Health/Medical
See other Health/Medical Articles
Title: 2005 article from the NIH indicate the effectiveness of Cloroquine in prevention and treatment of coronavirus.
Source:
[None]
URL Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1232869/
Published: Jul 31, 2020
Author: NIH
Post Date: 2020-07-31 09:22:05 by A K A Stone
Keywords: None
Views: 4320
Comments: 30
Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and spread Background Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) is caused by a newly discovered coronavirus (SARS-CoV). No effective prophylactic or post-exposure therapy is currently available. Results We report, however, that chloroquine has strong antiviral effects on SARS- CoV infection of primate cells. These inhibitory effects are observed when the cells are treated with the drug either before or after exposure to the virus, suggesting both prophylactic and therapeutic advantage. In addition to the well-known functions of chloroquine such as elevations of endosomal pH, the drug appears to interfere with terminal glycosylation of the cellular receptor, angiotensin-converting enzyme 2. This may negatively influence the virus-receptor binding and abrogate the infection, with further ramifications by the elevation of vesicular pH, resulting in the inhibition of infection and spread of SARS CoV at clinically admissible concentrations. Conclusion Chloroquine is effective in preventing the spread of SARS CoV in cell culture. Favorable inhibition of virus spread was observed when the cells were either treated with chloroquine prior to or after SARS CoV infection. In addition, the indirect immunofluorescence assay described herein represents a simple and rapid method for screening SARS-CoV antiviral compounds. Keywords: severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus, chloroquine, inhibition, therapy Go to: Background Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) is an emerging disease that was first reported in Guangdong Province, China, in late 2002. The disease rapidly spread to at least 30 countries within months of its first appearance, and concerted worldwide efforts led to the identification of the etiological agent as SARS coronavirus (SARS-CoV), a novel member of the family Coronaviridae [1]. Complete genome sequencing of SARS-CoV [2,3] confirmed that this pathogen is not closely related to any of the previously established coronavirus groups. Budding of the SARS-CoV occurs in the Golgi apparatus [4] and results in the incorporation of the envelope spike glycoprotein into the virion. The spike glycoprotein is a type I membrane protein that facilitates viral attachment to the cellular receptor and initiation of infection, and angiotensin-converting enzyme-2 (ACE2) has been identified as a functional cellular receptor of SARS-CoV [5]. We have recently shown that the processing of the spike protein was effected by furin-like convertases and that inhibition of this cleavage by a specific inhibitor abrogated cytopathicity and significantly reduced the virus titer of SARS-CoV [6]. Due to the severity of SARS-CoV infection, the potential for rapid spread of the disease, and the absence of proven effective and safe in vivo inhibitors of the virus, it is important to identify drugs that can effectively be used to treat or prevent potential SARS-CoV infections. Many novel therapeutic approaches have been evaluated in laboratory studies of SARS-CoV: notable among these approaches are those using siRNA [7], passive antibody transfer [8], DNA vaccination [9], vaccinia or parainfluenza virus expressing the spike protein [10,11], interferons [12,13], and monoclonal antibody to the S1-subunit of the spike glycoprotein that blocks receptor binding [14]. In this report, we describe the identification of chloroquine as an effective pre- and post-infection antiviral agent for SARS-CoV. Chloroquine, a 9- aminoquinoline that was identified in 1934, is a weak base that increases the pH of acidic vesicles. When added extracellularly, the non-protonated portion of chloroquine enters the cell, where it becomes protonated and concentrated in acidic, low-pH organelles, such as endosomes, Golgi vesicles, and lysosomes. Chloroquine can affect virus infection in many ways, and the antiviral effect depends in part on the extent to which the virus utilizes endosomes for entry. Chloroquine has been widely used to treat human diseases, such as malaria, amoebiosis, HIV, and autoimmune diseases, without significant detrimental side effects [15]. Together with data presented here, showing virus inhibition in cell culture by chloroquine doses compatible with patient treatment, these features suggest that further evaluation of chloroquine in animal models of SARS-CoV infection would be warranted as we progress toward finding effective antivirals for prevention or treatment of the disease. Go to: Results Preinfection chloroquine treatment renders Vero E6 cells refractory to SARS- CoV infection In order to investigate if chloroquine might prevent SARS-CoV infection, permissive Vero E6 cells [1] were pretreated with various concentrations of chloroquine (0.1–10 ¼M) for 20–24 h prior to virus infection. Cells were then infected with SARS-CoV, and