SoylentNews

This message is to customers with VPSs on our legacy SolusVM system.

At approximately 20:34 eastern (GMT -4) on May 2, recently published SaltStack vulnerabilities (CVE-2020-11651, CVE-2020-11652) were used to launch cryptocurrency miners on our SolusVM host nodes. The attack disrupted various services in order to allocate as much CPU as possible to the miners. SSH and QEMU processes were killed on some of our CentOS 6 KVM hosts, causing extended downtime in certain cases.

Upon detecting the disruption, we quickly began to re-enable SSH, disable and remove Salt, kill related processes, and boot shutdown KVM guests. After careful analysis of the exploit used, we do not believe any data was compromised.

RamNode was not specifically targeted, but rather anyone running SaltStack versions prior to the one released a few days ago (April 29).

Our OpenStack Cloud services were not impacted since we do not use SaltStack for them.

We take security seriously and will revise our configuration management and software updating protocols to reduce the chance of similar issues in the future. We apologize for any inconvenience and will continue to monitor.

Thanks,

RamNode

Coincidentally, SoylentNews was already taking steps to do our own server backups, separate from RamNode. Further, we currently have Linode providing backups of beryllium, boron and helium which would also allow us to recover.

Original Submission

Biologists Invent a New Way to Fight Viruses with Llama Blood and Molecular Super Glue

upstart writes in with an IRC submission for AzumaHazuki:

Biologists invent a new way to fight viruses with llama blood and molecular super glue:

For more than 20 years, researchers have tried with limited success to engineer antibodies into new treatments for bacterial and viral infections. Now, a team of scientists has come up with a new approach: fastening together tiny antibodies from llama blood with a type of bacterial super glue. The interconnected antibodies protect mice from two dangerous viruses, and they could subdue other pathogens.

The new work has been able to bypass a lot of the hurdles that stymied previous attempts, says protein engineer Jennifer Maynard of the University of Texas, Austin. I think this will be a very general technology that will be useful for infectious diseases and for cancer.

[...] The study shows that the small antibody approach is possible and gives new opportunities to optimize it, Wichgers Schreur says. Researchers still need to answer several questions before they can think about testing the strategy in people, he says, such as whether they can produce sufficient amounts of the linked antibodies. He adds that the approach could work against other types of viruses, but it probably won't be ready in time to fight the coronavirus causing the current pandemic.

Original Submission

First Drug Known to Work Against SARS-CoV-2 Imaged in Action

upstart writes in with an IRC submission for AzumaHazuki:

First drug known to work against SARS-CoV-2 imaged in action:

Just this week, we had the first promising report of a drug that appears to improve the recovery time of patients suffering from COVID-19. Hot on the heels of that announcement, a scientific journal has released a paper that describes how the drug interferes with the virus. While there's no real surprises in what has been revealed, it provides key details of how SARS-CoV-2 can be blocked.

[...] Remdesivir, which saw a large clinical trial produce promising results, is a drug that's designed to target one of these virus-specific vulnerabilities. The coronavirus genome is encoded using the chemical RNA, as opposed to the DNA used for our genome. In fact, there's nothing about our cells that requires them to make an RNA copy of an RNA molecule. As a result, the coronavirus genome encodes proteins that do this RNA-to-RNA copying, called an RNA-dependent RNA polymerase. Remdesivir was designed to look like one of the building blocks of RNA in the hope that it would bind to an RNA virus' polymerase and inhibit it.

That said, this drug was designed with the intention of inhibiting the polymerase of a different virus (Ebola), so it wasn't guaranteed to work against coronavirus. And our cells need to make RNA copies of DNA, a process that's similar enough that remdesivir could interfere with that, too.

Still, tests in cells had been promising enough to drive testing in humans. While that testing was starting, a group of Chinese scientists decided to look into how remdesivir actually works. To do so, they decided to figure out how the drug interacted with the coronavirus RNA polymerase at the atomic level. And that requires a technique to determine where all the atoms in the protein and drug are.

