• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
* * * * * 2 votes

Protecting from Coronavirus - Supplements & Therapies

coronavirus flu disease epidemics viruses immunity covid-19

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
3083 replies to this topic

#2251 Dorian Grey

  • Guest
  • 2,211 posts
  • 988
  • Location:kalifornia

Posted 17 December 2020 - 03:06 AM

USA Today "fact checks" doctor advocating vitamin-D to lower risk of COVID morbidity...  Doctor deletes his tweet & issues groveling apology!  

 

https://www.yahoo.co...-150809575.html

 

Fact check: More study needed on link between vitamin D deficiency, COVID-19 mortality

 

Seems the problem was, the study the doctor linked to showing "Vitamin D Insufficiency May Account for Almost Nine of Ten COVID-19 Deaths" was an observational study & not a multi-million dollar placebo controlled, double blind & randomized multi-center prospective trial, which I guess means it is worthless?  

 

"Therefore, in the absence of a randomized controlled trial on VitD treatment, no causal association between VitD status and severity/outcome of COVID-19 can be inferred," Radujkovic and Merle emphasize.

 

The USA Today article also helpfully pointed out, too much Vitamin-D can be DANGEROUS!  

 

---------------------------

 

God help us...  The world's gone mad!  


Edited by Dorian Grey, 17 December 2020 - 03:08 AM.

  • Agree x 5

#2252 albedo

  • Guest
  • 2,113 posts
  • 756
  • Location:Europe
  • NO

Posted 17 December 2020 - 08:16 AM

USA Today "fact checks" doctor advocating vitamin-D to lower risk of COVID morbidity...  Doctor deletes his tweet & issues groveling apology! 

....

 He is not alone ;-)

https://vitamind4all.org/letter.html


  • Informative x 2

#2253 mike_ag

  • Guest
  • 18 posts
  • 6
  • Location:Brussels
  • NO

Posted 18 December 2020 - 11:28 AM

How do you guys get Ivermectin ? I've been looking to purchase some for a while, no idea where to find it.

 

Thank you ! 


  • like x 1

#2254 Dorian Grey

  • Guest
  • 2,211 posts
  • 988
  • Location:kalifornia

Posted 18 December 2020 - 03:34 PM

United Pharmacies, which I believe is in Taiwan has pharmaceutical (human) grade ivermectin.  

 

https://www.unitedph...ivermectin.html

 

They've been selling out quickly, but it comes back in stock every few days if you keep checking.  I used bitcoin to make the purchase.  Don't know if there are other payment options.  This can take up to a month to arrive, so if you're in a hurry, another option might be wisel

 

I've also got the equine (horse) paste from amazon.  Farnam "IverCare" brand advertises "made in America" which is good.  You really need to also get a 1cc syringe (without needle) to dose "smaller animals" properly.  I asked the pharmacist at Walmart if I could buy one & he tossed one on the counter & said "no charge".  Pull the plunger out of the syringe, & shoot the paste into the back.  

 

Amazon has been selling out of the IverCare off & on too, but sometimes there are other sources.  Is there a harness shop in your city?  

 

The equine paste is 1.87% ivermectin, which I reckon translates to 18.7mg/cc; thus 0.7cc would be close to the 12mg standard prophylactic dose (for an adult), with18.7mg reasonable for treating an infection.  Be sure & do your own math & researching of dosage.  

 

I gave "my little pony" 0.8cc of the paste last Saturday, & he's doing fine.  

 

Attached Files


Edited by Dorian Grey, 18 December 2020 - 03:52 PM.

  • Informative x 3

#2255 Dorian Grey

  • Guest
  • 2,211 posts
  • 988
  • Location:kalifornia

Posted 18 December 2020 - 05:52 PM

Dr Kory acknowledges widespread use of "veterinary grade ivermectin" for COVID.  

 

 

"If you are taking ivermectin, you will not contract COVID-19"


Edited by Dorian Grey, 18 December 2020 - 06:07 PM.

  • like x 2

#2256 lancebr

  • Guest
  • 440 posts
  • 196
  • Location:USA

Posted 18 December 2020 - 09:07 PM

How do you guys get Ivermectin ? I've been looking to purchase some for a while, no idea where to find it.

 

Thank you ! 

 

I got mine from AllDayChemist. 

 

I got USP grade 12mg Ivermectin 30 tablets for $22.00. 

 

I intend to half the tablets for 6mg so that will work out to be 60 tablets.

 

Their shipping is a little high at $15.00, but what do you expect coming from India.

 

 


Edited by lancebr, 18 December 2020 - 09:10 PM.

  • Informative x 3

#2257 bladedmind

  • Guest
  • 286 posts
  • 221
  • Location:United States
  • NO

Posted 19 December 2020 - 05:04 AM

 
Double leg takedown.  
 
