SARSCoV2 cell entry depends on ACE2 and TMPRSS2, blockable by protease inhibitor

Re:SARSCoV2 cell entry depends on ACE2 and TMPRSS2, blockabl... by rscho on Friday March 06, 2020 @08:06AM (#22503234)

3% is as good as a number drawn from a hat at this stage of the epidemic, be it drawn from Nature, Cell or whatever. Also, those 3% assume you are contaminated. You can't compare that to a short-to-medium term run of preventive chloroquine adminstration, which has a rather high incidence of minor side effects.

You are statistically comparing oranges to apples. This behaviour increases your risk of hurting yourself by a large margin compared to simply following WHO recommendations.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:SARSCoV2 cell entry depends on ACE2 and TMPRSS2, blockabl... by jamesblonde on Friday March 06, 2020 @09:15AM (#22503701)

I don't disagree with you, actually. Like I said, if you are in a high risk group, the math changes - but I agree that mass preventive chloroquine adminstration would not be a good idea. However, if there is a large outbreak, shortages of chloroquine or you have to wait days/weeks for your doctor to prescribe chloroquine - that is not a place i personally want to be.

On another note, this is a nice thread helping me (and maybe others) inform them about side effects and efficacy of possible treatments.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:SARSCoV2 cell entry depends on ACE2 and TMPRSS2, blockabl... by angry_octet on Friday March 06, 2020 @08:41AM (#22503431)

Statistically, population wide chloroquine prophylaxis would probably cause more problems than is warranted by the COVID-19 threat.

Even if it works, and isn't just wishful thinking / propaganda.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:SARSCoV2 cell entry depends on ACE2 and TMPRSS2, blockabl... by rscho on Friday March 06, 2020 @08:44AM (#22503446)

I agree.

[ Parent | on HN ]