. They concluded that k for COVID-19 is somewhat higher than for SARS and MERS. But in a March preprint, Adam Kucharski of LSHTM estimated it's only 0.1. “Probably about 10% of cases lead to 80% of the spread,” Kucharski says.

 

If he is right, SARS-CoV-2 needs to be introduced undetected into a new country at least four times to have an even chance of establishing itself, Kucharski says. That may explain why the virus did not take off around the world sooner after it emerged in China, and why some very early cases elsewhere—such as one in France in late December 2019, reported on 3 May—apparently failed to ignite a wider outbreak. If the Chinese epidemic was a big fire that sent sparks flying around the world, most of the sparks simply fizzled out.

 

 

 

Edited May 29, 2020 by wwww

[wwww]

 

Quote

Why coronaviruses cluster so much more than other pathogens is “a really interesting open scientific question,” says Christophe Fraser of the University of Oxford, who has studied superspreading in Ebola and HIV. Their mode of transmission may be one factor. SARS-CoV-2 appears to transmit mostly through droplets, but it does occasionally spread through finer aerosols that can stay suspended in the air, enabling one person to infect many. Most published large transmission clusters “seem to implicate aerosol transmission,” Fraser says.

 

Individual patients' characteristics play a role as well. Some people shed far more virus, and for a longer period of time, than others, perhaps because of differences in their immune system or the distribution of virus receptors in their body. A 2019 study of healthy people showed some breathe out many more particles than others when they talk. (The volume at which they spoke explained some of the variation.) Singing may release more virus than speaking, which could help explain the choir outbreaks. People's behavior also plays a role. Having many social contacts or not washing your hands makes you more likely to pass on the virus.

 

Quote

Superspreading usually happens indoors. Researchers in China studying the spread of the coronavirus outside Hubei province—ground zero for the pandemic—identified 318 clusters of three or more cases between 4 January and 11 February, only one of which originated outdoors. A study in Japan found that the risk of infection indoors is almost 19 times higher than outdoors. Some situations may be particularly risky. Meatpacking plants are likely vulnerable because many people work closely together in spaces where low temperature helps the virus survive.

 

Quote

If public health workers knew where clusters are likely to happen, they could try to prevent them and avoid shutting down broad swaths of society, Kucharski says. “Shutdowns are an incredibly blunt tool,” he says. “You're basically saying: We don't know enough about where transmission is happening to be able to target it, so we're just going to target all of it.”

 

But studying large COVID-19 clusters is harder than it seems. Many countries have not collected the kind of detailed contact tracing data needed. And the shutdowns have been so effective that they also robbed researchers of a chance to study superspreading events. (Before the shutdowns, “there was probably a 2-week window of opportunity when a lot of these data could have been collected,” Fraser says.)

 

Quote

The research is also prone to bias. People are more likely to remember attending a basketball game than, say, getting a haircut, a phenomenon called recall bias that may make clusters seem bigger than they are. Clusters that have an interesting social angle—such as prison outbreaks—may get more media coverage and thus jump out to researchers, while others remain hidden. Clusters of mostly asymptomatic infections may be missed altogether.

 

Privacy is another concern. Untangling the links between patients can reveal who was at the origin of a cluster or expose information about people's private lives. In its report about the chorus, CDC left out a seating map that could show who brought the virus to the practice. Some clubs involved in the new South Korean cluster were gay venues, which resulted in an antigay backlash and made contact tracing harder.

 

 

 

[wwww]

Prof Drosten je juce pricao o klasterima u podcastu.

