Oh hey, the thing I'm working on! We're working on getting such an RCT trial completed and reviewed. Hopefully we'll have a definitive answer for you soon.
It worked for my wife she had pneumonia couldn't even get out of bed after getting the treatment 5days later she was walking around feeling alot better and she got treatment 6 days after having symptoms of covid. many celebrities are get the antibody treatment at first signs of covid and none of them had any symptoms after receiving treatment.
I've been trying to explain to people WHY we need randomized controlled trials in order to know if a treatment is actually effective, but I'm not a scientist. The only explanation I can give is one that's purely mathematical. Unless somebody has a strong math background, they're not going to really understand that, and if they already have a strong math background, they don't need this explained to them anyway. Can you recommend a video that I can point people to that will help them understand this better?
The main thing you probably need to get across is BIAS and the importance of 'randomized but equal[ish]' subjects (because if the person chooses who goes where, bam, of course the ones most likely to survive/get well can be put into the group with the new treatment, plasma or otherwise, even if it's done subconsciously-computers are just better at creating study groups than we can ever possibly be; another real evil we've seen time and time again is that we subject people with dark skin to harsh treatments AND throw them into the control groups historically while white folks get safer more promising options time and time again-HISTORY is a good way to explain it if they'll understand bias better by seeing reputable people's behavior when choosing their own study groups!). I will update this if I find others with details that everyday folks can use and understand well, but for the MOST simple basic and importantly SHORT (attention spans are not all created equal) one, try this and let me know if you are struggling with something more detailed: ua-cam.com/video/fkOCYov1p-o/v-deo.html 2mins from Cancer Research UK
I think the best way to explain is to say that the way studies are made is not perfect. If you don't have a control group it is simply hard to tell if what is tested is helping, or maybe the people chosen for the trial are just not the same as the general population (very likely actually). Randomization is also important since otherwise the people making the study might just choose the healthier people to get the meds to begin with.
We are partial to this one (made by us in 2013) for explaining the importance of RCTs, though it uses the example of sugar making kids hyper rather than the example of a medical treatment: ua-cam.com/video/mkr9YsmrPAI/v-deo.html We also like this CrashCourse video, which does pull in treatment examples: ua-cam.com/video/kkBDa-ICvyY/v-deo.html Hope this helps! -Tiffany
I feel like this video should have been longer and explained a bit more about what an emergency use authorization actually means as well as discussing any potential harms of convalescent plasma treatment.
Antibodies are produced over days to weeks after infection with the virus. The strength of antibody response depends on several factors, including age, nutritional status, severity of disease, and certain medications or infections like HIV that suppress the immune system.👍
@@doctaflo I just wanted to circle back and let you know that we've added this one to the queue! Video should be out sometime in the next month or so. :) -Tiffany
++ Another good, easy to understand video. I wish the people who are supposed to be leading the US (by all standards the most noticed and LOUDEST nation when media is concerned) would quit getting a kick out of spreading misinformation like the pandemic is just part of a reality television show and once this season is over we'll all just move to running a small previously undiscovered island somewhere between Mauritius and Perth. Public distrust is inevitable when someone goes from 'it's a hoax' to 'two very big words' and 'a real problem,' touting bleach and plaquenil while saying a magical vaccine will be here in October. Being treated like a pawn is kind of normal, sure, but I'd rather be a cog in a machine, not a piece to kick off the playing field the moment I seem to be a 'threat.' At least the cogs in machines are used til they stop working and get recycled into soup cans or whatnot.
I'm curious what your current thoughts are? (With current research). I fear the current news will devastate the blood/plasma donation supply chain for every other medical condition as the multiple stimulus checks and tax refunds are effecting the amount of donations collected by ~40% reduction. That's going to be a lot of burn victims, bleeding disorders, and immunosuppressant diseases we can't effectively treat.
Wait a sec i know its critical to know how effective it is to know if a treatment is actually working but as long as its not harmful plus it has already been seen working previously on other diseases generally even if its helping a little with this one( although i think it should work just as fine since its the same as if your body made those) why wait for a solid proof? Also knowing for sure that its going to help even if its a little why prevent some people from getting it and put them in control group? They may very well die in that group while the treatment is 100% safe and we are 100% sure it can help at least a little?
For those who need it (like me), here is a link to an excellent refresher on relative vs absolute risk: www.statisticshowto.com/calculate-relative-risk/
The answer is so political because the framework of the problem is political in origin. C'est-à-dire, if politics spoils the ground for research, treatment, and communication, then we know where we've got to begin.
Oh hey, the thing I'm working on! We're working on getting such an RCT trial completed and reviewed. Hopefully we'll have a definitive answer for you soon.
I remember that convalescent plasma was the state-of-the-art treatment for polio when I was a kid, before Salk and Sabin.
Before pharmaceutical conglomerates, yes. Plasma is the cure and China proved it.
Actually, two people I know got the treatment . One had pneumonia already and other started a symptom. Both got better!
It worked for my wife she had pneumonia couldn't even get out of bed after getting the treatment 5days later she was walking around feeling alot better and she got treatment 6 days after having symptoms of covid. many celebrities are get the antibody treatment at first signs of covid and none of them had any symptoms after receiving treatment.
