Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy resolves long covid in 24 patients

researchgate.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 234 posts

Re: Antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy resolves long covid in 24 patients

#211

Post by dpark »

surgeryres wrote: post #210
dpark wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. I would love some actually citations rather than a hand-wavey claim that sounds like conspiracy theory. This sounds like you’re talking about hydroxychloroquine. 2. None of this matters to the claim I addressed. Long COVID it’s not something that would be treated in an ICU. It’s also not something that even had a name “when COVID hit”.

The problem the paper is addressing is fibrin micro clots, which occurs in long Covid. This also occurs in acute Covid. The treatment is similar - anti coagulation. We (doctors) knew this from the beginning (1). Chill out bubba. (1) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7378457/ Attached article was written during initial outbreak

I find this to be such a bizarre statement. “What causes long COVID?” has been a common question for a year and a half now. Someone publishes results indicating it might be X and treatable with Y and we get a couple of people chiming in with “yeah, we knew that already”.

You knew the solution to long COVID and just kept it quiet? The NIH was publishing guidance to give anticoagulants to hospitalized acute COVID patients but just neglected to tell people the cure to long COVID?

I’ve got no dispute that you knew to give hospitalized patients anticoagulants early on. My statement is that this is a different thing than knowing to treat long COVID with a related protocol. This study hasn’t even been published yet, has it? This is a preprint we’re discussing. Have there been a bunch of other studies showing this is a viable treatment I’m unaware of (this is certainly possible)? Or is this new data?

Re: Antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy resolves long covid in 24 patients

#212

Post by ck2 »

beagle3 wrote: post #131
ck2 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The clotting in covid is fibrin based not platelet. If aspirin did anything for covid you'd be seeing it on the news every single day for the past two years.

Budedenide was shown to help significantly if given early. So does fluvoxamine. And sufficient vitamin D3 level seems to work well as a prophylactic. And yet there’s hardly any mention of them, let alone “everyday”.

If you read only positive analysis of those supplements/drugs, they always seem positive. Except they aren't doing what you think because you don't hear when they don't work.

https://www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/tables/fluvox...

     "No difference between arms in time to symptom resolution"

     "Fluvoxamine did not impact time to symptom resolution"

Re: Antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy resolves long covid in 24 patients

#213

Post by surgeryres »

dpark wrote: post #211
surgeryres wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem the paper is addressing is fibrin micro clots, which occurs in long Covid. This also occurs in acute Covid. The treatment is similar - anti coagulation. We (doctors) knew this from the beginning (1). Chill out bubba. (1) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7378457/ Attached article was written during initial outbreak

I find this to be such a bizarre statement. “What causes long COVID?” has been a common question for a year and a half now. Someone publishes results indicating it might be X and treatable with Y and we get a couple of people chiming in with “yeah, we knew that already”. You knew the solution to long COVID and just kept it quiet? The NIH was publishing guidance to give anticoagulants to hospitalized acute COVID patie…

All your question marks makes brain hurt.

This study is not establishing a new treatment protocol by any means. It’s also a tiny number of people.

This study raises the question maybe we should design bigger trials to investigate treating long COVID with blood thinners.

Re: Antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy resolves long covid in 24 patients

#214

Post by dpark »

surgeryres wrote: post #213
dpark wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find this to be such a bizarre statement. “What causes long COVID?” has been a common question for a year and a half now. Someone publishes results indicating it might be X and treatable with Y and we get a couple of people chiming in with “yeah, we knew that already”. You knew the solution to long COVID and just kept it quiet? The NIH was publishing guidance to give anticoagulants to hospitalized acute COVID patie…

All your question marks makes brain hurt. This study is not establishing a new treatment protocol by any means. It’s also a tiny number of people. This study raises the question maybe we should design bigger trials to investigate treating long COVID with blood thinners.

> This study is not establishing a new treatment protocol by any means.

So this was a known treatment protocol? That’s interesting. I hadn’t heard much about long COVID that wasn’t “we have no real idea”.

Re: Antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy resolves long covid in 24 patients

#215

Post by smileybarry »

tasogare wrote: post #184
wantsanagent wrote: post #44

This is a big hammer. Please note this section: "A proton pump inhibitor (PPI) pantoprazole 40 mg/day was also prescribed for gastric protection. Such a regime must only be followed under strict and qualified medical guidance to obviate any dangers, especially haemorrhagic bleeding, and of the therapy as a whole." Induced hemophilia is no joke.

> Induced hemophilia is no joke. Note that this is one of the possible side effect mentionned in Pfizer documentation of their covid vaccine, reported in article research articles like [1], and it doesn't seem to bother too much people. [1] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33783953/

I don't see where the research article mentions a link to Pfizer (i.e.: acknowledgement, confirmed side effect, etc.) and googling the terms + "pfizer" brings up no official documentation about it.