(negde od sredine):

https://www.ndr.de/nachrichten/info/44-Coronavirus-Update-Die-rote-Murmel-kontrollieren,podcastcoronavirus216.html

ima deo o statistici

 

pricao je o neravnomernom sirenju virusa, gde npr. od 9 inficiranih svako zarazi po jednog, a deseti zarazi 10 ljudi. U zavisnosti kad se taj deseti pojavi u nizu zavisi koliko treba virusu da krene rapidno da se siri. Pa je onda dao primercic kako bi mogla da se razvija epidemija. Skraceno to bi recimo ovako nekako izgledalo:

prve sedmice jedan zarazeni zarazi jednog, taj u roku od narednih 7 dana zarazi narednog, pa onda taj naredni zarazi jednog, dok se onda jedne od tih sedmica ne pojavvi taj "deseti" zarazeni koji ce da zarazi 10 novih. Tu sad krece rapidno povecavanje broja inficiranih. Skraceno to bi nekako ovako izgledalo (ako izbacim sedmice kada jedan zarazeni zarazi samo jednog narednog):

 

1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14	15
1	10	19	28	55	100	190	370	703	1333	2530	4807	9127	17335	32932
1	10	9	9	25	50	90	170	333	633	1200	2277	4327	8215	15602
		10	9	10	10	100	200	370	700	1330	2530	4800	9120	17330
			10	10	10
				10	10
					10
					10

 

prvi red su recimo sedmice/generacija

drugi red je porast broja inficiranih

a ispod je kako druge sedmice taj jedan superspreader zarazi 10

pa trece sedmice od tih 10, njih 9 ce svaki zaraziti samo po jednog, ali ce taj deseti da zarazi narednih deset, sto daje 19 zarazenih

i tako iz sedmice u sedmicu: na svakih 9 koji zaraze po jednog dodje jedan superspreader koji zarazi deset novih. (znaci, prvi red ovde su oni koji zaraze samo po jednog narednog, a red ispod su superspreaderi)

Vrlo brzo upadamo u eksponencijalni rast broja zarazenih.

 

 

 

Edited May 29, 2020 by wwww

[Angelia]

6 hours ago, Angelia said:

Kompanija ima svoje razloge zasto to radi.

 

 

2 hours ago, Baby said:

 

 

Zasto to rade?

 

 

2 hours ago, Eddard said:

Ok, ajd sad dosta.

Izvini eddarde ali ovo zahteva korekciju.

 

Moj odgovor da kompanija ima svoje razloge zasto to rade, se odnosio na odrzavanje sajta za koji je baby rekla da rade za dzabe. Zasto sam to rekla, jer sam procitala intervju sa bivsim vlasnikom, koji je tvrdio da je sajt od njega kupljen da bi se povecao protok na druge sajtove novog vlasnika. Inace slabo ko je cuo za sajt pre ove pandemije.

 

Taj komentar se nije odnosio na razloge zasto imaju greske u podacima, niti je bila nekakva insinuacija da postoje neke tendencije. Nego jednostavno baby cita izmedju redova, a ja pisem u redovima.....

 

Zasto imaju greske u podacima, ne znam, znam samo da imaju. jbga i ja mislila nekom ce podatak biti koristan. Umesto toga na dve strane moram da se pitam kakve veze ima Tramp sa pogresnim podacima na sajtu.

[wwww]

https://covid.idmod.org/data/Stochasticity_heterogeneity_transmission_dynamics_SARS-CoV-2.pdf

Stochasticity and heterogeneity in the transmissiondynamics of SARS-CoV-2

[ciao]

On 5/24/2020 at 4:00 AM, wwww said:

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31180-6/fulltext

Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: a multinational registry analysis

 

 

 

Objavljivanje ovog rada je zestoko uzburkalo i naucni svet i okolo, sada se vec uveliko prica o LancetGate. To se i ocekivalo od objavljivanja rada medju ljudima koji se bave tim, ukratko :

- autori rada su prakticno nepoznati medju ljudima koji se bave tim, u principu zna se ko pripada vrhu struku a ko je nepoznat isto kao sto se zna naprimer ko je Rafa Nadal u tenisu a ko je nepoznati bivsi teniser za koga se nikad nije culo i to odmah stvara naravno podozrivost. S druge strane 96000 pacijenata koji su kao analizirani nije jasno koji su to pacijenti, gde je to radjeno i sl.

Ispostavilo se da to uopste nije studija radjena od strane "struke" nego je to kompilacija postojecih podataka u bolnicama, nije cak jasno ni kojim, za jednu koju su pomenuli da je u Australiji se ispostavilo da nije tacno pa su se autori popravili da je to ustvari negde u Aziji itd. Znaci to nije rad naucnika nego rad "Big Data" ljudi.

