We Can Cure COVID, and Control the Weather with Space Lasers!

Big, if true.

|

From YNetNews:

Researchers at Tel Aviv's Ichilov Hospital on Thursday announced it has seen positive results in preliminary trials for a cure for COVID-19 … [test] on patients in moderate and serious condition …. Of the 30 patients that were given the drug, 29 showed a marked improvement within two days and were released from the hospital three to five days later. One patient also recovered but her recovery took a few days longer, the hospital said….

The Hadassah Medical Center in Jerusalem also reported on a possible cure. The hospital administered to 21 patients in critical condition who suffered from underlying conditions a drug called Allocetra. According to the doctors, 19 patients recovered within six days and were released from the hospital on average after eight days….

For more on Jewish doctors, see here. For more on Jewish space lasers, see here. Thanks to InstaPundit for the pointer, and to Leonard Cohen.

NEXT: The First Amendment Arguments in the House of Representatives’ Managers’ Trial Memorandum

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I don't get it ... you'd think that the Democrats would want to keep the Greenes of the world publicly visible and affiliated with the GOP?

    1. The difference is, the Democratic party still believes in democracy.

      Granted, this sets up a disturbingly unstable situation.

      1. The left has its own antisemitism issues, so they love the buffoonery of Ms Greene because it somehow absolves them.

        1. The difference is that leftist anti-Semites like Ilhan Omar are nonetheless situated in reality. Ms. Greene, on the other hand, in addition to some noxious views, is a lunatic.

          1. There is no need for such nasty insults against...lunatics.

      2. The difference is, the Democratic party still believes in democracy.

        Only insofar as it justifies new intrusions of government control into places heretofore undreamt of.

        When democracy does things it doesn't like, via representatives or popular direct vote, off to the courts to overturn it.

        So, freedom is what makes this country great, not democracy.

        Politicians are only on board with one or the other, philosophically, when it supports their already-chosen goals. This is called "situational ethics", the high valuation of principles when it supports a goal, and the deriding or bypassing of it when it does 't.

        1. freedom is what makes this country great, not democracy.

          Here's how you can tell you're wrong: Democracy is well-defined.

          Freedom has wildly different interpretations for different people. How many South American coups were yelling about freedom and liberty?

          Your facile sloganeering will rationalize you into all sorts of manifestly unfree systems, even as you're sure your ethics have never changed.

    2. Space Lasers of all faiths aside, California's $64 Billion Bullet Train to Nowhere is worthy of questioning. Even if she goes off on bizarre tangents, she is a threat to the Dems because she'll stumble across stuff they want to hide.

  2. Yes, but do all of you believe the President incites erections?

    1. Trump definitely did, don’t think Biden can give anyone a boner even if they took a whole bottle of viagra

      1. NoVaNick : "Trump definitely did....."

        Sadly enough, true. Clearly today's Right takes a (metaphoric) tumescence-style excitement from a clownish buffoon and his incoherent / lying carnival-barker shill. Talk about sordid pleasures!

        What does that say about today's Right?

  3. Israel's response to Covid has been an excellent model in some ways (getting a really large percentage of citizens vaccinated) while deeply disturbing in other ways (essentially no sharing of the vaccine with Palestine). This possible treatment is more great news. Yay for us Jews!

    1. I'm a bit confused here.

      Should the US be sharing its vaccine doses with Afghanistan? Or should it concentrate on vaccinating its own citizens first, while allowing the Afghanistan Government the responsibility of vaccinating its own citizens?

      Gaza is claimed by the Palestinian State. Gaza has its own government, Hamas. Israel has no formal claim over it. Israel has no troops present in Gaza. Israel has no citizens present there. Gaza has borders with multiple countries (Egypt, Israel), who could allow shipments through. Hamas could and should take responsibility for its own citizens and seek out the vaccine, and vaccinate its own citizens.

      But instead, you are disturbed that Israel doesn't strip away vaccine doses from its own citizens, to give them to Hamas?

    2. while deeply disturbing in other ways (essentially no sharing of the vaccine with Palestine).

      Why is that deeply disturbing? Is the U.S. sharing its vaccine with Mexico?

