| Pages:
1
2 |
Pyro_cat
Hazard to Others
Posts: 243
Registered: 30-4-2018
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Hydroxychloroquine, could an amateur make this stuff ?
I just saw on the news about censorship of some doctors for promoting this stuff. The politics lately are so insane.
I watched the video, I don't know what to think. The fact that it was censored actually gave it more credibility somewhat.
Screw politics, this is a science forum. My question is could an amateur make this stuff ?
[Edited on 30-7-2020 by Pyro_cat]
|
|
|
unionised
International Hazard
Posts: 5102
Registered: 1-11-2003
Location: UK
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by Pyro_cat  |
I just saw on the news about censorship of some doctors for promoting this stuff. The politics lately are so insane.
I watched the video, I don't know what to think. The fact that it was censored actually gave it more credibility somewhat.
[Edited on 30-7-2020 by Pyro_cat] |
Why would you bother?
As you say, this is a science forum, and the science is quite clear; the stuff does not work as a treatment for covid.
A bunch or extremists was saying that people should take it- but they aren't saying that because it works; they are just trying to make it look as if
there's a "conspiracy of silence". If people think the science isn't clear then they won't blame the politicians for not following it.
It was censored because it was false and dangerous.
|
|
|
Pyro_cat
Hazard to Others
Posts: 243
Registered: 30-4-2018
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
"It was censored because it was false and dangerous."
Censorship is dangerous too.
I think instead of censorship they should have been overwhelmingly called out on their bull.
Kind of how science is done. Like those flat earthers, like no look at the evidence we live on a globe dummies.
|
|
|
JnPS
Hazard to Self
Posts: 90
Registered: 29-7-2016
Location: PA, USA
Member Is Offline
Mood: Umpolung
|
|
Making the 7-chloroquinoline would be a project in its own right but probably feasible via a skraup reaction and then chlorinating. I'm not sure how
you would direct the aromatic chlorination though. There might be a different reagent combination to form the quinoline ring with the chlorine all at
once.
I'd have to give more thought on attaching that side functionality but I have class to get to.
It would "probably" be do-able with enough thought & effort but like unionised said, why bother? Especially since anything made in an amateur
setting would be moronic to try to use as a home-brewed medication even if there was science to back up its effectiveness.
|
|
|
Fyndium
International Hazard
Posts: 1192
Registered: 12-7-2020
Location: Not in USA
Member Is Offline
|
|
As a project? Possibly.
As a medicine for the C? Nope.
Home-brewed medication, if synthesized correctly and analyzed, would not be an issue, if it were effective for the purpose and alternative scenario
would be a deterioration of health. For example, in USA and many other undeveloped countries where access to healthcare is limited and highly
capitalized, this would be a scenario and there are actual start-ups that attempt to find a way to produce cheap insulin to combat the monopoly. In
Europe, where taxpayers will pay the bill for(everything), not so.
|
|
|
ShotBored
Hazard to Others
Posts: 124
Registered: 19-5-2017
Location: Germany
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Pyro_cat | "It was censored because it was false and dangerous."
Censorship is dangerous too.
I think instead of censorship they should have been overwhelmingly called out on their bull.
Kind of how science is done. Like those flat earthers, like no look at the evidence we live on a globe dummies.
|
@unionised agree with everything you say
@Pyro_cat But it has been called out overwhelmingly. Because a handful of rogue doctors are claiming it works somehow outweighs the thousands of
doctors that are saying it doesn't, not to mention the studies that show non-efficacy in treatment with it against Covid-19?
The heart of the issue in my opinion lies with the fact that many elements are actively working at discrediting scientific institutions around the
world and fueling populist, anti-intellectual sentiment. It doesn't matter how much evidence is presented to these peoples, they simply refuse to
alter their preconceptions. Doesn't it seem fishy to you that many well-established and well supported topics, such as climate change, vaccination,
legitimacy of covid and/or its treatments, are seemingly always under attack by the same groups of people?