Konkretno je bilo "pokazano" u radu da upotreba chlorokina nije efikasna u lecenju korone i da moze da bude i opasna medjutim postoji par elementarnih "gresaka" u polazu a to je da su svi slucajevi koji su analizirani ljudi koji su bili u bolnici znaci vec u polazu tezi slucajevi korone, Raoult od pocetka insistira i ponavlja svaki put kad su ga pitali da njegov protokol lecenja zajedno sa antibiotikom je efikasan samo u pocetnom stadijumu, kada virus korone jos nije dosao do pluca i poceo da rastura pluca a da kada dodje to toga ne moze da pomogne i insistira da njegov protokol ne leci ljude nego ubrzava lecenje ljudi koji bi se i sami izborili a sem toga postoji i detaljan spisak kontraindikacija povodom eventualnih kardiovaskularnih probleme ili sa bubrezima u kom slucaju je kontraindikativno uzimati taj lek i ne treba ga uzimati (kao i za sve ostale lekove). Ova studija je znaci generalno uzela teze slucajeve koji su vec na bolnickom lecenju i "pokazala" da im cloroqin tj terapija sa njim ne pomaze - to niko nije ni tvrdio.

- zasto to sve i zasto je bas taj rad izazvao toliko prica i posledica (cak je francuski ministar ukinuli davanje terapije u Fra trenutno ocekuje se da ce da povuce odluku) - zna se da je Lancet poslednjih godina finansiran izuzetno mnogo (sto inace ne bi trebalo da bude slucaj uopste ali zna se da jeste oni to i ne kriju) od strane farmaceutskih industrija, na prvom mestu Gilead - a clorokin da ponovimo jos jednom nikome takoreci ne donosi pare pogotovo ne velike jer je dobro poznat lek i mnogo upotrebljavan vec jako dugo i vrlo jeftin.

 

I jos jednom : protokol : cloroqin + antibiotik se pokazao uspesan da ubrza proces oporavljanja kod pacijenata koji su dobili koronu a virus nije poceo da rastura organizam a i u tim slucajevima treba ga uzimati u preciznim dozama i ako pacijenti nemaju kontraindikacije za upotrebu tih lekova.

Raoult je to tvrdio od pocetka, nikakva cudotvorna svojstva leku nije pripisivao nikad a za ovo je pokazao da pomaze.

 

 

 

 

Edited May 30, 2020 by ciao

[Sunshine State]

 "Fourteen-day isolation periods are not necessary to defeat the coronavirus and a second wave of infections can be avoided, Germany’s leading government scientist said on Friday.

With what is now known about the virus, it is possible to contain further outbreaks, claimed Prof Christian Drosten, chief advisor to Angela Merkel’s government on the crisis."

 

https://news.yahoo.com/isolation-14-days-unnecessary-claims-134829445.html

 

@wwww

 

[wwww]

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/29/health/coronavirus-transmission-dose.html

It’s Not Whether You Were Exposed to the Virus. It’s How Much.

The pathogen is proving a familiar adage: The dose makes the poison.

 

When experts recommend wearing masks, staying at least six feet away from others, washing your hands frequently and avoiding crowded spaces, what they’re really saying is: Try to minimize the amount of virus you encounter.

A few viral particles cannot make you sick — the immune system would vanquish the intruders before they could. But how much virus is needed for an infection to take root? What is the minimum effective dose? A precise answer is impossible, because it’s difficult to capture the moment of infection. Scientists are studying ferrets, hamsters and mice for clues but, of course, it wouldn’t be ethical for scientists to expose people to different doses of the coronavirus, as they do with milder cold viruses.

 

For SARS, also a coronavirus, the estimated infective dose is just a few hundred particles. For MERS, the infective dose is much higher, on the order of thousands of particles. The new coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, is more similar to the SARS virus and, therefore, the infectious dose may be hundreds of particles, Dr. Rasmussen said.

