COVID19 update, May 16, 2020: evidence hydroxychloroquine works better with zinc added; how Taiwan succeeded; Niall Ferguson on his disgraced namesake

(1) When I reported on the failed hydroxychloroquine (HOcq) trial, a number of commenters asked “what about zinc?” It is indeed so that the early reports of success by both Didier Raoult [director of IHU-Méditerranée in Marseille, France] and by Williamsburg, NY community doctor Zev Zelenko included zinc supplementation.
Now the latest video of Roger Seheult MD highlights a retrospective study with zinc+HOcq (plus azithromycin) about which a preprint just was published. And guess what: results there look a good deal more promising if administered early in the disease. That is strongly suggestive of HOcq’s role being that of a zinc ionophore (and, at least in vitro, Zn2+ inhibits with the RdRp, a.k.a. replicase, that copies the viral RNA) https://www.medrxiv.org/conte…/10.1101/2020.05.02.20080036v1  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZq-K1wpur8

(2) Two COVID19-related videos worth watching from the Hoover Institute

(2a) Vice President Chen Chien-jen, Taiwan, himself a reputed epidemiology professor, describes Taiwan’s response, and how they quickly contained the epidemic without lockdowns.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3Ry6eiKvvw

(2b) Niall Ferguson, the British-born Harvard University historian, discusses the British and American responses to the epidemic, the economic falloutk, and his now-disgraced near-namesake of the “2 million will die” model.

Neil Ferguson (the modeler) reminds me of the Talmudic maxim:

Scholars, be careful with your words, lest you [lead your pupils] to a place of bitter waters, and they drink from it and die — and thus the Name of Heaven will be desecrated.

Pirkei Avot 1:11

ADDENDUM: Quillette has an article from Paulina Neuding, who lives in Stockholm: “Sweden Has Resisted a Lockdown. But That Doesn’t Make it a Bastion of Liberty” [This is aside from issues with its healthcare system reported on earlier.]

In reality, Sweden’s response to the pandemic has less to do with freedom and individual responsibility, and more to do with the country’s tradition of consensus and social control. Its choice of a uniquely lax approach to the pandemic should not be mistaken for a sudden turn toward individual freedom.

The Swedish strategy, devised by a team of government experts headed by chief epidemiologist Anders Tegnell, rests on the assumption that [(a)] COVID-19 cannot be contained, and that [(b)] other international experts are overestimating its fatality rates. Herd immunity is viewed as the inevitable end point, and it is assumed that such immunity can be achieved relatively quickly and at a cost in human lives that will not be too high.

“We have been a bit careful [about] the words [herd immunity] because it can give the impression that you have given up, and that is not at all what this is about… We will not gain control of this in any other way,” Tegnell explained in an interview in March.

[…] Though polls show that most Swedes trust the state consensus, a minority would prefer to have their families self-isolate, but cannot because they risk intervention from social services. Imagine being a Swedish parent who belongs to a high-risk group, and to face the choice between possibly contracting the virus through your child’s school, and that of being reported to the authorities for the offence of homeschooling.

Sweden’s COVID-19 death rate hovers high above that of other Nordic countries, which have chosen a more restrictive strategy. As of this writing, Sweden has 22 deaths per 100,000 citizens—more than five times as many as Norway (four per 100,000) and three times as many as Denmark (seven per 100,000), even though all three countries saw their first fatalities on roughly the same date. But collectivism is deeply ingrained in Swedish culture—for good and ill—and many view it as bad form to question the authorities in the midst of a crisis.

Even though Sweden has taken a path that is extreme compared to virtually all other EU countries, there is limited overt political opposition, and scientists who have criticized the strategy have been victims of vicious attacks on their characters, and are rejected at public events. The rector at a leading Swedish university even saw it necessary to declare in a blog post (available in English) that employees who had publicly criticized the government’s COVID-19 response would not be censored for doing so. That he even saw a need for such a public statement is telling of the current mood in the country.

COVID19 update, April 28, 2020: drug repurposing; perverse incentives; Neil Ferguson now sees further lockdowns as impractical

(1) “Drug repurposing”: it’s a thing. Basically, if you have an emerging disease and need a remedy right this minute — even if you design a new drug that works well in the test tube, you are still faced with months of Phase 1, 2, and 3 clinical trials.

In contrast, if you can repurpose an existing drug that is already approved for treatment of another condition, you can skip testing whether the drug is safe, what side effects it has, and what is a safe dosage range. (As the old quip goes, nothing is safe at all doses, not even dihydrogen monoxide ;)) All you need to establish is: does it work against the new disease?

So there have been massive efforts to screen databases of approved drugs for molecules that inhibit this, that, or the other enzyme that is a vital part of the viral reproduction cycle. Increasingly, the first step of this is done on the computer, and the most promising candidates are then tested out in vitro, then in “animal models”.