Original Submission

NIH Abruptly Cuts Coronavirus Research Funding, Alarming Scientists

upstart writes in with an IRC submission for Fnord666:

NIH abruptly cuts coronavirus research funding, alarming scientists:

Researchers expressed alarm this week after the National Institutes of Health abruptly cancelled funding for a long-standing research project by US and Chinese scientists to examine how coronaviruses leap from bats to humans, potentially causing devastating pandemics such as the one we are currently experiencing by a coronavirus genetically linked to those found in bats.

The funding cut could set back critical research into preventing such disease spread, scientists say. They also expressed dismay that the decision was prompted by unfounded conspiracy theories and what some see as a wider attempt by the Trump administration to deflect criticism of its handling of the pandemic by blaming China for unleashing the disease.

The NIH has not provided a clear explanation for its move to cancel the funds, which occurred April 24 and was first reported by Politico Monday, April 27. However, in emails exchanges published April 30 by Science magazine, it is clear that the NIH was motivated by conspiracy theories that allege without evidence that the virus was somehow released by Chinese researchers in Wuhan, the central Chinese city where the pandemic began.

The grant that is now going unfunded is titled Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence, and it was written by EcoHealth Alliance, Inc., a non-profit based in New York that collaborates with a leading Chinese researcher who studies bat coronaviruses in Wuhan. The NIH initially funded the work in 2014, providing $3.1 million for five years. The NIH then renewed the grant in 2019 after the work received an outstanding peer-review score, according to Science.

Original Submission

Florida Man Stalks Beach as Grim Reaper to Protest Reopening Amid Pandemic

upstart writes in with an IRC submission for nutherguy:

Florida man stalks beach as Grim Reaper to protest reopening amid pandemic:

Florida's governor, Ron DeSantis, announced on Friday that state parks will soon reopen, even as the coronavirus pandemic continued and Death himself stalked the beaches of the Sunshine state.

In fairness, the Grim Reaper in question was actually Daniel Uhlfelder, a lawyer and campaigner for public beach access who put on a cowl and wielded a scythe in an attempt to alert Floridians to the dangers of reopening their economy too soon.

As footage of a socially distanced interview with a TV reporter at Miramar Beach in Walton county went viral, Uhlfelder told CNN: "We aren't at the point now where we have enough testing, enough data, enough preparation for what's going to be coming to our state from all over the world from this pandemic.

"I know how beautiful and attractive our beaches are. But if we don't take measures to control things, this virus is going to get really, really out of control."

Original Submission

Dossier Lays Out Virus Case Against China

upstart writes in with an IRC submission for GrandFireWizard:

Dossier lays out virus case against China:

China deliberately suppressed or destroyed evidence of the coronavirus outbreak in an assault on international transparency that cost tens of thousands of lives, according to a dossier prepared by concerned Western governments on the COVID-19 contagion.

The 15-page research document, obtained by The Saturday Telegraph, lays the foundation for the case of negligence being mounted against China.

It states that to the endangerment of other countries the Chinese government covered-up news of the virus by silencing or disappearing doctors who spoke out, destroying evidence of it in laboratories and refusing to provide live samples to international scientists who were working on a vaccine.

Original Submission

Surviving COVID-19: A Disease Tolerance Perspective

hubie writes:

There is an interesting editorial in the most recent release of the journal Science Advances questioning the heavy virus-focused approach in attacking the COVID-19 virus outbreak. I know there are some who frequent this site who are much smarter about these things than I, and I thought it would be an interesting topic for discussion.

The editorial is written by Janelle Ayres of the Salk Institute for Biological Studies. She describes the race to find new antiviral solutions to combat this virus and she notes that should an effective solution be found, it will be effective for the fraction of infected patients that develop mild cases of COVID-19 by shortening their length of infection and for reducing transmission to other hosts. However, for those whom progress along the downward spiral (pneumonia, respiratory failure, etc.), their fate depends upon how their body responds to the virus. The need here is to keep them alive until their body can work through the infection. While hospitals are scrambling to find respirators, beds, and other equipment to keep patients alive, the scientists are focusing on antivirals and not on the drugs that promote physiological function during the infection.