Concluding paragraphs

AP’s piece unfortunately wasn’t authored to convey the truth, hence it’s not even complete journalism but rather propaganda, or a representation of a particular material agenda. 
 
….
 
Our position is that this is not an “either or” false dilemma type of situation. The marketplace needs multiple treatments at various price points, levels of accessibility and effectiveness given any number of conditions. This includes both novel, branded treatments as well as generic products.  Hence, should there be compelling evidence for action, the importance of investigating the use of off-label, FDA approved drugs for helping to treat COVID-19 is of paramount concern. And we now have the case for ivermectin.
 
That is, the amount of data justifies such public research expenditure. In any other time, regulatory authorities would embrace this opportunity. After all, this was the very point of FDA’s Real World Evidence program in association with the 21st Century Care Cures Act.  
 
In the aggregate, dozens of studies—from case series to observational studies to randomized controlled trials—reveal plenty of data to justify serious investigations into ivermectin, one of many treatment considerations associated with COVID-19. This of course doesn’t contradict a major vaccination program but actually complements such an effort. While the vaccination programs ramp up, no person in their right mind would stand against safe and effective low-cost options to help combat a pandemic should they be proven safe and effective. Moving forward, AP journalists should do a little more homework before making such broad and conclusive claim.
 

Edited by bladedmind, 19 December 2020 - 05:31 AM.

  • like x 3
  • Enjoying the show x 1

#2258 bladedmind

  • Guest
  • 286 posts
  • 221
  • Location:United States
  • NO

Posted 19 December 2020 - 05:31 AM

IVERMECTIN IN UTTAR PRADESH (200 million population)

 

UP leads India in early adoption and wide use of Ivermectin.  Individual caregivers in UP started to treat with Ivermectin in April, after the in vitro study came out, and usage spread with observed successes.

 

...strategic interventions....the first is the widespread use of the drug, ivermectin, not just for treatment of cases but also as a prophylactic. The state government provides free medicines to all patients in home isolation or in government COVID-19 facilities, which have more than 1.5 lakh beds. We have used the combination of ivermectin and doxycyclin to successfully treat over three lakh [100,000]  home-isolated patients with mild symptoms so far. This combination has also been used by the hospitals across the state for admitted COVID-19 patients. But what is more interesting is the state’s successful use of ivermectin as a prophylactic.
 
In the beginning of the pandemic, the Agra model of containment had been hailed for its efficiency. But with a spurt of cases in May-June, there was a sense of despondency in the management team. That is when the team, relying on the wisdom of its young district surveillance officer who had been successfully using ivermectin as prophylactic for his rapid-response teams, started administering this medicine to the close contacts of positive cases in the district. This gave them positive results. We took note at the state headquarters, and asked a technical team to look into it. It recommended that it can be tried across the state as a prophylactic. Recognising the sense of urgency, we decided to go ahead. Many other states have also followed suit. Last month, AIIMS Bhubaneswar published a study that found that ivermectin had prophylactic functions but we have been using it in the state from July itself with considerable success.

 

 
US coronavirus deaths 300,000/330 million
UP coronavirus deaths 8000/200 million (way better, even if UP underreports tenfold)
 
 
 
Attached File  Bangladesh.jpeg   76.89KB   0 downloads

Edited by bladedmind, 19 December 2020 - 05:36 AM.

  • WellResearched x 2

#2259 DanCG

  • Guest
  • 237 posts
  • 162
  • Location:USA

Posted 19 December 2020 - 02:32 PM

 

"Therefore, in the absence of a randomized controlled trial on VitD treatment, no causal association between VitD status and severity/outcome of COVID-19 can be inferred," Radujkovic and Merle emphasize.

 

 

Dr. John Campbell addresses the “more research needed” canard with dry British humor, but you can see that he can barely contain his anger. Worth watching.


  • Enjoying the show x 1
  • like x 1

#2260 lancebr

  • Guest
  • 440 posts
  • 196
  • Location:USA

Posted 21 December 2020 - 07:32 PM

It looks like other countries are banning travel to UK because of the new strain of Covid found in UK

 

https://www.usatoday...ant/3987226001/

 

https://www.bbc.com/...europe-55385768

 

Gov. Cuomo says the President should ban travel from UK....Fauci disagrees and says not to worry about it at this time...I wonder who will be right

 

https://www.business...-strain-2020-12

 


Edited by lancebr, 21 December 2020 - 07:42 PM.

  • Enjoying the show x 1

#2261 Daniel Cooper

  • Member, Moderator
  • 2,699 posts
  • 642
  • Location:USA

Posted 21 December 2020 - 08:11 PM

How do you guys get Ivermectin ? I've been looking to purchase some for a while, no idea where to find it.

