BANGKOK, April 26 (TNA) – Two million pills of favipiravir antiviral medicine have arrived and 1 million more pills will follow next month, according to Deputy Prime Minister and Public Health Minister Anutin Charnvirakul.

 

Mr Anutin wrote on his Facebook account that at 1am (on April 26) 2 million pills of favipiravir drug on the NH8545 flight from Narita airport in Japan arrived in Thailand and the Government Pharmaceutical Organization would distribute them to hospitals right away in accordance with the allocation plan of the Public Health Emergency Operations Center.

 

In May, one million more pills of the antiviral drug will arrive, raising the total of the newly acquired drug to 3 million pills as earlier planned.

 

Full Story: https://tna.mcot.net/english-news/line-today-english-news-683132

 

-- © Copyright TNA 2021-04-26

 

- Whatever you're going through, the Samaritans are here for you

- Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking COVID-19 updates

So this Antiviral will be used to treat patients that already have Covid 19 ?,

until they get the vaccine into people's arms and quickly, looks like they

are going to need all these tablets, and I thought prevention was always

better than cure.....

regards Worgeordie

1 hour ago, snoop1130 said:

BANGKOK, April 26 (TNA) – Two million pills of favipiravir antiviral medicine have arrived and 1 million more pills will follow next month, according to Deputy Prime Minister and Public Health Minister Anutin Charnvirakul

now the idiot wants us to be believe in these ' near vaccines'

2 hours ago, worgeordie said:

So this Antiviral will be used to treat patients that already have Covid 19 ?

Yes. And this drug has been widely used for much more dangerous viruses like Ebola.

And by no means a flash of genius in Thailand.

Evaluated in a couple of countries.

Another antiviral drug (remdesivir ) has been used for a  VIP patient from White House.

2 hours ago, worgeordie said:

and I thought prevention was always

better than cure.....

Of course. But who knows what this virus will develop into. Maybe vaccination becoming as hopeless like for HIV (cat and mouse race).

The latest from India sounds really concerning.

Cross your fingers that vaccinations will still be efficacious.

Clinical evidence for efficacy of this drug is scanty, at best.

Concerning remdesivir, it’s like Tamiflu, also from Gilead, in that it helps a little.

 

What really works are monoclonal antibodies.

6 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

Two million pills of favipiravir antiviral medicine have arrived and 1 million more pills will follow next month

 

I would be impressed if it was vaccines and was rolling out to the people that need it i.e. front line people instead of tourism worker in Phuket 

 

if I say any more the post will be deleted 

 

holes 

 

add to that what you want

2 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

Clinical evidence for efficacy of this drug is scanty, at best.

but the people believe because they have been told 

 

social media will reveal the truth - and meanwhile how much peoples money was spent on this useless attempt to appease the masses and how much of the budget got lost somewhere - this #### really makes me angry 

 

There is only one direction funds should be going - vaccine procurement 

https://aac.asm.org/content/aac/early/2021/02/24/AAC.00020-21.full.pdf

 

Favipiravir (T-705, commercial name Avigan), a drug developed to treat influenza virus infection, 20 has been used in some countries as an oral treatment for COVID-19; however, its clinical efficacy in 21 this context is controversial. The anti-SARS-CoV-2 effects of favipiravir reported by previous 22 studies are inconsistent. For example, the findings of Jeon et al. reported in this journal (1) and 23 others (2) demonstrate that favipiravir (500 μM) shows negligible effects against SARS-CoV-2 in 24 cultured cells, whereas two other studies reported weak effects, with an EC50 ranging from 61.88 to 25 207.1 μM (3, 4).

Reported flame post and response removed.

 

No personal remarks please.

I can't understand why more people aren't considering ivermectin. It seems to work prophylactically as well as in early and late stages of the virus. Hydroxychloroquine was effective also but only if used early in treatment. Ivermectin has been used effectively all over the world. It's just weird to me that new treatments keep being introduced that show limited to no effectively when there are a multitude of studies showing the efficacy of this drug that has been around for 45 years and has been distributed billions of times with negligible to no side effects.

