Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Cannabis may stop corona from infecting other people?
#11
(05-20-2020, 05:26 PM)Pwrpuffgirl Wrote: Seriously!? What is wrong with people? Sad to take advantage of people that way but people will take the bait I’m sure.

Agreed, this is so sad to see. In general I would say "follow the money" might be a good test to apply to any cures. Who is promoting it and are they linked to the people selling it? And if it seems too good to be true then I'm afraid it probably is. I seriously doubt there will be a single silver bullet that is a cure all. We'll be lucky to have an effective vaccine within a year or so (that's for those who aren't anti-vaccine - I realise opinions on this forum vary).

The area I'm reading most about is vitamin D. It passes the "follow the money" test because it isn't patented, hundreds of companies produce it, and it isn't even especially expensive. I'll post more of the science around vitamin D elsewhere - hopefully I'll find time at the weekend to gather actual research. But don't get your hopes too high, best case scenario for vitamin D is higher survival rate/not such severe cases - this isn't a cure.
Reply
#12
Absolutely- wasn’t sure if I could post the link but Preprints are the ones who published the study.
The link to the article is Here
~~Patience is the gateway to success~~
Reply
#13
There is a lot more information about the study in the article I posted too. This study is still very new and they haven’t tested it on humans yet- they’re using a lot of biotech equipment with human cells etc. and seeing how it interacts. I’m no scientist, but I truly believe God put this plant on earth for a reason. Even though it’s legal is some places it is still very new medical wise. However, I would put money down that in the future there will be so much more to come from this plant than what we have now. I also wonder if someone makes a poll (I couldn’t do it since I don’t have a following) but say a research institute does a poll on MJ users and compares it to patients who have had covid- who use/don’t use- if there would be any correlation with the numbers. Hmm..
~~Patience is the gateway to success~~
Reply
#14
I was wondering the same?? Haha thanks guys!
Reply
#15
(05-21-2020, 07:08 PM)BeReel1010 Wrote: Absolutely- wasn’t sure if I could post the link but Preprints are the ones who published the study.

Thank you - interesting reading. If you want to post a link but obscure it a bit you can always get the URL and deliberately scramble the start a bit so https://www.website.com becomes hxxps://www.website.com - although it doesn't make for such a handy clickable link! Anyway I printed the article because I'm old fashioned and can't critically evaluate science from a screen - I need it on paper :-) 

This research is at an incredibly early stage - it is too early to say whether there is anything to it or not. It is years away from being a marketable product. Who knows what the results would look like when tested on humans. Also I'm a bit worried by the statistics. It is really complicated to explain, but if anyone wants to discuss p-values with me then that's fine - I'm more than 95% sure you won't (geeky stats joke).

The broader caveat I'd put on this research is that they get these varying results and (rightly) point out that medical cannabis can't be treated as generic. To start testing on people they'd need something much more standardized. It doesn't seem to be the case that just any medical cannabis will work, which is obviously a shame for people in this forum who wish to take matters into their own hands. 

Note the affiliations of all the researchers - they all work for Pathway and their business model is finding medical uses for cannabis. That doesn't nullify anything and they've honestly declared it in the paper. My concern is whether they are looking at things through the lens of "how can we make cannabis relevant to COVID-19?" rather than "out of all the drugs we know of, what modulates ACE2 receptors?". I guess what I'm questioning is whether they've started from a very narrow perspective.

I don't want to shoot them down, there could be something to it eventually. This COVID-19 pandemic is taking so many lives, people losing jobs, etc that I think we need to throw everything we have at it. So even though this specific piece of research doesn't fill me with optimism, I'm still glad they did the work. There will be a cure, the only question is when. For now I'm placing my bets on vitamin D to lessen the virus.
Reply
#16
We know that the virus has no effect on some people. For instance, the cruise ship that was quarantined, many people tested positive but never experienced one symptom. I think there has to be something more to that. If we could figure out why, maybe it’d help? I’m no scientist haha
Reply
#17
(05-24-2020, 01:45 AM)Pwrpuffgirl Wrote: We know that the virus has no effect on some people. For instance, the cruise ship that was quarantined, many people tested positive but never experienced one symptom. I think there has to be something more to that. If we could figure out why, maybe it’d help? I’m no scientist haha

Yes, I agree that is a really interesting feature. Also makes it dangerous because a certain number of people are walking around unknowingly spreading the virus. I've heard of others who've tested positive yet had symptoms equivalent to a mild cold.

In addition to what you've mentioned we also know there is a gender effect with men far more likely to die and also ethnicity/race seeming to be relevant. There's got to be something going on there that would help us understand it. Like you say, maybe it would help.

We desperately need more general testing, not just of the very sick in hospital, but a random selection of the population (including healthy people), then we'd have a better idea how many people have had it with no/mild symptoms. From there I'm sure it must be possible to start looking at those individuals to find out what is different compared to those who got very sick or died. In my country we have the infuriating situation that the government have contracts for testing and that's only taking place in a few centralised facilities. However there are universities with labs offering to help and nothing is being done. It is ridiculous. 

One thing that does seem relatively certain is that people who are infected with a high amount of virus, e.g. health workers, have more severe symptoms than those presumed to have had a lower exposure (albeit still enough to make them sick). I believe inhaling just 10 viral particles is enough to catch the disease, but those looking after sick people can be exposed to thousands, or millions of particles.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)