 

Thank you ! 

 

I bought injectable ivermectin for cattle at my local feed and seed store. $30 for more than I will ever use. I also got a tube of the paste. No prescription required.



#2262 bladedmind

  • Guest
  • 286 posts
  • 221
  • Location:United States
  • NO

Posted 21 December 2020 - 09:56 PM

"Therefore, in the absence of a randomized controlled trial on VitD treatment, no causal association between VitD status and severity/outcome of COVID-19 can be inferred," Radujkovic and Merle emphasize.

 

Someone suggested that public policy suffers because it is not “evidence-based,” i.e., not based on RCT fundamentalism like medicine supposedly is.   Just the opposite.  If public policy were required to be based on RCT fundamenalism then, while trial outcomes were awaiting, Hitler would have pushed the blitzkrieg all the way to Denver and the Japanese would have colonized California.    

 

For any interested in the virtues and vices of RCTs in making public decisions, here is a short popular-science article, and a longer book with greater depth and sophistication. 

 

Medicine’s Fundamentalists

 

The idea that “only RCTs can decide,” is still the defining attitude, though, of what I shall describe as the RCT fundamentalist. By fundamentalist I here mean someone evincing an unwavering attachment to a set of beliefs and a kind of literal mindedness that lacks nuance—and that, in this case, sees the RCT as the sole source of objective truth in medicine (as fundamentalists often see their own core belief). Like many a fundamentalist, this often involves posing as a purveyor of the authoritative position, but in fact their position may not be. As well, the core belief is repeated, like a catechism, at times ad nauseum, and contrasting beliefs are treated like heresies. What the RCT fundamentalist is peddling is not a scientific attitude, but rather forcing a tool, the RCT, which was designed for a particular kind of problem to become the only tool we use. In this case, RCT is best understood as standing not for Randomized Control Trials, but rather “Rigidly Constrained Thinking” (a phrase coined by the statistician David Streiner in the 1990s).

 

…. The RCT fundamentalist is the classic case of the person who has a hammer, and thinks that everything must therefore be a nail. The nonfundamentalist position is that RCTs are a precious addition to the researcher’s toolkit, but just because you have a wonderful new hammer doesn’t mean you should throw out your electric drill, screwdriver, or saw….the approach I take—and I think most trained physicians with any amount of experience and investment in their patients’ well-being also take—might be called the all-available-evidence approach.

 

Cartwright and Hardie, Evidence-Based Policy: A Practical Guide to Doing It Better

 

Nancy Cartwright is one of the most highly reputed philosophers of science in the world; Jeremy Hardie went from economics to business to philosophy of science.  The book contains rigorous philosophical argument, simpler explanations, and practical guidance on how best to reason about policy decisions.  

 

Over the last twenty or so years, it has become standard to require policy makers to base their recommendations on evidence. That is now uncontroversial to the point of triviality--of course, policy should be based on the facts. But are the methods that policy makers rely on to gather and analyze evidence the right ones? In Evidence-Based Policy, Nancy Cartwright, an eminent scholar, and Jeremy Hardie, who has had a long and successful career in both business and the economy, explain that the dominant methods which are in use now--broadly speaking, methods that imitate standard practices in medicine like randomized control trials--do not work. They fail, Cartwright and Hardie contend, because they do not enhance our ability to predict if policies will be effective.

The prevailing methods fall short not just because social science, which operates within the domain of real-world politics and deals with people, differs so much from the natural science milieu of the lab. Rather, there are principled reasons why the advice for crafting and implementing policy now on offer will lead to bad results. Current guides in use tend to rank scientific methods according to the degree of trustworthiness of the evidence they produce. That is valuable in certain respects, but such approaches offer little advice about how to think about putting such evidence to use. Evidence-Based Policy focuses on showing policymakers how to effectively use evidence, explaining what types of information are most necessary for making reliable policy, and offers lessons on how to organize that information.

 

 

That description fails to covey the thoroughness, depth, and soundness of the content.  I was tempted to summarize some of the points, but it's better to give references and be brief.   


Edited by bladedmind, 21 December 2020 - 09:57 PM.

  • Enjoying the show x 1
  • WellResearched x 1

#2263 bladedmind

  • Guest
  • 286 posts
  • 221
  • Location:United States
  • NO

Posted 21 December 2020 - 10:57 PM

IVERMECTIN AND ASPIRIN FOR POST-EP AND EARLY STAGE COVID-19

 

Updated findings and protocols from Peru’s Dr. Gustavo Aguirre-Chang.   He always offers brief, clear, and detailed charts.

 

COVID-19: THERAPEUTIC PLAN IN THE INITIAL STAGE OR LOCATION OF THE NASAL AND PHARYNGEAL.

