Today, it is a day of "remdesivir" brushing the screen.
Since the beginning of the new crown epidemic, the Western medicine remdesivir has been pushed to the cusp of the storm -
Some people use it to heal, some people use it to be deadly, and some people have no effect.
Experiments and tests on western medicine remdesivir are also always underway, basically waiting for remdesivir to produce efficacy and data hammer.
As a result, within one day, three institutions and three sets of data were all out.
I thought that the "remdesivir" curative effect of seeing flowers in the fog would finally be revealed to the world.
Unexpectedly, the experimental conclusions on this drug are not consistent, and the interpretation of all parties has also made this drug full of controversy.
Here it is necessary to first talk about the "past and present lives" of this drug.
Remdesivir, which was seen before the outbreak of the new crown epidemic.
Produced and developed by Gilead Sciences, inc., the safety and efficacy of the drug has not been proven.
Prior to the outbreak, no country had clinical qualifications.
Initially, the authoritative medical journal New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) published several papers online on the case of the new coronavirus (2019-nCoV).
One of the articles describing the cure of the first confirmed case in the United States suggested that remdesivir performed well in the treatment of covid-19.
As a result, this drug was named the "miracle drug" for the treatment of the new crown, and countries have included it in clinical treatment.
(The first patient in the United States to have a chest X-ray photo)
This scene is very similar to the Korean movie "Clematis Invasion".
The mutated clematis can be extremely transmissible, can multiply in large numbers in humans, and suck up host nutrients.
There is an unknown pharmaceutical factory that has a drug that can effectively inhibit and kill the invading body.
Only one is needed to excrete the insects that parasitize the human body.
For a time, the stock prices of pharmaceutical companies soared, and a drug was difficult to find.
Unlike this, the drugs in Korean movies do kill clematis, and remdesivir has not yet been proven to be a "miracle drug."
Yesterday, three sets of data on Reidsevelde, the most optimistic of which was the conclusion of the US NIH, were unusually positive.
Even the white house chief infectious disease scientist Fauci endorsed it, personally saying:
"In the LARGE RANDOMized Controlled Trial RCTs conducted by NIH, remdesivir was shown to be effective."
forthwith
U.S. stocks closed higher, with Gilead Sciences shares surging 9 percent and the Dow up 500 points.
But the U.S. conclusions have been widely questioned, and the same conclusions from the Chinese team confirm that remdesivir has no imagined "significant effect."
Two conclusions, which are unconvincing.
Exactly is remdesivir "deified"?
Conclusion 1:
The recovery rate of severe patients is accelerated and the course of illness is shortened
(National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases)
First, look at the conclusions of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases NIAID .
The experiment began in February with a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled group.
There were a total of 1063 patients, and the endpoint of the evaluation was the patient's recovery time, that is, when these 1063 patients would be successfully discharged after receiving treatment.
Here's the experimental data:
The mortality rate was 8.0% in the remdesivir treatment group and 11.6% in the placebo control group.
The difference between the two is not significant and does not reach statistical significance (p=0.059).
Another set of data is:
Patients receiving remdesivir recovered 31 percent faster than those who received a placebo.
This study did not show a significant clinical effect of remdesivir, but it can shorten the course of the disease.
Conclusion 2:
There is no difference between 5 days of medication and 10 days of medication
(Gilead Sciences Limited)
Gilead Sciences' experiment did not say whether the drug was effective.
Rather, it is to study how long the optimal course of remdesivir is.
Here's the data:
In patients with a course of treatment of 5 days, 50% of the clinical improvement was 10 days;
In patients with a course of 10 days, 50% of the clinical improvement was 11 days.
In both medical groups, more than half of the patients were discharged within 14 days, with an overall mortality rate of 7%, 64% of patients improved, and 61% of patients were discharged.
The purpose of the experiment was to determine the course of remdesivir and did not answer the question of whether the drug was effective.
Conclusion 3:
Remdesivir did not improve significantly in severely ill patients
(China Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Diseases)
The conclusions of the Chinese experiment were published in the authoritative medical journal The Lancet.