virus antigens were visualized by indirect immunofluorescence as described in Materials and Methods. Microscopic examination (Fig. (Fig.1A)1A) of the control cells (untreated, infected) revealed extensive SARS-CoV-specific immunostaining of the monolayer. A dose-dependant decrease in virus antigen-positive cells was observed starting at 0.1 ¼M chloroquine, and concentrations of 10 ¼M completely abolished SARS-CoV infection. For quantitative purposes, we counted the number of cells stained positive from three random locations on a slide. The average number of positively stained control cells was scored as 100% and was compared with the number of positive cells observed under various chloroquine concentrations (Fig. (Fig.1B).1B). Pretreatment with 0.1, 1, and 10 ¼M chloroquine reduced infectivity by 28%, 53%, and 100%, respectively. Reproducible results were obtained from three independent experiments. These data demonstrated that pretreatment of Vero E6 cells with chloroquine rendered these cells refractory to SARS-CoV infection.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: medicalmalcontent (#0)
ping
There are numerous articles in 2020 that indicate the effectiveness of wearing masks in prevention of COVID-19. Since as evidence by the posting of this article, you are interested in the prevention of spreading COVID-19 – Then: There is sincere hope that you will find those articles both interesting and greatly educational.
Show me the where the FDA did a randomized test of masks like required by law or go suck that faggots dick whose article you pimped today.
Here is just the first hit I found as one of many reports showing FDA testing of masks: I saw many more reports of FDA testing mask – but I didn’t bother wasting time hotlinking to all of them. If you will not believe one report of FDA testing masks – then you will never believe any. It’s your proven nature to believe only what you want to believe. Pathetically …
Please show links to where the FDA is - as you say ... Can you?
Here's another one of your pals taking the law into his own hands. All of you covid cultists are insane, do you know that freakshow?
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen. Stone has not turned extremist – yet – only “threatened”: Whew ….
The same dick wads like you who say no church I am an extremist. Extremely correct. You're extremely stupid.
Judging from your words and threatening actions, I would say that you are absolutely correct – you are definitely an extremist.
You don't have the balls to tell anyone to wear a mask in person - you'll just call the cops and have them do it for you. If GrandIsland were still around, even he would be calling you a pussy.
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen. It’s nothing to do with “having the balls” – It’s simply not my business to tell them.
Click here for the: Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff – May 2020 Okay, “mister big-mouth Know-it-all” – you need to “show everyone” exactly WHERE in this Enforcement Policy, or any other place for that matter, the FDA is, as you CLAIM: You surely can easily do that – Right? So – either just do it. or STFU and stop repeating it.
That is not what I asked for. Here slow boy. https://www.fda.gov/media/87603/download
Here slow boy. You SPECIFICALLY asked: I read through your hotlink. And then I went and read through all 10 Chapters of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. I simply cannot find where the law requires … Can you please provide this old “slow boy” with a link to show this?
So your position is companies can offer devices that are supposed to stop disease with no FDA trials. You think a company that sells bandanas can market them as devices that will stop the spread of coronavirus. Ha you're dumber than I thought. I already posted you the info in the past. Go find it. Also n95 masks do nothing to stop viruses when you exhale. Which you brag about wearing because you care about people and you are so good. You're a fool.
You directed me to this link: Your implied intent was to show me where …. I have already shown you that … And I have shown you that the: Now, let’s use some Logical reasoning which is one of the fundamental skills of effective thinking here. You do know how that works? Probably not. So, let me explain. You said: Let’s reverse that and you: You cannot prove they didn’t. I cannot prove they did. You cannot even prove they are required to do so. At least – nowhere yet … Uh – What is that word you like so much to use? Oh, yea. “Checkmate” … Although, I prefer – “Gotcha” …
That is only a contention made by you. Prove it.
That is not “MY” contention. That is the information in the link I posted to you. As I remember, it said the company producing the masks does the trials and FDA looks over those trials. Prove where the information in the link is wrong in stating that.
You think a company that sells bandanas can market them as devices that will stop the spread of coronavirus. Ha you're dumber than I thought. You are as dumb as I already knew to even ask that question.
I already posted you the info in the past. Go find it. I already factually disputed all the info you posted in the past. Go review it.