There is no scientific or public health reason for why we have not developed such therapeutics. It was described more than a decade ago that the infection defense response relies on essential mechanisms for survival that limit damage to the host and promote physiological function, rather than targeting the pathogen. These mechanisms are called disease tolerance mechanisms encoded by the host's cooperative defense system and are essential for survival following infections and operate to achieve the same goal as supportive care. The cooperative defense system also encodes antivirulence mechanisms that neutralize pathogen and host-derived pathogenic signals that cause damage.

One of the advantage therapeutics has is that there is less of a chance for drug resistance to occur because the therapeutics target the host and not the virus.

The simple explanation for this disconnect is that the perspective for combating infectious diseases shared by scientists is incomplete. The fields of immunology and microbiology have focused on understanding strategies to kill the infection, which has provided us with some of the most important innovations for global health: vaccines and antimicrobials. However, while this perspective is valuable, it is not enough. Instead of asking "how do we fight infections?", we might start asking "how do we survive infections?". To understand the answer to this question, we must approach infectious diseases at the molecular, cellular, organ, physiological, and organismal levels. We have an understanding of the mechanisms of disease pathogenesis for COVID-19 related pathologies, and now, we need to understand the mechanism that restore normal function in the body and how we can drug these pathways for COVID-19 treatment.

Journal Reference:
Janelle S. Ayres, Janelle S. Ayres. Surviving COVID-19: A disease tolerance perspective [open], Science Advances (DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.abc1518)

Original Submission

"They're Writing COVID on All the Death Certificates": NYC Funeral Directors Doubt Legitimacy

upstart writes in with an IRC submission for nutherguy:

"They're Writing COVID On All the Death Certificates": NYC Funeral Directors Doubt Legitimacy of Deaths Attributed to Pandemic. - Global Research:

Project Veritas today released another video featuring conversations with funeral home directors and their staff throughout New York City questioning the number of deaths officially attributed to the COVID-19 pandemic.

In late April, a Project Veritas reporter spoke with Michael Lanza, the director of Staten Island's Colonial Funeral Home.

To be honest with you, all of the death certificates are writing COVID on it, they re writing COVID on all the death certificates, Lanza said.

Lanza said DeBlasio might see inflated COVID death tallies as a way to bring more money to New York City.

Whether they had a positive test or didn't, so I think again this is my personal opinion, I think like the mayor and our city they re looking for federal funding and the more they put COVID on the death certificate the more they can ask from the federal funds.

The Staten Island funeral director said it did not add up to him.

I think it's political, so, I m going to turn around and say: You know, like, not everybody that we have here that has COVID on the death certificate died of COVID. Can I prove that? No, but that is my suspicion.

Original Submission

South Korean Scientists Doubt COVID-19 Reinfections

stormwyrm writes:

There have been worrying signs that it is possible to have COVID-19 reinfection, such that getting sick with the disease and recovering might not confer subsequent immunity to the disease as with other similar diseases. This would make controlling the spread of the disease much more difficult. However, further studies by Korean infectious disease experts seem to show that these reports of reinfection may be due to false positives, since the PCR tests South Korea uses for diagnosing COVID-19 infections also detect remnant RNA strands of the virus, which can persist in the body of a previously infected person for months without causing further disease. The Korea Herald reports:

South Korea's infectious disease experts said Thursday that dead virus fragments were the likely cause of over 260 people here testing positive again for the novel coronavirus days and even weeks after marking full recoveries.

Oh Myoung-don, who leads the central clinical committee for emerging disease control, said the committee members found little reason to believe that those cases could be COVID-19 reinfections or reactivations, which would have made global efforts to contain the virus much more daunting.

The tests detected the ribonucleic acid of the dead virus, said Oh, a Seoul National University hospital doctor, at a press conference Thursday held at the National Medical Center.

He went on to explain that in PCR tests, or polymerase chain reaction tests, used for COVID-19 diagnosis, genetic materials of the virus amplify during testing, whether it is from a live virus or just from fragments of dead virus cells that can take months to clear from recovered patients.

Original Submission

Top Chinese Cyber Spy Crashes Australian Press Conference to Defend Chinese COVID Origins

An Anonymous Coward writes:

A Chinese official who was a cyber spy hijacked a press conference to defend China's position in the midst of Australia calling for an independent inquiry into the source of the COVID-19 virus. The Chinese official, Long Zhou, stated that "there is no absolute freedom in this world" while denying China had launched Cyber attacks. Australian officials have responded to this event by cancelling events with "Twiggy" Forrest and stating the costs for purchasing all medical equipment procured by the billionaire would be reimbursed. The fallout from Twiggy's decision to allow China to gatecrash a major media event is he will now find himself out in the cold with a source from Canberra saying Twiggy will find the door to Canberra is closed .

