• 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

#2821 lancebr

  • Guest
  • 440 posts
  • 196
  • Location:USA

Posted 01 July 2021 - 06:09 PM

So for anyone who has a better understanding of studies is there any reason from the following study

that would explain the conclusion that "results indicate that there may be a protective effect of the MMR

vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 in males but not females."

 

https://pubmed.ncbi....h.gov/34187707/

 

I noticed that there was a larger number of women in the study compared to the number of men, so would

that explain why the results favored the men over the women?

 

 


Edited by lancebr, 01 July 2021 - 06:13 PM.

  • unsure x 1

#2822 Dorian Grey

  • Guest
  • 2,202 posts
  • 985
  • Location:kalifornia

Posted 01 July 2021 - 08:28 PM

This is my opinion, be it dangerous and irresponsible or rub some people the wrong way:

 

HCQ doesn't work. This is the truth.  It was promoted by Dear Leader and now his followers just can't let go and admit the truth that it does not work. It's an example of how tribal and politicized our society has become and how some people  follow charlatan politicians like sheep. Even my Republican pulmonologist brother who voted for Trump stopped using it and told me it doesn't really work in his experience. Why can't the MAGA folks just let it go? Is it too brutal to admit maybe something recommended by Dear Leader does not work? Stop being sheep!

 

Hot off the presses for you geo, peer reviewed & published:

 

https://www.scienced...567576921002721

 

Clinical outcomes of patients with mild COVID-19 following treatment with hydroxychloroquine in an outpatient setting

 

Highlights

     Early administration of HCQ reduced the odds of hospitalization by 38%.

     Early administration of HCQ reduced the odds of death by 73%.

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

 

Those who don't believe "the science" always have the option of isolating at home until they turn blue!  


Edited by Dorian Grey, 01 July 2021 - 08:29 PM.

  • Informative x 3
  • Good Point x 1
  • WellResearched x 1
  • Agree x 1

#2823 geo12the

  • Guest
  • 762 posts
  • -211

Posted 01 July 2021 - 10:17 PM

Hot off the presses for you geo, peer reviewed & published:

 

https://www.scienced...567576921002721

 

Clinical outcomes of patients with mild COVID-19 following treatment with hydroxychloroquine in an outpatient setting

 

Highlights

     Early administration of HCQ reduced the odds of hospitalization by 38%.

     Early administration of HCQ reduced the odds of death by 73%.

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

 

Those who don't believe "the science" always have the option of isolating at home until they turn blue!  

 

Yes from the center of medical research: Iran LOL! There has already been a letter to the journal questioning this study. One of the issues is that they gave HCQ to people who tested negative or were not tested and it's not clear if they were included in the final data showing benefit. That is a pretty big flaw.

 

Here is the letter:

 

https://www.scienced...05142?via=ihub 

 

A recent paper from the US shows no benefit:

 

https://pubmed.ncbi....h.gov/34165150/

 

At the end of the day it's not a contest. It works or not. Most studies show it doesn't work. You can put your faith in the Iran study if it validates Dear Leader's magic medicine.  


  • Dangerous, Irresponsible x 2
  • WellResearched x 1

#2824 Advocatus Diaboli

  • Guest
  • 583 posts
  • 630
  • Location:Chronosynclastic Infundibulum ( floor Z/p^nZ )
  • NO

Posted 01 July 2021 - 10:19 PM

I'm going to have to take issue with the information you present, Dorian Grey. Your abnegation of the incontrovertibly-clear evidence: " Even my Republican pulmonologist brother who voted for Trump stopped using it and told me it doesn't really work in his experience." that  HCQ doesn't work, is rather perplexing. You have been presented with the facts and yet it appears that you are willfully choosing to ignore them. Not to mention that you have been advised that "This is the truth.". It's shameful to deny the truth.

 

Instead, you are promulgating what is clearly an anti American, anti Deer Leader, hit piece ginned up by the obvious colporteur Minions of the Mullah (MoMs).

 

 

(This message is brought to you by Deer Leader who advises that it behooves each and every one of us to follow the seance, and that an attack against seance and mediumship is an attack against Marshall McLuhan, as well as massage parlors)


  • Pointless, Timewasting x 2
  • Cheerful x 2

#2825 Advocatus Diaboli

  • Guest
  • 583 posts
  • 630
  • Location:Chronosynclastic Infundibulum ( floor Z/p^nZ )
  • NO

Posted 02 July 2021 - 12:11 AM

Re post # 2823

 

Yeah, the paper is recent. I wonder what the time-period of analysis was? Oh!! March 1, 2020 through April 30, 2020. Doh. Might have to label it (or at least the data) as incunable (snicker, snicker).

 

From the paper:

 

"Of the 7,193 positive cases, 2,809 were hospitalized, and 657 individuals were prescribed HCQ within the first 48-hours of hospitalization for the treatment of COVID-19."

 
Ok. 2,809 were sick enough, presumably, to require hospitalization. Why else admit them if they weren't hospital-grade sick? Eh? Of those 2,809, 657 were prescribed HCQ (228 HCQ alone + 429 HCQ plus Azithromycin ) within the first 48 hours of hospitalization. Ok. So, some of those sick people had to wait a while to have treatment started. No big deal, I mean your condition isn't really likely to worsen in a mere 2 days, is it? Too bad the average wait time wasn't mentioned in the study. Tsk, Tsk.
 
