That's Dr. Javitt's claim. Dr. Javitt of RLFTF ini
Post# of 154115
(Total Views: 660)
Posted On: 01/20/2021 5:58:33 PM
That's Dr. Javitt's claim. Dr. Javitt of RLFTF initially said that two of the main mechanisms of action for RLF-100's effectiveness were blocking cytokines and it's antiviral capabilities. I said I doubted some of the claims made about RLF-100 apparently so does Dr. Javitt.
Someone needs a course in marine biology.
and human biology.
https://pharmaphorum.com/r-d/views-analysis-r...treatment/
One does has to ask why the supposed difference in outcomes.
https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19/87990
Someone needs a course in marine biology.
Quote:
“Every air-breathing warm-blooded animal makes this peptide to protect the lungs from the toxic effects of breathing air,”
“For example – when a fish swims through water, seawater goes across its gills and oxygen is then absorbed from the seawater. The fish derives enough oxygen from that to carry out all the functions it needs to live. However, the minute you put that fish on the land, the fish dies. But why? There is more oxygen in the air than there is in the sea, so why would the fish die?”
The problem, he says, is due to the fact the atmosphere is toxic to the fish’s epithelial cells.
and human biology.
Quote:
“In humans it is the same. The mixture of gases that we breathe all the time are toxic if it touches the lung’s cell, so the lung is covered by this layer of fluid that creates a barrier between the atmosphere, the air, and the cell membrane.”
Quote:
“The cytokine storm story became popular, but it was mostly popularised by companies who already had drugs against cytokines. They created the story and then threw their monoclonal antibodies against COVID-19 but there is real scepticism now about whether COVID-19 is really a cytokine storm problem.
“Personally, I don’t think it is. I think cytokine storms are a secondary problem and until we really face the lesion that occurs when the SARS-CoV-2 virus infects the lungs and causes COVID-19, we’re not going to have a solution.”
https://pharmaphorum.com/r-d/views-analysis-r...treatment/
One does has to ask why the supposed difference in outcomes.
Quote:
It was initially thought to have application in pulmonary hypertension and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). But after eight patients showed a "miraculous response," said Hill, subsequent trials were unable to show any significant benefit. That was in the early 2000s.
https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19/87990
(7)
(0)