[vivek95]

Its good to know Bangalore has escaped the crisis as compared to Mumbai. Both being major hubs of business and international travel, its a surprise Bangalore has so less number of positive cases. My Bangalore friends attribute that to stringent measures by police during lockdown 1.0 , however I honestly feel that it has more to do with Mumbai's high population density, cramped living conditions and slums compared to much better living conditions of Bangalore.

[srishiva]

Originally Posted by paragsachania

Cases in Mandya and Hassan district are mostly from those who have entered from Maharashtra and these are people who were either employed or related to the bakery industries in Mumbai/Pune regions.

These migrants or returnees to be precise have only come back to their base now fearing for their lives due to the pandemic or also because of mounting loses due to shutting down of the 2 big cities of Mumbai and Pune and unable to foresee a good future in coming days.

Yes, I didnt mean people are coming here to spread They are all returning to their home bases.

The trouble with people sneaking in is they may spread it in family without being seen in public. Also, there was one person who got covid spending time at toll gate where there were lot of people. When you are in public places where you dont know each other (bus stations, markets etc) and also with lockdown eased, they can easily spread the virus.

Still, if majority of these migrants are rule abiding and authorities can quarantine them, there is no issue and there need not be panic even if numbers rise. Our people dont trust authorities and take shortcuts. Its blame on both sides which is causing the huge migrant issue.

[akhil_007]

A small question: When they say x% of people are asymptomatic, does that mean "only symptoms don't exist" OR "their body(lungs etc) did not get affected, which in turn means they shrugged it off just like common cold"?

The reason I ask this is because we're happy to push the flooding of hospitals for now.But if there is an after-affect, hospitals might get flooded in future.

[DCEite]

Originally Posted by akhil_007

A small question: When they say x% of people are asymptomatic, does that mean "only symptoms don't exist" OR "their body(lungs etc) did not get affected, which in turn means they shrugged it off just like common cold"?

The reason I ask this is because we're happy to push the flooding of hospitals for now.But if there is an after-affect, hospitals might get flooded in future.

Asymptomatic means symptoms do not exist. It may or may not mean their bodily parts are affected or not. For example, the lung damage may be so small and temporary that one may not notice it. Or, the body temperature rise only marginally, say 99 degree F.

Nevertheless, how does it matter ? Any patient either asymptomatic or symptomatic, who comes out of Covid successfully, is not going to go back to the hospital later again with Covid, as body develops immunity to the virus after first attack.

[samaspire]

Originally Posted by DCEite

Any patient either asymptomatic or symptomatic, who comes out of Covid successfully, is not going to go back to the hospital later again with Covid, as body develops immunity to the virus after first attack.

This point has not been proved yet!!

[AZT]

Some good articles

1. Transmission of the coronavirus is 20x lower in outdoor settings, viral load lower as well

Read More: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1....28.20029272v2

2. Antibody Tests Point To Lower Death Rate For The Coronavirus Than First Thought

"The current best estimates for the infection fatality risk are between 0.5% and 1%," says Caitlin Rivers, an epidemiologist at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security.
That's in contrast with death rates of 5% or more based on calculations that included only people who got sick enough to be diagnosed with tests that detect the presence of virus in a person's body.

Read More: https://www.npr.org/sections/health-...-first-thought

3. France, Italy, Belgium act to stop use of hydroxychloroquine for covid-19 on safety fears

France on Wednesday cancelled a decree allowing hospital doctors to dispense the medicine, while the Italian Medicine Agency (AIFA) suspended authorization to use hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19 outside clinical trials.


Belgium's medicine agency warned against using the drug to treat the virus any more except within ongoing clinical registered trials. It said trials aiming to evaluate the drug should also take potential risks into consideration.

Read More: https://www.livemint.com/news/world/...595109623.html

[Miyata]

Originally Posted by AZT

3. France, Italy, Belgium act to stop use of hydroxychloroquine for covid-19 on safety fears

I hope there is some deeper probe into this whole "hydroxychloroquine episode." Appears to be a case of politics taking precedence over science. There seems to be a very desperate need to find some use....any use for this drug in the covid context. Surely some one is profiteering at the expense of many around the world while exploiting the pandemic and fear around it.