As far as the science goes, there is a few patents out there that detail the synthesis. Typically starts with 4,7-dichlorquinoline and
N'-ethyl-N'-β-hydroxyethyl-1,4-pentadiamine. React with KI in phenol for 18 hours and attach a phosphate. Yield is only 35% though and reagents would
seem difficult to get.
https://patents.google.com/patent/WO2010027150A2/en
|
|
|
Chemi Pharma
Hazard to Others
Posts: 349
Registered: 5-5-2016
Location: Latin America
Member Is Offline
Mood: Quarantined
|
|
I'm not a flat earther, but I think that there is a lot of misunderstanding around hydroxychloroquine usage. To date, I have not seen a serious study
that was even conclusive about this drug not working for covid-19.
Some scientists have conducted experiments with dosages below the ideal and others above it, causing the famous side effects such as cardiac
arrhythmia that the media loves to report. It appears that this has become more of a political clash between Donald Trump supporters and his
opponents. Serious mistake mixing politics with science.
I do not like the President of my country too and he supports the use of hydroxychloroquine, but I must admit that there is a certain truth in
admitting that its use in conjunction with azithromycin seems to be able to prevent the sequestration of hemoglobin iron ions by proteins of the
virus, and prevent the development of opportunistic pneumonia, attenuating the respiratory insufficiency and alleviating the respiratory failure.
Not that it prevents infection or fights the virus. I do not believe that either, but look, since 2005 there have been respected studies published in
the world journal of virology attesting to the promising results of its use against the family of the sars-cov virus. I am attaching such a study
below.
As for its synthesis from raw chemical material, I am also attaching a very interesting and practical project for those brave who wish to venture into
this synthesis.
Attachment: Chloroquine as an inibitor of SARS-COV infections.PDF (898kB)
This file has been downloaded 315 times
Attachment: Chloroquine synthesis.PDF (4.2MB)
This file has been downloaded 375 times
|
|
|
Eddie Current
Hazard to Self
Posts: 78
Registered: 25-7-2018
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Chemi Pharma | I'm not a flat earther, but I think that there is a lot of misunderstanding around hydroxychloroquine usage. To date, I have not seen a serious study
that was even conclusive about this drug not working for covid-19.
Some scientists have conducted experiments with dosages below the ideal and others above it, causing the famous side effects such as cardiac
arrhythmia that the media loves to report. It appears that this has become more of a political clash between Donald Trump supporters and his
opponents. Serious mistake mixing politics with science.
I do not like the President of my country too and he supports the use of hydroxychloroquine, but I must admit that there is a certain truth in
admitting that its use in conjunction with azithromycin seems to be able to prevent the sequestration of hemoglobin iron ions by proteins of the
virus, and prevent the development of opportunistic pneumonia, attenuating the respiratory insufficiency and alleviating the respiratory failure.
Not that it prevents infection or fights the virus. I do not believe that either, but look, since 2005 there have been respected studies published in
the world journal of virology attesting to the promising results of its use against the family of the sars-cov virus. I am attaching such a study
below.
As for its synthesis from raw chemical material, I am also attaching a very interesting and practical project for those brave who wish to venture into
this synthesis.
|
I agree, politics and corporate interests have commandeered the discussion as there's billions of dollars at stake.
|
|
|
Chemi Pharma
Hazard to Others
Posts: 349
Registered: 5-5-2016
Location: Latin America
Member Is Offline
Mood: Quarantined
|
|
@Eddie, thank you for your support.
By the way, the last document that I've attached is about the synthesis of the intermediate 4,7 dichloroquinoline. I am attaching now the second part
that deals with the synthesis of the other intermediate molecule, 5-(ethyl(2-hydroxyethyl)amino)pentan-2-one, it's oxime and amine, that reacts with
the first resulting in the final hydroxychloroquine compound.
