Like some of the many discussants on the thread you cited, we can agree the case report is interesting, but it is one case. In response to the objection that the report is anecdotal , a few others noted that there were other successful individual case reports as well. Still other contributors implied that FDA is corrupt, because it won’t approve drugs like this with a few scattered reports of success, which by the way we don’t really know were successes. It could as well be the case that those patients who were receiving other treatment modalities would have recovered anyway. That is the problem. The FDA is bound to consider only data that arise from a controlled trial which is conducted according to a study plan that is submitted to FDA and approved by FDA prior to the start of the study. Furthermore there have to be safety precautions in place, and there has to be an independent data monitoring board that reviews adverse events and makes final judgment on clinical outcome. Apparently the company that makes this drug did submit some study data to FDA, and on the basis of those data, FDA did not see fit to issue an EUA. This drug was originally formulated and developed for treatment of HIV, because it blocks the CCR5 receptor on T lymphocytes which is an auxiliary receptor for HIV. I guess it could be useful in Covid because of possible activity in inhibiting cytokine storm via its putative effect on the immune response. Several other drugs with similar rationales for their use have been tried in late stage, severe cases of Covid, and some of them do show a modest benefit. But the operative word is modest. None of them is a magic bullet. None of them is even any better than dexamethasone, which is current standard of care. Certainly the CCR5 receptor has no biological role in the pathogenesis of Covid. So I am dubious that this drug will ever be a major success in this particular application.
Peter Lederman in Second Bout With COVID-19
I saw on Facebook late last night that Mike Fremer told one of his Audio Friends that he heard from Peter Lederman of Soundsmith that he is suffering his second round with COVID. Peter said he has blood clots on his lungs. That is all the post said. Here is hoping that Peter pulls through with a full recovery.
502 responses
lewm, You just wasted a lots of words. Save youself some effort. This is what you are dealing with... Blah blah blah yada yada whatever. FUDD: Fear Uncertainty Doubt Derision. Funny how the FUDD always no matter what winds up serving the interests of a large and callous government over the individual.
millercarbon 09-28-2020 1:50ammillercarbonThere’s a lot of anger in Australia right now after having banned HCQ from a study that was completely debunked in the UK, where a doctor actually was using OD levels of HCQ in a study. It has been completely debunked and the doctor involved was found out. Timing in the use of this drug, according to the report is more important. The bans in Australia are expiring, and with the truth now uncovered, it seems it may become used in early stages of the viral infection?! 10-17-2020 2:48pmmillercarbon 10-17-2020 9:34pm And, every cake needs icing...
Go figure! |
@lewm @mijostynhat What are your thoughts on the gain of function research conducted at the Wuhan lab, partially subsidized by the NIH ( Fauci ). In particular if this virus is man made, then I would as a layman assume that we dont know how it is going to mutate, that it may not behave like a naturally occurring virus and bascially we cant predict anything. What are your thoughts. |
Just to be clear, Tony Fauci is not synonymous with NIH and Tony Fauci does not personally dispense extramural research grants. In fact, he has nothing to do with it. Fauci is Director of the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Disease. He runs that institute only, which is one of at least 10 different institutes that constitute NIH, albeit NIAID has one of the biggest but not the biggest budget of any of the institutes. He also runs a large and very productive lab (I am sure he has co-authored more than 1000 papers in peer-reviewed journals), and he is ultimately in charge of all the patients admitted to the NIH Clinical Center under the NIAID aegis. Plus, he has become a TV personality, thanks to DJT and the pandemic. I don’t know his work schedule these days, but a decade ago it was common knowledge that he typically put in 12-14 hours in his office, not to mention time spent reading at home. I think that’s enough work and responsibility for any man. NIAID specifically, and each of the other NIH institutes, have large groups of reviewers, who give out extramural grant money. (The NIAID grant review group mainly funds research related to its mission, to combat pathogens like HIV, tuberculosis, malaria-related applications.) I served on the NIAID extramural grant review committees more than once during Fauci’s term as Director; he is nowhere in sight during that process. That myth about "gain of function" is BS meant to discredit Fauci that has been circulating since before the election; it makes no sense to anyone who knows anything. Truthfully, that whole business makes me sick. My thoughts are the virus is NOT man-made. If it were man-made, it could only have been man-made in the sense that someone took pieces of one or more other Coronavirus genomes and spliced them together. This could be done in a lab, but guess what... No one could concoct such a virus and know in advance what it was going to do. We are just not that good. Hollywood exaggerates. There is not even any lab method to predict the particular pathogenicity of this particular virus, in advance of releasing it into the human population. Further, the Coronaviruses have the capacity to re-combine in nature, which is to say when or if two coronaviruses infect the same cells in an animal, the genomes of the two separate viruses can exchange pieces with each other. These exchanges of genetic information occur at certain known points in the genome; it’s tightly