BTW, Here’s the good news:
Remdesivir already has proven effective in lab tests against a range of coronaviruses like SARS, MERS and single-strand RNA viruses like Nipah virus.
Remdesivir has been proven to work against every coronavirus tested against whether in lab or animals. There is NO tests that showed no positive results.
There are also anecdotal evidence.
A U.S. man (the Washington case) and a French COVID-19 patient both recovered after being administered Remdesivir on a compassionate use basis. The French article wasn’t easy to find but it said the following (translated with Google translate):
The 48-year-old patient infected with the new coronavirus and released from the Bordeaux University Hospital on Thursday, after 22 days of hospitalization, was treated with remdesivir, a “promising” antiviral, said his medical team on Friday.”
It’s a promising sign that this patient was treated after 22 days. One question with therapies like this is how effective they are once you already are sick, and this is promising.
Of course,We should not derive conclusions from a handful of patients but it’s one more piece of the puzzle that helps raise the confidence level this drug works.
The only question is this — WHAT ARE THE SAFETY AND SIDE EFFECTS? This, we do not yet know.
“Remdesivir already has proven effective in lab tests against a range of coronaviruses like SARS, MERS and single-strand RNA viruses like Nipah virus.”
Being effective means something.
What studies have shown it to be effective (I’m not saying it hadn’t been - am asking what study showed it was).
Lab tests mean nothing.
I wasn’t sure how to read that at first. A treatment that took 22 days would be bad. But I guess it said he was in hospital for 22 days, and THEN they treated him, and he got better. Then the question is, how many days after treatment, and do they know he wasn’t at the end of the run of treatment anyway?