Here is more information you can ignore.
Actually a type of respirator, an N95 mask offers more protection than a surgical mask does because it can filter out both large and small particles when the wearer inhales. As the name indicates, the mask is designed to block 95% of very small particles. Some N95 masks have valves that make them easier to breathe through. With this type of mask, unfiltered air is released when the wearer exhales. Health care providers must be trained and pass a fit test to confirm a proper seal before using an N95 respirator in the workplace. Like surgical masks, N95 masks are intended to be disposable. However, researchers are testing ways to disinfect N95 masks so they can be reused. Some N95 masks, and even some cloth masks, have one-way valves that make them easier to breathe through. But because the valve releases unfiltered air when the wearer breathes out, this type of mask doesn't prevent the wearer from spreading the virus. For this reason, some places have banned them. You’re the fool …
Masks don't work. They collect germs. I'm not wearing one and if you told me to wear one I would knock you out cold. That is all that matters. No matter what you say. I don't listen to anti christian faggots like you.
“Why are yall wearing a mask? I will not ignore that information on the box. However, the information by the author is MISLEADING. The warning on the box states: I wear a “RESPERATOR” and not an “EAR LOOP MASK” Stated here on May 16, 2020 in a Facebook post: You have become a Deckard with your false information posting technique. The mask box label is legitimate, but people are misinterpreting it But other masks, like the ones in the photo or homemade fabric masks, are effective in reducing the spread of the disease because they help stop asymptomatic individuals from unknowingly spreading the disease. Online rumors continue to claim that different face masks are ineffective in protecting against the spread of COVID-19. We recently fact-checked this false claim, yet new versions on Facebook are now pointing to a warning label that appears to be on the side of a box of disposable surgical masks. The label in the image reads: One person who posted the picture wrote: "Gee....wonder how many people are gonna tell me I haven't done my research now? Black and white. Right there. Even the people making the masks know it's all bull." But that’s not what this photo shows. This is a misunderstanding about the kind of protection standard masks provide and a misreading of the disclaimer, which isn’t saying the masks are ineffective at limiting the spread of COVID-19. width="60%"> The posts were flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) width="60%"> Certain medical-grade masks, such as the N95 respirator, offer the most protection against viral particles for the wearer because it can filter aerosol particles as small as 0.3 micron. But other masks, like the ear-loop ones in the photo or homemade cloth masks, are effective in reducing the spread of the disease, or what health experts call "source control." When you wear these masks it is most helpful to people around you. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention doesn’t recommend that the general public wear medical-grade masks like the N95 because they are in high demand, and officials say they should be reserved for health care workers who are in direct contact with infected patients. As an additional public health measure, the agency recommends that people wear cloth face coverings in public settings to help slow the spread of COVID-19 (emphasis ours): The "CDC still recommends that you stay at least 6 feet away from other people (social distancing), frequent hand cleaning and other everyday preventive actions. A cloth face covering is not intended to protect the wearer, but it may prevent the spread of virus from the wearer to others. This would be especially important if someone is infected but does not have symptoms." Jeremy Howard, a data scientist at the University of San Francisco, wrote an article in the Conversation in favor of universal mask wearing. Howard says that researchers were looking at the wrong question at first – how well a mask protects the wearer from infection – and not how well a mask prevents an infected person from spreading the virus. He said masks function very differently as personal protective equipment versus "source control." Our ruling A photograph of a box of disposable masks shows a warning label that says the masks "will not provide any protections against COVID-19." Such disclaimers don’t mean that the masks are ineffective at slowing the spread of the disease, but that they don’t protect the wearer as well as medical respirators such as the N95 recommended for use by health care professionals. Disposable and homemade cloth masks are recommended for people to wear because it protects ot hers around them in case they have the virus and may not be showing any symptoms. The users sharing this image are making a false interpretation of the type of protection standard face masks provide. We rate it False.
Your brain doesn’t work. Why you are Deckard are so to stupid to believe everything you read on the internet you want to believe – I will never know. I do however know that you provide me with great amusement when I continue to factually proved you both wrong – and show your narrow-minded and gullible ignorance. Thank you for that …
Have you considered suicide?