Generally, people who harbor high levels of pathogens — whether from influenza, H.I.V. or SARS — tend to have more severe symptoms and are more likely to pass on the pathogens to others.

 

But in the case of the new coronavirus, people who have no symptoms seem to have viral loads — that is, the amount of virus in their bodies — just as high as those who are seriously ill, according to some studies. And coronavirus patients are most infectious two to three days before symptoms begin, less so after the illness really hits. Some people are generous transmitters of the coronavirus; others are stingy. So-called super-spreaders seem to be particularly gifted in transmitting it, although it’s unclear whether that’s because of their biology or their behavior. On the receiving end, the shape of a person’s nostrils and the amount of nose hair and mucus present — as well as the distribution of certain cellular receptors in the airway that the virus needs to latch on to — can all influence how much virus it takes to become infected. A higher dose is clearly worse, though, and that may explain why some young health care workers have fallen victim even though the virus usually targets older people.

...

People may take in virus by touching a contaminated surface and then putting their hands on their nose or mouth. But “this isn’t thought to be the main way the virus spreads,” according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. That form of transmission may require millions more copies of the virus to cause an infection, compared to inhalation. Coughing, sneezing, singing, talking and even heavy breathing can result in the expulsion of thousands of large and small respiratory droplets carrying the virus.

“It’s clear that one doesn’t have to be sick and coughing and sneezing for transmission to occur,” said Dr. Dan Barouch, a viral immunologist at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston. Larger droplets are heavy and float down quickly — unless there’s a breeze or an air-conditioning blast — and can’t penetrate surgical masks. But droplets less than 5 microns in diameter, called aerosols, can linger in the air for hours. “They travel further, last longer and have the potential of more spread than the large droplets,” Dr. Barouch said.

Three factors seem to be particularly important for aerosol transmission: proximity to the infected person, air flow and timing.

...

Recently, Dutch researchers used a special spray nozzle to simulate the expulsion of saliva droplets and then tracked their movement. The scientists found that just cracking open a door or a window can banish aerosols.

Observations from two hospitals in Wuhan, China, published in April in the journal Nature, determined much the same thing: more aerosolized particles were found in unventilated toilet areas than in airier patient rooms or crowded public areas.

...

Apart from avoiding crowded indoor spaces, the most effective thing people can do is wear masks, all of the experts said. Even if masks don’t fully shield you from droplets loaded with virus, they can cut down the amount you receive, and perhaps bring it below the infectious dose. “This is not a virus for which hand washing seems like it will be enough,” Dr. Rabinowitz said. “We have to limit crowds, we have to wear masks.”

 

 

[Asterion]

Global Deaths Due to Various Causes and COVID-19

[Angelia]

Malo sam pazljivije pogledala cifre na worldometer, Italija, Nemacka, UK.....podaci uzeti sa zvanicnih sajtova, znaci cifre se poklapaju.

US razlika u broju slucajeva, skoro 60,000 vise na worldometer nego zvanicno, umrlih preko 2,000 vise.

Edited June 1, 2020 by Angelia

[Tomiprunet]

Ko sad onda skriva brojke? 

[nonick]

marsovci

[Sunshine State]

http://rs.n1info.com/Zdravlje/a605523/Pandemija-prekinula-lecenje-dijabeticara-i-pacijenata-sa-visokim-pritiskom.html

 

"U istraživanju sprovedenom tokom maja, SZO je uočila probleme u lečenju bolesnika koji nisu zaraženi virusom, ali su izloženi većem riziku od teških komplikacija zbog izostanka terapije za svoje bolesti.

"Mnogim ljudima koji boluju od raka, kardiovaskularnih bolesti i dijabetesa uskraćene su zdravstvene usluge i lekovi koji su im potrebni, otkad je počela pandemija Kovid-19," rekao je generalni direktor SZO Tedros Adhanom Gebrejesus."

