Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
Great post Fitz!
You express exactly why I am out here looking for any weapon I can find, rather than just sitting and waiting for covid19 to come and run me over.
As for your speculation about our pm, sadly I don’t agree. The UK is the home of all things ‘elite’ starting at the top with the monarchy. Preserving the class system is what the UK is all about. The British people have acquiesced to this for centuries and I can’t see it changing now.
dointime
They are talking here that vaccine efficacy could last a year. That’s the hope. Natural immunisation from the virus less than that. Nobody actually knows yet, but to assume you are immune because you’ve had covid19 could be a mistake. I mean, what a bummer to get it twice.
I quote your words about cinchona from another thread:
“About 10 days in, I sought out and found Cinchona tablets, and some rather powerful low sugar high quinine tonic water, and perhaps it was placebo effect, but I began to feel better within a very short time after starting the Cinchona and tonic combination.”I’m reading all kinds of warnings about cinchona but with your recommendation and the advice of a herbalist I’d give it a try.
It has been so interesting hearing about how it is going over your way and what people are trying. They are really not trying anything here except to make a vaccine. It feels like we are all still horror-struck by the images out of Italy of zombies on ventilators dying en masse. It is refreshing to hear a bit of can-do out of the US, and Tasmania.
dointime
I wasn’t able to get any HCQ. Forget about doctors here writing a prescription off label, and most countries are forbidding export of their HCQ. Interesting to hear that it is giving good results. I mean, lets use anything at all that helps.
Even if you are right about the extent of the infection, I think you are making a flawed asumption that the infected will remain immune for long enough to give significant herd immunity. Countries which were early in their first wave of infection like South Korea are reporting that some people who were cured of covid19 are getting it again. Corona viruses leave a notoriously short immune response in the host. A good vaccine should create a longer lasting response than getting infected with the actual virus will.
There’s still a lot that’s not known but my bet is that it’ll be a rough ride for some time to come. Dr James is not going to run out of work any time soon.
dointime
I really do hope that Indomethacinis is effective enough to stave off a visit to the ICU. I’ve put my order in to a trusted source which requires no prescription but unfortunately takes a long time to ship because of not many planes flying.
I heard that Trump had an interest in hydroxycloroquine but I don’t know if that is true.
I hadn’t heard about the micro-clots issue so that’s interesting. Man is this virus scary. Here in the UK there are no cures being touted, just a hopeless procession of high figures for daily death toll and infection rate and politicians who dropped the ball and are destitute of answers. Going to a medical facility has as much chance of killing you as curing you. It’s bad, bad, bad and no letup in sight until an effective vaccine is available.
dointime
Hi Fitz, thanks for this amazing information! I have looked at the papers that Dr James posted, also your previous post on the subject and I’ve ordered the Indomethacin. Given the price and the ease of access it’s a no brainer.
I read the article about the Iran trials again. The way I read it, Dr James is suggesting at the end that dac by itself (without the sof) might be enough, seeing that resistance should not develop until after the covid19 infection is over. I don’t right now have a source of dac who is willing to send without prescription or a doc willing to prescribe off label but I think this is still worth pursuing. (Dr James, if you would be willing to supply dac for covid19 please pm me).
So, all the best to you Fitz, and Dr James – humanity needs you! I thought I was done with kicking viral ass but it turns out hepC was just the first round. Oh well, on with the virus slaying,
dointime
Anyway, I think you’ve been here long enough to be made a moderator too so take care with the extra buttons. The pay is terrible and the hours are awful.
Doc Freeman,
Thanks but I don’t want to be a moderator. Could you undo it please?
Best wishes
dtMy broad reason for starting this thread has been this:
Up until today, the opportunities to study and collate a body of knowledge about post-SVR issues have been neglected. That’s understandable. HepC specialists have had their hands full with firefighting active hepC infection. When people got to SVR who can blame them for considering that their job is done and they have plenty more infected queuing up to be taken care of.
So what has happened is that post-SVR people who still had issues went back to their GPs and were hived off to whichever other specialist was considered to be relevant to their particular post SVR issues. People got passed around to various specialists, especially if they had autoimmune conditions which are notoriously hard to diagnose. Many people got nowhere. The trend towards increasing specialization in medicine contributed to this situation. Nobody has been equipped to get the Big Picture.