Attachment: Chloroquine from 4,7-dichloro quinoline- step2.PDF (371kB)
This file has been downloaded 312 times
|
|
|
ShotBored
Hazard to Others
Posts: 124
Registered: 19-5-2017
Location: Germany
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Chemi Pharma | I'm not a flat earther, but I think that there is a lot of misunderstanding around hydroxychloroquine usage. To date, I have not seen a serious study
that was even conclusive about this drug not working for covid-19.
Some scientists have conducted experiments with dosages below the ideal and others above it, causing the famous side effects such as cardiac
arrhythmia that the media loves to report. It appears that this has become more of a political clash between Donald Trump supporters and his
opponents. Serious mistake mixing politics with science.
I do not like the President of my country too and he supports the use of hydroxychloroquine, but I must admit that there is a certain truth in
admitting that its use in conjunction with azithromycin seems to be able to prevent the sequestration of hemoglobin iron ions by proteins of the
virus, and prevent the development of opportunistic pneumonia, attenuating the respiratory insufficiency and alleviating the respiratory failure.
Not that it prevents infection or fights the virus. I do not believe that either, but look, since 2005 there have been respected studies published in
the world journal of virology attesting to the promising results of its use against the family of the sars-cov virus. I am attaching such a study
below.
As for its synthesis from raw chemical material, I am also attaching a very interesting and practical project for those brave who wish to venture into
this synthesis.
|
I guess the nitpicky scientist in me would argue that this study was conducted in 2005 and suggested the possibility of using chloroquines
for prevention. Here are three sources that have come out very recently that kind of negate the popular beliefs surrounding its use (I'm not gonna
include that Lancet paper since it's been retracted)
Press Release from research group in UK regarding Hydroxychloroquinine use in infected patients. Findings: "No clinical benefit from use of
hydroxychloroquinine in hospitalised patients with COVID-19" (https://www.recoverytrial.net/files/hcq-recovery-statement-0...)
University of Minnesota paper about whether hydroxychloroquinine is an effective Covid-19 chemoprophylactic. Findings: no statistical difference in
infection rates between placebo and test groups (https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2016638)
Meta-Study using 24 different studies about hydroxychloroquinine to treat or prevent Covid-19. Findings: "insufficient and often conflicting evidence
on the benefits and harms of using hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine to treat COVID-19"
|
|
|
ShotBored
Hazard to Others
Posts: 124
Registered: 19-5-2017
Location: Germany
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
oops forgot to link final paper: https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-2496
|
|
|
unionised
International Hazard
Posts: 5102
Registered: 1-11-2003
Location: UK
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Pyro_cat |
I think instead of censorship they should have been overwhelmingly called out on their bull.
Kind of how science is done. Like those flat earthers, like no look at the evidence we live on a globe dummies.
|
Have you not noticed?
That didn't work. The flat Earthers are still here.
Now, it hardly matters if someone thinks (or claims to think) that the world is flat.
But ingesting poisonous chemicals in the forlorn hope of treating a disease will kill people.
|
|
|
unionised
International Hazard
Posts: 5102
Registered: 1-11-2003
Location: UK
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
How hard did you look?
This was headline news.
https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/04-07-2020-who-disconti...
And it says "These interim trial results show that hydroxychloroquine and lopinavir/ritonavir produce little or no reduction in the mortality of
hospitalized COVID-19 patients when compared to standard of care."
|
|
|
Eddie Current
Hazard to Self
Posts: 78
Registered: 25-7-2018
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by ShotBored |
Meta-Study using 24 different studies about hydroxychloroquinine to treat or prevent Covid-19. Findings: "insufficient and often conflicting
evidence on the benefits and harms of using hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine to treat COVID-19" |
This basically supports my premise.
I wouldn't take anything in the mainstream media or politicized organizations like the WHO that seriously. Go to the science literature for your
information.
Folks who post on a forum like this should already know better.
