ICAM - an optimistic report of a therapy for COVID

[Librarian]

... but still early.

https://bgr.com/2020/09/26/coronavirus-cure-icam-protocol-florida/

The scientists have not yet tested their combination of drugs in a clinical trial to prove beyond any doubt that the treatment is safe and effective. But according to the researchers, ICAM therapy has yielded a 96.4% survival rate since April. It’s unclear how many patients have received ICAM, but Florida was one of the hardest-hit states in the US over the summer.

ICAM isn’t a new drug, it’s an acronym for a combination of existing medications used simultaneously on patients. It uses Immunosupport drugs (Vitamin C and Zinc), Corticosteroids against inflammation, Anticoagulants against blood clots, and Macrolides to help fight infection.
...
The major limitation of this report is that it doesn’t specify the number of individuals who received ICAM in hospitals and the various stages of their illnesses. The company confirmed that a clinical trial is planned and that it has partnered with the Marion County Health Department and Heart of Florida Health Centers to provide ICAM as an outpatient treatment for 100 adults who test positive for the novel coronavirus consent to the treatment.

Maybe Linus Pauling was a little bit right?

Even if this does not work out, negative results are useful data.

[balgor]

Similar to MATH protocol:

https://covid19criticalcare.com/math-hospital-treatment/pdf-translations/

Not fully vetted, but promising early results, definitely enough there to merit a clinical trial.

[duenor]

Anytime someone claims to have a "near 100%" cure rate for anything, I start getting leery. However, the underlying process by itself, at least from what I can see, doesn't seem implausible.

Vitamin C and Zinc - zinc's been demonstrated to reduce the duration of colds, but only at high dosages. It's plausible, although we are reminded of the pretty nasty side effects of high zinc (namely, the loss of the sense of smell, for one)

Steroids - again, plausible since it's the traditional treatment for pneumonia. I do recall however early on that it became contraindicated because doctors felt that some patients actually did WORSE. But that was 8 months ago.

Anticoagulants - I read a lot about this, and about the effect of SARS COV2 on capillaries. also plausible, although anticoagulants also have serious dangerous (ie, decreasing blood pressure)

Macrolides - I don't know much about this, although I do know that antibiotics are another traditional treatment.

I am reminded of my last conversation with my cousin. He said, "we tried pretty much everything except the kitchen sink. for those who survived and did well, it is really hard to tell what worked and what didn't."

It's quite plausible that there is indeed a winning combination in there somewhere.

[as_rocketman]

Maybe Linus Pauling was a little bit right?

Even if this does not wok out, negative results are useful data.

Linus Pauling was a nut, but he was right a lot of the time.

Be careful with statistics, though -- 96.4% survival rate of what groups? Otherwise this implies a 3.6% fatality rate, which is at the high end of estimates for all those positively diagnosed, even with treatment being unchanged from April norms.

Other evidence supports that survival rates from patients admitted to ICU have roughly doubled. How much of that signal remains after demographic correction I don't know. But clearly therapies are improving, including many approaches listed in the OP, and this is leading to significantly better outcomes.

[sd_shooter]

So now it's ok to combine other things with Zinc, but it was not ok to combine HCQ with Zinc? (Back when all the fraudulent 'studies' were taking place, this combination was deliberately excluded.) And now we need more studies with Zinc? I hope you see the massive double standard.

Of course we should have studies. Hopefully they'll be honest science-driven studies