Ok, now we get to the nitty gritty. That is, the protocol! Yes!, carefully reading the study we see that dosage and dosage intervals are consistent with scrupulous , cutting-edge medical practice missing!. Susie? (excuse me?). Yes, you heard (read) that right! The study doesn't deign to be so base as to include crucial dosage data.
 
But, but, but...stick to the point!, which is: HCQ Bad! Ignore! OMB! (Orange Man Bad)
 
 
(This message is brought to you by Deer Leader, who says if you want to design a study, design it to fail, or at least to bolster your confirmation bias)

  • Enjoying the show x 1
  • Informative x 1
  • dislike x 1

#2826 DanCG

  • Guest
  • 237 posts
  • 162
  • Location:USA

Posted 02 July 2021 - 12:32 AM

So for anyone who has a better understanding of studies is there any reason from the following study

that would explain the conclusion that "results indicate that there may be a protective effect of the MMR

vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 in males but not females."

 

https://pubmed.ncbi....h.gov/34187707/

 

I noticed that there was a larger number of women in the study compared to the number of men, so would

that explain why the results favored the men over the women?

 

Another way to look at your question is to ask, "if they included more men, so that the number of men and women were the same, would men and women still show different results?"

 

The short answer is YES.  The statistical analysis is done to ask the question, "If men and women are really the same, what is the probability that we would get the results we got?" P=0.006, which means that there is only a 6 in 1000 chance that men and women really are the same and the results are a fluke.

 

They did not attempt a biological explanation for why men and women show different immune responses, they just reported that that is what happened.


  • WellResearched x 1

#2827 Dorian Grey

  • Guest
  • 2,202 posts
  • 985
  • Location:kalifornia

Posted 02 July 2021 - 12:59 AM

There really should be some sort of prize for dodgy HCQ studies.  Almost all done on hospitalized patients...  The VA study didn't give their patients their first dose of HCQ until many were already on a vent.  Solidarity and Recovery used massive doses, & then shut down when cardiac abnormalities were observed.   

 

I recall one "early/outpatient" study that recruited patients on social media.  Little testing was done, and patients were diagnosed remotely by reported symptoms.  HCQ was MAILED to them within 48 hours after enrollment, and they accepted patients symptomatic for up to 5 days (before enrollment).  Patients self-reported how long they felt icky.  

 

Anyone remember the Surgisphere panic?  News media was absolutely giddy!  The final nail in the coffin...  HOORAY!  Never seen such fanatic opposition to our only potential outpatient therapeutic (at the time).  

 

We live in interesting times!  


  • Good Point x 2

#2828 geo12the

  • Guest
  • 762 posts
  • -211

Posted 02 July 2021 - 02:11 AM

There really should be some sort of prize for dodgy HCQ studies.  Almost all done on hospitalized patients...  The VA study didn't give their patients their first dose of HCQ until many were already on a vent.  Solidarity and Recovery used massive doses, & then shut down when cardiac abnormalities were observed.   

 

I recall one "early/outpatient" study that recruited patients on social media.  Little testing was done, and patients were diagnosed remotely by reported symptoms.  HCQ was MAILED to them within 48 hours after enrollment, and they accepted patients symptomatic for up to 5 days (before enrollment).  Patients self-reported how long they felt icky.  

 

Anyone remember the Surgisphere panic?  News media was absolutely giddy!  The final nail in the coffin...  HOORAY!  Never seen such fanatic opposition to our only potential outpatient therapeutic (at the time).  

 

We live in interesting times!  

 

Yes of course, It's all a conspiracy to discredit Dear Leader!!! It couldn't be that maybe the stuff doesn't work? Doesn't matter, the brainwashed sheep will follow Dear Leader off of a cliff. 


  • Ill informed x 2
  • Off-Topic x 1
  • Dangerous, Irresponsible x 1

#2829 Dorian Grey

  • Guest
  • 2,202 posts
  • 985
  • Location:kalifornia

Posted 02 July 2021 - 02:25 AM

Yes of course, It's all a conspiracy to discredit Dear Leader!!! It couldn't be that maybe the stuff doesn't work? Doesn't matter, the brainwashed sheep will follow Dear Leader off of a cliff. 

 

I've actually been a progressive all my life, until 2020.  Voted for Hillary in 2016, & Libertarian in 2020.  Goofy Gus was just too far gone for me to hold my nose & pull for him.  The COVID crisis was one thing the orange man got right though.  Warp speed vaccines, and 70 million doses of the most promising outpatient therapeutic.  Can't help but think things might have gone a lot better if we could have implemented both policies, but apparently any outpatient therapeutic would have interfered with the EUA for the vaccines.  


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

#2830 Qowpel

  • Guest
  • 355 posts
  • 36
  • Location:New jersey

Posted 02 July 2021 - 04:01 AM

I've actually been a progressive all my life, until 2020.  Voted for Hillary in 2016, & Libertarian in 2020.  Goofy Gus was just too far gone for me to hold my nose & pull for him.  The COVID crisis was one thing the orange man got right though.  Warp speed vaccines, and 70 million doses of the most promising outpatient therapeutic.  Can't help but think things might have gone a lot better if we could have implemented both policies, but apparently any outpatient therapeutic would have interfered with the EUA for the vaccines.  

For the record I HATE orange man. WIsh the guy would drop dead. But I remember there being doctors using early HCQ Azithromycin and zinc sulfate with nice results. Wish we had seen more of that.