Whilst on this topic, Remdesivir is a very clever molecule worthy of closer examination, and I am particularly impressed with the insertion design
strategy (click on the numbers in the interactive image):
https://www.asbmb.org/asbmb-today/science/031720/what-makes-...
|
|
|
Morgan
International Hazard
Posts: 1660
Registered: 28-12-2010
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
You wonder how Stella Immanuel could be a doctor or how anyone would use her for a reference.
https://www.inquirer.com/opinion/stella-immanuel-trump-covid...
[Edited on 31-7-2020 by Morgan]
|
|
|
clearly_not_atara
International Hazard
Posts: 2691
Registered: 3-11-2013
Member Is Offline
Mood: Big
|
|
I would like to highlight something regarding the "scientists" who are pushing this hydroxychloroquine "prophylactic antiviral" hypothesis.
Here's Harvey Risch, the Yale professor who wrote an article in Newsweek about hydroxychloroquine. As evidenced by the fact that A: he is
still a professor at Yale and B: he is allowed to publish in Newsweek we conclude that C: he is not being censored. The date of the
Newsweek article is July 23.
https://www.newsweek.com/key-defeating-covid-19-already-exis...
You will notice in the article that he references a paper which makes a number of drastic claims about hydroxychloroquine. He references those claims
in the article; for example: "These seven studies include: an additional 400 high-risk patients treated by Dr. Vladimir Zelenko, with zero
deaths..."
That study is indeed referenced in the paper, published May 27:
http://www.breggin.com/coronavirus/HCQ/Risch2020.pdf
"Symptomatic patients presenting to Dr. Zelenko were treated with five days of HCQ+AZ+zinc sulfate if they were considered high-risk, as evidenced
by one or moreof: age 60 years or older; high-risk comorbidities; body-mass index>30; mild shortness of breath at presentation. Patients were
considered to have Covid-19 based on clinical grounds and started treatment as soon as possible following symptom onset, rather than delaying for test
results before starting treatment. Of the 1450 patients, 1045 were classified as low-risk and sent home to recuperate without active medications. No
deaths or hospitalizations occurred among them. Of the remaining 405 treated with the combined regimen, 6were ultimately hospitalized and 2
died. No cardiac arrhythmias were noted in these 405 patients."
You will immediately notice the first problem: actually, there were two deaths. When Prof. Risch is writing in a medical journal, he gets the number
of deaths right. In Newsweek, he fudges.
The other problem was highlighted by Vincent Fleury of the University of Paris, in his comment on the paper, published in the same journal on
July 20:
https://academic.oup.com/aje/article/doi/10.1093/aje/kwaa155... (PDF is free!)
"In Dr. Zelenko’s cohort, the situation is less clear becauseas far as we know, the patients were not actually
tested..."
We also know that Risch read Fleury's comment, because he also published a Response to the comment, included in the same issue on July
20:
https://academic.oup.com/aje/article/doi/10.1093/aje/kwaa156... (PDF is free!)
You will notice particularly that Zelenko's cohort is not mentioned in Risch's response to Fleury that was published in the medical journals. This is
because he knows he doesn't have a leg to stand on. When Risch is talking to his colleagues who can call him on his bullshit, he knows exactly when to
stop talking.
But when he's writing in Newsweek, Risch is happy to peddle the same old bullshit that he got called on last month. He doesn't care -- he
wants to be famous. There are many other such incongruities between the Newsweek article and the scientific record.
That is who is pushing hydroxychloroquine.
[Edited on 04-20-1969 by clearly_not_atara]
|
|
|
unionised
International Hazard
Posts: 5102
Registered: 1-11-2003
Location: UK
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
If you think the WHO is "politicised" try "America's Frontline Doctors " who are sponsored by the Tea Party movement.
That's what started this thread.
Meanwhile, Trump is defunding WHO because they refuse to do his bidding.
If they did what a politician told them to, that would actually be political.
They aren't.
|
|
|
Chemi Pharma
Hazard to Others
Posts: 349
Registered: 5-5-2016
Location: Latin America
Member Is Offline
Mood: Quarantined
|
|
Despite the contrary opinion of some members, I have already imported the USP grade inputs and made medicinal pills of hydroxychloroquine sulfate and
azithromycin, which are properly packaged and kept in a bottle inside the refrigerator.