But sometimes scientists stumble serendipitously on something that seems to work. SCIENCE magazine reports on… the H2 antagonist famotidine (sold in the US under the brand name Pepcid), used widely as a heartburn remedy until more recently displaced by proton pump inhibitors such as omeprazole (Prilosec).

“The virus was killing as many as one out of five patients older than 80 [in Wuhan]. Patients of all ages with hypertension and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were faring poorly. Callahan and his Chinese colleagues got curious about why many of the survivors tended to be poor. “Why are these elderly peasants not dying?” he asks.

In reviewing 6212 COVID-19 patient records, the doctors noticed that many survivors had been suffering from chronic heartburn and were on famotidine rather than more-expensive omeprazole (Prilosec), the medicine of choice both in the United States and among wealthier Chinese. Hospitalized COVID-19 patients on famotidine appeared to be dying at a rate of about 14% compared with 27% for those not on the drug, although the analysis was crude and the result was not statistically significant.

But that was enough for Callahan to pursue the issue back home. […]

“Anecdotal evidence has encouraged the Northwell researchers. After speaking to Tracey, David Tuveson, director of the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Cancer Center, recommended famotidine to his 44-year-old sister, an engineer with New York City hospitals. She had tested positive for COVID-19 and developed a fever. Her lips became dark blue from hypoxia. She took her first megadose of oral famotidine on 28 March. The next morning, her fever broke and her oxygen saturation returned to a normal range. Five sick co-workers, including three with confirmed COVID-19, also showed dramatic improvements after taking over-the-counter versions of the drug, according a spreadsheet of case histories Tuveson shared with Science. Many COVID-19 patients recover with simple symptom-relieving medications, but Tuveson credits the heartburn drug. “I would say that was a penicillin effect,” he says.”

“After an email chain about Tuveson’s experience spread widely among doctors, Timothy Wang, head of gastroenterology at Columbia University Medical Center, saw more hints of famotidine’s promise in his own retrospective review of records from 1620 hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Last week, he shared the results with Tracey and Callahan, and he added them as a co-authors on a paper now under review at the Annals of Internal Medicine. All three researchers emphasize, though, that the real test is the trial now underway. “We still don’t know if it will work or not,” Tracey says.”

I am definitely looking forward to the results of that trial.

(2) I have heard the claim made that US hospitals have a financial incentive to code a patient as COVID19. Given the complexity of the US health insurance market (and governmental players in it), it struck me as “plausible, but verify”. Turns out: yes, Virginia. (The article notes that notoriously left-biased Snopes agrees with them.)

In our own system, there is no financial incentive to do so as it all comes out of the same insurance pool (divided among the four authorized HMOs by enrollment, not actual costs). Whatever downsides our socialized-with-private-options medical system may have, a perverse incentive to code a non-COVID19 patient as COVID19 is not one of them. As a result, we have “only” 208 COVID19 deceased at the time of writing, according to the Ministry of Health’s daily update.

A source in Belgium’s medical community told me that pathologists massively write COVID19 as the cause of death “if the patient has even been near a COVID19 case”, even if the actual cause is heart attack, stroke,… This appears to be one reason for the anomalously high per-capita COVID19 mortality in Belgium (the highest in the world, and far in excess of next-door Germany which uses much stricter criteria). When all-cause mortalities were compared year over year, an excess mortality was found that is comparable to neighboring countries.

(3) In this interview with Imperial College modeler Neil Ferguson https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6cYjjEB3Ev8 (yes, the one with the “two million million will die” model, that later got revised drastically downward) he seems to take a more nuanced position than some of his acolytes, sees continued lockdown as unrealistic “and causing excess mortality from other causes” (!), expects a second wave (he’s not alone in that), and favors a South Korean-style test, track & trace approach. Defends himself as “as a nation, we acted in time to prevent a breakdown of medical services”. For balance, I offer a video on the same channel by his Swedish critic Prof. Johan Giesecke. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfN2JWifLCY The interviewer is fairly tough on both: nice to see some actual journalism.

(4) in John Campbell’s daily update, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lu00u2dEnbs about 16 minutes in, John Campbell discussed “pediatric inflammation syndrome” in the UK. Is it COVID19 or some unidentified viral pathogen? Abdominal pain, GI symptoms more annoying than anything else, cardiac involvement more worrisome. “Let’s hope that comes to nothing, but would seem to be expedient to have a higher index of suspicion [of abdominal pain in children].”

He also thinks Canada is starting to look good.

(5) Miscellaneous updates (h/t Mrs. Arbel):

Today, Israel marks Yom HaZikaron, or Memorial Day, for its fallen soldiers. Tonight (days on the Jewish calendar run sundown to sundown) it will transition into Yom HaAtzmaut or Independence Day — the former to remind us of those who paid the ultimate price for the latter.