Edited by Daniel Cooper, 02 July 2021 - 07:24 PM.

  • Needs references x 2
  • Dangerous, Irresponsible x 2
  • Good Point x 1
  • Off-Topic x 1
  • Cheerful x 1

#2831 Advocatus Diaboli

  • Guest
  • 583 posts
  • 630
  • Location:Chronosynclastic Infundibulum ( floor Z/p^nZ )
  • NO

Posted 02 July 2021 - 05:07 AM

Acid test, geo12the. One day ago you had a slight cough and a low-grade fever. You immediately (because you pulled some Bay Area strings) got an RT-PCR test and a comprehensive suite of blood tests. The tests came back within 6 hours. You were positive for SARS-CoV-2  (as well as for 6-monoacetylmorphine and some pesky spirochetes, but that's beside the point).

 

Your only options are to be treated with HCQ which can be delivered to you in 15 minutes, or, to fly to Tuva untreated with anything, where you will hear some really cool throat singing as you slowly drift off into the sunset.

 

Which option do you pick?

 

 

(This message is brought to you by Deer Leader, who just returned from a conference with another deer leader)


Edited by Advocatus Diaboli, 02 July 2021 - 05:35 AM.

  • Enjoying the show x 1
  • Good Point x 1
  • dislike x 1
  • Disagree x 1

#2832 Dorian Grey

  • Guest
  • 2,202 posts
  • 985
  • Location:kalifornia

Posted 02 July 2021 - 05:33 AM

Many moons ago, in another thread, I posted on Ralph S Baric's published opinions on coronavirus, & potential therapeutics.  

 

https://www.longecit...oroquine/page-2

 

Don't know if there are any experts who know more about coronavirus than Baric, but doubt anyone would deny he's in the top 3.  

 

Back in 2015, he is listed as co-author of a paper: A SARS-like cluster of circulating bat coronaviruses shows potential for human emergence

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm...les/PMC4797993/

 

Where he states: "Evaluation of available SARS-based immune-therapeutic and prophylactic modalities revealed poor efficacy; both monoclonal antibody and vaccine approaches failed to neutralize and protect from infection with CoVs using the novel spike protein."

 

Back in 2010, he co-authored a paper: Zn2+ Inhibits Coronavirus and Arterivirus RNA Polymerase Activity In Vitro and Zinc Ionophores Block the Replication of These Viruses in Cell Culture

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm...les/PMC2973827/

 

Where he states: Increasing the intracellular Zn2+ concentration with zinc-ionophores like pyrithione (PT) can efficiently impair the replication of a variety of RNA viruses, including poliovirus and influenza virus. For some viruses this effect has been attributed to interference with viral polyprotein processing. In this study we demonstrate that the combination of Zn2+ and PT at low concentrations (2 µM Zn2+ and 2 µM PT) inhibits the replication of SARS-coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and equine arteritis virus (EAV) in cell culture. 

 

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

 

So here you have the Godfather of coronavirus research telling you not to fool around with vaccines & monoclonal antibodies, but seek out a safe ionophore that will get zinc into cells, & you can inhibit SARS coronavirus replication, buying your immune system precious time to mount its own defense.  Don't know what to make of his pyrithione ionophore, but haven't seen this as a pharmaceutical or supplement.  Apparently it is used in dandruff shampoos (not recommended for human consumption).  

 

We know HCQ is a potent zinc ionophore, and that there are a couple of other options...  Quercetin & EGCG.  I recall Dr Zelenko saying he prescribed quercetin for his patients who could not get HCQ, but that HCQ was a far superior ionophore for zinc.  I've searched for a comparison, but can not find one, but why not go with the best?  

 

I recall quite a fuss being made by some regarding why zinc was never included in the HCQ trials.  Interesting also, the fact both ACEi & ARB blood pressure medications, and diuretics often prescribed for cardiac patients are all known to deplete zinc.  Isn't hypertension & heart failure two of the top comorbidities for COVID?  

 

So they repeatedly trialed a drug with a theoretical action as a zinc ionophore, in zinc depleted patients, without correcting the zinc deficiency.  Anyone see a problem here?  


  • Good Point x 4
  • WellResearched x 1
  • like x 1

#2833 Qowpel

  • Guest
  • 355 posts
  • 36
  • Location:New jersey

Posted 02 July 2021 - 08:03 AM

Many moons ago, in another thread, I posted on Ralph S Baric's published opinions on coronavirus, & potential therapeutics.  

 

https://www.longecit...oroquine/page-2

 

Don't know if there are any experts who know more about coronavirus than Baric, but doubt anyone would deny he's in the top 3.  

 

Back in 2015, he is listed as co-author of a paper: A SARS-like cluster of circulating bat coronaviruses shows potential for human emergence

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm...les/PMC4797993/

 

Where he states: "Evaluation of available SARS-based immune-therapeutic and prophylactic modalities revealed poor efficacy; both monoclonal antibody and vaccine approaches failed to neutralize and protect from infection with CoVs using the novel spike protein."