1 hour ago, fearless1 said:

I can't understand why more people aren't considering ivermectin. It seems to work prophylactically as well as in early and late stages of the virus. Hydroxychloroquine was effective also but only if used early in treatment. Ivermectin has been used effectively all over the world. It's just weird to me that new treatments keep being introduced that show limited to no effectively when there are a multitude of studies showing the efficacy of this drug that has been around for 45 years and has been distributed billions of times with negligible to no side effects.

As I  understand it, these "established" drugs offer little income for big pharma, and it is big pharma that usually undertake most of the drug trials (especially for their new drugs).  With no significant income to be made from therse generic medicines, they won't provide the funding for the trials, and without recognised trials, few health authorities will sanction their use outside of their established uses.

It's many of the poorer countries that have used these established drugs, often with great success.  Eg. India was using Ivermectin until they started their vaccination program..... 

 

21 minutes ago, steve73 said:

As I  understand it, these "established" drugs offer little income for big pharma, and it is big pharma that usually undertake most of the drug trials (especially for their new drugs).  With no significant income to be made from therse generic medicines, they won't provide the funding for the trials, and without recognised trials, few health authorities will sanction their use outside of their established uses.

It's many of the poorer countries that have used these established drugs, often with great success.  Eg. India was using Ivermectin until they started their vaccination program..... 

 

There have been plenty of clinical trials of generics such as chloroquine.

 

You don't seem to understand that not just pharmaceutical companies operate clinical trials, plenty of universities and other non-profits test out medications all the time. One of the reasons this is not obvious to you is that a repurposed drug such as Ivermectin is announced with big publicity, based on some tiny study, and then it takes months for the clinical trials to determine its effectiveness. That's the part you don't hear about.

 

I believe there were 100 clinical trials for chloroquine and its derivatives.

 

1 hour ago, fearless1 said:

I can't understand why more people aren't considering ivermectin. It seems to work prophylactically as well as in early and late stages of the virus. Hydroxychloroquine was effective also but only if used early in treatment. Ivermectin has been used effectively all over the world. It's just weird to me that new treatments keep being introduced that show limited to no effectively when there are a multitude of studies showing the efficacy of this drug that has been around for 45 years and has been distributed billions of times with negligible to no side effects.

There are  not a multitude of studies demonstrating effectiveness of Ivermectin against Covid-19. Someone has been feeding you misinformation.  There have been a handful of studies with mixed results. Come back in 6 months, and there should be better information.

 

There are many studies on Hydroxychloroquine. It is ineffective.  To give you a picture of how bad it is, the two biggest producers and consumers of Hydroxychloroquine  are India and Brazil.

15 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

There are  not a multitude of studies demonstrating effectiveness of Ivermectin against Covid-19. Someone has been feeding you misinformation.  There have been a handful of studies with mixed results. Come back in 6 months, and there should be better information.

The US CDC reviewed 46 studies and all of them showed Ivermectin to be effective against Covid-19

There are dozens of more studies out there and more coming in every week. That amounts to a multitude of studies IMO.

Where do you get your claim of mixed results? The 46 studies that the CDC reviewed had an overall 89% efficacy at preventing covid-19 infection and 1 study showed a 100% reduction is infection rate among hundreds of health care works who were treating covid-19 infected patients.

And the idea that it has been used for 40 years by over a billion people with virtually zero side effects makes it unbelievable that it is still not recommended?

I suspect there has been too much money invested in vaccines to warrant trying anything else until the vaccines run their course?

3 minutes ago, tz1965 said:

The US CDC reviewed 46 studies and all of them showed Ivermectin to be effective against Covid-19

There are dozens of more studies out there and more coming in every week. That amounts to a multitude of studies IMO.

Where do you get your claim of mixed results? The 46 studies that the CDC reviewed had an overall 89% efficacy at preventing covid-19 infection and 1 study showed a 100% reduction is infection rate among hundreds of health care works who were treating covid-19 infected patients.

And the idea that it has been used for 40 years by over a billion people with virtually zero side effects makes it unbelievable that it is still not recommended?

I suspect there has been too much money invested in vaccines to warrant trying anything else until the vaccines run their course?

