19 Comments
User's avatar
RedPilledBoomer's avatar

Boy, must they hate the Japanese now. Especially for their pricing.

Andrew Devlin's avatar

Maybe those whose bodies have become spike protein factories through repeated jabs would benefit from a course of treatment with this?

SaHiB's avatar

Pineapple better. No jabs, but I just ate mine!

Andrew Devlin's avatar

I love pineapple! I remember buying one from a vendor who cut it up with a machete, fresh from the tree. Fantastic!

LCNY's avatar

Forgive my ignorance- but where can I learn more about how we are measuring viral load in such discussions?

SaHiB's avatar

Ensitrelvir looks to me to have plenty of covalent bonds. Linus Pauling rolls over in his grave!

Graham Wells's avatar

The FDA will be working hard to find a reason this shouldn't be used, while the media will stop people hearing about it as long as possible, and then tell everyone why it's dangerous.

STH's avatar

I do not take new experimental drugs especially for colds I already have natural immunity to. But it might be helpful for the elderly or immune compromised? If they don’t mind being a Guinea pig…again

idkfa's avatar

> achieving an approximately 30-fold reduction (bringing the viral load to 1/300 of its baseline level)

This is *extremely* misleading -- primarily because PLACEBO results in the reduction of the viral load as well.

From Phase 2A publication (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9578433/):

"The change from baseline in viral RNA level (log10 copies/mL) on day 4 was significantly greater in the ensitrelvir 125 mg (mean [SD], –2.677 [1.063]; difference from placebo, –1.408; P = 0.0029) and 250 mg (–2.761 [1.291]; difference from placebo, –1.492; P = 0.0039) groups versus the placebo group (–1.269 [1.228])."

Thus, we have the following results.

From BASELINE:

Dose-------------|----------Viral Titer (fraction)----------|----Viral Titer Fold Change

125 mg----------|----------0.0021------------------------|----------476

250 mg----------|----------0.0017------------------------|----------588

From PLACEBO:

Dose-------------|----------Viral Titer (fraction)---------|----Viral Titer Fold Change

125 mg----------|----------0.039------------------------|----------26

250 mg----------|----------0.032------------------------|----------31

That having been said, in Phase 2B, the Viral Titer fraction compared to placebo is only 0.39, and thus the fold change from placebo is *only 2.5 times*.

All that having been said, while PLACEBO (i.e., the immune system) results in very similar reduction of the viral load as well, it happens much slower, which ultimately produces the key benefit for the severely ill: quick reduction of the viral load.

This is the primary niche for these pharmaceutical products.

Toolste's avatar

2.5 times lower aint chump change imo If you think the virus floating around is not a good thing

idkfa's avatar

2.5 times is also not 30 times and not 300 times, eh?

My entire point is that the original statement by JLW is misleading as fuck.

Toolste's avatar

oh to be sure. what, you think this isnt some pharma company?

idkfa's avatar

I'm puzzled by JLW's praise. It *seems* to be a decent product, but is it definitely safe and definitely efficacious? Knowing what we know now, I think it's too early to tell.

rjt's avatar

Agreed.

Recall the description of Paxlovid as a "pause" button on a Covid infection. Rebound was reported in a couple of famous cases, possibly Fauci and Biden.

Without looking at the original data I have to wonder if the same target gives the same outcome.

I repeat my usual comment, would the infection not be better mitigated by paying attention to Vit. D levels?

GeoffPainPhD's avatar

Hi James, Have you found anything on Defluorination of Ensitrelvir inside or outside Humans?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ensitrelvir

Toolste's avatar

Big issue with Pax is rebound. what do we know about reboud with this? IMO, they should dose twice a long

David AuBuchon's avatar

Question: Had medicine wanted to develop lots of preperatory antivirals for covid before covid even existed, how successful would they have been? I would think extremely so. I suppose a related way of framing the question is: if medicine sanely went about trying to cure the common cold, would it not have done so 20 different ways by now?

GeoffPainPhD's avatar

Found the official warning that no Woman who is, or might become Pregnant, should take this drug due to Teratogenic concern.

https://geoffpain.substack.com/p/ensitrelvir-xocova-compound-s-217622