You didn’t know the guy in Ace Hardware “out cold” when you had the chance. I have come to believe that lately you lie as much as hondope did. That’s pathetic. But amusing to observe …
No. But if I had to hang around you and deal with you in real life. I just may …
#2. To: A K A Stone, All (#0)
2005 article from the NIH indicate the effectiveness of Cloroquine in prevention and treatment of coronavirus. Click here to check them out.
#3. To: Gatlin (#2)
#4. To: A K A Stone, All (#3)
Show me the where the FDA did a randomized test of masks like required by law. FDA bans faulty masks, 3 weeks after failed tests.
#5. To: A K A Stone, All (#3)
Interestingly enough. while doing further research – I found this: The FDA does not test and certify surgical masks – but clears them for sale after reviewing the manufacturer’s test data and proposed claims (FDA 2004) … “required to do a randomized test of masks like required by law?”
#6. To: Gatlin, A K A Stone (#4)
The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning.
Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom.
#7. To: Deckard, All (#6)
Florida man opens fire in hotel lobby because a mother and son weren't "social distancing", police say “Tell me to wear a mask in person and I will knock your faggoty ass out cold.”
#8. To: Gatlin (#7)
#9. To: A K A Stone, All (#8)
(Edited)
I am an extremist. Extremely correct. Estremist noun: a person who holds extreme or fanatical political or religious views, especially one who resorts to or advocates extreme action.
#10. To: Gatlin, . A K A Stone, GrandIsland (#7)
“Tell me to wear a mask in person and I will knock your faggoty ass out cold.”
The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning.
Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom.
#11. To: Deckard, All (#10)
You don't have the balls to tell anyone to wear a mask in person -
#12. To: A K A Stone, All (#3)
“Show me” the where the FDA did a randomized test of masks like required by law … FDA Enforcement Policy for Face Masks and Respirators During the
Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Public Health Emergency (Revised) “Required by law to do a randomized test of masks.”
#13. To: Gatlin (#12)
#14. To: A K A Stone, All (#13)
That is not what I asked for. “Show me” the where the FDA did a randomized test of masks like required by law … … “the FDA to do a randomized test of masks” …
#15. To: Gatlin (#14)
#16. To: A K A Stone, All (#15)
https://www.fda.gov/media/87603/download. … “the FDA is required by law to do a randomized test of masks.” The “FDA does not test and certify surgical masks” – but clears them for sale after reviewing the manufacturer’s test data and proposed claims (FDA 2004) “FDA bans faulty masks, 3 weeks after failed tests” [performed by others]. “Show me” the where the FDA did a randomized test of masks like required by law … “Show me” the where the FDA did NOT perform randomized test of masks …
#17. To: A K A Stone, All (#15)
Also n95 masks do nothing to stop viruses when you exhale.
#18. To: A K A Stone, All (#15)
So your position is companies can offer devices that are supposed to stop disease with no FDA trials.
#19. To: A K A Stone, All (#15)
#20. To: A K A Stone, All (#15)
#21. To: Gatlin (#19)
#22. To: A K A Stone, All (#15)
Also n95 masks do nothing to stop viruses when you exhale. N95 masks
#23. To: Gatlin (#22)
#24. To: A K A Stone, All (#21)
Here is more information you can ignore.
even the box is saying it doesn’t
protect against covid19 or other
viruses “THIS PRODUCT IS AN EAR LOOP MASK. IT IS NOT A RESPERATOR
AND WILL NOT PROVIDE ANY PROTECTION AGAINSTY COVID-19 (CORONAVIRUS)
OR OTHER VIRUSES OR CONTAMINENTS.”
Says a warning label on a box of disposable masks shows that they are ineffective at protecting against the spread of COVID-19. IF YOUR TIME IS SHORT "This product is an ear loop mask, this product is not a respirator and will not provide any protections against COVID-19 (coronavirus) and other viruses or contaminants."
The photo appears to be legitimate. But the words on the label are being misinterpreted as evidence to suggest that masks are not effective. 
#25. To: A K A Stone, All (#23)
Masks don't work.
#26. To: Gatlin (#25)
#27. To: A K A Stone, All (#23)
You are a liar. I'm not wearing one and if you told me to wear one I would knock you out cold.
#28. To: A K A Stone, All (#26)
Have you considered suicide?
#29. To: A K A Stone, All (#23)
That’s a typical selfish trait … That is all that matters.
#30. To: A K A Stone, All (#23)
To whom do you ever listen? I don't listen to anti christian faggots like you.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]