Local hospitals to participate in study

Convalescent plasma Study

We discussed this issue here a few days ago, so it is interesting that there will be local participation. On reading the article, I noticed that the proposed study follows the problem I raised here, of not treating until too late. So, I emailed Dr Michael Joyer at the Mayo Clinic, who is running the study, early this morning

“Dear Dr Joyner,

As a 71 year old asthmatic with polycythemia, I have been following the efforts to find effective treatments for Covid-19 with some interest. Our local newspaper ran an article on participation by local hospitals in a study of convalescent plasma in which you are involved. Of course, articles in lay media on studies tend to be superficial, but as described, I am concerned about the methodology.

The article said the serum would be tried on patients with ‘severe disease.’ My understanding is that Covid-19 has an early phase of rapid viral multiplication followed by a second phase of viral decline but increased immune system response, and that it is in that second phase that patients become severely ill, and that the testing of convalescent plasma would be in that second phase.

Consider that if the popular antiviral drug for the seasonal flu, Tamiflu, were tested in that manner, it would fail, as the window for using it is in the initial phase of the flu.

I am concerned that using convalescent plasma in the second phase will also fail, even though had it been given in the first phase of rapid viral replication, it might well have been successful in preventing a severe second phase.

Would it not be more effective to administer the serum as soon as a diagnosis is made, at least in individuals like myself with a high risk of a severe second phase?

I am no virologist, but 40 years in dentistry treating severe bacterial infections taught me that often, timing is everything.

Thank you for your time and consideration, I really would like to see convalescent plasma given a fair and successful trial.

Wm. Donald Tabor Jr., DDS”

And in less than an hour I received a reply

“Dr. Tabor….. things are heading in the direction you mention.


It is good to know the study is being run by a morning person.


5 thoughts on “Local hospitals to participate in study

  1. Good call on your letter. And glad to see you got a reply.

    One of the issues that continues to come up, and you mention it, is that too many times people are asymptomatic but are carrying the disease. And most testing is being done on those who are showing signs of the disease. And most treatment attempts (run it up and the flag pole and see who survives?) are late stage. That is why ALL testing needs to be ramped up. Maybe not 100% of the population, but a SOLID random sampling of individuals to determine everything we possibly can. Including those who may have been sick, but never were officially diagnosed and now have the antibodies to be harvested for treatment of others.

    Vaccine identification needs to be worked. We really don’t know how much of that is going on.

    It appears as if the concerns are to save the sickest, yet ignore those that are NOT going into full respiratory distress and need ventilator treatment to survive.

    We really don’t know a lot of what is going on. But I firmly believe that those who are tasked with finding the answers to our questions (the scientists, NOT the politicians) are doing their almighty best to do so.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. It is important to remember that for planning purposes, a self-selected sample is worse than no sample at all.

      You are correct that a representative random sample is of more value than the on-demand testing we have so far. But how do you get one?


      1. “But how do you get one?”

        Excellent question. If I knew the answer, I wouldn’t be selling light bulbs and fixtures and posting on Tidewater News and Opinion Forum.


      2. RE: “But how do you get one?”

        That’s a good question. Listenning to Dr.s Fauci and Birx in the daily briefings I get the impression they are not much interested in answering it. They seem quite content with monitoring the case mortality rate, and basing policy on it, which we know to be a flawed approach.

        I submitted a comment to the president at Whitehouse.gov to request the serology test results be reported as a separate topic in the daily briefings.


      3. Testing is a precise science involving sample quality, size and controls. This takes time and patience.

        The FDA is under fire for being to slow, so I suspect the throw it all out there approach is both the only choice and politically feasible route.

        Right now, including this little corner of the Internet, we have critics who say that the scientists are killing our economy and protestors egged on by the administration who doubt the veracity of the elites in the medical world.

        So what can we do? If the administration is not supporting science in their warnings and predictions it is hard to see how the researchers can move along.

        Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s