Original Submission

First Bit of Success from a Randomized Trial of a COVID-19 Treatment [UPDATED]

upstart writes in with an IRC submission for Bytram:

First bit of success from a randomized trial of a COVID-19 treatment [UPDATED]:

Update, 5:40pm ET, April 29: Additional data on remdesivir's effects from a separate study are described below the original article.

Today, Dr. Anthony Fauci announced the first potential treatment for COVID-19 had emerged from a randomized clinical trial sponsored in part by the National Institutes of Health. The drug, remdesivir, significantly shortened the recovery time for patients with COVID-19, triggering an ethical clause that allowed the placebo group to receive the real drug. Unfortunately, that cut the trial short before a significant effect on mortality was clear.

Fauci made the announcement while speaking to the press with President Donald Trump in the White House.

Remdesivir was originally developed to target a different virus: Ebola. It works by binding to the enzyme that copies the RNA genome of the Ebola virus. Since our cells don't need to make copies of RNA, the hope has been that we can find drugs that target the viral enzyme but not any that our own cells need. Testing had already indicated it was safe for general use, suggesting that remdesivir was successful in this regard. Unfortunately, it didn't clearly work against the Ebola virus, leaving it the very large collection of drugs that are safe but ineffective.

With the onset of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, remdesivir received renewed interest, given that the new virus also has an RNA genome and enzymes dedicated to copying it. While the drug wasn't designed specifically to bind these proteins, the overlapping biochemical needs of the Ebola and SARS-CoV-2 enzymes meant that there was a chance that the drug would be effective, leading to some early anecdotal reports of its use.

This appears to be the first report of a non-anecdotal test of the drug. Fauci said that the trial, conducted in the United States and various European countries, had enrolled 1,090 patients. Those participants were randomly assigned to receive the drug or placebo, and the primary measure of success was time to recovery—how quickly the patients could be discharged from the hospital or resume normal activities. By this measure, remdesivir was a significant success; those receiving the drug took an average of 11 days to recover; those on the placebo took 15 days. That's a 30 percent faster recovery, a result that's statistically significant given the size of the trial population.

[...] On the same day that Anthony Fauci announced the positive results of a large clinical trial of the antiviral drug remdesivir, the research journal The Lancet released a smaller randomized study of the same drug from China. In this study, the researchers had planned on a large-enough population of patients for their study design to have a high probability of producing significant results. But the severe restrictions in place in Wuhan cut the number of patients in their hospitals that met the study's selection criteria, leading to its termination with a small population (only 237 patients). Potentially confusing matters, the participants were allowed to continue some other untested treatments, including anti-virals and immune-system modulators.

[...] None of the results were statistically significant, but the researchers saw a result consistent with what Dr. Fauci announced today: those taking remdesivir reached clinical improvement faster than those in the placebo group. Had the trial involved more patients, it might have found a significant improvement here. Since the total number of people needing ventilators was even smaller, there was no chance of a significant result here.

Original Submission

First Randomized Trial of Remdesivir Suggests Antiviral Drug is Not Associated with Significant Clinical Benefits

upstart writes in with an IRC submission for Bytram:

First randomized trial of remdesivir suggests antiviral drug is not associated with significant clinical benefits, more research needed:

Although their study is the first randomised controlled trial (considered the gold standard for evaluating the effectiveness of interventions) of remdesivir, the authors caution that interpretation of their findings is limited because the study was stopped early after they were unable to recruit enough patients due to the steep decline in cases in China*. They conclude that more evidence from ongoing clinical trials is needed to better understand whether remdesivir can provide meaningful clinical benefit.

In the absence of any known treatment for COVID-19, remdesivir is one of a handful of experimental drugs undergoing clinical trials worldwide. It has only been available to patients with COVID-19 on compassionate grounds (the use of unapproved drugs when no other treatment is available). In the trial, all patients received standard care including lopinavir-ritonavir, interferons, and corticosteroids.