I haven't caught covid-19 yet and I hope not to because I am quarantined at home and my 23 years old son is the one who goes out shopping. However, if
I or someone in my family gets it, before a vaccine has been developed, I already have the correct dosages based on several studies demonized by some
members: 450mg of hydroxychloroquine sulfate and 500mg of azithromycin daily from the onset of the first symptoms of fever.
Against cardiac arrhythmia, which I do not believe occurs with this dosage, the use of a beta blocker such as propanolol is enough.
[Edited on 31-7-2020 by Chemi Pharma]
|
|
|
Eddie Current
Hazard to Self
Posts: 78
Registered: 25-7-2018
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by unionised |
If you think the WHO is "politicised" try "America's Frontline Doctors " who are sponsored by the Tea Party movement.
That's what started this thread.
Meanwhile, Trump is defunding WHO because they refuse to do his bidding.
If they did what a politician told them to, that would actually be political.
They aren't.
|
Bureaucratic (WHO) and corporate swine.
I have no time for any of them.
|
|
|
clearly_not_atara
International Hazard
Posts: 2691
Registered: 3-11-2013
Member Is Offline
Mood: Big
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by unionised |
And it says "These interim trial results show that hydroxychloroquine and lopinavir/ritonavir produce little or no reduction in the mortality of
hospitalized COVID-19 patients when compared to standard of care." |
I think these are more convincing:
"Baseline use of hydroxychloroquine in systemic lupus erythematosus does not preclude SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe COVID-19"
A retrospective analysis of patients taking HCQ for SLE who later developed COVID-19. Shows, at the very least, that any suggestion that HCQ is a
"cure" is absurd. Despite being on HCQ for the entire duration of infection, these patients still developed COVID-19, in some cases severe
infections.
These studies attempt to assess the actual concentration of hydroxychloroquine in plasma of COVID-19 patients treated with the drug. We find similar
conclusions:
"Effect of Systemic Inflammatory Response to SARS-CoV-2 on Lopinavir and Hydroxychloroquine Plasma Concentrations"
"HCQ was shown to have a low RLTEC(i.e.,0.11–0.34), indicating that HCQ levels achieved in vivodo not result in
adequate clinical activity against SARS-CoV-2(33)."
and here's (33):
"Connecting hydroxychloroquine in vitro antiviral activity to in vivo concentration for prediction of antiviral effect: a critical step in treating
COVID-19 patients"
"As a result, the ratio between in vivo intracellular concentration and EC50_intracellular would still be low, suggesting low potential for in
vivo antiviral activityat doses that would not be rate-limiting from the standpoint of toxicity."
In other words, hydroxychloroquine does not reach sufficient in vivo concentration to replicate the antiviral effects seen in vitro
at levels which are safe for human dosing.
Favipiravir has some evidence of efficacy. Remdesivir has some evidence of efficacy. Dexamethasone has excellent evidence of efficacy. But conspiracy
theories are more fun, which is our new standard for "true".
[Edited on 31-7-2020 by clearly_not_atara]
[Edited on 04-20-1969 by clearly_not_atara]
|
|
|
macckone
International Hazard
Posts: 2159
Registered: 1-3-2013
Location: Over a mile high
Member Is Offline
Mood: Electrical
|
|
Dexamethasone and supportive therapy is currently the best treatment.
It isn't ideal because you are giving an immuno-suppresant to someone with a raging infection.
Remdesivir is less effective than Dexamethasone and causes liver damage (degree of damage varies significantly by patient).
Hydroxychloroquine has had a number of double blind studies that didn't show it to be an effective treatment.
There are retrospective studies and unblinded studies where a variety of other medications are used as well that are far from scientific.
The actual blinded studies don't indicate effectiveness of HCQ or azithromycin
The reason it gained traction at the beginning is because of politics not science.