 

Back in 2010, he co-authored a paper: Zn2+ Inhibits Coronavirus and Arterivirus RNA Polymerase Activity In Vitro and Zinc Ionophores Block the Replication of These Viruses in Cell Culture

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm...les/PMC2973827/

 

Where he states: Increasing the intracellular Zn2+ concentration with zinc-ionophores like pyrithione (PT) can efficiently impair the replication of a variety of RNA viruses, including poliovirus and influenza virus. For some viruses this effect has been attributed to interference with viral polyprotein processing. In this study we demonstrate that the combination of Zn2+ and PT at low concentrations (2 µM Zn2+ and 2 µM PT) inhibits the replication of SARS-coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and equine arteritis virus (EAV) in cell culture. 

 

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

 

So here you have the Godfather of coronavirus research telling you not to fool around with vaccines & monoclonal antibodies, but seek out a safe ionophore that will get zinc into cells, & you can inhibit SARS coronavirus replication, buying your immune system precious time to mount its own defense.  Don't know what to make of his pyrithione ionophore, but haven't seen this as a pharmaceutical or supplement.  Apparently it is used in dandruff shampoos (not recommended for human consumption).  

 

We know HCQ is a potent zinc ionophore, and that there are a couple of other options...  Quercetin & EGCG.  I recall Dr Zelenko saying he prescribed quercetin for his patients who could not get HCQ, but that HCQ was a far superior ionophore for zinc.  I've searched for a comparison, but can not find one, but why not go with the best?  

 

I recall quite a fuss being made by some regarding why zinc was never included in the HCQ trials.  Interesting also, the fact both ACEi & ARB blood pressure medications, and diuretics often prescribed for cardiac patients are all known to deplete zinc.  Isn't hypertension & heart failure two of the top comorbidities for COVID?  

 

So they repeatedly trialed a drug with a theoretical action as a zinc ionophore, in zinc depleted patients, without correcting the zinc deficiency.  Anyone see a problem here?  

maybe theoretically one could take like 2 grams of quercetin and double the zinc dosage for ionophore activity potential to be a bit higher


  • unsure x 1
  • dislike x 1
  • Disagree x 1

#2834 pamojja

  • Guest
  • 2,880 posts
  • 727
  • Location:Austria

Posted 02 July 2021 - 10:38 AM

maybe theoretically one could take like 2 grams of quercetin and double the zinc dosage for ionophore activity potential to be a bit higher

 

Well practically 95% of the pupulation have enough innate immunity to handle the virus just fine. They don't even need antibodies. Neither natural of artificial ones. I seem to be one of them.
 

For the remainng 5% it would actually be wise to stick to known safe long-term doses. Better still, monitor your intracellular zinc by whole blood-test, and to adjust the zinc/quercetin doses accordingly.

 

Just as example, I suffer from low-normal serum zinc and high copper many years, therefore supplemented ~50 mg/d of zinc for the last 13 years, along with 200 mg quercetin. Serum zinc is still persisting any rise, copper any lowering, though in whole blood I've even seen above norma zincl!

 

Just after that high whole-blood zinc result last spring came covid, and I got a cold. Where just this light cold had my whole blood zinc reduced to low normal again.

 

It's a very dynamic system, therefore worthwhile being informed of your state by blood-testing, and not on probably wrong assumption on account of your daily mg-intake.


Edited by pamojja, 02 July 2021 - 10:41 AM.

  • Needs references x 1

#2835 DanCG

  • Guest
  • 237 posts
  • 162
  • Location:USA

Posted 02 July 2021 - 11:48 AM

Another way to look at your question is to ask, "if they included more men, so that the number of men and women were the same, would men and women still show different results?"

 

The short answer is YES.  The statistical analysis is done to ask the question, "If men and women are really the same, what is the probability that we would get the results we got?" P=0.006, which means that there is only a 6 in 1000 chance that men and women really are the same and the results are a fluke.

 

They did not attempt a biological explanation for why men and women show different immune responses, they just reported that that is what happened.

CORRECTION:  The statistical analysis is done to ask the question, "If  vaccinated men and unvaccinated men are really the same, what is the probability that we would get the results we got?" The bottom line is still the same: the results are very unlikely to be a fluke that could be changed by studying more men.  They ask the corresponding question for women, P=0.92, which means it is very likely that unvaccinated and vaccinated women are no different from each other.



#2836 geo12the

  • Guest
  • 762 posts
  • -211

Posted 02 July 2021 - 01:47 PM

Acid test, geo12the. One day ago you had a slight cough and a low-grade fever. You immediately (because you pulled some Bay Area strings) got an RT-PCR test and a comprehensive suite of blood tests. The tests came back within 6 hours. You were positive for SARS-CoV-2  (as well as for 6-monoacetylmorphine and some pesky spirochetes, but that's beside the point).

 

Your only options are to be treated with HCQ which can be delivered to you in 15 minutes, or, to fly to Tuva untreated with anything, where you will hear some really cool throat singing as you slowly drift off into the sunset.

 

Which option do you pick?

 

 

(This message is brought to you by Deer Leader, who just returned from a conference with another deer leader)

 

I probably wouldn't do HCQ to be honest.  But I would LOVE to fly to Tuva, closest I've been is Fiji, and drink some Kava and look for seashells.. 


  • Pointless, Timewasting x 1
  • Good Point x 1

#2837 geo12the

  • Guest
  • 762 posts
  • -211

Posted 02 July 2021 - 02:04 PM

I probably wouldn't do HCQ to be honest.  But I would LOVE to fly to Tuva, closest I've been is Fiji, and drink some Kava and look for seashells.. 

 

But I might do Ivermectin, though I probably don't need to-I practically bathe in Abamectin (very similar compound) for work.


