[QUOTE=Till;547299]You dismissed my critique on a small, intransparant company based in the US some weeks ago, now you rage on another one, haha.

When it comes to the Hydroxychloroquine question, is there any study yet that proves a positive effect?
Or are you simply going the Trumpian way, blaming the WHO/chinese because someone else must be the bad guy (but not Trump).[/QUOTE]

Bad science is bad science, no need to invoke the name of Trump as a bogeyman. Re. studies, a sampling:

[url=http://www.ijmr.org.in/preprintarticle.asp?id=285520]Healthcare workers & SARS-CoV-2 infection in India: A case-control investigation in the time of COVID-19[/url] | (preprint) Indian Journal of Medical Research: “Consumption of four or more maintenance doses of HCQ was associated with a significant decline in the odds of getting infected.”

[url]https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32205204/[/url] -- Admits it had small sample size, tests HCQ + azithromycin, "Despite its small sample size our survey shows that hydroxychloroquine treatment is significantly associated with viral load reduction/disappearance in COVID-19 patients and its effect is reinforced by azithromycin."

The NIH article has lots of links ... the studies I've read about that appear to be well-designed and show positive effect all use HCQ not alone but in combination with either azithromycin as above and/or zinc supplementation. Again I would not want WHO to base any worldwide best-practices recommendation changes on these - they apparently only do that based on obviously-flawed studies by Pharma outfits looking to promote expensive 'treatment' drugs of their own - we need more studies of the not-obviously-bogus-or-designed-to-fail-by-design variety. It appears a number of such are underway, hopefully a few of those will prove sufficiently large and well-designed so as to provide some clarity.

[QUOTE=ewmayer;547313]Re. studies, a sampling:

[URL="http://www.ijmr.org.in/preprintarticle.asp?id=285520"]Healthcare workers & SARS-CoV-2 infection in India: A case-control investigation in the time of COVID-19[/URL] | (preprint) Indian Journal of Medical Research: “Consumption of four or more maintenance doses of HCQ was associated with a significant decline in the odds of getting infected.”

[URL]https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32205204/[/URL] -- Admits it had small sample size, tests HCQ + azithromycin, "Despite its small sample size our survey shows that hydroxychloroquine treatment is significantly associated with viral load reduction/disappearance in COVID-19 patients and its effect is reinforced by azithromycin."

The NIH article has lots of links ... the studies I've read about that appear to be well-designed and show positive effect all use HCQ not alone but in combination with either azithromycin as above and/or zinc supplementation. Again I would not want WHO to base any worldwide best-practices recommendation changes on these - they apparently only do that based on obviously-flawed studies by Pharma outfits looking to promote expensive 'treatment' drugs of their own - we need more studies of the not-obviously-bogus-or-designed-to-fail-by-design variety. It appears a number of such are underway, hopefully a few of those will prove sufficiently large and well-designed so as to provide some clarity.[/QUOTE]


Thanks for the links.

Study finds that people with blood group A+ have a 77% higher risk of a severe development of COVID-19, and people with AB0 a 32% higher risk.
[url]https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.31.20114991v1[/url]

[QUOTE=Till;547355]Study finds that people with blood group A+ have a 77% higher risk of a severe development of COVID-19, and people with AB0 a 32% higher risk.
[url]https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.31.20114991v1[/url][/QUOTE]
The blood donors group that I am a part of have been talking about that for a while.
But something about your statement confuses me. ABO blood typing along with Rh factor breaks down to:

A+, B+, AB+, O+, A-, B-, AB-, O-

There is not an AB[SIZE="3"][FONT="Fixedsys"]0[/FONT][/SIZE] in common terms. AB- would be used normally for those that are Rh negative.

[QUOTE=Uncwilly;547372]The blood donors group that I am a part of have been talking about that for a while.
But something about your statement confuses me. ABO blood typing along with Rh factor breaks down to:

A+, B+, AB+, O+, A-, B-, AB-, O-

There is not an AB[SIZE=3][FONT=Fixedsys]0[/FONT][/SIZE] in common terms. AB- would be used normally for those that are Rh negative.[/QUOTE]


Uh yes, you are right.
My primary source was [URL]https://www.aerzteblatt.de/nachrichten/113527/Genvarianten-erhoehen-Risiko-auf-schweren-Verlauf-von-COVID-19[/URL] (in german), and there they write:
"Die Genvariante befindet sich auf dem Chromosom 9q34 im ABO-Gen, das die Blutgruppeneigenschaften bestimmt."

I just didn't read thoroughly enough and confused the ABO gene with the blood group xD. Sorry.

Edit: Maybe it's not that I can't read, but rather that I don't understand all that medical stuff.

[QUOTE=ewmayer;547313]Bad science is bad science
... It appears a number of such are underway, hopefully a few of those will prove sufficiently large and well-designed so as to provide some clarity.[/QUOTE]There's also the vast field study possible by analyzing the impact of antimalarial use on Covid19. The nations with highest malarial incidence don't appear in Covid19 data such as [URL]https://ig.ft.com/coronavirus-chart/?areas=bra&areas=usa&areas=mex&areasRegional=usny&areasRegional=usnj&cumulative=0&logScale=1&perMillion=0&values=deaths[/URL]
Brazil and Mexico are positioned to become the world leaders in Covid19 death rate per nation, although the US with its recent riots may stage a comeback in death rate (probably not per capita).

[QUOTE=kriesel;547424]..... [U]the US with its recent riots[/U] may stage a comeback in death rate (probably not per capita).[/QUOTE]
hmmm. A few assumptions and presumptions there?

"Importantly, we detected SARS-CoV-2-reactive CD4+T cells in ~40%–60% of unexposed individuals, suggesting cross-reactive T cell recognition between circulating "common cold" coronaviruses and SARS-CoV-2."
To be published as 'Grifoni et al, 2020, Cell 181, 1-13" June 25, 2020

[url]https://www.cell.com/cell/pdf/S0092-8674(20)30610-3.pdf[/url]

[QUOTE=kladner;547518]hmmm. A few assumptions and presumptions there?[/QUOTE]Sure, and uncertainty, hence the may and probably. There's lots of video of recent dense urban protests and the coincident rioting and looting showing failure to keep nominal 6 foot spacing and proper PPE use. Conversely, there are recent reports that asymptomatic transmission is lower than previously thought.
Extrapolating current trends in the FT graphs, US death rate would decline while Brazil and Mexico increase, crossing the US curve and exceeding the US rate. Unless there's a significant bump in the future for the US. Time will tell.

Sick until proven healthy
 

[url]https://phys.org/news/2020-06-sick-proven-healthy-covid-pandemic.html[/url]

I love these last two paragraphs:[quote]In the post-pandemic age, it is possible countries with the most COVID-19 cases will be greatly affected by health-related measures taken by more vigilant countries. Moreover, the reality on the ground shows Western countries such as the US and Europe are the least prepared and have the highest numbers of cases in the world.

It should not be surprising then if, for example, US citizens have to go through additional checks and interrogations when landing in a developing country such as Vietnam in Southeast Asia.[/quote]Oh the irony!

[QUOTE=retina;547607]I love these last two paragraphs:Oh the irony![/QUOTE]
When the USA was having a measles outbreak a few years ago because so many people thought they were to special to get a vaccine, Mexico was warning people that were leaving to sneak across the border to get all of their shots. This was especially true for people that were sending children.