Tag Archives: PAXLOVID

Is Lianhua Qingwen More Effective Than Paxlovid?!

Is Lianhua Qingwen More Effective Than Paxlovid?!

Is the Chinese herbal medicine Lianhua Qingwen more effective than the Pfizer Paxlovid antiviral combination?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Lianhua Qingwen Is More Effective Than Paxlovid!

People are sharing a link to a Bloomberg called “Pfizer’s Covid Pill Doesn’t Work For Healthier Patients, Will Focus On Those With higher Risk”, together with this message :

Pfizer scams the world with US$22 billion in sales of Paxlovid to treat Covid.
Now finds that Paxlovid does not work and may cause rebound of disease.
Malaysia has ordered 200,000 doses at a cost of RM500 million –
RM2,500 per dose compared to a few bucks for China’s effective Lian Hwa pills.

 

Truth : Paxlovid Is More Effective Than Lianhua Qingwen!

This is yet another example of FAKE NEWS created by the Chinese 50 Cent Army (wumao, 五毛) as part of their campaign to support Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM), and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : Paxlovid Is Combination Of Two Antiviral Drugs

Pfizer PAXLOVID is an antiviral treatment that consists of two protease inhibitors :

  • two 150 mg tablets of Nirmatrelvir (the new protease inhibitor developed by Pfizer)
  • one 100 mg tablet of Ritonavir (an old antiviral approved in 1996)

Protease inhibitors work by binding to proteolytic enzymes used by the SARS-CoV-2 virus to replicate. This prevents the virus from replicating in the infected cells, stopping the infection and preventing transmission.

Drug combinations like this offer a synergistic effect, above and beyond their individual abilities. In this combination, ritonavir helps to slow down the breakdown of nirmatrelvir, allowing it to remain in the body for a longer period at higher concentrations.

Fact #2 : Paxlovid Was Proven To Work Against COVID-19

Unlike Lianhua Qingwen, Paxlovid underwent and passed an actual randomised double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial.

In the EPIC-HR clinical trial, Paxlovid was shown to reduce hospitalisation or death from COVID-19 by 88%, compared to placebo.

That statistically significant result was why the US FDA issued an Emergency Use Authorisation (EUA) for Paxlovid on December 22, 2021.

The EUA allows Paxlovid to be used for the treatment of mild-to-moderate COVID-19 in adults and children 12 years and older, who are at high risk of developing severe COVID-19.

Read more : Did Cornell Name Ivermectin Most Effective Drug vs. Omicron?

Fact #3 : Paxlovid EPIC-HR Trial Involved High-Risk Patients

I should point out that the EPIC-HR trial involved adults who have a high risk of developing severe COVID-19 :

  • 18 years and older with a risk factor for developing severe COVID-19, or
  • 60 years and older, regardless of chronic medical conditions

All these patients also were not vaccinated against COVID-19, which puts them at higher risk of developing severe COVID-19.

Fact #4 : Paxlovid Not Effective In Normal Risk Patients

After successfully proving that Paxlovid worked for patients who are at high risk of developing severe COVID-19, Pfizer tested it on “standard risk patients”.

Their study showed a 51% relative risk reduction of developing severe COVID-19, which was not statistically significant.

That was why Pfizer halted further enrolment in its Paxlovid trial for “standard risk patients”, which are people who do not have co-morbidities – health conditions that put them at risk of developing severe COVID-19.

This “failure” actually shows the value of running clinical tests, before approving any drug. Unlike Paxlovid though, Lianhua Qingwen did not undergo any clinical trial to prove that it can treat or prevent COVID-19.

Fact #5 : Lianhua Qingwen Not Proven To Work Against COVID-19

Lianhua Qingwen (连花清瘟) has been heavily promoted by the Chinese government and the Chinese 50 Cent Army (wumao, 五毛), leading to massive sales in the global Chinese diaspora.

It then gained oversized importance when both Hong Kong and Shanghai distributed boxes of these capsules to help stave off the surge of COVID-19 in both cities.

Yet, the mass distribution of Lianhua Qingwen has done nothing to stop the spread of COVID-19 in both cities.

That’s because, unlike Paxlovid, there never was any evidence that Lianhua Qingwen can treat or prevent COVID-19.