PART I. NON -PHARMACOLOGICAL MEASURES

Important to remember non-pharma measures – gargling, nasal wash, ventilation.  I would add hydrotherapy.

 

ACUTE COVID-19: THERAPEUTIC PLAN IN THE INITIAL OR NASAL AND PHARYNGEAL STAGE

PART II. FARMACOLOGICAL MEASURES 

They’ve dropped doxycycline (and earlier dropped HCQ?).   Post-exposure prophylaxis, and early treatment, are almost entirely ivermectin and aspirin, on varying schedules.  I’ve worried that my planned self-treatment stack is too polypharmaceutical – has unpredictable risks of its own.  Aguirre provides quite clear and extremely detailed advice on how to monitor and how to respond in the first few days – with ivermectin, aspirin, and vitamins.   With ivermectin and aspirin treatment (“Ivermectin reduces viral load by 93% after 24 hours and by 99.9% in 48 hours”) he expects that almost all exposed would avoid symptoms, or if symptomatic would resolve within 3-4 days – and provides additional options for the harder hit.   I think my own stack will follow closely Aguirre’s simple approach.

 

COVID-19: INCLUSION OF ASPIRIN IN PROPHYLAXIS FOR PEOPLE AT INCREASED RISK OF DEVELOPING SEVERE ILLNESS AND MORTALITY. Its use is related to lower mortality, lower requirement for mechanical ventilation and admission to the ICU.  

 

INCLUSION OF IVERMECTIN IN THE FIRST LINE OF THERAPEUTIC ACTION FOR COVID19

A very significant decrease in the Mortality Rate is reported with its use.  


Edited by bladedmind, 21 December 2020 - 11:33 PM.

  • WellResearched x 3

#2264 albedo

  • Guest
  • 2,113 posts
  • 756
  • Location:Europe
  • NO

Posted 22 December 2020 - 08:21 AM

A mine of information:

https://www.quora.co...er/Steve-Kirsch


  • Informative x 2

#2265 Hebbeh

  • Guest
  • 1,661 posts
  • 571
  • Location:x

Posted 22 December 2020 - 02:49 PM

https://www.theatlan...ic-zzzz/617454/

When President Donald Trump was flown to Walter Reed National Military Medical Center for COVID-19 treatment, his doctors prescribed—in addition to a plethora of other experimental therapies—melatonin.

#2266 lancebr

  • Guest
  • 440 posts
  • 196
  • Location:USA

Posted 22 December 2020 - 02:57 PM

 

So is fluvoxamine as good as he makes it sound?  Any serious side effects?

 

I wonder how easy or hard it would be to get a doctor to prescribe it.


Edited by lancebr, 22 December 2020 - 03:09 PM.


#2267 Gal220

  • Guest
  • 1,062 posts
  • 640
  • Location:United States

Posted 22 December 2020 - 04:25 PM

So is fluvoxamine as good as he makes it sound?  Any serious side effects?

 

I was more drawn to the one dose a week of ivermectin.

 

"100% success rate whereas those doctors taking placebo had a 59%% infection rate… not a typo 237 of 400 docs on placebo got infected vs. 800 docs on Ivermectin none got infected"

 

 

Several good alternatives though, closing remark is the best

 

"Dr. Joseph Ladapo said it eloquently in his Wall St. Journal op-ed, “Too much caution is killing patients.” I couldn’t agree more. The placebo is killing people. This drug is not. There is no evidence that I am aware of that the placebo is superior to fluvoxamine for patients who test positive for COVID-19. Please help spread the word. Today."


  • Good Point x 2

#2268 Dorian Grey

  • Guest
  • 2,211 posts
  • 988
  • Location:kalifornia

Posted 22 December 2020 - 04:32 PM

The SSRI (fluvoxamine) bus may be difficult to hop off once you're on board.  I've known quite a few folks who've gotten on SSRI meds who've tried to get off and now admit they will be on them for life.  

 

Don't know if a short term treatment for acute disease might be doable, but from what I've seen with SSRI's, I'll pass.  Weight gain & sexual dysfunction the primary side effects with long term use.  Not my cup of tea!  

 

I'm on the ivermectin train, & feeling fine about the future.  May take the vaccine once we see if it is effective against the new mutated strain.  


  • Good Point x 2

#2269 lancebr

  • Guest
  • 440 posts
  • 196
  • Location:USA

Posted 22 December 2020 - 06:56 PM

I noticed Fauci was on the news today taking the Moderna vaccine.

 

I wonder what made him choose that one over the Pfizer.



#2270 Dorian Grey

  • Guest
  • 2,211 posts
  • 988
  • Location:kalifornia

Posted 23 December 2020 - 03:30 AM

OK, interesting comment from Dr. Carvallo on whiteboard discussion tonight. 

