Posted on 03/19/2020 6:42:21 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Could a drug already in existence turn out to be the gamechanger countries around the world are searching for to defeat coronavirus? This is what researchers at US drug firm Gilead are currently investigating, spurred by reports of the apparent recovery of an Italian patient who had tested positive for the virus.
On Tuesday evening, reports emerged that a 79-year-old man from Italy’s Liguria region represented “the first real case of coronavirus cured” and that the man would soon be discharged from hospital. The man was treated with a drug called remdesivir, a broad-spectrum antiviral that was originally developed by Gilead around a decade ago and was first used to treat Ebola, with disappointing results.
However, repurposing of antiviral drugs is common practice, and the use of remdesivir in Italy was not actually the first recorded case of the drug being given to combat Covid-19. Another report in the February issue of the New England Journal of Medicine detailed the case of a 35-year-old patient who was also successfully treated with remdesivir, after contracting coronavirus on a trip to China. The report stated that “no adverse events were observed” as a result of the drug’s administration, and that the man began to feel better within a day of commencing treatment.
According to Bruce Aylward of the World Health Organization (WHO), “There’s only one drug right now that we think may have real efficacy. And that’s remdesivir.” The drug is currently being tested in five separate clinical trials, including one in China and another by the US National Instititutes of Health (NIH) on 13 patients who were hospitalized after contracting coronavirus on board the Diamond Princess cruise ship in Japan.
(Excerpt) Read more at israelnationalnews.com ...
This and the other drug that seems to help is are good news.
It won’t change everything tomorrow.
But it could make a huge difference in the coming weeks and months
Don't most people recover without the drug? This does not seem extraordinary.
Trump...MIGA!
I think they mean the first seriously ill patients (hospitalized, ventilator, etc.)
“Don’t most people recover without the drug? This does not seem extraordinary.”
—
Many illnesses are that way, but since there is treatment to help with recovery (and free up beds sooner), why not?
Also this is a man in his late 70s recovering - that alone is something, considering cv19 kills so many that age.
“I think they mean the first seriously ill patients (hospitalized, ventilator, etc.)”
—
From what I’ve heard “moderate” cases may not be all that moderate - the person can be very miserable & feel terrible, it’s quite a range of symptoms/degrees of the virus. But basically it means they think a person doesn’t need hospitalization and can get by at home, but can come in later if it does get worse.
When did Bruce say this ? If it was in the last 48 hours I have to wonder if Bruce had a significant investment in Gilead? Hey Bruce heard of "HYDROXYCHLOROQUINE" in the last few days???
“Italian coronavirus patient recovers after treatment with antiviral drug remdesivir”
...............................................................
Don’t most people recover without the drug? This does not seem extraordinary.
****************************************************
Yes, but many don’t ....particularly the 79 year olds like this Italian patient. We need more Coronavirus patients to be treated to see what the statistical results are. Remdesivir has now been approved to be used under the “compassionate use” program.
I am glad that a couple of antivirals look promising, and when you need them, you need them.
But, unless I am mistaken, recovery with them leaves you still susceptible to the disease. If you recover with your own antibodies, you are subsequently immunized. I think this is not true with the antivirals.
Does anyone know if my understanding is correct? If the recovered are still susceptible, are they more at risk?
Very good news. However, remdesivir is administered intravenously, a major drawback if you want to treat hundreds of thousands of patients.
But, unless I am mistaken, recovery with them leaves you still susceptible to the disease. If you recover with your own antibodies, you are subsequently immunized. I think this is not true with the antivirals.
Does anyone know if my understanding is correct? If the recovered are still susceptible, are they more at risk?
**********************************************
The folks receiving these treatments are people who TESTING HAS REVEALED have already been exposed and their bodies have already produced antibodies which are fighting off the virus...just not completely successfully yet. These drugs become allies in fighting off the Coronavirus bugs.
Thank you!
So, the “test” being talked about is to show that you have antibodies for the virus, and not just the virus, itself? Is that correct?
I think the test shows that they are shedding the virus and thus infected. It would be very rare for them not to have been producing antibodies unless they are somehow immunodeficient.
Make immunity great again?
Chloroquine combined with azithromycin seems promising as well.
CC
Better!
Terrific! Give it to everyone infected and reopen the country!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.