Its main “call to fame” was a small Chinese study conducted early during the pandemic, which showed that it had only a modest effect on symptom recovery :

  • time to recover from fever : 2 days, instead of 3 days
  • time to recover from fatigue : 3 days, instead of 6 days
  • time to recover from coughing : 7 days, instead of 10 days

There was NO DIFFERENCE in the viral load, or the risk of developing severe COVID-19.

In other words – Lianhua Qingwen only helped to reduce symptoms, and was no different from taking over-the-counter drugs like paracetamol.

Read more : Did US NCBI Confirm Lianhua Qingwen Treats COVID-19?

Fact #6 : Lianhua Qingwen Should Not Be Taken To Prevent COVID-19

Official Chinese media outlets like CGTN and China Daily have falsely claimed that that Lianhua Qingwen was “proven effective for the treatment of COVID-19” and that it was “approved to treat [COVID-19] virus”.

However, Lianhua Qingwen cannot prevent COVID-19, and should not be taken on a long-term basis to prevent it, due to potential side effects.

The medicine could cause side effects such as nausea, vomiting, diarrhea and rash.

Fang Bangjiang, doctor from Long Hua Hospital of the Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, said that Lianhua Qingwen has complex ingredients and is mainly suitable for COVID-19 patients with mild symptoms of fever and pneumonia but unsuitable for prevention.

Its ingredients will affect the renal system.

Fact #7 : Chinese Official Admits Lianhua Qingwen Cannot Kill Coronavirus

When Chinese Deputy Consul General in Vancouver, Kong Weiwei, was confronted about these claims, he said that people should be “mature enough” to do their own research and understand that Lianhua Qingwen cannot kill the COVID-19 virus :

They’re not babies. We don’t want to be like a nanny telling every one of them that these [Lianhua Qingwen capsules] cannot kill the virus.

Read more : Lianhua Qingwen Finally Tumbles Over Efficacy Concerns!

Fact #8 : Singapore HSA Warns Against Lianhua Qingwen Claims

The Singapore Health Sciences Authority (HSA) continues to warn the public not to believe the many misleading claims made about Lianhua Qingwen’s ability to treat or prevent COVID-19.

To date, there is no scientific evidence from randomised clinical trials to show that any herbal product, including Lianhua Qingwen products, can be used to prevent or treat COVID-19.

All herbal products formulated for common cold and flu, including CPM, should only be used to manage symptoms such as headache, runny or blocked nose, sore throat and cough.

We strongly advise members of the public not to fall prey to unsubstantiated claims or spread unfounded rumours that herbal products can be used to prevent or treat COVID-19.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | Science | Tech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Was Dr. Fauci Found Dead After Catching COVID-19?!

Was Dr. Anthony Fauci found dead in his home, after catching COVID-19?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Dr. Fauci Was Found Dead After Catching COVID-19!

Vancouver Times just posted a story claiming that Dr. Anthony Fauci was found dead in his home, after catching COVID-19!

Dr. Fauci has been found dead in his home after he caught Covid-19. The head of the government’s Covid response had four doses of the vaccine, making his death suspicious. Doctors haven’t ruled out that the vaccines may have contributed to his death.

Fauci was isolating and recovering at home from a case of Covid-19, at first reporting “mild” symptoms. His symptoms suddenly took a turn for the worst, and Fauci was found dead by his wife, who promptly called for paramedics. However, the paramedics arrived too late to save Fauci.

Fauci’s response to the Covid pandemic was seen as “heavy handed.” Many people had called for his resignation, even murder. Steve Bannon suggested on his podcast that Fauci should be decapitated. He was subsequently banned from Twitter and YouTube.

The mainstream media and big tech want to hide the truth. Beat them at their own game by sharing this article!

 

Truth : Dr. Fauci Was NOT Found Dead After Catching COVID-19!

This is yet another example of FAKE NEWS created to generate page views and money from gullible people.

Fact #1 : Vancouver Times Is A Fake News Website

Vancouver Times is a “content aggregator” (copy and paste) website that is known for creating fake news to generate more page views and money.

To look legitimate, they copy and paste news from legitimate news organisations. To drive traffic, they create fake news, sometimes masked as “satire”.

To give themselves a veneer of deniability, they label themselves as a “satire website” in their About Us section.