 

 

In the Q & A, he was asked about ivermectin absorption, empty stomach vs with fatty meal.  You may have seen ivermectin dosing instructions always recommend empty stomach dosing.  

 

Dr Carvallo opines this is because to treat intestinal parasites, you want ivermectin to be poorly absorbed, and stay in the GI tract where the worms live.  For systemic therapy, Dr C says you want good absorption from the GI tract, and this occurs taking ivermectin with a fatty meal.  

 

I expect you'd want to avoid high doses of ivermectin if you are going to be taking it with food for maximum absorption, as blood levels are dramatically higher when taken with high fat meals.  

 

https://www.merck.co...romectol_pi.pdf

 

"Administration of 30 mg ivermectin following a high-fat meal resulted in an approximate 2.5-fold increase in bioavailability relative to administration of 30 mg ivermectin in the fasted state."

 

30mg?  YIKES!  

 

More isn't always better, but good absorption of what you take to systemic circulation if you want high levels of ivermectin to accumulate in lung tissue make sense to me.  


Edited by Dorian Grey, 23 December 2020 - 03:42 AM.

  • Informative x 2
  • Good Point x 1
  • like x 1

#2271 bladedmind

  • Guest
  • 286 posts
  • 221
  • Location:United States
  • NO

Posted 23 December 2020 - 04:57 PM

 

This is excellent, maybe the best single piece of advice all year.   Steve Kirsch deserves a medal.  It's the COVID-19 Early Treatment Fund promising-drugs information interpreted in terms of guidance for personal action. 

 

The promising-drugs page is revised (without indication) every few days.  Their rationale for touting fluvoxamine is that there is good-quality evidence for its efficacy & safety and it has the best chance for rapid approval and roll-out - quickest way to save lives.  The current page is more positive about ivermectin than it was last week. 

 

Dorian Grey

 

Don't know if a short term treatment for acute disease might be doable, but from what I've seen with SSRI's, I'll pass.  Weight gain & sexual dysfunction the primary side effects with long term use.  Not my cup of tea!  

 

 

 

 

In my long life I've tried  SSRIs twice with no result other than crushing sedation.  The fluvoxamine dosage for the trial published in JAMA:

 

Participants received a dose of 50 mg of fluvoxamine (or matching placebo) in the evening immediately after the baseline assessment and confirmation of eligibility, then for 2 days at a dose of 100 mg twice daily as tolerated, and then increasing to a dose of 100 mg 3 times daily as tolerated through day 15 then stopped 

 

 

In standard use the maximum dose of fluvoxamine is 300 mg a day.   It can be a potent  CYP-* inhibitor and there are numerous interactions to avoid.  Clearance is lower in slow metabolizers and in the old.  Caution is advised, especially if taking other potent pharmaceuticals.  300 mg/day seems way too risky to me.   But Kirsch relates that in the race track study the dose was 50 mg twice a say for 14 days.  That seems more doable to me.   I might combine that lower dose with  Aguirre's simple early protocol if I am stricken.  


  • Informative x 2

#2272 Dorian Grey

  • Guest
  • 2,211 posts
  • 988
  • Location:kalifornia

Posted 26 December 2020 - 06:19 AM

Don't know about you, but I feel better just listening to Dr Kory talk.  Here's an hour long fireside chat with Dr K, where he does a deep dive into the madness of plague politics.  St Lukes forced him to resign a couple of weeks back after his senate testimony.  

 

 

I sleep the sleep of the saved after a talk like this.  Just took my second dose of prophylactic IVM this morning.  Got the real-deal human pills from United Pharmacies (Taiwan) a couple days ago.  Looks like they are sold out again.  They say God looks after children, drunks & fools, & I've been all three at one time or another.  I'll be thanking God there are still people like Dr Kory in the world in my prayers tonight.  Tragic so many will have to suffer before he is vindicated.  


  • like x 3

#2273 Mr Serendipity

  • Guest
  • 986 posts
  • 19
  • Location:UK
  • NO

Posted 26 December 2020 - 07:01 PM

https://m.jpost.com/...-uv-leds-653315

 

Tel Aviv research: 99.9% of COVID-19 virus in 30 seconds with UV LEDs

 

The study is the first of its kind in the world.

 

Ultraviolet radiation is a common method of killing bacteria and viruses. Now, researchers from Tel Aviv University have proven that the novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, can be killed efficiently, quickly and cheaply using ultraviolet (UV) light-emitting diodes (UV-LEDs) at specific frequencies.

 

“We discovered that it is quite simple to kill the coronavirus using LED bulbs that radiate ultraviolet light,” said Prof. Hadas Mamane, head of the Environmental Engineering Program at Tel Aviv University's School of Mechanical Engineering, who led the study with Prof. Yoram Gerchman and Dr. Michal Mandelboim.

