Le Coronavirus Covid19

[alain2908]

ça fait peur.
c'est pas anodin comme augmentation.
La dernière phrase de l'article est plus rassurante

Les critiques de l’étude disent qu’il y a observation et association, mais pas preuve de causalité.

[GillesH38]

Il y a sans doute quelque chose qui m'échappe mais je ne comprends absolument pas la courbe du haut



l'écart entre les deux populations semble venir d'une MOINDRE fréquence chez les non vaccinés dans les 3 premiers mois, puis le rythme est à nouveau parallèle. Mais je trouve ça complètement illogique : les non vaccinés n'ont aucune raison d'avoir un rythme de cancer qui évolue avec le temps, la courbe devrait etre rectiligne... or c'est celle des vaccinés qui semble régulière !

Au contraire si c'était le vaccin qui provoque des cancers, on devrait voir la courbe des VACCINES évoluer avec le temps, c'est à dire que ce sont les vaccinés qui devraient augmenter plus rapidement au début, puis sans doute reprendre un rythme normal. Je ne comprends pas du tout comment on peut observer le contraire ?

[energy_isere]

Le retour du Covid se confirme en France, à un niveau jusqu'ici modéré

AFP •01/10/2025
........................

https://www.boursorama.com/actualite-ec ... 2bcf580272

[kercoz]

Pour éviter de vous infecter en famille apres les repas, c'est facile comme le suggère Trump , il suffit d' inhaler votre digestif plurot que de le boire :
Ethanol efficiency: experimental and clinical data leave no doubt about ethanol power on destroying or inactivating SARS-CoV-2, even at concentration as low as 30% v/v and short time (30 sec) [11]. Quite probably, ethanol is not effective on the intracellular virus. Considering that viral replication occurs in 48-72 hours - to be followed by cellular death and shedding - it is important to prolong ethanol inhalation at least for 3 days. Moreover, thanks to its non-specificity, ethanol is intrinsically effective on any SARS-CoV-2 variant and other “enveloped” viruses. This feature broadens the ethanol spectrum of action over SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and prospects its use on possible future outbreak caused by such viruses. Theoretical minimal dose of ethanol necessary to eliminate the hypothetical viral load has been calculated (= 153 µg) and results quite low in comparison to daily exposition in many work and voluptuary activities.

Ethanol effects on respiratory cells and microbiota: Sisson [13] has shown that the effect of alcohol on respiratory hairy cells is a bimodal function of both exposure time and dose. Ethanol at low concentration (10mm = 0.46 mg/ml) increases ciliary clearance, reasonably contributing to the faster elimination of viral load, which has hopefully been rendered inactive by the physicochemical properties of ethanol itself. Studies about the impact over respiratory microbiota of short-term ethanol administration are lacking. However, some suggestions can be derived on this matter. Indeed, worse outcomes on intesive care unit (ICU) patients were related to the abnormal presence of Mycoplasma salivarium into the lower tract or Clostridiaabsence in the upper tract. Interestingly, it should be noted that Mycoplasma and SARS-CoV-2 (Eterpi et al.) [27] and SARS-CoV-2 are completely inactivated by ethanol. Moreover, certain strains of Clostridia are known to produce endogenous ethanol and this potential has been exploited industrially in ABE fermentation (acronym) to produce acetone, butanol and ethanol [28]. Hypothetically, the absence of nasopharyngeal Clostridia could lead to a lack of local ethanol production and therefore reduced/absent inactivation of SARS-CoV-2 at this level, thus allowing the virus to spread to the lower respiratory tract [2].

Ethanol toxicity: acute ethanol exposition is subject to the law and varies according to country or state. For general population, the allowed maximum Blood alcohol concentration (BAC) in USA it ranges from 500 to 800mg/L. In work environment also the law regulates the maximum chronic ethanol exposition. For example, the occupational exposure limit (OEL) in United Kingdom is 1000 ppm of ethanol = 1910 mg/m3, over an 8-hour shift, and estimated an equivalence of ingestion of 10g of ethanol (approximately 1 glass of alcohol) per day [23]. These figures go largely beyond the theoretical dose required to eliminate the viral load in the respiratory tract. Concerns about the mucosal damage that inhaled ethanol could induce locally have been frequently and strongly raised. The meticulous work from Castro-Balado et al. [21] seems to have definitively eliminated these concerns.