I've been trying to explain to people WHY we need randomized controlled trials in order to know if a treatment is actually effective, but I'm not a scientist. The only explanation I can give is one that's purely mathematical. Unless somebody has a strong math background, they're not going to really understand that, and if they already have a strong math background, they don't need this explained to them anyway. Can you recommend a video that I can point people to that will help them understand this better?
The main thing you probably need to get across is BIAS and the importance of 'randomized but equal[ish]' subjects (because if the person chooses who goes where, bam, of course the ones most likely to survive/get well can be put into the group with the new treatment, plasma or otherwise, even if it's done subconsciously-computers are just better at creating study groups than we can ever possibly be; another real evil we've seen time and time again is that we subject people with dark skin to harsh treatments AND throw them into the control groups historically while white folks get safer more promising options time and time again-HISTORY is a good way to explain it if they'll understand bias better by seeing reputable people's behavior when choosing their own study groups!). I will update this if I find others with details that everyday folks can use and understand well, but for the MOST simple basic and importantly SHORT (attention spans are not all created equal) one, try this and let me know if you are struggling with something more detailed:
ua-cam.com/video/fkOCYov1p-o/v-deo.html 2mins from Cancer Research UK
I think the best way to explain is to say that the way studies are made is not perfect. If you don't have a control group it is simply hard to tell if what is tested is helping, or maybe the people chosen for the trial are just not the same as the general population (very likely actually). Randomization is also important since otherwise the people making the study might just choose the healthier people to get the meds to begin with.
We are partial to this one (made by us in 2013) for explaining the importance of RCTs, though it uses the example of sugar making kids hyper rather than the example of a medical treatment: ua-cam.com/video/mkr9YsmrPAI/v-deo.html
We also like this CrashCourse video, which does pull in treatment examples: ua-cam.com/video/kkBDa-ICvyY/v-deo.html
Hope this helps! -Tiffany
One other video that really helped me get a grasp of it was by this place, on how does science. ua-cam.com/video/3MRHcYtZjFY/v-deo.html
I feel like this video should have been longer and explained a bit more about what an emergency use authorization actually means as well as discussing any potential harms of convalescent plasma treatment.
I enjoy 😊 the up-beat broadcast style! Thanks!
I think Indonesia has been using this treatment for a while... I can't tell you how effective it is though because I don't know the data
Antibodies are produced over days to weeks after infection with the virus. The strength of antibody response depends on several factors, including age, nutritional status, severity of disease, and certain medications or infections like HIV that suppress the immune system.👍
Damnit FDA, you slipped o.o
you MUST comment on the acetaminophen risk aversion study!
omg omg omg creator acknowledgement :0)
@@doctaflo I just wanted to circle back and let you know that we've added this one to the queue! Video should be out sometime in the next month or so. :) -Tiffany
@Healthcare Triage, how polite; thank you! can’t wait to see what you come up with!!
++ Another good, easy to understand video. I wish the people who are supposed to be leading the US (by all standards the most noticed and LOUDEST nation when media is concerned) would quit getting a kick out of spreading misinformation like the pandemic is just part of a reality television show and once this season is over we'll all just move to running a small previously undiscovered island somewhere between Mauritius and Perth. Public distrust is inevitable when someone goes from 'it's a hoax' to 'two very big words' and 'a real problem,' touting bleach and plaquenil while saying a magical vaccine will be here in October. Being treated like a pawn is kind of normal, sure, but I'd rather be a cog in a machine, not a piece to kick off the playing field the moment I seem to be a 'threat.' At least the cogs in machines are used til they stop working and get recycled into soup cans or whatnot.
0:59 wouldn't this rather prevent the host from creating their own antibodies? This is the behind principle giving Anti-D to Rh- pregnant women.
I'm curious what your current thoughts are? (With current research). I fear the current news will devastate the blood/plasma donation supply chain for every other medical condition as the multiple stimulus checks and tax refunds are effecting the amount of donations collected by ~40% reduction. That's going to be a lot of burn victims, bleeding disorders, and immunosuppressant diseases we can't effectively treat.
Thank you :)
is there finally a verdict on that malaria med for helping with corvid?
I don't think so. It's really hard to get the ravens and crows to take it.
@@docnevyn5814 I like the way your brain thinks.
Read Up On Dr Giuseppe De Donno.
Wait a sec i know its critical to know how effective it is to know if a treatment is actually working but as long as its not harmful plus it has already been seen working previously on other diseases generally even if its helping a little with this one( although i think it should work just as fine since its the same as if your body made those) why wait for a solid proof? Also knowing for sure that its going to help even if its a little why prevent some people from getting it and put them in control group? They may very well die in that group while the treatment is 100% safe and we are 100% sure it can help at least a little?
For those who need it (like me), here is a link to an excellent refresher on relative vs absolute risk: www.statisticshowto.com/calculate-relative-risk/
now talk about cholesterol medication's such as Liputor claims.
💚💚💚
The answer is so political because the framework of the problem is political in origin. C'est-à-dire, if politics spoils the ground for research, treatment, and communication, then we know where we've got to begin.
This isn't a new therapy for saving sick patients. What magic are you waiting for? Clinical medical treatments work; they aren't perfect. What is?