Re: Antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy resolves long covid in 24 patients

#216

Post by manwe150 »

phkahler wrote: post #27
deelowe wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It feels to me that the medical community at large looks almost exclusively at data regarding severe cases. I'm certainly no medical expert but it seems reasonable to me that the treatments for someone who is literally dying from COVID could be completely orthogonal from those who are in the early stages of the infection. My understanding of severe cases is that the body is no longer or not only fighting the virus bu…

>> It feels to me that the medical community at large looks almost exclusively at data regarding severe cases. I'm certainly no medical expert but it seems reasonable to me that the treatments for someone who is literally dying from COVID could be completely orthogonal from those who are in the early stages of the infection. This seems to be a problem with every account of "treatment X doesn't work". They wait until…

The challenge is that you don’t necessary want to be often taking lots of drugs “just in case,” since they can have their own long-term issues (just browse the other comments here for discussion).

Also, adverse-drug interactions is potentially a a major killer already in the US, sometimes from doctors making mistakes, and often from people using OTC drugs outside of their safe regime.

So then, we might wait until it is clear that intervention is necessary, but now the intervention also probably needs to be much more aggressive.

And besides, we do have a pretty good preventative/protective option already in vaccines. It is only when breakthrough cases lead to hospitalization that we then need to pull out the backup strategies, otherwise, we’ve seen that statistically our primed immune systems are usually pretty good at dealing with it on their own.

Re: Antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy resolves long covid in 24 patients

#217

Post by sizzle »

jonathan-adly wrote: post #205
allturtles wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe. Here's a skeptical view: "Despite a large number of studies, the overall quality of evidence for adverse effects of long-term use of PPIs is low to very low." [0] [0]: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6463334/

10 years ago, as a young post-grad I spent a ridiculous amount of hours analyzing ALL the published peer-reviewed literature on the pros/cons of PPI prophylaxis for CVD patients and published my results in a peer reviewed article. I am literally the expert in that topic lol. Here is a nice paper[0] by Adly (me!), et al. I am biased, but I find it to be very comprehensive (and an excellent cure for insomnia!) [0]: htt…

Awesome, what else can you teach us about PPI that isn’t mainstream knowledge

Re: Antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy resolves long covid in 24 patients

#218

Post by sizzle »

surgeryres wrote: post #194

Very interesting study. I am an expert in the field of clotting mechanics (US NIH funded research / vascular surgery fellow). Not sure why they chose TEG to monitor coagulation status - it does not reflect well changes from any of the drugs used in the study. It would be interesting to see the results broken down by gender - females respond much differently to aspirin and have less of a survival benefit than males (d…

I always take aspirin before flights to avoid DVT due to chronic venous insufficiency and ankle swelling.

Do you recommend aspirin to thin blood for flights where I am sitting with legs bent and pressure from the seat underneath the leg pressing into the skin contributing to clotting?

Re: Antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy resolves long covid in 24 patients

#219

Post by yosame »

swader999 wrote: post #155
jrussino wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I found Scott Alexander's review to be very informative: https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/ivermectin-much-more-t...

I read all that a while back. It is good and about all you can get out of it is to conclude that ivermectin needs more study. Unfortunately its off patent and won't get much $$$ thrown at it. Its getting hard to ignore the growing mass of people that have just said, hey, this is obviously safe and I'll just try it. And holy sh-t it worked! (that's my story...).

If ivermectin actually worked, pharma companies would just make a new version with a slightly different structure and patent/sell that formula instead.

Re: Antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy resolves long covid in 24 patients

#220

Post by anonfornoreason »

TechBro8615 wrote: post #91
chaosmachine wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've never had COVID but I did get the mRNA vaccines + booster. > my heart goes into light arrhythmia all too frequently. It used to be maybe once or twice a year I'd notice 1-3 seconds of "off-beat" heart pattern. All of of a sudden it's a few times a week. I'm also getting older (entering mid 30's now) This is my situation exactly, starting a few weeks after getting my second booster (Moderna). I've read enough a…

> Got my third booster recently Out of curiosity, if you noticed these negative side-effects affecting the health of your heart after the second shot, why did you choose to proceed to get a third shot?

Not the parent poster, but I stopped after first Pfizer dose due to chest pain that lasted for three weeks. My entire family and all my coworkers berated me to get the second dose. Not saying parents friends/family did that to them, but there is a subset of people that don’t believe you should opt out of the vaccine if you have adverse reactions.

Lesson learned in honestly answering “are you fully vaccinated”. I still get told I should do it 8 months later.

Post reply on HN