May not matter now that the virus has mutated into a more virilent form that makes it easier to transmit the infection between people. I wonder if that's the same monoclonal antibody tested by the Dutch.
daveklepper“It should be emphasized that this scientific achievement has the potential to progress towards a treatment for corona patients, and that it is not a vaccine for wide use.” .
It would help to know precisely the binding site on the virus for which the monoclonal antibody is specific, and more particularly how the complex precludes selective attachment of the virus to ACE2.
What this will do is permit the same thing as 'serum from recovered patients' would have done a century ago: allow B-cell incompetent patients the benefits of formed antibodies for subsequent viral binding and inactivation. The single great application here will be in early diagnosed infection of patients at risk of proceeding to ARDS; particularly if it blocks the selective affinity (and possibly triggered signaling) to form the enzyme/viral spike protein complex that facilitates the 40x greater infectiousness. This would probably be administered in a continuous drip style of IV, with appropriate monitoring for potential sensitivities. But it will be very important to start before symptoms of impending ARDS, such as fever, are manifest, or the patient has presented to health care in an already-debilitated state.
Now, if it is what it says it is -- it should be safe for 'prophylactic' administration, meaning that people at risk, but not actually testing positive for viral infection serologically, could have it administered to lower the chance of infection (the effect being the same, in a cellular sense, that would have been induced by a vaccine. The difference is that once the monoclonal antibodies have been flushed from circulation, the body will not 'make' more of them, or 'learn' to make them; there is in principle the risk that some part of the immune system will 'prime' on the antibody itself if administered in too high a concentration, or with the wrong constituents, or in the presence of certain immune-system activation or stimulation, and selectively become sensitized toward it. In these respects it might be desirable to co-administer a specific antiviral (such as 3CLpro or polymerase inhibitor) to ensure multiple arrest of the infection at a number of points.
same saources:
Excerpted from The Times of Israel and www.jpost.com:
Touché!
charlie hebdoFrank Herbert was never on my bucket list nor are silly, trendy expressions.
It's not a Frank Herbert fiction reference, it's an Apple Computer reference. And very 'on point' in this context. Were you as knowledgeable in the history of technology as you are opinionated about science fiction, you might have enjoyed the connotations.
(For what it's worth, I agree with you about much of Herbert's writing, and at least some of his 'popular' expressions.)
charlie hebdo But the clock is ticking down to his end.
The 'clock' cannot tick fasr enough.
Frank Herbert was never on my bucket list nor are silly, trendy expressions.
charlie hebdoIt's more covert than your view. Look at what Jung has to say about reaching people with communication (much more than the surface meanings of words; emotional tone and register are major factors).
I'd more or less tacitly assumed that his behavior was much more an 'evolution' of the combination of bombast and influence that characterized his earlier careers. I had not thought he was receiving special training (as Bill Clinton notably did) in the various techniques of effective rhetorical manipulation -- in fact I'd expect him to think 'He' was above needing that Bene Gesserit stuff to prevail in this world of liars and sin.
And surely advice on riling up the perceived base would go hand in hand without advice on eschewing chronic sequential retrocranial inversion? Something Trump never seems to want to learn...
EuclidI think the reason he is not doing that is because it is not his intention.
Overmod charlie hebdo ...the speech style is more akin to an updated Wolf. I think only peripherally. Hitler put great care into his arguments and delivery, and was a master at evoking the kinds of emotion that would further his messages. Trump has repeatedly disparaged any idea of using rhetoric to actually further anything he wants -- if anything, he starts almost wheedling when that comes into play. He's also made, or at least tried to make, attempts by "the media" look like concerted attacks (and, technically, they usually are, which doesn't help the situation) -- that is not the priority that successful fascism generally puts on information control. Now, to people who just see an orator spitting and yelling and getting red in the face while trying to dominate a situation, then yes, Trump and Hitler would seem similar. If Trump actually adopts a manner of 'speechifying' that excites troglodytic tendencies in a racist proportion of his followers, again yes, you could rank him with some of the great demagogues. But personally I don't give him the credit for exploiting rhetoric knowingly, or as part of a managed agenda to assume more and more absolute power.
charlie hebdo ...the speech style is more akin to an updated Wolf.