Vancouver Times is the most trusted source for satire on the West Coast. We write satirical stories about issues that affect conservatives.

Here are some of their fake news that we debunked :

Fact #2 : Dr. Anthony Fauci Only Has Mild COVID-19 Symptoms

Dr. Anthony Fauci tested positive for COVID-19 using a rapid antigen test on June 15, 2022.

After his diagnosis, he isolated himself, and started working from his home, following CDC guidelines for COVID-19. He is currently experiencing only mild symptoms.

Fact #3 : Dr. Anthony Fauci Just Testified At Senate Hearing

Dr. Anthony Fauci was healthy and well, when he sparred with Senator Rand Paul at the Senate HELP hearing on the US federal pandemic response on June 16, 2022.

Together with CDC Director Rochelle Walensky, and FDA Commissioner Robert Califf, he answered questions from other Senators at the hearing which lasted over 2.5 hours.

Fact #4 : Dr. Anthony Fauci Received Four COVID-19 Vaccine Doses

Dr. Fauci was fully-vaccinated, with two booster doses of the COVID-19 vaccine. He is also taking the Pfizer antiviral drug, Paxlovid, as a precaution.

If the COVID-19 vaccine can kill people, as Vancouver Times suggested, Dr. Fauci would have been struck dead by any of the four doses he received.

Fact #5 : COVID-19 Vaccines Are Safe + Effective

Even though Dr. Fauci is 81 years old, the odds of him dying from COVID-19 is extremely remote, because he is not only fully-vaccinated, he was boosted twice.

Because his body’s own immune system has been trained to tackle COVID-19, he will most likely experience mild symptoms that will not become worsen, much less kill him.

Despite what anti-vaccination activists may claim, COVID-19 vaccines have proven to be both safe and effective in preventing severe infections and deaths.

The RECoVaM study, for example, showed that the vast majority of people who died from COVID-19 were either unvaccinated, or partially vaccinated.

Read more : RECoVaM Study Highlights How Well Covid-19 Vaccines Work!

Fact #6 : There Is No Such Thing As A Publication Ban

If Dr. Anthony Fauci was found dead in his home, it would have been worldwide news, even if he didn’t recently test positive for COVID-19.

Vancouver Times likes to use the “media blackout” claim, to explain why you can’t find any reputable media outlet reporting on Dr. Fauci’s purported death from COVID-19 or the vaccine.

That’s utter and complete bullshit. No one – not a judge, not even the FBI – can control the worldwide media, or prevent anyone from writing about such a momentous arrest.

You can also be sure that even if the mainstream media refused to run the story, it would have been gleefully published by bloggers and anti-vaccination websites.

Yet, not a single press / gonzo outlet published their account of this incredible story? That’s because IT NEVER HAPPENED…

Read more : Did US Special Forces Just Arrest Dr. Anthony Fauci?!

Fact #7 : Mainstream Media + Big Tech Would Have Loved The Hype

Vancouver Times is gaslighting you about how mainstream media and Big Tech want to hide the “truth” about Dr. Fauci’s death.

They would all loved it if Dr. Fauci was really found dead in his home. The news would have driven tons of traffic and engagement to their websites / platforms.

In fact, that was precisely why Vancouver Times created the fake story – to drive traffic, for the ad money.

Everything that Vancouver Times publishes should be regarded as FAKE NEWS, until proven otherwise.

Please help us fight fake news websites like Vancouver Times – SHARE this fact check out, and SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact CheckScienceTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Malaysia Approves Pfizer PAXLOVID Antivirals For COVID-19!

Malaysia just approved the Pfizer PAXLOVID antiviral treatment for COVID-19!

Here is what you need to know!

 

Malaysia Approves Pfizer PAXLOVID Antivirals For COVID-19!

On 3 March 2022, the Malaysia Health Ministry (KKM) announced that the 370th Drug Control Authority meeting has agreed to give conditional approval to:

PAXLOVID (PF-07321332 150mg Film-Coated Tablets and Ritonavir 100mg Film-Coated Tablets)

Registrant : Pfizer (Malaysia) Sdn. Bhd.
Manufacturer : Pfizer Manufacturing Deutschland GmbH, Germany and Pfizer Ireland Pharmaceuticals, Ireland
Indication : COVID-19 treatment for adults age 18 years and above who do not require oxygen therapy, and are high-risk for severe COVID-19.