  • Informative x 1
  • Agree x 1

#2838 Gal220

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

Posted 03 July 2021 - 02:26 AM

LINK1, LINK2, LINK3, LINK4

 


On February 17, Chinese health officials reported that all 60,107 cases of covid-19 were successfully treated with TCM. The nation was exclusively using TCM to treat a vast majority of covid cases at that time...

 

Chinese scientists put 16,500 plant compounds to the test, measuring their individual and synergistic inhibitory effects against three viral proteins, 3-chymotypsin protease, papain-like protease, and RNA-dependent RNA polymerase....

 

The top three most effective plants for treating covid-19 included Licorice root(Glycyrrhizin), chicory root, (Cichorium intybus) and hibiscus flowers (Hibiscus sabdariffa). 

 

 

Other anti-virals(prevention) - olive leaf (Olea europaea), white horehound (Marrubium vulgare), black cumin seed (Nigella sativa), garden cress (Lepidium sativum), Judean wormwood (Artemisia Judaica), guava (Psidium guajava), chrysanthemum ( Glebionis coronaria), and Maryam’s flower (Anastatica).

 

3rd tier anti-virals - Plants that had action against two of the viral enzymes included: hairy willow herb (Epilobium hirsutum), chickpea (Cicer arietinum), and Kantarioun (Centaurea incana). Plants that had action against two of the viral proteins included: roselle (Hibiscus sabdariffa), German chamomile (Matricaria chamomilla), celery (Apium graveolens), and alfalfa (Medicago sativa).

 

Information like this should be all over.  Too bad licorice shouldnt be taken long term.

 


Edited by Gal220, 03 July 2021 - 02:36 AM.

  • WellResearched x 1
  • Agree x 1

#2839 Hip

  • Guest
  • 2,402 posts
  • -449
  • Location:UK

Posted 03 July 2021 - 03:25 AM

Information like this should be all over.   

 

How many of these herbs were tested in humans or in animal models? Because if they were just in vitro tests, then that means nothing. It does not imply the herb will have any antiviral effects in vivo. 


Edited by Hip, 03 July 2021 - 03:33 AM.

  • Pointless, Timewasting x 3
  • Agree x 2
  • Good Point x 1

#2840 CarlSagan

  • Guest
  • 91 posts
  • 36
  • Location:UK

Posted 05 July 2021 - 04:41 PM

So to summarize the thread so far, what readily accessible things are with trying at the onset of symptoms?

 

Zinc (50mg) with Quercitin (500mg twice daily) as an ionophore & inflammation controller ? https://rcm.imrpress...CM2020264.shtml

 

Vitamin D 6000IU daily (with magnesium) ?

 

 

Licorice? licorice tea?  what dose if so?

 

Vitamin C 3000mg daily ?

 

Nigela Sativa?  what dose?

Palmitoylethanolamide (beforehand for inflammation?)  https://pubmed.ncbi.....gov/33296131/   https://www.ncbi.nlm...s/PMC8137339/   The most suitable daily dose would be 2700 mg as an oral suspension (mPEA 300 mg plus umPEA 600 mg 3 times a day  in order to prevent the onset of an hyperinflammatory state

 

What else? What is effective acutely for lung inflammation?


Edited by CarlSagan, 05 July 2021 - 04:50 PM.

  • like x 1

#2841 Gal220

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

Posted 06 July 2021 - 04:02 AM



So to summarize the thread so far, what readily accessible things are with trying at the onset of symptoms?

 

Zinc (50mg) with Quercitin (500mg twice daily) as an ionophore & inflammation controller ? https://rcm.imrpress...CM2020264.shtml

 

Vitamin D 6000IU daily (with magnesium) ?

 

Looks good, I would not do 50 zinc long term, 2 weeks is ok though. Take Quercetin with vitamin C or Bromelain on an empty stomach for best absorption.  If you have EGCG(~300mg), I would do it in the afternoon and Quercetin in the morning.

 Life extension sells EGCG w/o caffeine, but the dose is too much. I take half in water(not tasty) and leave the other half in the capsule for the next dose.

 

 


Licorice? licorice tea?  what dose if so?

I would dose according to the bottle, Vitamin shoppe should have it. Cats claw and mushroom extracts are also good, widely available.

 

 


Vitamin C 3000mg daily ?

  

If you have 1000 mg capsule, every half hour is possible once your white blood cells ramp up. Stay away from sugar.  You cant take too much, it will just cause a loose stool, then back off to 1000 mg every hour or as necessary.

I would do  no fillers, plain vitamin C.

 

 


Nigela Sativa?  what dose?

Palmitoylethanolamide (beforehand for inflammation?)  https://pubmed.ncbi.....gov/33296131/   https://www.ncbi.nlm...s/PMC8137339/   The most suitable daily dose would be 2700 mg as an oral suspension (mPEA 300 mg plus umPEA 600 mg 3 times a day  in order to prevent the onset of an hyperinflammatory state

Not familiar with them.  

 

 


What else? What is effective acutely for lung inflammation?

 

I would be taking NAC(Jarrow brand), glutathione(Jarrow brand), Curcumin(Life extension brand), and nattokinase(Jarrow or arthur andrew medical brand)/alternative baby aspirin for blood thinner.

 

Multivitamin + fish oil would also help.

 

 


Edited by Gal220, 06 July 2021 - 04:36 AM.