I think only peripherally.
Hitler put great care into his arguments and delivery, and was a master at evoking the kinds of emotion that would further his messages. Trump has repeatedly disparaged any idea of using rhetoric to actually further anything he wants -- if anything, he starts almost wheedling when that comes into play. He's also made, or at least tried to make, attempts by "the media" look like concerted attacks (and, technically, they usually are, which doesn't help the situation) -- that is not the priority that successful fascism generally puts on information control.
Now, to people who just see an orator spitting and yelling and getting red in the face while trying to dominate a situation, then yes, Trump and Hitler would seem similar. If Trump actually adopts a manner of 'speechifying' that excites troglodytic tendencies in a racist proportion of his followers, again yes, you could rank him with some of the great demagogues. But personally I don't give him the credit for exploiting rhetoric knowingly, or as part of a managed agenda to assume more and more absolute power.
It's more covert than your view. Look at what Jung has to say about reaching people with communication (much more than the surface meanings of words; emotional tone and register are major factors). He attempts, although he is about as good at this as he is as a business leader- multiple bankruptcies). But the clock is ticking down to his end.
OvermodIf Trump actually adopts a manner of 'speechifying' that excites troglodytic tendencies in a racist proportion of his followers, again yes, you could rank him with some of the great demagogues. But personally I don't give him the credit for exploiting rhetoric knowingly, or as part of a managed agenda to assume more and more absolute power.
I think the reason he is not doing that is because it is not his intention.
Flintlock76admirers of General Smedley D. Butler!
One of my all time favorites. His statements about being an enforcer for Wall Street catalyzed my current world view.
GERALD L MCFARLANE JR Euclid ~snip~ Here is something I have heard: China made an effort to close off Wuhan, and prevent people from leaving Wuhan to enter other parts of China. At the same time, they allowed people to freely leave Wuhan to travel to other countries. It this true? If so, why would China allow people to leave Wuhan and travel outside of China when they knew it was too dangerous to let them travel in China outside of Wuhan? It's China, they're not interested in protecting the rest of the world, only protecting their own. It's not that hard a concept to understand, we'd probably do the same thing, at least as far as people traveling to certain areas outside the U.S., that I won't name but should be easy to figure out.
Euclid ~snip~ Here is something I have heard: China made an effort to close off Wuhan, and prevent people from leaving Wuhan to enter other parts of China. At the same time, they allowed people to freely leave Wuhan to travel to other countries. It this true? If so, why would China allow people to leave Wuhan and travel outside of China when they knew it was too dangerous to let them travel in China outside of Wuhan?
~snip~
Here is something I have heard: China made an effort to close off Wuhan, and prevent people from leaving Wuhan to enter other parts of China. At the same time, they allowed people to freely leave Wuhan to travel to other countries. It this true?
If so, why would China allow people to leave Wuhan and travel outside of China when they knew it was too dangerous to let them travel in China outside of Wuhan?
It's China, they're not interested in protecting the rest of the world, only protecting their own. It's not that hard a concept to understand, we'd probably do the same thing, at least as far as people traveling to certain areas outside the U.S., that I won't name but should be easy to figure out.
I pose the question under the assumption that what it says is true. I am not completely convinced that it the case. And if it is true, I would not conclude that we would do the same thing.
But assuming that it is true, Yes, it is not a hard concept to understand. The point is that for China to understand the threat of the virus; to protect people from it within china; and to not inform other countries while letting Chinese citizens to freely travel to those countries seems like a form of criminal negligence. I don't think that can be dismissed just because China does not care about the rest of the world.
charlie hebdoHe was more famously involved in stopping the "Business Plot" an attempted coup by business leaders, backed by Morgan, to remove FDR.