controlled. The resulting chimeric viruses could/can easily be detected by genome sequencing and comparing results to the parent viruses. There are some papers that show a plausible origin of SARS-CoV2 in relation to certain native bat viruses. I don't know if any particular scenario is yet proven. In general, for any virus, the vast majority of deliberate mutations introduced into the genome by scientists in a lab result in a crippled or attenuated virus that has actually lost some of its virulence properties. It’s much easier to do that than it is to create a Franken-virus that will eat your face. There is absolutely nothing about this virus that makes me think it came out of a lab. (However, it could have come out of a lab by accident if there were a lab that was collecting Coronavirus isolates from bats or other animal hosts for a legitimate scientific purpose, but there is no way it was made in a lab.) As to your question about mutation. Coronaviruses actually have a lower mutation rate than most viruses, owing to the fact that the virus genome codes for a "proof-reading" protein that eliminates most mutations before transcription is completed. IF there were a man-made "synthetic" Coronavirus, it would still have to obey all the rules by which Coronaviruses operate and proliferate, and I would expect it to mutate at a rate no different from any other Coronavirus. As far as COVID is concerned, the virus is constrained from mutating in such a way as to negatively affect its binding affinity for its cell receptor, ACE2. ACE2 is the receptor in both humans and susceptible animal species. This is good for us, as our vaccines are targeted to produce antibodies to the part of the virus that binds ACE2; the virus will have a hard time escaping antibodies induced by the present vaccines, although we may have that problem in future. Fortunately, it’s very easy to combat an escape mutant when it occurs, using the latest technology. |
@lewm Thanks for the explanation - as you are aware there is much speculation and misfinformation. I at least try to sort out the wheat from the chaff. We are fortunate here in New Zealand we have not had a significant outbreak yet - more a fluke than good management though - our borders are porous and have process gaps. |
@bkeske, my only point is that we know there is a problem but we really do not know the state of affairs. All we can do is hope he gets better and that someone notifies the press when he does so we can all stop worrying. Being in a hospital is not a good sign. Getting discharged is a very good sign. |
"...my only point is that we know there is a problem but we really do not know the state of affairs." In all fairness, it is none of our business to go snooping about details of his health condition. In fact, with all the good intentions, even posting these details so far might have been a step too far. |
Do you think maybe Peter deliberately let it be known that he expects to be on the way to recovery, so as to lessen the anxiety of his many customers and future potential customers? And also to explain why his business output may be backed up a bit at present? Anyway, he has nothing but well-wishers here, myself included. |
"Do you think maybe Peter deliberately let it be known that he expects to be on the way to recovery..." I have no guess about that. It is hard, if not impossible, to predict how a person would react to stressful situation. I do remember him joining one of the threads, and starting one with poetry. In neither of those did he mention his health so this time it is different. I am only trying to point out that we do not know how Mr. Ledermann would react to our curiosity about his health status. Not everyone responds to that in the same way so I would suggest erring on the side of polite distance. |
In situations like this it is very hard for people to be deliberate. I do not think that is Peter's style. I also would bet he fully knows about the grape vine going on about this and I suspect he will eventually announce his situation. As for the etiology of this virus I fully agree with Lewm who is more knowledgeable about this than I am. In nature this virus is likely to mutate one protein at a time and what ever it does is up for grabs. It may well mutate itself out of existence just as well as becoming more virulent. One thing is for certain, once a virus loses it's hosts it is done. It can not replicate without the genetic machinery of it's host. There is always a way to eradicate a virus, you either immunize or knock off the hosts. Smallpox is an example. |
One other comment, this whole mess is a great example of how mythology can quickly form. The conspiracy theories proliferate like wildfire without even any serious evidence of wrong doing. I personally do not think this pandemic was handled well. It was another chicken little story. Millions of people lost their jobs and businesses in the process. The economic damage will take years if not decades to overcome and for people will never be the same again. Nobody interviewed the elderly and asked what they want. Every last one of my cognitively intact elderly nursing home patients said things like "I'm ready to go" or "don't worry about me." We could have protected the elderly and infirmed without near as much economic damage. |
GOOD NEWS - Peter Ledermann is now at home recovering - read post today from John@Soundsmith Keep Peter Ledermann In Your Thoughts - Audionirvana.org
|
Good for Peter - I hope he makes a complete recovery; this can be a very bad, long-lasting disease as well as a quick, mild one. Indeed, many hospitals are terrible (though nurses and technicians usually are not), but I've always had good luck with teaching hospitals, like University of California in San Francisco. Had colon cancer surgery there a few years ago, couldn't have gone smoother, and cost me absolutely nothing. |
Watched the Art D. interview with Peter again. Worth your time. https://www.stereophile.com/content/soundsmiths-peter-ledermann-building-mastering-and-giving-back |
