6 ms·

From the article Paper: https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vTi-g18ftNZUMRAj2SwRPodtscFio7bJ7GdNgbJAGbdfF67WuRJB3ZsidgpidB2eocFHAVjIL-7deJ7/pub https:/

• bertil 7y ago
  That researcher is likely, at best, controversial: - he starts by arguing against quarantine; his point is that it didn’t work for Cholera in 1832; - he dismisses two thirds of the efforts against HIV/AIDS: understanding transmission effort and promoting condoms, focusing on treatment lowering viral load; - he then moves on to framing response to the pandemic in a conspiracy-sounding “shift of power towards the Far East”; - he then says “most countries” have chosen to test extensively early — I don’t think that’s really true: South Korea, has but I don’t think many other did; - he’s surprisingly unmoved by mortality on the cruise boat ashore Japan; I know epidemiologists can seem comfortable with terrifying stats, but he’s more than that. He’s not terrible over all and fairly eloquent to make his case but I’d take his presentation with a grain of salt. Key points: - children don’t seem to be contagious (they are asymptomatic but vectors for the flu); - viral loads are more predictive than anything; - people appear contagious for 20 days; key point isn’t a fix duration but measuring viral load and isolating anyone with a high level; - the hospital has 143 samples, they are looking forward to comparing genes with symptoms. He’s happy that people are attacking him for advertising chloroquinine because the controversy drives traffic… Not sure most doctors would be confortable with that media strategy. He’s unhappy that television features people without qualification, though. He compares his findings with similar findings in China and Korea with slightly different treatment (600 mg vs 2x500 hydroxi-chloroquinine, which he claims to have been the first to propose for other infections). He uses patients from nearby town who didn’t receive the treatment in a quasi-experiment on the impact on viral-load duration. He’s also recommending a combination with an anti-biotic because complications are often microbial. His final point is to not recommend to go home but be tested and treated. I think that he’s onto something scientifically and he could be talking about it on TV but before that, he _needs_ to get some media training to focus on the positive.
  • dillondoyle 7y ago
    One one point, HIV treatments is so effective now (viral load undetectable) that many don't use condoms with informed partners. On the other end of the spectrum PrEP has been wildly successful in virtually eliminating transmission. And we know humans are not great at using condoms despite the risks.
    • bertil 7y ago
      The focus on the viral load has helped, that’s for sure but as doctor and a researcher, I wouldn‘t throw most of the initial effort under the bus, or explain that quarantine doesn‘t work by quoting a pre-Pasteur example.
  • tunesmith 7y ago
    does higher viral load mean worse symptoms?
    • bertil 7y ago
      He seems to assume it but doesn’t really detail. I’m not sure there’s a scale for measure symptoms in details.
  • agumonkey 7y ago
    question about viral load[0]: do masks reduce it ? [0] IIUC viral load means amount of viruses getting in your system
    • bertil 7y ago
      I believe that viral load ("charge virale") is the number of virus in your system, so mainly viruses that are coming out of your own cells. Masks prevent contamination before it starts but if one is measuring load, I’d say it’s too late.
      • agumonkey 7y ago
        ok, I thought it was the initial intake
• aduitsis 7y ago
  And a short presentation: https://www.mediterranee-infection.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/COVID-19.pdf https://www.mediterranee-infection.com/wp-content/uploads/20... See the last slide, combination with Azythromycin seems to help (they say). Azythromycin is the widely known Zithromax, less than 7€ to get a box of 500mg doses.
  • christefano 7y ago
    Interesting. Zithromax is an antibacterial, not an antiviral.