adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

Business

What are antiviral COVID-19 pills and how could they help? – Global News

Published

 on


The United Kingdom on Thursday became the first country in the world to approve an orally ingested COVID-19 antiviral pill, developed by Merck and Ridgeback Biotherapeutics.

On Friday, COVID-19 vaccine maker Pfizer unveiled promising results on their experimental pill, claiming that it could cut rates of hospitalization and death from the virus by nearly 90 per cent.

300x250x1

Public health experts have described the implementation of the anti-viral pills as potentially game-changing in the fight against the pandemic, citing both their effectiveness in preventing severe disease and death as well as their low cost to produce.

Read more:
New Pfizer COVID-19 pill reduces hospital, death risk by 90%, company says

Here’s what you need to know about the anti-viral COVID-19 pills.

How does it work?

The antiviral drugs have intrigued health experts and epidemiologists in how they specifically target parts of the virus’ genetic code.

In the case of Merck’s molnupiravir, the drug, once ingested, targets an enzyme used by the coronavirus to reproduce itself.

When the coronavirus’ RNA begins to replicate within a cell, it would mistakenly pick up the drug and incorporate it into the RNA chain.

The drug would then insert errors into the virus’ genetic code — slowing its ability to spread and take over human cells.


Click to play video: 'Answering your COVID-19 questions – Nov. 4, 2021'



5:36
Answering your COVID-19 questions – Nov. 4, 2021


Answering your COVID-19 questions – Nov. 4, 2021

“So basically, if the virus is trying to replicate more and more copies of itself, one of the things it needs is to put that intact viral RNA into that new virus particle that’s going to be shed from the cell, and this drug basically really screws that whole process up,” explained Dr. Gerald Evans, chair of Infectious Diseases at Queen’s University.

“It creates like a faulty template to be able to undergo further replication.”

While Merck’s pill acts as a nucleoside analog that tries to introduce errors into the virus’ genetic code, Pfizer’s differs as an inhibitor that looks to block an enzyme the coronavirus needs in order to multiply.

Pfizer said its pill targets the part of the virus essential to viral replication, essentially meaning that it cannot become resistant to the drug itself.

Read more:
U.K. approves Merck antiviral pill to treat COVID-19

Both antiviral remedies would need to be taken over a period of five days, though the number of pills taken would differ between the brands.

Pfizer’s anti-viral concoction would need to be taken six times a day, with three tablets in the morning and another three at night. Merck’s treatment on the other hand needs eight pills in total, with four in the morning and four in the evening.

How effective are the pills?

In early October, Merck revealed that its pill cut the chances of COVID-19 hospitalization or death by 50 per cent in at-risk patients if its pill was given within five days of the disease’ onset.

The company said then that viral sequencing so far showed that its drug would be effective against all variants of COVID-19 — including the much more deadly Delta.


Click to play video: 'Is Merck’s COVID pill a game changer?'



6:47
Is Merck’s COVID pill a game changer?


Is Merck’s COVID pill a game changer?

On Friday, Pfizer said that its pill could reduce the chances of hospitalization or death by nearly 90 per cent should patients be treated within three days of the onset of symptoms, and 85 per cent within five days of onset.

Of the 1,219 patients in Pfizer’s study, 0.8 per cent were hospitalized and none died within 28 days after treatment compared to the seven per cent hospitalization rate and seven deaths in the placebo group who were not administered the drug.

Another two trials including people without underlying risks factors and people who were exposed to the virus but were not yet infected are still underway, the company said.

Are there side effects?

While both Pfizer and Merck’s drugs showed promising results, none were free from potential side effects.

Pfizer’s drug would have to be taken alongside an older antiviral called ritonavir, which works to boost the activity of inhibitors but could potentially cause gastrointestinal side effects and interfere with other medicines.

Similar drugs in the same class as Merck’s have also been linked to birth defects in some animal studies, though the company said that studies of its drug currently don’t show signs of it causing any birth defects or cancer.

Read more:
COVID-19 antiviral pill approved in U.K. still being reviewed by Health Canada

Both of the companies expressed confidence in their drug’s safety, despite having released only limited data on the treatments.

According to Pfizer, about 20 per cent of patients having taken the drug or a placebo experienced mostly mild adverse events, and that serious side effects were found in 1.7 per cent of those who took the drug.


Click to play video: 'Health Canada considers Merck’s experimental COVID-19 drug'



1:45
Health Canada considers Merck’s experimental COVID-19 drug


Health Canada considers Merck’s experimental COVID-19 drug – Oct 4, 2021

In Merck’s case, 12 per cent of patients who took the drug and 11 per cent who took a placebo experienced an adverse event. But the company’s pill targets the genetic code of the virus, leading to some experts questioning whether the drug could cause mutations like birth defects or tumours.

The U.K.’s regulatory agency said however that the pill’s ability to interact with DNA has been studied “extensively” and that it wouldn’t pose a risk to humans.

How could it change the fight against COVID-19?

While the U.K. remains the first and only country to have approved Merck’s antiviral pill, others aren’t too far behind.

U.S. advisers are set to meet later in November to vote on whether the drug should be authorized while Health Canada said it was still reviewing data from the pharmaceutical company before making its decision.