I’d like to see this situation improve. Maybe there will be a chance for that in the future now that the DAAs have arrived and the pressure eases off to treat the infected, as and when that happens. There needs to be a knowledge base that post-SVR people and their doctors can tap into. It can be started now.
That’s what I wished to draw attention to.
dtThose are the results of the test. They do not mean the range of the test. That is not stated as it also wasn’t for DTs test result.
Gaj, Mike’s PCR report does in fact state the range of the test. It says:
“The quantitative range of the assay is 15 IU/ML to 100 million IU/ML”This is what I would expect to see on any PCR report. In fact, I’ve never seen a PCR report that didn’t have it, until now.
————————————————
Anyway, I now have an answer – of sorts – to the issue. Many thanks to those who contributed this information.
The Doctor’sLab (TDL) says that the LLOQ for their test is 12 IU/ML.
The fact that my intermediary (Medichecks) did not put this on my report is because TDL did not provide it to them.
I can’t get a satisfactory answer as to why TDL didn’t provide it, or if they ever provide it, eg. on their PCRs which show DET rather than UND. It is also not displayed on their website.So, it is what it is.
There are implications to this for anybody seeking to get a private PCR done in the UK. TDL is a major provider of this test. It is used by several private blood services and private consultants. If you get a private PCR in the UK then the chances are that it will be done by TDL. So – you could, like me, get a report that does not contain the quantitative range of the assay, (no LLOQ).
My understanding is that TDL are a perfectly good provider and their LLOQ of 12 is fine for just about all purposes.
However, I’d urge anybody who wants the LLOQ and doesn’t get it on their report, to contact TDL and ascertain for themselves the LLOQ for their test.dt
Thanks to Mike for posting his PCR lab report where you can clearly see that the LLOQ is stated as 15.
Sir, I don’t understand why you can’t grasp the point that this information should be on a PCR lab report.By starting this thread DT has Again tried to confuse everyone hoping to make them as
anxiety ridden as he is.Sir. Maybe you should think about who is the one who is actually confused and anxiety ridden in this scenario?
dt
Hi Sir,
Have you just caught up with this conversation? – a day late and a dollar short, as they say.
Maybe get yourself into the ballpark first, then we’ll have something to talk about.
dtOK, now I got a code for the test (QPCR) so time to hit the email … and the phone if I really have to (sigh)
dtI have now found this on The Doctor’s Lab website under “H” but I can’t find any more info on it, ie. the LLOQ.
http://www.tdlpathology.com/test-information/a-z-test-list/h
Please anybody, have a go. Your search skills may be better than mine.Hepatitis C Quantification (Viral Load)
Code Sample Reqs Turnaround
QPCR A 5 daysAt least they do a quantification test and the turnaround is fast. I was beginning to fear that they didn’t, and Medichecks had made a really big blunder and got mixed up with the qualitative test. Still seeking an LLOQ though. That there is one is not in doubt. Getting it ….. something else.
dtSplitdog, I’m in agreement with everything you just explained.
dtHere’s the thing –
I did the PCR test via Medichecks, one of the private blood test services that does not require you to have a doctor’s request. They advertise the test as an HCV QUANTITATIVE test. Now on looking at The Doctors Lab website found by isaing4, all I can find is the QUALITATIVE PCR test.
So ideally, and for the sake of LG and those with the same requirements, I still want to know if Medichecks is simply advertising their test wrongly, or if there is also a QUANTITATIVE test done by The Doctor’s Lab that isn’t showing up on their website? I hate to phone and get a jobsworth on the line. Just too frustrating.
One thing for sure – it’s not OK to pay for a QUANTITATIVE PCR test, and the one that is run is QUALITATIVE. The figures that isaing4 found should not apply to the test that I ordered.
My report from Medichecks says quite clearly that it is QUANTITATIVE.Watch this space ………
dtisaing4 –
What a star! Yes, that’s the lab and it looks like you found the relevant info. I still need to digest it but –
Confirmatory Diagnostic Qualitative PCR
15 HCV RNA IU/ml to 6.90E+07 IU/mlWhich means that virus can be seen down to 15, although that’s qualitative, not quantitative. That’s good enough for my reading of UND. I know where I am with that. But what about LG? Can you see any info about the quantitative number? I mean, is it going to be able to distinguish between 150, 75, 25, …..
Thanks for this
dt -
AuthorPosts