Member Info for hold4results

If the vaccine is less effective against E484, I would be a bit concerned vaccinating people may cause selection pressure for E484 to become more dominant. It's already been identified all over the world. I guess they have to update to include E484 and also do whatever possible to prevent any new variants becoming dominant in the meantime. They can redesign quickly but still have to manufacture and distribute etc, it will take at least a few months.

I think this was it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVS6eBB9WbA
Most interesting bit maybe Fauci talking about variants and vaccines etc from 19:30

https://www.reddit.com/r/synairgen/comments/l4n8gl/investor_insight_synairgen_an_investment_brief_by/

CW pipped me to the post

https://www.sharecast.com/news/aim-bulletin/synairgen-enters-clinical-trial-deal-with-us-government--7790287.html

The body of words on the page may be gone but the spirit of research lives on in all of us :P
Time to update my google skills.

It was mainly a joke - but yes I think it should get noticed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ka9mfZbTFbk Follow the shoe
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHbzSif78qQ You've got to think for yourselves

...Now wait for the yanks to wake up :)

@Ghia really not sure why they would include patients without a positive test in the first place. I guess if they started in March they were in a rush and maybe they were struggling with test capacity.

It looks like a good result. Cheap repurposed drugs are going to have an impact, dexamethasone already has. They are also probably the only option open to millions of patients globally in the short term. Everything that works is a win, especially if there's nothing else available.

In terms of impact on Synairgen - remember when we got dexamethasone - cut mortality by 30%, but the problem didn't go away. It now looks possible some variants cause higher mortality, so the virus may even have caught up, in a sense.

One thing to note is that this trial started in March 2020, so it would be good to know how many, if any patients received dexamethasone, that might skew things a bit.

+1 for Tony, he wanders through these boards like a buddhist monk, never a boast, complaint or argument.
I'm impressed with the charting, but it still goes out the window on days like 20th July or 9th November.
Or the twenty-mmpth of January. Maybe :)

Darla there's no need to gamble on bitcoin for a new wheelchair.
Just prove you're not a sick troll and I'm sure we'll all happily chip in to get you one.

Sorry you're having a tough time, best wishes.

A ****tail of two different antibodies does mean it should be harder for the virus to develop resistance.
To me this makes much more sense than using any single antibody candidate.
It still looks like antibodies are the least likely to cope well with variants.

The ability to discharge a patient with a course of the drug to continue at home might well impact time to discharge - it could give doctors (and patients) greater confidence once the patient is improving?

It is a very good point, thanks!

It can be difficult to get statistically significant results for every endpoint in a small trial - often they are about looking for signals that justify further investigation. The headline P2 result of reducing odds of progression to severe disease or death by 79% is a very strong signal.

I was obviously typing that for far too long, everyone answered in the meantime :)

Good morning.

I think participating drugs are named at the point they are added to the activ trial.
It's an ongoing rolling process so they may be announced individually.

The expectation of 'nowish' is based on medical professionals close to the trials talking about adding a nebulised interferon beta candidate within a time frame of 2-3 weeks, 2-3 weeks ago. I don't have all the links to hand but a few sources agree on this, and it ties up with previous mentions of NIH support for Synairgen. These things do take time to set up so the process must have started quite a while ago, the medics are genuinely excited about the drug and it seems quite unlikely to change at the last second, but it's not 100% certain until it happens.

The COPD trial has not even been completed, you're talking about an interim analysis done to support development in Covid. It does look like you're now outright lying, you must know this.

You also seem to be missing the fact that if a drug does fail a primary endpoint, that does not indicate incompetent delusional management. Most drug candidates do.