  • like x 2

#2842 Hip

  • Guest
  • 2,402 posts
  • -449
  • Location:UK

Posted 06 July 2021 - 04:18 AM

The antiviral component of licorice, glycyrrhizin, is not only a very weak antiviral, it is not actually orally bioavailable!

 

The glycyrrhizin from licorice root is converted by gut bacteria to glycyrrhetinic acid, which is absorbed into the bloodstream, but the glycyrrhizin is not. So you need to inject glycyrrhizin if you want to get it into the bloodstream.

 

In Japan there are glycyrrhizin injections available, under the name of "Stronger Neo-Minophagen C". This injection is a 20 ml vial containing 40 mg of glycyrrhizin. 

 

You cannot use very high doses of glycyrrhizin, because it increases blood pressure. So a maximum of about 200 mg of injectable glycyrrhizin daily is your limit. Ref: here.

 

But even with an injection, licorice will still not work against coronavirus, as we now demonstrate:

 

 

The in vitro study found that the coronavirus EC50 concentration for glycyrrhizin was 0.44 mg/ml. Normally to get a reasonable antiviral effect, you have to achieve a blood concentration of at least 10 times the EC50, so in this case we are talking a blood concentration of 4.4 mg/ml.

 

Even with an injection, there is not a hope in hell of reaching the 4.4 mg/ml concentration in the blood. You have about 40 liters of fluids in the body (40,000 ml), so by the time your injected 200 mg of glycyrrhizin distributes to those 40 liters, it will only have a concentration of 0.005 mg/ml ( = 200 / 40,000).

 

 

So bottom line is, there is not a hope in hell of licorice fighting coronavirus, even if you use glycyrrhizin injections.

 

 

People on this forum need to learn some pharmacokinetics, so that they can make better sense of these in vitro studies. Just because a substance is antiviral in vitro, it does not prove that a substance will work in the body, because usually it is not possible to attain sufficient blood concentration of the substance in the body, as this example shows.

 

 

 


Edited by Hip, 06 July 2021 - 04:28 AM.

  • Ill informed x 1
  • Pointless, Timewasting x 1
  • Good Point x 1
  • Informative x 1
  • WellResearched x 1
  • Disagree x 1

#2843 Gal220

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

Posted 06 July 2021 - 04:34 AM

So bottom line is, there is not a hope in hell of licorice fighting coronavirus, even if you use glycyrrhizin injections.

 

You said the same thing for Ivermectin as well.  I cant say for certain, but it was identified as a top 3 treatment option by the Chinese and functional doctors recommend it here as well - LINK , LINK2

 

"In a new peer reviewed study published in the Lancet (https://www.scienced...307556?via=ihub) it was shown that out of 102 confirmed infected patients in one study at Hubei exhibiting mild symptoms of the Covid-19 disease, almost all recovered just on TCM concoctions alone"

 

"In all the concoctions(TCM), Licorice root was the main ingredient used in a larger proportion."

 

 

"The licorice root extract exhibited neutralizing effects even at a subtoxic concentration of 2 mg/ml, which is lower than the typical consuming dilution. For example, in tea, it is 12.5 mg/ml. " - LINK1, LINK2


Edited by Gal220, 06 July 2021 - 05:14 AM.

  • Good Point x 2

#2844 CarlSagan

  • Guest
  • 91 posts
  • 36
  • Location:UK

Posted 06 July 2021 - 07:34 AM

 it was identified as a top 3 treatment option by the Chinese and functional doctors recommend it here as well - LINK , LINK2
 
"In a new peer reviewed study published in the Lancet (https://www.scienced...307556?via=ihub) it was shown that out of 102 confirmed infected patients in one study at Hubei exhibiting mild symptoms of the Covid-19 disease, almost all recovered just on TCM concoctions alone"
 
"In all the concoctions(TCM), Licorice root was the main ingredient used in a larger proportion."
 
"The licorice root extract exhibited neutralizing effects even at a subtoxic concentration of 2 mg/ml, which is lower than the typical consuming dilution. For example, in tea, it is 12.5 mg/ml. " - LINK1, LINK2[/size]


The glycyrrhizin from licorice root is converted by gut bacteria to glycyrrhetinic acid, which is absorbed into the bloodstream, but the glycyrrhizin is not.

 
edit: so glycyrrhizin is glycyrrhizinic acid. Seems the Glycyrrhetinic acid would also have benefit here

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm...les/PMC7123798/

 

^ This mentions it being an anti-inflammatory agent through extending cortisol half-life

 

https://pubmed.ncbi....h.gov/34022526/

 

^ Another in vitro but mentions Glycyrrhetinic acid having anti viral properties, and its derivatives having an inhibitory effect on Zika virus

 

https://pubmed.ncbi....h.gov/23152913/

 

^ Mentions both compounds being anti-inflammatory & anti-viral. This shows anti-viral effect in mice when Glycyrrhetinic acid was delivered orally

 

"Using a mouse model of rotavirus infection, GRA reduced the duration of viral antigen shedding, and endpoint serum antibody titers were higher in GRA-treated animals."


Edited by CarlSagan, 06 July 2021 - 08:21 AM.