The Health Ministry warns that PAXLOVID is not meant to replace COVID-19 vaccination and public health measures.

 

Pfizer PAXLOVID : What Is It?

Pfizer PAXLOVID is an antiviral treatment that consists of two protease inhibitors :

  • two 150 mg tablets of Nirmatrelvir (the new protease inhibitor developed by Pfizer)
  • one 100 mg tablet of Ritonavir (an old antiviral approved in 1996)

Protease inhibitors work by binding to proteolytic enzymes used by the SARS-CoV-2 virus to replicate. This prevents the virus from replicating in the infected cells, stopping the infection and preventing transmission.

Drug combinations like this offer a synergistic effect, above and beyond their individual abilities. In this combination, ritonavir helps to slow down the breakdown of nirmatrelvir, allowing it to remain in the body for a longer period at higher concentrations.

Read more : Did Cornell Name Ivermectin Most Effective Drug vs. Omicron?

PAXLOVID was first given an Emergency Use Authorisation (EUA) by the US FDA on 22 December 2021, for the treatment of mild to moderate COVID-19 in adults and children 12 years and older.

It is meant to be taken by those who are at high-risk of developing severe COVID-19, and must be taken within 5 days of symptom onset. In addition, PAXLOVID must not be taken for more than 5 consecutive days.

The EPIC-HR trial showed that PAXLOVID is able to reduce the risk of hospitalisation or death from COVID-19 b y 88%, compared to placebo.

Individuals who took PAXLOVID have reported side effects like impaired sense of taste, diarrhoea, high blood pressure and muscle aches.

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Health | Tech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did Cornell Name Ivermectin Most Effective Drug vs. Omicron?

Did Cornell University just confirm ivermectin as the most effective drug against the Omicron variant of COVID-19?

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Cornell Calls Ivermectin Most Effective Drug vs. Omicron!

Antivaxxers and alternative medicine websites like Mercola are sharing what they claim to be a Cornell University study that names ivermectin as the most effective drug against the Omicron variant.

Here is an example of a WhatsApp message that people are sharing about this Cornell University study.

It’s a long post, so feel free to skip to the next section for the facts.

14.2.2022

LATEST STUDY BY CORNELL UNIVERSITY USA FOUND IVERMECTIN MORE EFFECTIVE AGAINST OMICRON THAN OTHER DRUGS, INCLUDING PFIZER’S EXPENSIVE PAXLOVID

Researchers used a computational analysis to look at the Omicron variant, which has demonstrated a lower clinical presentation and lower hospital admission rates.

After having retrieved the complete genome sequence and collecting 30 variants from the database, the researchers analyzed 10 drugs against the virus, including:

 

Truth : Cornell Did Not Call Ivermectin Most Effective Drug vs. Omicron!

This is yet another example of ivermectin FAKE NEWS, created by antivaxxers and alternative health websites like Mercola.

Let me show you just how they maliciously lied to you about this study…

Fact #1 : Study Was Not Conducted By Cornell University

The study in question is called Insights from a computational analysis of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant: Host-pathogen interaction, pathogenicity and possible therapeutics.

The study was conducted by Parvez et. al. – a team from the Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine in Japan, and the Shahjalal University of Science & Technology in Bangladesh.

This study on ivermectin and other protease inhibiting drugs has NOTHING to do with Cornell University.

Fact #2 : arXiv Is An Online Library Managed By Cornell University

The study summary in arXiv has a Cornell University logo at the top, which the fake news creator hopes will convince you that the study was done by a Cornell University team.

The truth is – arXiv is an open access repository (library) of scientific papers that is financed and managed by the Cornell University Library. Hence, the Cornell University logo.

That does not mean that the papers submitted to arXiv were conducted or endorsed by Cornell University.

Fact #3 : arXiv Papers Are NOT Peer-Reviewed

The C19Ivermectin website claims that the Parvez et. al. paper has been peer-reviewed. That’s false.

arXiv stores scientific preprints and post-prints (also called e-prints) that any scientist choose to submit.

All papers submitted to arXiv are NOT peer-reviewed, and must NOT be used without proper context.