About as likely a real "Plot" as the supposed business cabal described in House's 'Philip Dru, Administrator' -- and about as likely to succeed if it had in fact been tried. Did McGuire actually think that a half-million would succeed where the Bonus Army did not? (Or that a bunch of, you know, those ... financiers ... would be able to keep the secret under wraps long enough to produce their chosen fascism, with people like Long still very ascendant in their own plans to exploit it?)
Choosing Butler as the figurehead for a right-wing plot at a particularly infelicitous time was a major mistake, not the sort of thing a conspiracy other than a confederacy of dunces would use as a linchpin of strategy. One has to wonder at some of the subsequent Congressional testimony, too.
I always saw a kind of parallel between this and General Taylor at the time just before he promoted the Uncertain Trumpet. Not that either of them were wrong.
charlie hebdo...the speech style is more akin to an updated Wolf.
blue streak 1Many politicians are going to be fighting for their political lives.
And many should lose!
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
OM: The key adjective which you overlooked was "would-be" in describing or modifying the current occupant's aspirations or role model . He may resemble il duce in his strutting and poses but the speech style is more skin to an updated Wolf.
I have heartburn on how world wide case reporting is done. Germany for example has a very narrow reporting system that eliminates many possible cases. Brussels on the other hand is reporting a much higher rate that appears very open ? It has been cited as reporting correctly. As far as China ? Wow cannot believe it at all. Russia seems to be catching up ? Right now the USA has reported having 30% ( 1.1M ) of all world's cases. Does anyone really believe that ?
Then we have the USA. Florida is now hiding some reporting by direction that local persons cannot report some cases. See Miami Hearald. Also protecting senior homes reports. Its about time that nursing homes get the examination of their lack of good protocols.
Media is not really saying what is the present plan. So many call it stopping the virus. Aint so. It is just slowing the virus. None of us are immune but many only get a mild case. Are we all to get it sooner or later ? I certainly do not know. If a vacine comes too late for the oldsters then funeral homes are going to be backed up. No one has really explained why the over 60 persons are so much more vulnerable.
I really hope that there is not a second wave ?
All the executive orders are going to be challenged in courts. With different court rullings I expect that the fines etc will eventually end up at the Supreme court in a couple years. It makes one wonder how executive orders can hold up ? SCOTUS will have to walk a very fine line.
Many politicians are going to be fighting for their political lives.h
Overmod You don't like General Schriever better?
You don't like General Schriever better?
Schriever was a sharp dude as well, but Nimitz was really impressive in how he helped pull off Midway. Rochefort was an important contributor to Midway turning out as it did, but Nimitz was the one who made ships available despite what Washington wanted. Other impressive thing about Nimitz was that LeMay had nice things to say about him.
Favorite story from Schriever era: The engineers for the Atlas missile guidance/control systems were looking for smaller and lighter electronics. One company showed up with samples of the then brand new silicon transistors and asked for a few dozen. The company said "wait a minute, we don't have that kind of production. The engineers talked to the Air Force about the trasnsistors, the Air Force told the company that this was the highest priority project in the country and YOU WILL set up manufacturing facility. The company in question was Texas Instruments.
I heard this from one of the Convair engineers involved.
FWIW, I've heard that Schriever had told off a few congress critters when they were lobbying for one of their constituents.
NKP guy Actually, this is originally from Erik_Mag: charlie hebdo As far as leadership goes, my favorite example of a great leader is Chester Nimitz, who skill was inspiring the best from the people working for him and making sure those people had the resources to do their jobs. Adm. Nimitz awarded my father a Personal Citation in 1945 for his work in quickly getting damaged destroyers in the South Pacific back into action. For that and other reasons, I genuflect before the memory of Adm. Nimitz. My grandfather, a US Marine from 1908 - 1913, greatly admired Gen. Smedley Butler, "the Fighting Quaker," who was beloved by Marines for many years. He later played a significant part in keeping the veterans non-violent during the 1932 Bonus March on Washington, DC. Flintlock: Are you an admirer of Gen. Butler?