[ciao]

On 5/24/2020 at 4:00 AM, wwww said:

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31180-6/fulltext

Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: a multinational registry

 

 

 

Nastavak : Casopis The Lancet se sada zvanicno distancirao od ove publikacije i WHO je ponovo odobrila upotrebu hydrochloroqina

 

https://www.francetvinfo.fr/sante/maladie/coronavirus/coronavirus-l-oms-annonce-la-reprise-des-essais-cliniques-sur-l-hydroxychloroquine_3993655.html

[Laki21]

Kakva je to igranka... Šta se sve neće raditi zbog para.

 

I slepcu je bilo jasno nakon ovoliko vremena da hidrohlorokin/hlorodin primenjen u ranoj fazi bolesti pozitivno deluje na lečenje i tok iste. Međutim ta činjenica očito ne sme biti javno potvrđena, isključivo iz razloga da bi mogli da se valjaju i hiljadu puta skuplji lekovi. Bagra farmaceutska.

[𝓑𝓪𝓫𝔂]

Quote

Hidroksihlorokvin je neefikasan u sprečavanju COVID-19: studija

 

Lijek protiv malarije koji je predsjednik Trump uzeo kao preventivnu mjeru protiv COVID-19 ne štiti ljude od zaraze bolesti, pokazalo je istraživanje objavljeno u srijedu u Nev England Journal of Medicine. Studija je pregledala 821 osobu iz SAD-a i Kanade koji su bili izloženi koronavirusu i otkrili su da ih hidroksiklorokin ne sprečava da obole. „Naš cilj je bio da odgovorimo na pitanje da li hidroksihlorokvin deluje na sprečavanje bolesti ili ne deluje“, rekao je Dejvid Boulvare, koji je pokrenuo suđenje na Univerzitetu u Minesoti u martu. 

 

„Iako smo razočarani što to nije sprečilo COVID-19, drago nam je što smo uspeli da pružimo konačan odgovor. Naš cilj je bio pronaći odgovor. " Neki pacijenti su dobijali placebo, a drugi su dobijali hidroksihlorokvin pet dana, a zatim su pratili dve nedelje da vide da li su razvili bolest. Oko 12 procenata pacijenata koji su dobijali hidroksihlorokvin, a 14 procenata pacijenata koji su dobijali placebo razvilo je COVID-19. Studija je bila dvostruko slepa, što znači da ni pacijenti ni istraživači nisu znali šta pacijentima daju. Većina pacijenata su bili zdravstveni radnici koji su bili izloženi COVID-19 na poslu. Četrdeset procenata pacijenata razvilo je ozbiljne neželjene efekte, uključujući mučninu, uznemireni stomak ili proliv, ali nisu otkrivene ozbiljnije nuspojave ili srčane komplikacije. Upotreba hidroksihlorokina za lečenje i sprečavanje COVID-19 postala je kontroverzna nakon što ju je Trump promovirao. 

 

Prošlog meseca je uzimao lek dve nedelje nakon što mu je lični bolesnik dijagnostikovan COVID-19. "U to dovoljno verujem da sam uzeo program jer sam u Beloj kući imao dve osobe koje su bile pozitivne", rekao je. "Shvatio sam da je možda dobra stvar uzeti program." Odvojena studija koja je otkrila da je upotreba hidroksihlorokina povećala rizik od smrti kod pacijenata sa COVID-19 prolazi nezavisnu reviziju nakon što su lekari postavili pitanja o valjanosti podataka.

 

Međutim, Uprava za hranu i lekove upozorila je na upotrebu hidroksihlorokina za COVID-19 izvan kliničkog ispitivanja ili bolničke postavke, navodeći rizik od srčanih problema. Nacionalni zdravstveni instituti započeli su kliničko ispitivanje ranije ovog meseca kako bi procenili da li hidroksihlorokvin u kombinaciji sa azitromicinom, antibiotikom, može da spreči hospitalizaciju i smrt od COVID-19.

 

@Laki21 lek proizvodi dosta nuspojava a nema nikakve potvrde da sprecava ni zarazu, niti da leci. Bilo bi neodgovorno koristiti lek koji ima niz ozbiljnih nuspojava bez da je dokazano da zaista pomaze. Jos uvek proucavaju. Valjda cemo konacni odgovor znati u skorije vreme.