"Unfortunately, our trial found that while safe and adequately tolerated, remdesivir did not provide significant benefits over placebo," says Professor Bin Cao from China-Japan Friendship Hospital and Capital Medical University in China, who led the research. "This is not the outcome we hoped for, but we are mindful that we were only able to enroll 237 of the target 453 patients because the COVID-19 outbreak was brought under control in Wuhan. What's more, restrictions on bed availability resulted in most patients being enrolled later in the disease course, so we were unable to adequately assess whether earlier treatment with remdesivir might have provided clinical benefit."

He continues: "Future studies need to determine whether earlier treatment with remdesivir, higher doses, or combination with other antivirals or SARS-CoV-2 neutralising antibodies, might be more effective in those with severe illness."

Remdesivir was originally developed to treat Ebola, and is designed to interfere with the way a virus reproduces, thereby stopping it from multiplying inside the body. It has been shown to successfully block SARS-CoV-2 from replicating in vitro, and had activity against other coronavirus infections like severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), and COVID-19 in animal studies. Case studies have also reported benefit in some severely ill patients with COVID-19, but until now, there have been no clinical trials of remdesivir, so its efficacy against COVID-19 in patients is unknown.

Original Submission

Tests in Recovered Patients in S. Korea Found False Positives, Not Reinfections, Experts Say

upstart writes in with an IRC submission for carny:

Tests in recovered patients in S. Korea found false positives, not reinfections, experts say:

SEOUL South Korea's infectious disease experts said Thursday that dead virus fragments were the likely cause of over 260 people here testing positive again for the novel coronavirus days and even weeks after marking full recoveries.

Oh Myoung-don, who leads the central clinical committee for emerging disease control, said the committee members found little reason to believe that those cases could be COVID-19 reinfections or reactivations, which would have made global efforts to contain the virus much more daunting.

The tests detected the ribonucleic acid of the dead virus, said Oh, a Seoul National University hospital doctor, at a press conference Thursday held at the National Medical Center.

He went on to explain that in PCR tests, or polymerase chain reaction tests, used for COVID-19 diagnosis, genetic materials of the virus amplify during testing, whether it is from a live virus or just from fragments of dead virus cells that can take months to clear from recovered patients.

The PCR tests cannot distinguish whether the virus is alive or dead, he added, and this can lead to false positives.

PCR testing that amplifies genetics of the virus is used in Korea to test COVID-19, and relapse cases are due to technical limits of the PCR testing.

As of Sunday, 263 people in Korea tested positive for the disease again after being declared virus-free, of which 17 were minors or teens, the National Medical Center said.

Original Submission

A Close Look at the Frontrunning Coronavirus Vaccines as of April 28 (Updated)

upstart writes in with an IRC submission for Bytram:

A Close Look at the Frontrunning Coronavirus Vaccines As of April 28 (updated):

There's plenty of news on the coronavirus vaccine front, so let's have a look. If you need some details on the different sorts of vaccines in general, here's the background post, which should help this one make sense. This is a rapidly advancing field, with a huge number of programs. Some of the players are doing a lot more than they're talking about, while others (as is always the case) are talking much more loudly than their actions really justify. The signal/noise isn't great, but this will be an attempt to make sense of the landscape as of today.

Update: I should put in the links to the larger vaccine lists, as I did in the earlier post. Here's a good overview of the coronavirus vaccine world in a recent Nature Reviews Drug Discovery. The official WHO list is here, and at BioCentury they have constantly updated open-access summaries of the vaccines and other therapies that are in the clinic and the ones that are still preclinical. They ve also recently published this excellent overview of vaccine issues in this area.

[...] So by my count, the biggest and most advanced programs include two inactivated virus vaccines, three different adenovirus vector vaccines, two mRNA possibilities, a DNA vaccine, and a recombinant protein. That's a pretty good spread of mechanisms, and there are of course plenty more coming up right behind these. You cannot do the tiniest search for such information without being inundated with press releases about companies working on coronavirus vaccines — not complaining here — and moving on to smaller companies would make this post multiple times longer. I ll update as more news comes out and add in more companies and candidates.