  • Informative x 1

#2845 pamojja

  • Guest
  • 2,880 posts
  • 727
  • Location:Austria

Posted 06 July 2021 - 08:12 AM

The in vitro study found that the coronavirus EC50 concentration for glycyrrhizin was 0.44 mg/ml. Normally to get a reasonable antiviral effect, you have to achieve a blood concentration of at least 10 times the EC50, so in this case we are talking a blood concentration of 4.4 mg/ml...

 

So bottom line is, there is not a hope in hell of licorice fighting coronavirus, even if you use glycyrrhizin injections.

 

There is also not a hope on earth, that an invitro study would ever uncover what a compound introduced in a human body all would do, even if you used it only as a licorice-sweet. There are just to many pathways, secondary metabolites, microbiome- , enzym-, or other TCM interactions happening.

 

You're just too much enamoured with the pharmaceutical model, of any ingredient in a natural compound having to have only one pharmaceutcal action in the body, in this case anti-viral, and not consider all the other uncounted possibilities.

 

The first overall most antiviral action is provided by a body with a healthy immune-system fighting a virus successfuly via innate-immunity itself, even without anti-bodies. Which obiviously works against covid already perfectly fine in 95% of the population. With absolutely no additional pharmaceutical anti-viral neccesary.

 

So what if licorice (the much complex whole compound, not only glycyrrhizin) with all the other TCM co-factors, gives this inate-immunity for the remaining 5% just a boost? - Without any anti-viral action. A test-tube study would never uncover.


Edited by pamojja, 06 July 2021 - 08:16 AM.

  • Needs references x 1
  • Good Point x 1

#2846 CarlSagan

  • Guest
  • 91 posts
  • 36
  • Location:UK

Posted 06 July 2021 - 08:16 AM

 

Nigela Sativa?  what dose?

 

 

https://www.medrxiv....0.30.20217364v4

 

Three hundred and thirteen patients - 210 moderate and 103 severe - underwent randomization from April 30 to July 29, 2020. Among these, 107 were assigned to HNS whereas 103 to placebo for moderate cases. For severe cases, 50 were given HNS and 53 were given placebos.

 

HNS resulted in ∼50% reduction in time taken to alleviate symptoms as compared to placebo (Moderate (4 versus 7 days) and severe (6 versus 13 days)

 

HNS also cleared the virus 4 days earlier than placebo group in moderate (6 versus 10 days) and severe cases (8.5 versus 12 days). HNS further led to a better clinical score on day 6 with normal activity resumption in 63.6% versus 10.9% among moderate cases and hospital discharge in 50% versus 2.8% in severe cases.

 

In severe cases, mortality rate was four-fold lower in HNS group than placebo. No HNS-related adverse effects were observed.

 

-

That is a huge difference, sounds a bit too good to be true?  Honey @ 1 gram per kg + Nigela Sativa seeds @ 80mg per kg (over 2-3 daily doses) cleared the virus 3.5 - 4 days earlier than placebo, and cut duration of symptoms in half.  But the study has not been published / reviewed yet. 

-

 

Molecular docking studies have shown that some of its’ components such as nigelledine, α-hederin and thymoquinone have high affinity with several SARS-CoV-2 enzymes and proteins. In fact, they exhibit an energy complex score better than that of chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine and favipiravir – the drugs that have shown some anti-SARS-CoV-2 activity. 

 

 

The beneficial effects of honey against different viruses including rubella virus, Herpes Simplex virus, Hepatitis virus, and Varicella-Zoster virus have been reported earlier.6 Moreover, in-silico molecular docking studies have shown that six flavonoid compounds from honey might inhibit severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) replication by binding to the viral 3-chymotrypsin-like-cysteine protease.9

 

The use of honey not only improves the proliferation of T and B lymphocytes, but also their phagocytic activity. It additionally inhibits the expression of vital pro-inflammatory cytokines such as interleukin (IL) 1 beta and IL-6  Thus, honey is postulated to play a pivotal role in fighting COVID-19.10 https://www.mdpi.com...3049/25/21/5017

 

 Its’ use has shown to be more beneficial in upper respiratory tract infections than usual care especially in the context of cough frequency and severity.11 

 

 

https://www.nice.org...of-the-evidence For general Cough (acute) -> "Honey significantly reduced the frequency and severity of cough at 1 day follow-up compared with placebo"    

  • Honey significantly reduced bothersome cough by about 2 points on a 7‑point Likert scale compared with placebo (moderate quality evidence), but not compared with no treatment or dextromethorphan (low quality evidence).

https://www.cochrane...4.pub4/full/es 
Moderate quality evidence showed that honey may be better than 'no treatment' in reducing the frequency of cough (mean difference (MD) ‐1.05; 95% confidence interval (CI) ‐1.48 to ‐0.62; I2 statistic 23%; two studies, 154 participants). High quality evidence also suggests that honey may be better than placebo for reduction of cough frequency ( 
 

In vitro Nigella Sativa decreased replication of the virus. and chamomile did too https://link.springe...10.1007/s11033-014-3019-7 

450mg x3 daily Nigella sativa oil significantly reduced viral load of hepatitis C virus https://www.ncbi.nlm...les/PMC3646144/  In the current study, N. sativa administration resulted in a significant decrease in viral load, with 16.67% of patients becoming seronegative, and 50% showing a significant decrease in the quantitative viral count.


Edited by CarlSagan, 06 July 2021 - 09:14 AM.