Actually, this is originally from Erik_Mag:
charlie hebdo As far as leadership goes, my favorite example of a great leader is Chester Nimitz, who skill was inspiring the best from the people working for him and making sure those people had the resources to do their jobs.
Adm. Nimitz awarded my father a Personal Citation in 1945 for his work in quickly getting damaged destroyers in the South Pacific back into action. For that and other reasons, I genuflect before the memory of Adm. Nimitz.
My grandfather, a US Marine from 1908 - 1913, greatly admired Gen. Smedley Butler, "the Fighting Quaker," who was beloved by Marines for many years. He later played a significant part in keeping the veterans non-violent during the 1932 Bonus March on Washington, DC.
Flintlock: Are you an admirer of Gen. Butler?
He was more famously involved in stopping the "Business Plot" an attempted coup by business leaders, backed by Morgan, to remove FDR. He also became a critic of the use of military to back business interests a a pacifist.
You misattributed the source in quoting. Of course Erik said it, not I.
All Marines are admirers of General Smedley D. Butler!
The man was awarded not one, but two Medals of Honor! And was honest enough to admit when he did the deeds that got him the medals he "...would rather have been anywhere else than where I was at the time!"
I won't tell the story, he's easy enough to look up.
charlie hebdoAs far as leadership goes, my favorite example of a great leader is Chester Nimitz, who skill was inspiring the best from the people working for him and making sure those people had the resources to do their jobs.
Erik_Mag charlie hebdo NKP: It's pointless to try to have a rational discussion with Trumpists like Erik or Euclid. FWIW, I didn't vote for Trump. This was in part because I questioned whether he had the qualifications for the job and partly in distaste for some of his more extreme fans. I don't have a problem with legitimate criticism (e.g. specific examples on what he could have done better), and he certainly comes across as someone with poor impulse control. On the other hand, I am willing to give him credit where credit is due. As far as leadership goes, my favorite example of a great leader is Chester Nimitz, who skill was inspiring the best from the people working for him and making sure those people had the resources to do their jobs.
charlie hebdo NKP: It's pointless to try to have a rational discussion with Trumpists like Erik or Euclid.
NKP: It's pointless to try to have a rational discussion with Trumpists like Erik or Euclid.
FWIW, I didn't vote for Trump. This was in part because I questioned whether he had the qualifications for the job and partly in distaste for some of his more extreme fans. I don't have a problem with legitimate criticism (e.g. specific examples on what he could have done better), and he certainly comes across as someone with poor impulse control. On the other hand, I am willing to give him credit where credit is due.
As far as leadership goes, my favorite example of a great leader is Chester Nimitz, who skill was inspiring the best from the people working for him and making sure those people had the resources to do their jobs.
Point taken. Nimitz was one of our better leaders in WWII, sort of the anti-MacArthur.
I remember a quote from General Eisenhower, post-presidency:
"I never would have gotten as far as I did if I hadn't learned to hide my ego!"
Erik_MagAs far as leadership goes, my favorite example of a great leader is Chester Nimitz, who skill was inspiring the best from the people working for him and making sure those people had the resources to do their jobs.
charlie hebdoWe do not have a leader, only an ignorant would-be Führer.
He's not in Hitler's category in almost any sense -- and his style isn't Hitler's, either. If you have to make trolling fun of him by comparing him to an actual fascist leader, I think he's much more like the 'source' example, Mussolini.
And please, no personal insults for Obama. I don't care for his politics at all, and I find some of his credentials highly dubious in absolute terms, but he's far from the worst president we've had as a person, I don't find his ego ridiculously outsized, and I have no complaint with his intelligence.
It helps that I knew his wife pretty well at Princeton, and she was (and is) no fool. If she married him, that's an implicit strong recommendation in a variety of ways.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.