 

She said that the UV-LED bulbs require less than half a minute to destroy more than 99.9% of the coronaviruses.

 

The study is the first of its kind in the world. An article about it was published earlier this month in the Journal of Photochemistry and Photobiology B: Biology.



The Jerusalem Post has written about Mamane many times. She presented this summer at the Boris Mints Institute 2020 Research Conference on her involvement in the construction of a 30-meter "green wall" at the university, which is meant to create a sustainable ecosystem for waste, energy and water. 
 
The wall is also meant to act as a living laboratory to analyze the uses of greywater (wastewater generated from sinks, showers, baths, and washing machines) in absorbing carbon dioxide, as well as the effects on heat transfer and energy generation within old buildings that are prevalent in urban settings.
 
At the beginning of the coronavirus crisis, her research team developed an Israeli, low-cost, decentralized, nonpolluting means of producing ethanol – and thereby an alcohol-based hand sanitizer – from plant-based waste, such as municipal and agricultural trim, straw and residual paper fibers.

LEDs are available in a wide range of wavelengths, known as A, B and C, explained Mamane.

 

UV-A has a wavelength in the range of 315 nanometers (nm) to 400 nm. UV-B, also known as medium wave light, has a wavelength of 280-315 nm; UV-C has a wavelength of 200-280 nm.

 

UV-A is emitted by the sun (and artificial sources like tanning beds) and is weaker than UV-B and C. It has some human benefits, such as the creation of vitamin D, but it is also what causes sunburns and, in some cases, skin cancer.

 

UV-B and C radiation never really reaches humans naturally because these rays are absorbed by the earth’s ozone layer.

 

These ultraviolet wavelengths, which are what Tel Aviv researchers were examining, are especially effective in disinfection using UV-LED bulbs.

 

“We know, for example, that medical staff do not have time to manually disinfect, say, computer keyboards and other surfaces in hospitals – and the result is infection and quarantine,” said Mamane. “The disinfection systems based on LED bulbs, however, can be installed in the ventilation system and air conditioner, for example, and sterilize the air sucked in and then emitted into the room.”

 

She added that, "We are also developing, together with a scientist in North Western University a transparent coating that can be dipped or sprayed on surfaces and can kill viruses using visible light LEDs that are not dangerous and are used everywhere, providing another application for regular LEDs."

 

In her team’s research, they managed to kill the virus using cheaper and more readily available LED bulbs – 285 nm vs. 265 nm bulbs – which consume little energy and do not contain mercury like regular UV lamps.

 

She said that as the science develops, the industry will be able to make the necessary adjustments and install the bulbs in robotic systems, or air conditioning, vacuum and water systems, and thereby be able to efficiently disinfect large surfaces and spaces.

 

“Our research has commercial and societal implications,” Mamane said.

 

She added that her team had been working on UV-LEDs for a long time before coronavirus. But when COVID-19 surfaced, they tried to see if they could transfer their efforts to tackling the human coronavirus, studying the use of LEDs for killing corona at different frequencies.

 

She said the 285 nm LED is 15% to 30% less expensive and requires only a little more time to be effective.

 

“Anything that can reduce cost could help implementation,” she said.

 

She added that UV LEDs have an advantage because they can be turned on and off in an instant.

 

Mamane believes that this technology is the future, adding that she expects that by 2025, it will be cost effective enough to become mainstream.

 

“UV LEDs have a huge future,” she added. “Of course, as always, when it comes to ultraviolet radiation, it is important to make it clear to people that it is dangerous to try to use this method to disinfect surfaces inside homes. You need to know how to design these systems and how to work with them so that you are not directly exposed to the light.”


Edited by Jesus is King, 26 December 2020 - 07:02 PM.

  • like x 2
  • Informative x 1

#2274 zorba990

  • Guest
  • 1,607 posts
  • 315

Posted 26 December 2020 - 09:57 PM

https://m.jpost.com/...-uv-leds-653315

Tel Aviv research: 99.9% of COVID-19 virus in 30 seconds with UV LEDs


The study is the first of its kind in the world.

Ultraviolet radiation is a common method of killing bacteria and viruses. Now, researchers from Tel Aviv University have proven that the novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, can be killed efficiently, quickly and cheaply using ultraviolet (UV) light-emitting diodes (UV-LEDs) at specific frequencies.

“We discovered that it is quite simple to kill the coronavirus using LED bulbs that radiate ultraviolet light,” said Prof. Hadas Mamane, head of the Environmental Engineering Program at Tel Aviv University's School of Mechanical Engineering, who led the study with Prof. Yoram Gerchman and Dr. Michal Mandelboim.