[akhil_007]

Originally Posted by DCEite

Nevertheless, how does it matter ? Any patient either asymptomatic or symptomatic, who comes out of Covid successfully, is not going to go back to the hospital later again with Covid, as body develops immunity to the virus after first attack.

Well, he could be going back to hospital due to damage to body parts. Our healthcare is not equipped to handle non-treatable-yet covid. How do you think hospitals can handle other specific cases(like respiratory damage etc) , if patients keep rolling in.

Anyways the point Im trying to make is government should upgrade/boost healthcare infra taking these factors into account.

[DigitalOne]

Originally Posted by Miyata

There seems to be a very desperate need to find some use....any use for this drug in the covid context.

HCQ as a cure for Covid-19 patients is more or less buried.

Benefit of HCQ as a prophylaxis (preventive medicine) is still under investigations/research. India also recommends it as a prophylactic for frontline workers.

Surely some one is profiteering at the expense of many around the world while exploiting the pandemic and fear around it.

Also HCQ is a cheap generic available in plenty. If it is not found effective for Covid-19 (as is evident now), then the patented medicines like Ramdesivir have a lot to gain. So actually, the "profiteering" motive is in finding HCQ not effective.

[AZT]

Originally Posted by DigitalOne

Benefit of HCQ as a prophylaxis (preventive medicine) is still under investigations/research.

Yeah that bus has passed. The WHO, US FDA, Belgium, Italy, France etc have all found this drug risky and ineffective. Please don't take this or give it to your family, incase you believe this works as preventive.

Even the ICMR has revised its guidelines.

The revised advisory issued by the ICMR, however, cautioned that the intake of the medicine should not instill a sense of false security. Hydroxychloroquine has to be given under strict medical supervision with an informed consent

Lancet Study

In the study that looked at more than 96,000 people hospitalized with COVID-19, the respiratory disease caused by the novel coronavirus, those treated with hydroxychloroquine or the related chloroquine had higher risk of death and heart rhythm problems than patients who were not given the medicines.
The study, published in the Lancet medical journal, showed no benefit for coronavirus patients taking the drugs.

Read More: https://in.reuters.com/article/healt...-idINKBN22Y20C

Read More: https://www.livemint.com/news/india/...201494792.html

[DigitalOne]

Originally Posted by DigitalOne

Benefit of HCQ as a prophylaxis (preventive medicine) is still under investigations/research. India also recommends it as a prophylactic for frontline workers.

Originally Posted by AZT

Yeah that bus has passed. The WHO, US FDA, Belgium, Italy, France etc have all found this drug risky and ineffective. Please don't take this or give it to your family, incase you believe this works as preventive.

Even the ICMR has revised its guidelines.

Read More: https://www.livemint.com/news/india/...201494792.html

You are not reading the articles linked by you . Below is from the livemint article linked by you:

New Delhi: A revised government advisory on Friday recommended use of hydroxychloroquine as a preventive medication for asymptomatic healthcare workers working in non-COVID-19 hospitals, frontline staff on surveillance duty in containment zones and paramilitary/police personnel involved in coronavirus infection related activities.

Please understand the difference between a cure (medicine given to confirmed Covid-19 patients) and a prophylactic (preventive medicine, the way President Trump is taking).

Further reading:

From The Print

ICMR & Lancet HCQ study aren’t at odds. One is on preventing Covid, other about treating it

From The Hindu:

The World Health Organisation’s (WHO) moratorium on testing hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), the controversial anti-malarial drug, for treating COVID-19, which was announced on Monday, doesn’t imply that India should pause testing the drug as a preventive, Dr. Soumya Swaminathan, Chief Scientist, WHO, told The Hindu in an email. However, she stressed that India ought to be doing stricter trials to test the drug’s efficacy in staving off infection in asymptomatic people at high-risk of contracting the virus.

