Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

BBC: China pneumonia outbreak: COVID-19 Global Pandemic


China

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, twa said:

I think most of us feel her pain. 🤣

 

add

has Tom Lowe talked to him recently?

he was big in this

 

https://medicalresearch.com/infections/clinical-trial-of-ultraviolet-blood-irradiation-for-resistant-infectious-disease/15673/

 

lotta folk pay good money for it.

 

Going back to your other paper:

 

1.  Bacteria (microorganisms) certainly have methods to resist UV light.  

 

2.  UV light would damage things in the blood.  Bacteria also have DNA repair mechanisms.

 

3.  There are types of UV light that won't penetrate the surface of human skin (which is really mostly dead cells) but will kill cells and so can be used to sterilize surfaces.

 

4.  You're talking about the blood.  Though, I have seen somethings saying the virus can get into the blood that's not where it mostly is and it isn't believed that it needs to be in the blood to cause clotting (most likely that's a human immune response gone haywire).  Certainly even if you could deliver UV specifically to the respiratory track where the virus is living irradiating the cells of the respiratory tract with enough UV light to kill the virus would have long term consequences. (The virus lives in cells.  Not on a surface in the respiratory tract.  You'd have to get UV into living cells through out the respiratory tract.)

 

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200327-can-you-kill-coronavirus-with-uv-light

 

(It is a stupid idea that anybody that knows much should dismiss).

 

(For blood based bacteria and viruses, it is at least an interesting idea.  Yes you would damage human things in the blood, but those can be replaced to some extent by adding in healthy blood.  I'm dubious of it being a real treatment (could you get the blood out of the person fast enough to kill the virus/bacteria before the bacteria/virus in the person replicates and re-contaminates the blood after being added back to the person), but I could certainly imagine it being a reasonable co-treatment with something else or being something used to keep things under control for the immune system to do its job.

 

But in this case, just dumb.)

 

 

Edited by PeterMP
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, twa said:

 

eventually you will realize all advice ends that way. :evil: we need a grim reaper emoticon.

 

he is deferring to the experts for the most part.

You should certainly consider taking any advice he has, he would love it from such a staunch supporter as you are...

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

petermp, thanks for the reply.

from your link


 

Quote

 

Recently, scientists have discovered a promising new type of UVC which is less dangerous to handle, and still lethal to viruses and bacteria. Far-UVC has a shorter wavelength than regular UVC, and so far, experiments with human skin cells in the lab have shown that it doesn’t damage their DNA (more research is needed to be sure).

On the other hand, bacteria and viruses don’t come off as well, because they are small enough for the light to reach. One study found that it could prevent mouse wounds from becoming infected with the superbug MRSA, while another found that it could kill flu viruses suspended in the air.

 

 

this is what I'm specifically interested in.....and yes it is a reach....around or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, HOF44 said:

Leeches gonna be next!!

 

I hear leeches are still a thing today....and maggots

 

add

 my wife has a variation of scurvy.

 

it is just a matter of time before .....

Edited by twa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, twa said:

petermp, thanks for the reply.

from your link


 

 

this is what I'm specifically interested in.....and yes it is a reach....around or not.

 

That's on surfaces and in the air.  MRSA is a bacteria and doesn't live in human cells.  It is a cell.  This virus is in human cells.  UVC radiation doesn't travel far and so won't penetrate our outer layer of skin (which is I said is mostly dead cells) so isn't much of an issue for us on the outside.  But it won't also then kill a virus living in human cells.

 

If you have MRSA on your skin, I can kill it with UVC, and you'd be okay.  If there is a virus that hasn't infected your cells on a surface or in the air, shining UVC light will inactivate it.

 

If you have the virus on your hands, shining UVC light on your hands is good and would work and keep you from being infected no different than hand sanitizer or soap.

 

Once you're infected and its in your cells, the only way to affect i is to get something in your cells that's going to affect your cell too.  Other forms of UV radiation will enter your cells.  Those types of UV radiation also cause cancer among other issues.