    3. The Palestinians indicated that they did not want Israeli help in getting the vaccine, and would procure it on their own with international help.
      https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/palestinians-we-didnt-ask-israel-for-covid-19-vaccine-652703

      This is a classic anti-Israel blood libel. The Palestinians refused aid, and then when they could not procure what they needed, they blame Israel, with the help of their amen corners around the world.

  4. Israel has -- and has had for some time -- a world-class medical and pharmaceutical industry that the country really has not received credit for. What I find interesting is the names of the institutions involved and hence the fields these two drugs apparently came out of.

    The first drug, albeit on its initial clinical trial, comes out of a "cancer prevention center" and people have been looking at antivirals as a treatment for cancer for some time now. (NB: I'm assuming it is an antiviral -- the article doesn't say what it is.) The other drug is coming out of a Rheumatology center and was intended to deal with "overactive immune systems" - and remember that Rheumatology involves various forms of arthritis.

    What I am quietly suggesting here is that they may be very close to some jaw-dropping breakthroughs in the aforementioned fields, although a broad-spectrum antiviral (similar to a broad-spectrum antibiotic) would itself be a significant breakthrough. It would be a "cure for the common cold."

    Other people are looking at antivirals as well, see: https://medicalxpress.com/news/2021-02-scientists-uncover-potential-antiviral-treatment.html

    1. A lot more drugs come from Israel than people realize -- Teva Pharmaceuticals comes to immediate mind.

  5. Why do y'all complain about the weather when you can just ask the Rothschilds to fix it?

    https://reason.com/volokh/2018/03/18/dc-councilman-warns-about-rothschilds-co/

    1. I ask this because I do not understand: why is a reference to "the Rothschilds" (or George Soros) inherently antisemitic? At this point, isn't it more of a generic reference to the super-rich in general?

      And isn't George Soros a specific individual? Love him or hate him, isn't he a unique individual?

      I'm not justifying antisemitism, merely asking why stuff like this is in the same category as the schmuck shouting "Kill the Jews" -- I see that as something else entirely...

      1. 1. Slurs against the Rothschilds and the grand conspiracies where they "star" have a long history in anti-Semitism. It seems to me someone wanting to make a "generic reference to the super-rich" today has scores more relevant examples than the Rothschilds - if that's the only aim.

        2. George Soros' status as omniscient omnipresent omnipotent font of all leftist "evil" functions much the same way - particular since it's use is often untethered from reality in the most blatant way. Add to that the visceral hate frequently involved. The Left may not like the Koch brothers, but we aren't making up ugly lies about their childhood. Also add the common coupling of Soros with the term "internationalist", which is a well-worn anti-Semitic term. Also, take a look at Hungry - where Soros as whipping boy is so over-the-top it's hard to disguise what's involved.

        1. All of this is, of course, true, well-known, and painfully obvious to anyone who has been allowed outside the house to walk around the block a time or two, can tie his own shoes, and can feed himself.
          What's Dr Ed 2's excuse

        2. I think it depends on the allegations. The allegations about the Rothschilds controlling the weather are crazy; and because the Rothschilds are known specifically not just as bankers\ but as specifically Jewish bankers, it makes one think that this is probably anti-Semitic crazy and not just crazy.

          Soros is more complicated. Some of his critics are likely anti-Semites, and some of the allegations about his past are mistaken. But he is indeed a major funder of liberal causes -- #3 on New York Magazine's Most Influential Democratic Donors list -- and it's neither crazy nor inherently (or even likely) anti-Semitic to criticize him as that.

          I wrote about this here; an excerpt:

          Nor does this seem to be some sort of cherry-picking of a Jewish donor just because he's Jewish. He is indeed a major and long-standing funder of left-wing causes; his role in funding causes he believes in is widely reported in mainstream media outlets, see, e.g., this recent Bloomberg story about his plan to "Invest $220 Million in U.S. Equality Groups," and this recent Washington Post op-ed on his "trying to change the system that made him rich."