[AZT]

[quote=DigitalOne;4813716]

New Delhi: A revised government advisory on Friday recommended use of hydroxychloroquine as a preventive medication for asymptomatic healthcare workers working in non-COVID-19 hospitals, frontline staff on surveillance duty in containment zones and paramilitary/police personnel involved in coronavirus infection related activities.

Yes the point I was trying to make is the burden of proof is on the person / institute making the claim it works and ICMR hasn't provided any. Even that advisory talks of 'informed consent' which is basically well tell you it's risky and useless but if you die it's not on us.

Obviously the options here are :
1. Admitting all that exported Hydroxy is worthless and developed nations aren't allowing it to be used on their citizens, for preventive or curative purposes.
2. Continue using it on our citizens because who needs evidence.

Ignoring the useless part, to simply highlight how risky this is - WHO pauses trial of hydroxychloroquine, once touted by Trump as a ‘game changer,’ over safety concerns. Doesn't matter if its preventive or curative, there is a higher risk of death.

On Monday, however, the World Health Organization announced it had temporarily halted its global trial of the drug, citing a new study that found a significantly higher risk of death among those taking hydroxychloroquine or the closely related drug chloroquine.

And then there is this

Trump, meanwhile, said on Sunday that he is no longer taking hydroxychloroquine

Read More : https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...o-trump-study/

All I want to say is please don't take this or give it to your family incase you believe this works as preventive.

[DigitalOne]

[quote=AZT;4813729]

Originally Posted by DigitalOne

Obviously the options here are :
1. Admitting all that exported Hydroxy is worthless and developed nations aren't allowing it to be used on their citizens, for preventive or curative purposes.

All I want to say is please don't take this or give it to your family incase you believe this works as preventive.

Even the 'developed' countries are still continuing the research to use it as a preventive.

All I am saying is the question whether HCQ acts as a preventive is not closed. I will reserve my judgement till the results come out.

I am neither taking HCQ nor advising anybody to take it. I am not a doctor, just have open scientific curiosity (and trying hard not to judge scientific issues on what Trump says ).

And in case you are still interested, please read what a group of 120 doctors/scientists have raised issues about The Lancet study.

[vivek95]

Originally Posted by akhil_007

A small question: When they say x% of people are asymptomatic, does that mean "only symptoms don't exist" OR "their body(lungs etc) did not get affected, which in turn means they shrugged it off just like common cold"?

The reason I ask this is because we're happy to push the flooding of hospitals for now.But if there is an after-affect, hospitals might get flooded in future.

Their respiratory system--upper or lower does not get affected. Vital parameters - most importantly Spo2 ( oxygen saturation ) on room air and respiratory rate are bang normal. From my observations and most others, asymptomatic carriers also have no overt damage to lung as seen on a chest xray and CT chest. Forget lungs, the pharynx is not congested to begin with.

All the more reasons why I am vociferous about these indiscriminate admissions of presymptomatic / asymptomatic carriers across the hospitals.

[Miyata]

Originally Posted by DigitalOne

HCQ as a cure for Covid-19 patients is more or less buried.

That's what makes it more suspicious (to me at least). First the HCQ was drummed up as curative. When evidence started to build against that, it has found new spotlight in preventive care!

While there has been no definitive studies on its efficacy as being preventive - https://www.goodrx.com/blog/coronavi...nt/#prevention - Many many medicines and food [such as multivitamins; minerals like zinc, calcium, etc] can easily be projected as just about efficient in being preventive for a whole host of diseases, bacteria, viruses, parasites, and anything else novel out there!

And, ironically enough, no one would be held accountable if it turns out to be contrary...at least the multivitamins, minerals, some relevant food might have no side effects unlike the much advertised and potentially to be a little maligned HCQ.

It's all good to advertise it with backing of some credible scientific studies, but in its absence, one is better off being quiet - that way we (rather Mr.T) would do less harm to the world. There were enough cases ingesting questionable cleaning products as it is!