And the reason for the political push was the financial interests of the politicians.
And as clearly_not_atara stated, humans can't take the levels of HCQ that were shown effective in a petri dish.
All of that said azithromycin is useful and necessary in covid patients to prevent secondary infections while on a ventilator.
It is the gold standard for that purpose, so it is incorrect to say azithromycin doesn't save lives but studies have shown
azithromycin is less effective in covid patients than it should be. It doesn't improve outcomes as well as it does in the flu and other respiratory
viruses requiring ventilators. This indicates the possibility that Covid is either doing something funky to the T-Cells or otherwise neutralizing
azithromycin. Indications are that covid is messing with the immune system directly.
|
|
|
Eddie Current
Hazard to Self
Posts: 78
Registered: 25-7-2018
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by macckone | Dexamethasone and supportive therapy is currently the best treatment.
It isn't ideal because you are giving an immuno-suppresant to someone with a raging infection.
Remdesivir is less effective than Dexamethasone and causes liver damage (degree of damage varies significantly by patient).
Hydroxychloroquine has had a number of double blind studies that didn't show it to be an effective treatment.
There are retrospective studies and unblinded studies where a variety of other medications are used as well that are far from scientific.
The actual blinded studies don't indicate effectiveness of HCQ or azithromycin
The reason it gained traction at the beginning is because of politics not science.
And the reason for the political push was the financial interests of the politicians.
And as clearly_not_atara stated, humans can't take the levels of HCQ that were shown effective in a petri dish.
All of that said azithromycin is useful and necessary in covid patients to prevent secondary infections while on a ventilator.
It is the gold standard for that purpose, so it is incorrect to say azithromycin doesn't save lives but studies have shown
azithromycin is less effective in covid patients than it should be. It doesn't improve outcomes as well as it does in the flu and other respiratory
viruses requiring ventilators. This indicates the possibility that Covid is either doing something funky to the T-Cells or otherwise neutralizing
azithromycin. Indications are that covid is messing with the immune system directly. |
ACE-2 is expressed throughout most of the body and therefore the differing complexities of the immune system make identification of the underlying
pathology very difficult.
|
|
|
Tsjerk
International Hazard
Posts: 3022
Registered: 20-4-2005
Location: Netherlands
Member Is Offline
Mood: Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Eddie Current |
ACE-2 is expressed throughout most of the body and therefore the differing complexities of the immune system make identification of the underlying
pathology very difficult.
|
There probably isn't a single disease of which the complete pathology is easy to identify. What are you trying to say?
[Edited on 3-8-2020 by Tsjerk]
|
|
|
Eddie Current
Hazard to Self
Posts: 78
Registered: 25-7-2018
Member Is Offline
|
|
I'm stating that the viruses binding affinity for ACE-2 and the expression of the enzyme throughout the body most likely contributes to the widely
varying pathological outcomes.
|
|
|
ShotBored
Hazard to Others
Posts: 124
Registered: 19-5-2017
Location: Germany
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Eddie Current | | I'm stating that the viruses binding affinity for ACE-2 and the expression of the enzyme throughout the body most likely contributes to the widely
varying pathological outcomes. |
@Eddie Current you ignored my other articles when claiming that that supports your premise. The articles together are to be taken as a array of
high-profile studies that have shown that hydroxychloroquinine (HCQ) is ineffective, that studies that support it's use are often conflicting and full
of shitty science. @clearly_not_atara's other links further drive this point home.
The takeaway: good science trumps bad science. That's why we know that modern vaccines containing mercurous compounds do not cause mercury poisoning.
And it's why we know that HCQ does not treat or prevent Covid-19. Almost every "doctor" that is claiming that HCQ is effective has some level of
quackery or controversy involved in their credentials or questions about their morality.
To me, i think they are mostly charlatans that are trying to increase their public presence with neo-populists for economic gain. Lotta Andrew
Wakefield types hanging around the Trump office nowadays.
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
2 |
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