While papers are typically peer-reviewed before becoming post-print and published (see graphic below), this is not the case for arXiv.

In fact, arXiv specifically warns that their post-prints are NOT peer-reviewed at the top of the page :

Important: e-prints posted on arXiv are not peer-reviewed by arXiv; they should not be relied upon without context to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information without consulting multiple experts in the field.

Fact #4 : Study Used Computer Modelling

The Parvez et. al. study (PDF download) was not conducted in the real world, or even in a laboratory. It was conducted on a computer.

They used computational analysis to analyse the binding potential for ten drugs that target the SARS-CoV-2’s protease protein.

However, this was all done on a computer, and may not necessarily reflect real world results. They must be reviewed (to look for mistakes), and then confirmed in actual lab and real world tests.

As the study authors themselves state, “While these hypotheses hold great value and may provide significant insights into the therapeutic strategies, further research is crucial to authenticate these statements.

Fact #5 : PAXLOVID Consists Of Two Drugs, Not One

The Parvez et. al. paper looked at individual drugs, and labelled Nirmatrelvir as PAXLOVID.

That is incorrect, as PAXLOVID is a combination of two protease inhibitors :

  • two 150 mg tablets of Nirmatrelvir (the new protease inhibitor developed by Pfizer)
  • one 100 mg tablet of Ritonavir (an old antiviral approved in 1996)

Drug combinations like this offer a synergistic effect, above and beyond their individual abilities.

Hence, the Parvez et. al. study does not accurately reflect the ability of the PAXLOVID combination of Nirmatrelvir and Ritonavir to simultaneously and synergistically bind to the coronavirus protease enzyme.

And no – you cannot combine or average their results. It doesn’t work that way…

Pro Tip : If you are searching for Ritonavir in the Parvez et. al. study, do note that they wrongly called it Ritonvir.

Fact #6 : In Silico Results Are Least Clinically Important

Computational analysis can help scientists identify potential drug candidates, but the results are not always clinically important.

In this study’s case, it looked at the affinity (ease) at which ten drugs can bind to the protease enzyme of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.

While that is a critical feature of protease inhibiting drugs that block the coronavirus’ ability to replicate, it does not tell us other important things like :

  • the minimum drug plasma level to inhibit replication
  • maximum dose a human being can safely tolerate
  • the dose required to achieve the therapeutic plasma level
  • drug interactions and adverse effects
  • plasma half life and drug metabolism

In the order of clinical importance, such computational (in silico) research is the least significant. That’s why we cannot draw any conclusions from such studies.

Fact #7 : PAXLOVID Proven To Work Against COVID-19

Like many people, I am aghast at the high price of the Pfizer PAXLOVID drug combination. However, low cost is not a requirement for FDA approval.

The US FDA issued PAXLOVID an Emergency Use Authorisation (PDF download) because its Phase 2/3 trial results (PDF download) showed an 88% reduction in the risk of hospitalisation or death from COVID-19.

Even so, the US FDA limited PAXLOVID’s use to only treat early cases of mild-to-moderate COVID-19 :

  • Not authorised for severe or critical COVID-19
  • Not authorised as a preventive measure (prophylaxis) against COVID-19
  • Cannot be used for longer than 5 consecutive days

Fact #8 : Ivermectin Not Proven To Work Clinically Against COVID-19

Ivermectin has shown promise against the COVID-19 virus in laboratory tests since April 2020, but that has not translated into actual clinical benefit.

In other words – scientists can only show that ivermectin kills the coronavirus in laboratory tests, but not in actual human beings.

Here is a meta-analysis of ivermectin RCTs (randomised control trials), with three fraudulent studies removed – Elgazzar, Okomus and Niaee. Results towards the left suggest a clinical benefit for ivermectin.

Taken in totality, the latest meta-analysis show that the clinical effect of ivermectin on COVID-19 patients is NOT SIGNIFICANT enough to warrant its use as a treatment.

While it is ridiculous that Pfizer would charge so much for PAXLOVID, there is fortunately a low-cost way to prevent COVID-19 – vaccines.

Getting vaccinated is a cheap way to avoid getting COVID-19, and avoid the use of expensive drugs like PAXLOVID.

If you want to stick it to Pfizer, get vaccinated against COVID-19!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Health | Fact Check | Tech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!