Yet you were the one touting Remdesivir Haha. Good lord.There were numerous studies showing remdesivir did "in the lab" too.
But it ain't terribly effective in vivo.
Big big difference.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Yet you were the one touting Remdesivir Haha. Good lord.There were numerous studies showing remdesivir did "in the lab" too.
But it ain't terribly effective in vivo.
Big big difference.
Because early data showed it worked in the lab, and that it DID provide benefit in vivo.Yet you were the one touting Remdesivir Haha.
Interesting study, thanks Wildcat.
You really have to ask what the snark is for? Read your own responses to the Remdesivir thread I had a few months ago. It was you that was touting Remdesivir and Dexamethasone, both shown to be largely ineffective.Because early data showed it worked in the lab, and that it DID provide benefit in vivo.
That benefit is small; and that actually makes a lot of sense, because as an antiviral, it can only be administered AFTER people are in the hospital and have a massive viral load. And we now know that it is the cascade effects, not the virus, that result in those severe cases by that point, triggered by the virus.
I have yet to see if the Merck version of that which is in pill form and can be administered earlier, provides actual antiviral benefit.
No idea what the "haha" snark is for.
It was you that was touting Remdesivir and Dexamethasone, both shown to be largely ineffective.