Inhaled ethanol therapeutic window: no targeted studies on this topic were found, so one must necessarily relate to the current experience [16,23]. Therefore, being the surgical disinfection by 70% ethanol for 90 a daily gesture and universally recommended and practiced, it seems reasonable and logical to assert that the toxic risk of such acute inhalation - that is to say approximately 330 mg - can be considered as negligible [16]. In fact, even assuming this dose was given instantly to a healthy adult, the concentration of ethanol in the air inspired would be 330 mg/5L (airway volume) = 78 mg/L = 0.078 mg/ml. This concentration is both much lower than that experimentally causing alcohol-induced ciliary dysfunction (i.e., 46 mg/ml) [13] and that permitted by law (i.e., 500 mg/L = 0.5 mg/ml). In fact, being the lung and blood volumes roughly the same, similar figures would be obtained for the concentration of ethanol in the blood, well below the legal toxic dose of 500 mg/L. On the other hand, this dose is much higher (a thousand times) than the minimum dose (153 µg) required to inactivate the calculated viral load in the lungs [12]. Each type of inhalation therapy for airway diseases is potentially more effective than any other form of administration [12]. Aerosol therapy makes it possible to lower the dosages, to reach “hidden” areas, to better target specific cells or compartments, etc.: in short, to increase the bioavailability of drugs. The size of the particles generated - classified according to the Aerodynamic Median Mass Diameter (AMMD) - well relates to the site to be treated. For the purpose in the present paper, the AMMD of the aerosol particles should be 5 µm.

By reason of the relative novel approach proposed in this paper, not surprisingly consolidated data in medical literature are scarce. Focus on dimension of the problem showed that disinfection of asymptomatic positives subjects is of utmost importance in term of individual and public health concerns and related economic negative consequences. Currently, efficient and cost-effective solutions for that problem are lacking. The review and updating of knowledge bear witness - within a well-defined framework - to the high efficiency and acceptable toxicity of inhaled ethanol. Therefore, the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 asymptomatic positive subjects with inhaled ethanol is well justified. As already envisaged by Prof. Shintake [29] on March 17th, 2020, and Dr. Amoushahi et al. [30] on May 25th 2020 - a clinical trial should be conducted to study its efficacy and tolerance in certain specific situations. Actually, the study would be agile, inexpensive, of simple execution.

The authors post the following propositions: first of all, as vaccination seems not avoiding delta variant infection, it has to be made clear that ethanol treatment is not believed alternative to the vaccination, but rather has to be considered synergistic with. Once proven this treatment is effective, the expected benefits on health would include: i) elimination, or at least reduction, of the viral load on the respiratory tract in times significantly shorter than natural times; ii) reduction of the viral pressure on the immune system of the infected subject, in order to slow down the progression to the disease; iii) reduction of the amount of active virus emitted during coughing or sneezing; iv) reduction of the spread of the infection; v)reduction of biological/health damage (lethality, pulmonary fibrosis, psychiatric disorders etc.).

If the proposed treatment were effective on health, an enormous fallout benefits should be expected: i) reduction in the economic burden linked to the lowered (if not stopped) work activity (the drop in Gross Domestic Product for the 2020 is close to 10% worldwide) and hospitalisation costs. Savings should be calculated in billions of euros; ii) faster return to normal life (school, work, sports, travel, reduction of measures restricting personal freedom etc.); iii) by virtue of its nonspecific mechanism of action, ethanol is theoretically active regardless of the variant in circulation; iv) moreover, it could be active on other “enveloped” viruses, possible sources of future epidemic outbreaks; v) the slowing down (see, the blocking) of the viral circulation allows to alleviate the pressure on the vaccination campaign; vi) ethanol is largely available and very cost-effective, allowing even countries with limited economic resources to cope with and efficiently manage SARS-CoV-2 epidemic.
Conclusion

Therefore, Scientists and Public Health Authorities should wisely consider and strongly promote a study on this topic.
Footnotes

Cite this article: Pietro Salvatori et al. The rationale of ethanol inhalation for disinfection of the respiratory tract in SARS-CoV-2-positive asymptomatic subjects. Pan African Medical Journal. 2021;40(201). 10.11604/pamj.2021.40.201.31211
Competing interests

The author declares no competing interests.
Authors’ contributions

The author has read and agreed to the final manuscript.
References

1.Sungnak W, Huang N, Bécavin C, Berg M, Queen R, Litvinukova M, et al. SARS-CoV-2 entry factors are highly expressed in nasal epithelial cells together with innate immune genes. Nat Med. 2020 May;26(5):681–687. doi: 10.1038/s41591-020-0868-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
2.Polak SB, Van Gool IC, Cohen D, von der Thüsen JH, van Paassen J. A systematic review of pathological findings in COVID-19: a