Original Submission

Trump Admin Threatens to Sue States that Don't Lift Pandemic Orders

upstart writes in with an IRC submission for Bytram:

Trump admin threatens to sue states that don't lift pandemic orders:

The Trump administration is threatening to sue states and municipalities whose pandemic orders infringe on people's rights or cause "undue interference with the national economy."

"I am directing each of our United States Attorneys to also be on the lookout for state and local directives that could be violating the constitutional rights and civil liberties of individual citizens," US Attorney General William Barr wrote yesterday in a memo to all 94 US attorneys' offices. The Barr memo said that "even in times of emergency, when reasonable and temporary restrictions are placed on rights, the First Amendment and federal statutory law prohibit discrimination against religious institutions and religious believers." The memo is available at The Washington Post website.

Barr's memo is not just aimed at protecting members of religious groups. He continued:

Original Submission

Researchers Crack COVID-19 Genome Signature

upstart writes in with an IRC submission for TurkeyWaddle:

Researchers crack COVID-19 genome signature:

Using machine learning, a team of Western computer scientists and biologists have identified an underlying genomic signature for 29 different COVID-19 DNA sequences.

This new data discovery tool will allow researchers to quickly and easily classify a deadly virus like COVID-19 in just minutes a process and pace of high importance for strategic planning and mobilizing medical needs during a pandemic.

The study also supports the scientific hypothesis that COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) has its origin in bats as Sarbecovirus, a subgroup of Betacoronavirus.

The findings, Machine learning using intrinsic genomic signatures for rapid classification of novel pathogens: COVID-19 case study, were published today in PLOS ONE.

The "ultra-fast, scalable, and highly accurate" classification system uses a new graphic-based, specialized software and decision-tree approach to illustrate the classification and arrive at a best choice out of all possible outcomes. The entire method uses a new graphic-based, specialized software to illustrate a best choice out of all tested possible outcomes.

Original Submission

Doctor's Note: Why Do We Get Fevers?

Doctor's Note: Why do we get fevers?:

One of the most prominent symptoms of COVID-19 is fever. So, if you are running a temperature, you should stay at home and self-isolate. When we get a fever, we usually respond by trying to bring our temperature down - usually by taking paracetamol.

But evidence suggests that a fever may be part of your body's strategy for fighting an infection rather than just a by-product of the infection.

What is a fever?

It is normal for your body's temperature to fluctuate throughout the day, and it is often highest in the evenings and lowest in the mornings.

A fever is usually defined as a temperature above 37.5 degrees Celcius (99.5 degrees Fahrenheit), but the temperature you read can vary depending on where you take it from.

When taken in the mouth, the average body temperature is usually between 36.5C (97.7F) and 37.2C (98.96F) but, taken in the armpit, it can be 0.2C to 0.3C (0.36F-0.54F) lower.

During the pandemic, there has been a shortage of thermometers, and without one, it can be difficult to determine whether you have a fever.

To assess whether you might have a fever without the use of a thermometer you can use the back of your hand to feel your forehead, check in the mirror for a flushed face, observe for chills, muscular aches and weakness and assess for dehydration from a fever by checking for darker, more concentrated urine.

Original Submission

Anti IL-6 for Coronavirus Patients: Does It Work, or Not?

upstart writes in with an IRC submission for Bytram:

Anti IL-6 For Coronavirus Patients: Does It Work, or Not?:

It's been looking for some time as if these coronavirus infections need a biphasic approach to therapy an antiviral approach earlier on, and for those in serious trouble, perhaps a shift to immune modulation as the body's reaction to the virus starts doing even more harm. That post goes into some detail on possible therapies targeting IL-6 for this purpose, and today we finally have some clinical data on the idea. Prepare yourself, if you are one of the many people who haven t had experience with investigational therapies but are watching to see how things play out with the pandemic. Because this is another one of those cases that will make you wonder what's going on.

There's an antibody against the IL-6 receptor from Roche/Genentech, tocilizumab (brand name Actemra), and this morning came preliminary word from France that the CORIMUNO-TOCI trial had produced positive results. This was in patients who had moderate to severe disease but were not in the ICU: 65 got standard of care, and 64 got standard of care plus tocilizumab (but note: the trial, although it has a control group, was open-label). The press release says that both deaths and the need for later ventilator support were significantly reduced in the treatment group, with no more adverse effects than in the control group.