She said that the UV-LED bulbs require less than half a minute to destroy more than 99.9% of the coronaviruses.

The study is the first of its kind in the world. An article about it was published earlier this month in the Journal of Photochemistry and Photobiology B: Biology.


The Jerusalem Post has written about Mamane many times. She presented this summer at the Boris Mints Institute 2020 Research Conference on her involvement in the construction of a 30-meter "green wall" at the university, which is meant to create a sustainable ecosystem for waste, energy and water.
The wall is also meant to act as a living laboratory to analyze the uses of greywater (wastewater generated from sinks, showers, baths, and washing machines) in absorbing carbon dioxide, as well as the effects on heat transfer and energy generation within old buildings that are prevalent in urban settings.
At the beginning of the coronavirus crisis, her research team developed an Israeli, low-cost, decentralized, nonpolluting means of producing ethanol – and thereby an alcohol-based hand sanitizer – from plant-based waste, such as municipal and agricultural trim, straw and residual paper fibers.

LEDs are available in a wide range of wavelengths, known as A, B and C, explained Mamane.

UV-A has a wavelength in the range of 315 nanometers (nm) to 400 nm. UV-B, also known as medium wave light, has a wavelength of 280-315 nm; UV-C has a wavelength of 200-280 nm.

UV-A is emitted by the sun (and artificial sources like tanning beds) and is weaker than UV-B and C. It has some human benefits, such as the creation of vitamin D, but it is also what causes sunburns and, in some cases, skin cancer.

UV-B and C radiation never really reaches humans naturally because these rays are absorbed by the earth’s ozone layer.

These ultraviolet wavelengths, which are what Tel Aviv researchers were examining, are especially effective in disinfection using UV-LED bulbs.

“We know, for example, that medical staff do not have time to manually disinfect, say, computer keyboards and other surfaces in hospitals – and the result is infection and quarantine,” said Mamane. “The disinfection systems based on LED bulbs, however, can be installed in the ventilation system and air conditioner, for example, and sterilize the air sucked in and then emitted into the room.”

She added that, "We are also developing, together with a scientist in North Western University a transparent coating that can be dipped or sprayed on surfaces and can kill viruses using visible light LEDs that are not dangerous and are used everywhere, providing another application for regular LEDs."

In her team’s research, they managed to kill the virus using cheaper and more readily available LED bulbs – 285 nm vs. 265 nm bulbs – which consume little energy and do not contain mercury like regular UV lamps.

She said that as the science develops, the industry will be able to make the necessary adjustments and install the bulbs in robotic systems, or air conditioning, vacuum and water systems, and thereby be able to efficiently disinfect large surfaces and spaces.

“Our research has commercial and societal implications,” Mamane said.

She added that her team had been working on UV-LEDs for a long time before coronavirus. But when COVID-19 surfaced, they tried to see if they could transfer their efforts to tackling the human coronavirus, studying the use of LEDs for killing corona at different frequencies.

She said the 285 nm LED is 15% to 30% less expensive and requires only a little more time to be effective.

“Anything that can reduce cost could help implementation,” she said.

She added that UV LEDs have an advantage because they can be turned on and off in an instant.

Mamane believes that this technology is the future, adding that she expects that by 2025, it will be cost effective enough to become mainstream.

“UV LEDs have a huge future,” she added. “Of course, as always, when it comes to ultraviolet radiation, it is important to make it clear to people that it is dangerous to try to use this method to disinfect surfaces inside homes. You need to know how to design these systems and how to work with them so that you are not directly exposed to the light.”



So if you use 222, which is seemingly safe on the DNA damage front :
https://www.eurekale...u-riw040720.php

And strap it to the wrist where the skin is thin, or put a small LED up the nose like VieLight,
https://www.alexferg...nitive-function
would you eventually get the bloodstream affected?

Seems worth a study, though sterilizing the blood stream might have the same negative effects as sterilizing the intestines.....
  • Enjoying the show x 1

#2275 geo12the

  • Guest
  • 762 posts
  • -211

Posted 27 December 2020 - 08:39 PM

In the latest TWIV (this week in Virology) podcast they discuss Ivermectin and give some background about it's use for COVID in countries with high parasitic infections. In those counties if I understand correctly it seems like it is often administered when steroids are given as a way of preventing parasite proliferation side-effects of steroids:

 

 

 


  • like x 2

#2276 albedo

  • Guest
  • 2,113 posts
  • 756
  • Location:Europe
  • NO

Posted 28 December 2020 - 05:55 PM

An extensive FAQ by Kory on Ivermectin, in case you missed it:

https://covid19criti...-on-ivermectin/

I also liked this in particular: "...Our understanding of the importance of ivermectin in the context of the new vaccines, is that ivermectin prophylaxis should be thought of as complementary bridge to vaccination until the vaccines are made available to all those in need..."