Professor Cao Bin of the China-Japan Friendship Hospital interpreted remdesivir as follows:
"I thought it was a seedling of Tsinghua, but I couldn't get a book."
Remdesivir can only be regarded as an imaginary "good student", who did not perform well in the exam, and could go to college, but could not go to a book.
A total of 237 patients were enrolled, of whom 158 were enrolled in the treatment group and used remdesivir, and another 79 were in the control group and placebo.
After 10 days of treatment, remdesivir was not as good as expected, and in terms of viral load, it did not achieve statistical benefits.
Remdesivir is a special drug to treat "new crown" is basically blown up, it is not a cure for new crown.
If you want to fight the epidemic, I am afraid that you will have to wait for the emergence of a vaccine.
But remdesivir is not useless either.
Fauci said at a news conference that the remdesivir experiment, while not statistically clear, at least showed that the drug could stop the virus.
It has to be said that Dr. Fauci's words are very clever.
Euphemistically expressing the limited nature of drug treatment has brought confidence to the United States.
To sum up:
1. Remdesivir can not cure the new crown, is not a special drug, at most it is a piece of equipment, not as god as the United States says.
2. Remdesivir has a tendency to reduce patient mortality.
3. You can refer to the cocktail therapy for the treatment of HIV, and several drugs are combined to make up for each other and improve the cure rate.
4. If you want to solve the new crown, you also need to rely on vaccines.
5. The toxic side effects of remdesivir have yet to be studied.
On the other hand, the Trump administration has also vigorously promoted the listing of remdesivir.
Trump wants the FDA to approve it as soon as possible for the treatment of COVID-19.
Gilead Corporation states:
More than 50,000 courses of remdesivir are ready to be shipped at any time.
Once remdesivir is granted emergency drug use, it will be used on a large scale in the United States, but do you really understand the side effects of remdesivir?
Reports from China show that
Side effects of remdesivir were relatively large, with a total of 32 patients (60%) experiencing adverse reactions.
The most common are elevated liver enzymes, diarrhea, rash, impaired kidney function, and hypoglycemia.
There are also patients with multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, septic shock, acute kidney injury and other adverse events.
These drug injuries to the human body must be included in the discussion.
Remdesivir has been hyped up on the Internet, and the research on the effect of treatment has not been very prominent, and there has not been much progress in research on toxic side effects.
80% of COVID-19 patients are mild, how to cause 100% drug injuries?
Source: AP
According to an Article published in the New England Journal of Medicine on April 10, Gilead Science has conducted a "compassionate drug" drug trial of remdesivir on 53 patients with severe COVID-19.
Of these critically ill patients, 22 are in the United States, 22 are in Europe or Canada, and the other 9 are in Japan. They injected 200 mg of remdesivir on day 1 and 100 mg per day for the next 9 days.
23% of patients (12 people) experienced serious side effects, including multi-organ dysfunction syndrome, septic shock, acute kidney injury, hypotension, etc.
Daniel O'Day, Chairman and CEO of Gilead Sciences, released an open letter
Image source: Screenshot of Gilead Sciences' official website
Remdesivir, which was once favored by many people, has been shown by more data that the treatment effect is not as good as expected.
During the SARS period in 2003, many patients recovered a life from the ghost gate.
But what I never expected was that pure Western medicine treatment left a very serious sequelae for SARS patients at that time.
Many survivors spend the rest of their lives with diffuse interstitial fibrosis, interstitial pneumonia, machined pneumonia, and focal fibrosis of their respiratory systems;
There are also many survivors who have necrosis of the femoral head, resulting in lifelong disability and loss of the right to enjoy life: a little light exercise can lead to joint rupture, and artificial joint replacement can only be carried out continuously.
These people have lost all of them because of severe sequelae.
At present, the risks of remdesivir drug therapy do exist, and the claim of specific drugs no longer exists.
The key is to see whether the United States allows the drug to be used on a large scale.
In the absence of a vaccine, how are the side effects of remdesivir addressed?
If remdesivir is a drug that cuts off the entire foot in order to treat finger disease, is it still necessary to use it?
All of this requires further research and exploration.
Editor| Shang Sunflower
Typography | Eight Danmu
Proofreading | business sunflower