The French team is also studying tocilizumab in patients in intensive care, and they re looking at another approved antibody to the IL-6 receptor as well, sarilumab (brand name Kevzara) from Sanofi and Regeneron. These two drug are both given for rheumatoid arthritis, with the same mechanism of action, but every antibody is a different beast. For example, tocilizumab is given i.v. and sarilumab is subcutaneous, so they have different pharmacokinetics right from the start.

And those results are certainly going to be interesting, because we have the results of a separate study on sarilumab this morning where it was shown to be almost completely ineffective. There had been an earlier report from China of efficacy for the drug, albeit in a small trial without a control group and if there's one thing that people should take away about drug discovery from this whole pandemic experience, it's that small uncontrolled trials cannot prove anything. All they can do is to point to something that might be interesting to study for real, and you should be ready for most such signals to turn out to be noise.

Original Submission

Original Submission

That emoji are so heavily used, it shouldn't be a surprise that they have caught the attention of people who research language and communication. A research article by Thomas Holtgraves and Caleb Robinson in the open access journal PLoS ONE looks at the effectiveness of emoji in conveying indirect meaning. Indirect replies are the kind where one needs to infer the real meaning in the statement and are typically done via the use of metaphors, sarcasm, and irony. These researchers here focused on the interpretation of face-threatening indirect replies, which are those that are ambiguous statements that don't answer the question, but their meaning is clear in the way they are answered. They looked at three types of replies, Opinions (Q: What did you think of my presentation?; A: It's hard to give a good presentation), Disclosure (Q: How are you doing in chemistry?; A: Chemistry is a difficult course), and Refusal (Q: Will you go out on a date with me Friday?; A: I sort my sock drawer on Fridays).

The researchers presented subjects with a scenario and a question. They were then presented with indirect answers that either did not include an emoji, that included an emoji with the text, or consisted only of an emoji. They found the presence of emoji allowed for the opinion and disclosure replies to be correctly interpreted faster and more accurate than if no emoji were used. However, emoji didn't seem to provide any advantage for refusals. They speculate that the indirect refusal replies, though they didn't answer the questions asked, there was no ambiguity in their meanings.

[...] Although in this research emoji facilitated recognition of intended indirect meaning for opinions and disclosures, there is no guarantee that emoji will always be facilitative. This is because the meaning of emoji is often ambiguous. For example, Miller et al [29] found that when participants rated the same emoji rendering, they disagreed on whether the conveyed sentiment was positive, neutral, or negative 25% of the time. Because of this it seems likely that emoji will sometimes hinder recognition of a sender's intended meaning. Still, emoji are ubiquitous, and users likely believe their use facilitates communication. It may be that the successful communicative use of emoji is unique to communicative dyads. That is, over time individuals in digital contact with one another may come to use and understand the meaning of certain (perhaps idiosyncratic) emoji.

Journal Reference
Thomas Holtgraves, Caleb Robinson. Emoji can facilitate recognition of conveyed indirect meaning, PLOS ONE (DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0232361)

Original Submission

After several months had passed, the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit held a remote oral hearing this week, giving both sides the opportunity to share their arguments.

First up was Ian Heath Gershengorn, attorney for the record labels, who described FLVTO.biz and 2conv.com as sites that help millions of people to infringe the copyrights of his clients.

[...] The attorney for FLVTO.biz and 2conv.com, Evan Fray-Witzer, has a completely different take on the case. He told the judges that the district court was right and that his client should not be dragged into a US lawsuit.

[...] "If you had an old fashioned tape recorder and you recorded hundreds of millions of songs and then you sent those out to users across the world, including more than 100 million in the United States, yes, you would be subject to jurisdiction in the United States for that misuse and abuse of your tape recorder," he said.

The music companies hope that the appeal court will agree. If not, then the US may have little recourse to deal with foreign pirates sites going forward.

[Disclaimer: I have a friend who signed a recording contract with Warner last year and is expecting a release shortly. --martyb].

Original Submission