#2277 Gal220

  • Guest
  • 1,062 posts
  • 640
  • Location:United States

Posted 28 December 2020 - 06:55 PM

An extensive FAQ by Kory on Ivermectin, in case you missed it:

https://covid19criti...-on-ivermectin/

I also liked this in particular: "...Our understanding of the importance of ivermectin in the context of the new vaccines, is that ivermectin prophylaxis should be thought of as complementary bridge to vaccination until the vaccines are made available to all those in need..."

 

I thought IVM would be approved sometime in November after Mariks video in October and the Peruvian results were widely published.  But now two months later, nothing, despite good evidence.  Im afraid the NIH/CDC/FDA arent going to do anything to discourage people from taking the vaccine(approving alternatives).  Looks like we are going to sacrifice people for the sake of the vaccine...


  • Agree x 2
  • Ill informed x 1
  • Informative x 1
  • Good Point x 1

#2278 Heisok

  • Guest
  • 612 posts
  • 200
  • Location:U.S.
  • NO

Posted 29 December 2020 - 12:04 AM

I mentioned the interaction issue early in the thread. Here is a link. (Many might be very minor, but others not. Some here take Sirolimus or Dasatanib.)

 

https://www.drugs.co...ctin-index.html


  • Good Point x 1
  • Informative x 1

#2279 geo12the

  • Guest
  • 762 posts
  • -211

Posted 29 December 2020 - 12:30 AM

 Im afraid the NIH/CDC/FDA arent going to do anything to discourage people from taking the vaccine(approving alternatives).  Looks like we are going to sacrifice people for the sake of the vaccine...

 

People here were ranting and raving earlier this year about NIH etc. suppressing HCQ and how horrible that was and costing lives etc. Now we know HCQ does not really work. With Ivermectin there is promising evidence but we have to wait for the science to catch up.  Demonizing NIH/Fauci etc. is just empty virtue signaling.  


  • Ill informed x 3
  • Enjoying the show x 1
  • Pointless, Timewasting x 1
  • Agree x 1
  • Good Point x 1

#2280 Dorian Grey

  • Guest
  • 2,211 posts
  • 988
  • Location:kalifornia

Posted 29 December 2020 - 03:58 AM

People here were ranting and raving earlier this year about NIH etc. suppressing HCQ and how horrible that was and costing lives etc. Now we know HCQ does not really work. With Ivermectin there is promising evidence but we have to wait for the science to catch up.  Demonizing NIH/Fauci etc. is just empty virtue signaling.  

 

Donald Rumsfeld once said: 'You go to war with the army you have, not the army you might want or wish to have at a later time.'

 

I have no problem with the boffins pointing out potential therapeutics like HCQ & ivermectin have yet to be proven, but to forbid any doctor from prescribing these rather benign meds for outpatient use in the heat of a pandemic is baffling.  Doctors should have the right to prescribe already approved meds off-lable, and patients should have the right to try if their doctor feels they might benefit.  

 

These same boffins granted full approval for remdesivir the week after the largest RCT ever done with the med showed essentially no substantial benefit, & WHO advised against its use for any stage of COVID disease.  

 

The claim small scale RCTs, observational & retrospective studies and real world experience by doctors actively treating patients in the field have absolutely zero value, and multi-million dollar Gates/Wellcome / WHO trials foolproof & incapable of error doesn't hold water after what we saw with Solidarity & Recovery HCQ trials.  Delaying initiation of treatment until patients are critically ill, & then giving these patients near fatal overdoses, barely escapes an obvious sham-show.  

 

We're right up against the one year anniversary of the breakout of this plague, & the only outpatient option remains as it was on day one.  Isolate at home & call 911 if you start turning blue.  Not my idea of good science, when there are front line doctors shouting from the rooftops they are seeing remarkable results from off-label meds.  

 

Posit a scenario where another half million people die in 2021 before vaccination brings the pandemic under control, while we wait for someone to fund a massive RCT on ivermectin (which ain't gonna happen anyway).  Now consider the fullness of time shows ivermectin actually does work quite well, & becomes a front line therapeutic.  Is this really an optimal outcome?  What would you say to the millions of cardiac/pulmonary cripples, long-haulers & families who've lost loved ones?  "Sorry, but purity of our scientific method had to be preserved"?  Best of luck with the remainder of your lives?  

 

Cold Comfort is my humble opinion.  It doesn't have to be this way!  


Edited by Dorian Grey, 29 December 2020 - 04:18 AM.

  • Good Point x 4
  • like x 2
  • Agree x 2





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: coronavirus, flu, disease epidemics, viruses, immunity, covid-19

2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users