Note- old diseases and conditions continue to ret
Post# of 9144
(Total Views: 455)
Posted On: 03/23/2020 6:51:29 PM
Note- old diseases and conditions continue to return, such as tb, measles etc. The bubonic plague itself continues to affect Americans. e.g.,https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/100-years-of-bubonic-plague/
Plus a panoply of new diseases/conditions will continue to grow as per many sources-so whether or not NNLX's N-assay is used for the current pandemic, the N -assay will continue to be useful against a wide range of bacterial and viral conditions in the future,as NNLX has noted, especially in comparison to the more limited diagnosis afforded by the current pcr or pcp tech.
And yes, the govt contractor -whoever they are -who showed an interest in NNLX's N- assay -as per a preliminary agreement- is not likely to disappear in a week or two. I've explained ad nauseum in the past why it takes so long for things to move forward,given the required dd and communication among several disparate specialized groups who do not speak the same language.
almost all drugs have side effects and become toxic at some level of dosage. E.g., I've read that acetaminophen can cause liver failure at just 4000 mg/day (in fact in some cases as low as 2000mg/day i think i've read)=-bottles say do not exceed 4000mg/day or use with certain other drugs or take 3 or more alcoholic drinks/day. Untreated liver failure results in death.
https://www.uspharmacist.com/article/acetamin...ed-to-know
from the cited article: Acetaminophen toxicity is one of the most common causes of both intentional and unintentional poisoning in the U.S. In fact, there has been a steady increase in the incidence of acetaminophen-related toxicity over the past decade.... Acetaminophen-associated overdoses account for approximately 56,000 emergency department visits, 26,000 hospitalizations, and over 450 deaths annually.9
if such a commonly used drug as acetaminophen is so toxic then its odd that a reported side effect in just ONE wrong self diagnosed self treating patient was used in one article https://fortune.com/2020/03/20/malaria-drug-c...dly-china/ to caution against chloroquine treatment for covid 19- such a strange event/article title is more likely part of current widespread political assassination attempts.
the ff was the journal article cited by my post
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article...via%3Dihub
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32164085
the wiki article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chloroquine notes that
a further study concluded that hydroxychloroquine was more potent than chloroquine, with a more tolerable safety profile
one article said the older less safe form of chloroquine was widely used by europeans before entering any malaria prone theater and that said europeans continued on a dosage of such for 2 months AFTER exiting malaria prone areas. Obviously- even the older less safe form of the treatment were considered an improvement compared to malaria.
Of course, today safety is emphasized more than decades ago,but in all cases drugs are intended for particular uses under a doctors direction- and are not to be used willy nilly as per a wrong self diagnosis as did the chinese woman who developed arrhythmia- which is contraindicated for chloroquine, just as a long list of drugs are contraindicated for those with heart problems. In most such cases it is the side effect which kills -often in people prone to such a side effect.
In italy i've read that up to 99% of deaths occurred in those with a previous underlying medical condition.
As French and Australian and Chinese work with chloroquine (which was also effective against some previous corona viruses) and its safer derivatives came to light it was naturally jumped on as a possible treatment modality, and it still is, since regulatory approval for all potential vaccines seems to be one year away, according to reports i've read and heard.
So non-scientists, including politicians, will in the current climate of runaway fear be glad to push such a potential treatment.
That is part of their job to calm fears in a fear prone populace.
Meanwhile scientists,who by nature must be more cautious -want to look at the studies first and determine whether other studies or tests are necessary for safety purposes before jumping into the boat. This paradigm should be well known and understood-and remember it was scientists use of chloroquine or its safer derivatives and their scientific statements that such use was highly effective against the virus in their studies/samples that got politicians and others excited,as it should-why -because we cannot idly sit by and wait one year for a vaccine to be approved before we start to combat the virus. That should be obvious.
Plus a panoply of new diseases/conditions will continue to grow as per many sources-so whether or not NNLX's N-assay is used for the current pandemic, the N -assay will continue to be useful against a wide range of bacterial and viral conditions in the future,as NNLX has noted, especially in comparison to the more limited diagnosis afforded by the current pcr or pcp tech.
And yes, the govt contractor -whoever they are -who showed an interest in NNLX's N- assay -as per a preliminary agreement- is not likely to disappear in a week or two. I've explained ad nauseum in the past why it takes so long for things to move forward,given the required dd and communication among several disparate specialized groups who do not speak the same language.
almost all drugs have side effects and become toxic at some level of dosage. E.g., I've read that acetaminophen can cause liver failure at just 4000 mg/day (in fact in some cases as low as 2000mg/day i think i've read)=-bottles say do not exceed 4000mg/day or use with certain other drugs or take 3 or more alcoholic drinks/day. Untreated liver failure results in death.
https://www.uspharmacist.com/article/acetamin...ed-to-know
from the cited article: Acetaminophen toxicity is one of the most common causes of both intentional and unintentional poisoning in the U.S. In fact, there has been a steady increase in the incidence of acetaminophen-related toxicity over the past decade.... Acetaminophen-associated overdoses account for approximately 56,000 emergency department visits, 26,000 hospitalizations, and over 450 deaths annually.9
if such a commonly used drug as acetaminophen is so toxic then its odd that a reported side effect in just ONE wrong self diagnosed self treating patient was used in one article https://fortune.com/2020/03/20/malaria-drug-c...dly-china/ to caution against chloroquine treatment for covid 19- such a strange event/article title is more likely part of current widespread political assassination attempts.
the ff was the journal article cited by my post
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article...via%3Dihub
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32164085
the wiki article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chloroquine notes that
a further study concluded that hydroxychloroquine was more potent than chloroquine, with a more tolerable safety profile
one article said the older less safe form of chloroquine was widely used by europeans before entering any malaria prone theater and that said europeans continued on a dosage of such for 2 months AFTER exiting malaria prone areas. Obviously- even the older less safe form of the treatment were considered an improvement compared to malaria.
Of course, today safety is emphasized more than decades ago,but in all cases drugs are intended for particular uses under a doctors direction- and are not to be used willy nilly as per a wrong self diagnosis as did the chinese woman who developed arrhythmia- which is contraindicated for chloroquine, just as a long list of drugs are contraindicated for those with heart problems. In most such cases it is the side effect which kills -often in people prone to such a side effect.
In italy i've read that up to 99% of deaths occurred in those with a previous underlying medical condition.
As French and Australian and Chinese work with chloroquine (which was also effective against some previous corona viruses) and its safer derivatives came to light it was naturally jumped on as a possible treatment modality, and it still is, since regulatory approval for all potential vaccines seems to be one year away, according to reports i've read and heard.
So non-scientists, including politicians, will in the current climate of runaway fear be glad to push such a potential treatment.
That is part of their job to calm fears in a fear prone populace.
Meanwhile scientists,who by nature must be more cautious -want to look at the studies first and determine whether other studies or tests are necessary for safety purposes before jumping into the boat. This paradigm should be well known and understood-and remember it was scientists use of chloroquine or its safer derivatives and their scientific statements that such use was highly effective against the virus in their studies/samples that got politicians and others excited,as it should-why -because we cannot idly sit by and wait one year for a vaccine to be approved before we start to combat the virus. That should be obvious.
(2)
(0)