          Soros is genuinely a big player here, and thus rightly a big target for those who disagree with him. (For whatever it's worth, as best I can tell, of the 8 top Democratic donors included on the New York Magazine list, 7 are Jewish, and the one exception, Tom Steyer, is half-Jewish, though a practicing Christian.) We Jews shouldn't be specially criticized because we are Jewish, but we also aren't entitled to special immunity from criticism because we are Jewish.

          1. Eugene Volokh : #3 on New York Magazine’s Most Influential Democratic Donors list

            Then I presume no. 1&2 get the same right-wing treatment as Soros, but even more so. If they don't, might there be a reason?

      2. "why is a reference to “the Rothschilds” (or George Soros) inherently antisemitic"

        If the reference includes a weather machine which they use to pursue Bond Villain-level plans, then it's probably antisemitic.

        On the other hand, criticizing something they actually do (like Soros' election interference to get softness on crime) is fair game so long as it doesn't devolve into Soros or the Rothschilds being part of the lizard people or what have you.

  6. With apologies in advance for talking about potential lifesaving drugs in the face of a pandemic instead of politics, am I reading that right that there are two drugs in play? One called 'EXO-CD24' with an unspecified action, and another called 'Allocetra' that deals with the cytokine storm. The second sounds like it might be an existing drug, and hence might be available quickly.

    Two magic bullets at the same time seems too good to be true, and probably is, but I can't help hoping it's true.

    1. There are two treatments here.

      1. ‘EXO-CD24.’ The details are lacking here, but from the lead researcher's bio, this appears to be an antibody-based treatment against CD24 that was repurposed from a Cancer treatment. Antibody treatments can (and do) work, but they aren't as quick to scale up as a small molecule. There have been a few of these repurposed antibody based treatments for COVID. Original sample size on the Israeli system is fairly small, and it all needs to go through clinical trials anyway.

      2. "Allocetra." This is a fairly unusual treatment, which is an injection of early apoptotic cells into the patient. It's not a small molecule and not a biological (antibody). This won't "cure" COVID, as in the virus. What it does appear to do is interfere with the cytokine storm effects (effectively, the body's overreaction to COVID) that can cause a lot of severe effects. It's working in the same way dexamethasone is working...to suppress the body's immune overreaction to COVID.

      Allocetra may paradoxically may be easier to scale than an antibody-based biological, but it's only going to be of use for the more severe cases. It may help a lot in the more severe cases, but more R+D here is needed.

      1. Armchair -- a bit more on EXO-CD24: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9228317/amp/Experimental-cancer-drug-hailed-coronavirus-cure-Israeli-hospital.html

        While developed for Ovarian Cancer, it also appears to interfere with the cytokine storm -- it isn't the antiviral that I initially thought it might be.

  7. "...a drug called Allocetra..."

    Otherwise know as a 5% solution of chlorine bleach in distilled water?

    1. "Otherwise know as a 5% solution of chlorine bleach in distilled water?"

      No. It appears to be a biological treatment of early-apototic cells, designed to interfere with the cytokine storm cascade.

      https://www.timesofisrael.com/14-of-16-severe-covid-patients-in-trial-recover-with-experimental-israeli-drug/

    2. With chlorine bleach being a 3%-6% solution of Sodium Hypochlorite, so you aren't all that far from chlorinated pool water here.

      Just saying...

  8. Given the headline I thought it was going to be about some crazy person saying that we could cure COVID if only we had space lasers.

  9. A Covid cure? Let me predict what will happen.

    First, Andrew Cuomo will announce that it is “bad news“ that the cure was developed while Netanyahu is in the office, and will promise to “work with Democrat governors“ to prevent the distribution of the cure until Netanyahu is replaced.

    Second, we will be told that the cure should be given to “marginalized persons“ before sick people Receive it, because sick people are disproportionately white and allowing them to die will offset the advantages that they have had during their lives and “level the playing field.”

    Third, the governors who have so masterfully handled the distribution of the vaccine will seize control of distribution of the cure, which means that it will not make its way to people who are actually sick until the year 2025.

    1. Seeing how this still has to go through the approval process ... Couldn't he just wait until Nethanyahu is put of office? It will only be 2 months ...

Please to post comments