FDA Warns Against Using Ivermectin to Treat COVID-19

 

EMA advises against use of ivermectin for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19 outside randomised clinical trials

 

"Following recent media reports and publications on the use of ivermectin, EMA reviewed the latest published evidence from laboratory studies, observational studies, clinical trials and meta-analyses. Laboratory studies found that ivermectin could block replication of SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19), but at much higher ivermectin concentrations than those achieved with the currently authorised doses. Results from clinical studies were varied, with some studies showing no benefit and others reporting a potential benefit. Most studies EMA reviewed were small and had additional limitations, including different dosing regimens and use of concomitant medications. EMA therefore concluded that the currently available evidence is not sufficient to support the use of ivermectin in COVID-19 outside clinical trials."

 

You can argue with the experts. They agree with my assessment. Have a nice day.

14 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

Clinical evidence for efficacy of this drug is scanty, at best.

It's better than nothing. Personally, I take invermectin. 

37 minutes ago, Neeranam said:

It's better than nothing. Personally, I take invermectin. 

I prefer Holy Water, and I carry around a piece of the lost city of Colossae for good luck.

4 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

I prefer Holy Water, and I carry around a piece of the lost city of Colossae for good luck.

Faith can move mountains, I'm all for it, whatever floats yer boat. 

Many Thais I know are not bothered at all about dying from Covid, or anything else. "Arai ja gerd"(Que sara) and all that. there is no good and bad in this world of causality. 

Minister Anutun?

 

I thought he was being forced to resign? 

 

I can no longer trust anything that man has to say.

 

He is a Racist and a Bigot. 

just like his boss

Great news ........

 

more pills to hand out

Studies in Japan showed that Favipiravir  , a Japanese flu drug similar to Tamiflu, made in China under license, is completely ineffective against COVID.  So why are we importing and why is the Thai media keeping quiet about the Japanese studies?  Someone must be making money out of this.  Par for the course to make money out of the human misery of your countrymen.  

 

Other therapies like Remedesivir have been proved to help some with COVID but that comes from the US and is thus more expensive  and harder to pad invoices. So none of that for Thai COVID sufferers, just the snake oil pills.   

On 4/27/2021 at 9:57 AM, Danderman123 said:

You can argue with the experts. They agree with my assessment. Have a nice day.

Dr. Marik is THE "Expert" on this subject. I'm not arguing with him and he addresses the fact that this CDC/NIH information you posted is regurgitated info on their site and not based on updated information. YOU are arguing with Dr. Marik and he clearly has more expertise and first hand knowledge of this subject. The NIH is arguing against expert advice as well. I trust the experts and Dr. Marik is the most trustworthy expert as he shows us his references and allows any other doctor to look at the data themselves and critique his assessment. The NIH hasn't even looked at the new data yet.

This is the only quasi-aproved treatment here for severe cases.

 

Useless of course, but it makes the authorites feel better I guess.

 

Better off with some of those silly herbs I'd guess.

 

 

On 4/27/2021 at 9:57 AM, Danderman123 said:

Results from clinical studies were varied, with some studies showing no benefit and others reporting a potential benefit.

This is not true about Ivermectin. Other anti virals are not as effective.

Here's Dr. Kory's latest interview/Update.

 

this vaccine has nothing to do with this virus when are you all going to wake up

3 hours ago, tz1965 said:

Dr. Marik is THE "Expert" on this subject. I'm not arguing with him and he addresses the fact that this CDC/NIH information you posted is regurgitated info on their site and not based on updated information. YOU are arguing with Dr. Marik and he clearly has more expertise and first hand knowledge of this subject. The NIH is arguing against expert advice as well. I trust the experts and Dr. Marik is the most trustworthy expert as he shows us his references and allows any other doctor to look at the data themselves and critique his assessment. The NIH hasn't even looked at the new data yet.

Wow, an argument from authority! 

 

Seriously, listening to one guy rather than looking at the broad spectrum of clinical trials is a classic newbie mistake. 

 

So, you are right, but CDC and NIH are wrong...... 

1 hour ago, ba ba said:

this vaccine has nothing to do with this virus when are you all going to wake up

Did posting that garbage make you feel better? 

1 hour ago, tz1965 said:

This is not true about Ivermectin. Other anti virals are not as effective.

Here's Dr. Kory's latest interview/Update.

 

I am just reporting the facts. There have been limited clinical trials of Forsythia, and nothing conclusive so far.