Edited by PeterMP
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ecuador’s Death Toll During Outbreak Is Among the Worst in the World

 

https://nyti.ms/3atVJgF

 

Quote

QUITO, Ecuador — With bodies abandoned on sidewalks, slumped in wheelchairs, packed into cardboard coffins and stacked by the hundreds in morgues, it is clear that Ecuador has been devastated by the coronavirus.

But the epidemic is even worse than many people in the country realize.

 

The death toll in Ecuador during the outbreak was 15 times higher than the official number of Covid-19 deaths reported by the government, according to an analysis of mortality data by The New York Times.

 

The numbers suggest that the South American country is suffering one of the worst outbreaks in the world.

 

The figures provide a dire indication of the damage the virus can do to developing countries, where it can quickly overwhelm health care systems and even the government’s ability to keep count of how many people are falling to the disease.

 

Quote

The wave of deaths is all the more disturbing for being impossible to explain. There is no obvious reason for Ecuador to be devastated far more than other countries. Its population is relatively young, and most people live in rural areas, both factors that should reduce the risk, said Jenny Garcia, a demographer who studies Latin America at the Institut National d’Études Démographiques in France.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, twa said:

so reducing the viral load in the blood is useless at that point?

 

Well, I'm not going to say for sure it is useless.  This virus appears to be doing some odd things.  It does appear to get into the blood stream in some cases.  It is certainly possible reducing viral load in the blood would do some good.  It is possible that some of its lethality is related to it being in the blood stream.  But that certainly wouldn't be the normal case. 

 

And if you did that and it was useful, you couldn't use UVC light because you'd need something that is going to penetrate the tubing you have the blood in and the liquid of the blood.  Also there are essentially "filters" that have been used to take thing out of the blood so if you wanted to go that route, that would likely be better than UV light.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, PeterMP said:

 

Well, I'm not going to say for sure it is useless.  This virus appears to be doing some odd things.  It does appear to get into the blood stream in some cases.  It is certainly possible reducing viral load in the blood would do some good.  It is possible that some of its lethality is related to it being in the blood stream.  But that certainly wouldn't be the normal case. 

 

And if you did that and it was useful, you couldn't use UVC light because you'd need something that is going to penetrate the tubing you have the blood in and the liquid of the blood.  Also there are essentially "filters" that have been used to take thing out of the blood so if you wanted to go that route, that would likely be better than UV light.

 

they do have catheters that irradiate blood now.

 

thanks for your replies on a subject like this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My prediction for states opening up by May 15: 

 

1. Second wave of Covid-19 happening early to mid June and continuing into July. 

2. Third wave hitting in mid to late September and lasting into November, like what happened in 1918.

3. Fourth wave again starts mid February and into mid April.

 

The reasons for this pathway is because we still don't know much about this virus, it attacks different parts of the body, young people are having strokes, people on blood thinners are having problems (of big concern to me), it mutates at a faster rate,  people who had it should be immune but become positive again, there is a large number of asymptomatic carriers this is what little we know about it. Makes developing a vaccine problematic. Testing isn't prevalent enough. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, LadySkinsFan said:

Trump's remedy, it's so ****ed up, he's dangerous. The only persons who might try this are those in his cult.

“if you hit rock bottom, the only way to go is up.”, he always finds a way to go deeper.

This is the remedy

6726120_0.jpg

Edited by FrFan
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, LadySkinsFan said:

Trump's remedy, it's so ****ed up, he's dangerous. The only persons who might try this are those in his cult.

He's a simpleton. That someone with so much high-end education can be so ****ing stupid is just amazing. It would be hilarious if it wasn't so tragic.

 

Oh, and then there's this: 🤯   ... Only a lunatic!

 

 

 

Edited by EmirOfShmo
  • Haha 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trump is mostly viewed as a bumbling idiot over here (a bit like an unintelligent Boris Johnson), but after his recent ramblings the narrative is changing.  More people are describing him as dangerous, and speculating as to when the first death will occur when someone actually tries the disinfectant "cure".

  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...