  • Informative x 1
  • WellResearched x 1

#2847 zorba990

  • Guest
  • 1,604 posts
  • 315

Posted 06 July 2021 - 01:41 PM

You said the same thing for Ivermectin as well. I cant say for certain, but it was identified as a top 3 treatment option by the Chinese and functional doctors recommend it here as well - LINK , LINK2

"In a new peer reviewed study published in the Lancet (https://www.scienced...307556?via=ihub) it was shown that out of 102 confirmed infected patients in one study at Hubei exhibiting mild symptoms of the Covid-19 disease, almost all recovered just on TCM concoctions alone"

"In all the concoctions(TCM), Licorice root was the main ingredient used in a larger proportion."


"The licorice root extract exhibited neutralizing effects even at a subtoxic concentration of 2 mg/ml, which is lower than the typical consuming dilution. For example, in tea, it is 12.5 mg/ml. " - LINK1, LINK2


You should know that TCM 'prepared" licorice is not the same as off-the-shelf raw root.

https://www.ncbi.nlm...les/PMC3746624/
"Modern research revealed that the roasted licorice (roasted without honey) had the stronger effect in antianaphylaxis (Majima et al., 2004), anti-inflammation (Kim et al., 2006; Kim et al., 2010), neuroprotection (Hwang et al., 2006) and anti-diabetic action (Ko et al., 2007) than crude licorice. In recently years, pharmacological research also showed that processed licorice had the better effect of anti-arrhythmia (Huang et al., 1984) and analgesia (Peng et al., 1989) than crude licorice. However, the research about the influence of roasting with honey on the main efficacy of licorice, such as strengthening immunity, relieving cough, dissipating phlegm and detoxification, and the processing influence on the water-soluble active constituents of licorice, has not been reported. In the present study, therefore, the mainly pharmaceutical evaluation and the chemical analysis of licorice before and after honey-roasting were carried out. The results showed that honey-roasting could obviously modify the main pharmacological activities and chemical compositions of licorice."

Chinese pharmacopeia has specific instructions on preparation of herbs to reduce toxic effects, and increase potency.
  • Informative x 2

#2848 Hip

  • Guest
  • 2,402 posts
  • -449
  • Location:UK

Posted 06 July 2021 - 02:28 PM

You said the same thing for Ivermectin as well.  I cant say for certain, but it was identified as a top 3 treatment option by the Chinese and functional doctors recommend it here as well - LINK , LINK2

 
If functional doctors are recommending licorice for COVID, then you can be almost certain is it dubious!

 

Functional medicine is notorious for prescribing supplement or treatments for which there are next to no evidence. In functional medicine, if you have an illness, they will throw everything at it but the kitchen sink, giving your treatments without any evidence base of being effective, in hope that something might work. 

 

 

It still holds true that ivermectin is not antiviral in vivo. A simple calculation demonstrates this.

 

Ivermectin may have some immunomodulator effects which fight viruses in vivo though, or which might reduce the damaging immune attack on the lungs. Do you know the difference between an antiviral effect, and an immunomodulatory effect which fights viruses?

 

So we await the results of the Oxford trial on ivermectin for COVID, which may potentially show benefits.

 


Edited by Hip, 06 July 2021 - 02:30 PM.

  • Pointless, Timewasting x 1
  • Ill informed x 1

#2849 Hip

  • Guest
  • 2,402 posts
  • -449
  • Location:UK

Posted 06 July 2021 - 02:41 PM

There is also not a hope on earth, that an invitro study would ever uncover what a compound introduced in a human body all would do, even if you used it only as a licorice-sweet. There are just to many pathways, secondary metabolites, microbiome- , enzym-, or other TCM interactions happening.

 
It is correct that an in vitro antiviral study is only measuring the antiviral effect; it does not measure any anti-inflammatory or immunomodulatory effect that the substance might have. To measure the immunomodulatory effect against a virus, you would normally need and animal or human in vivo studies.
 
Remember that glycyrrhizin is not orally bioavailable, so taking licorice orally is not going to get any significant amount of glycyrrhizin into the bloodstream.
 
It will only get glycyrrhizin's metabolite into the bloodstream. 
 
 

 

So what if licorice (the much complex whole compound, not only glycyrrhizin) with all the other TCM co-factors, gives this inate-immunity for the remaining 5% just a boost? - Without any anti-viral action. A test-tube study would never uncover.


Then it is up to researchers to prove this, using human or animal in vivo studies. Until they do, we have no evidence of effect. 

 

 


  • Pointless, Timewasting x 2

#2850 Gal220

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

Posted 06 July 2021 - 02:55 PM

 If functional doctors are recommending licorice for COVID, then you can be almost certain is it dubious!

 

Functional medicine is notorious for prescribing supplement or treatments for which there are next to no evidence. In functional medicine, if you have an illness, they will throw everything at it but the kitchen sink, giving your treatments without any evidence base of being effective, in hope that something might work. 

 

Certainly there are bad and good functional doctors, however there are hundreds of things they could recommend and licorice was on the short list

 

Likewise, the Chinese have treated over 60k people with their TCM, of which Licorice is a main ingredient.

 

 

We SHOULD know(yay or nay), if you look back at the dates of articles, licorice like quercetin was recommended as something to look at early 2020, but corruption has consequences.  Everyone was too busy trying to make money off the pandemic instead of testing what was readily available.  


Edited by Gal220, 06 July 2021 - 02:56 PM.

  • Good Point x 2





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

32 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 32 guests, 0 anonymous users