All that matters at this point is effective anti-virals, and aggressive use of them before the virus or immune response damage the patient's lungs to the point that they need ventilation/ecmo.
For example, Guérin, C., Reignier, J., Richard, J.C., Beuret, P., Gacouin, A., Boulain, T., Mercier, E., Badet, M., Mercat, A., Baudin, O. and Clavel, M., 2013. Prone positioning in severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. New England Journal of Medicine, 368(23), pp.2159-2168.
But I don't think we have effective antivirals or evidence of usefulness. I'd say all that matters is saving people however we can. There's not one thing.
If it was that easy, we'd there would be no bacterial infections (antibiotics are already sitting on the shelves) and we would have no problems with viruses (antivirals are already sitting on shelves).
Yes, it's possible that existing drugs are effective against it, alone or on combination.
It's also quite likely (the norm, in fact, for viral diseases) that they aren't. It's not “we have antivirals we just have to find the right combination”, it's “we might get lucky and have a combination of an existing drug or combination of existing drugs that are effective”. As I said upthread we ought to be (and are) pursuing both approaches, vaccine and antiviral, not treating one as both certain and quicker and focussing exclusively on it, as another poster suggested upthread for antivirals.
The assumption that world wide medical professionals are not looking for some magic bullet anti-viral? Asinine.
The assumption that there is some magical anti-viral cocktail that medical professionals aren't using? Asinine.
We can't afford to give credence to mindless twits who are listening to Alex Jones/Fox News/Conspiracy du Jour and implying all we have to do is take up one of these fake news/fake cure woo and the problem is solved.
If there was an easy answer, life would be back to normal.
15 comments
[ 3.4 ms ] story [ 45.4 ms ] threadAll that matters at this point is effective anti-virals, and aggressive use of them before the virus or immune response damage the patient's lungs to the point that they need ventilation/ecmo.
We can't afford to wait 18 months for a vaccine.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfkbv_WQtn0
It's not that easy.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32147628
It's also quite likely (the norm, in fact, for viral diseases) that they aren't. It's not “we have antivirals we just have to find the right combination”, it's “we might get lucky and have a combination of an existing drug or combination of existing drugs that are effective”. As I said upthread we ought to be (and are) pursuing both approaches, vaccine and antiviral, not treating one as both certain and quicker and focussing exclusively on it, as another poster suggested upthread for antivirals.
The assumption that world wide medical professionals are not looking for some magic bullet anti-viral? Asinine.
The assumption that there is some magical anti-viral cocktail that medical professionals aren't using? Asinine.
We can't afford to give credence to mindless twits who are listening to Alex Jones/Fox News/Conspiracy du Jour and implying all we have to do is take up one of these fake news/fake cure woo and the problem is solved.
If there was an easy answer, life would be back to normal.