Merck has already etched out deals to sell more than 3 million courses of its drug so far, while the U.S. has already secured “millions of pill doses” of Pfizer’s antiviral pill according to President Joe Biden on Friday.


Click to play video: 'Fauci says Merck data on its COVID-19 pill treatment ‘impressive’'



1:06
Fauci says Merck data on its COVID-19 pill treatment ‘impressive’


Fauci says Merck data on its COVID-19 pill treatment ‘impressive’ – Oct 1, 2021

Dr. Sumon Chakrabarti told The Canadian Press that the “slow burn” of hospitalizations may have added more urgency to the U.K.’s authorization of the drug — a sentiment Evans also echoed.

And while there seems to be an urgency for its approval in other countries struggling from virus hospitalizations like Britain, both experts said that Canada’s health regulator would be sure to look to at it from a more domestic context.

Evans said that the vast majority of the Canadian population has already been vaccinated and protected against COVID-19 — essentially placing the antiviral drugs in a “niche” spot.

The drug wouldn’t specifically protect a person from contracting the virus, but would protect them from severe outcomes should they get it, according to Evans.

Read more:
Experimental pill fights COVID-19, drug-maker Merck claims

“So this would be a drug, which is if you want to think about it, it’s in a kind of niche, and the niche is an unvaccinated person where you don’t have that enormous protective effect of vaccines,” he said.

However, the the medication could potentially push undecided people from getting the vaccine, warned Evans.

“If this drug proves to be useful, it’s going to make people who otherwise should go for the vaccine … say ‘well, no, no we got an antiviral here, so I think I will not bother to get the vaccine,’ and that’s one of the only drawbacks to it right?”

With files from The Canadian Press, the Associated Press and Reuters

© 2021 Global News, a division of Corus Entertainment Inc.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Tesla Promises Cheap EVs by 2025 | OilPrice.com – OilPrice.com

Published

 on



Tesla Promises Cheap EVs by 2025 | OilPrice.com



300x250x1


Charles Kennedy

Charles Kennedy

Charles is a writer for Oilprice.com

More Info

Related News

Tesla

Tesla has promised to start selling cheaper models next year, days after a Reuters report revealed that the company had shelved its plans for an all-new Tesla that would cost only $25,000.

The news that Tesla was scrapping the Model 2 came amid a drop in sales and profits, and a decision to slash a tenth of the company’s global workforce. Reuters also noted increased competition from Chinese EV makers.

Tesla’s deliveries slumped in the first quarter for the first annual drop since the start of the pandemic in 2020, missing analyst forecasts by a mile in a sign that even price cuts haven’t been able to stave off an increasingly heated competition on the EV market.

Profits dropped by 50%, disappointing investors and leading to a slump in the company’s share prices, which made any good news urgently needed. Tesla delivered: it said it would bring forward the date for the release of new, lower-cost models. These would be produced on its existing platform and rolled out in the second half of 2025, per the BBC.

Reuters cited the company as warning that this change of plans could “result in achieving less cost reduction than previously expected,” however. This suggests the price tag of the new models is unlikely to be as small as the $25,000 promised for the Model 2.

The decision is based on a substantially reduced risk appetite in Tesla’s management, likely affected by the recent financial results and the intensifying competition with Chinese EV makers. Shelving the Model 2 and opting instead for cars to be produced on existing manufacturing lines is the safer move in these “uncertain times”, per the company.

Tesla is also cutting prices, as many other EV makers are doing amid a palpable decline in sales in key markets such as Europe, where the phaseout of subsidies has hit demand for EVs seriously. The cut is of about $2,000 on all models that Tesla currently sells.

By Charles Kennedy for Oilprice.com

More Top Reads From Oilprice.com:

Join the discussion | Back to homepage

Related posts

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Why the Bank of Canada decided to hold interest rates in April – Financial Post

Published

 on


Article content

Divisions within the Bank of Canada over the timing of a much-anticipated cut to its key overnight interest rate stem from concerns of some members of the central bank’s governing council that progress on taming inflation could stall in the face of stronger domestic demand — or even pick up again in the event of “new surprises.”

“Some members emphasized that, with the economy performing well, the risk had diminished that restrictive monetary policy would slow the economy more than necessary to return inflation to target,” according to a summary of deliberations for the April 10 rate decision that were published Wednesday. “They felt more reassurance was needed to reduce the risk that the downward progress on core inflation would stall, and to avoid jeopardizing the progress made thus far.”

Article content

300x250x1

Others argued that there were additional risks from keeping monetary policy too tight in light of progress already made to tame inflation, which had come down “significantly” across most goods and services.

Some pointed out that the distribution of inflation rates across components of the consumer price index had approached normal, despite outsized price increases and decreases in certain components.

“Coupled with indicators that the economy was in excess supply and with a base case projection showing the output gap starting to close only next year, they felt there was a risk of keeping monetary policy more restrictive than needed.”

In the end, though, the central bankers agreed to hold the rate at five per cent because inflation remained too high and there were still upside risks to the outlook, albeit “less acute” than in the past couple of years.

Despite the “diversity of views” about when conditions will warrant cutting the interest rate, central bank officials agreed that monetary policy easing would probably be gradual, given risks to the outlook and the slow path for returning inflation to target, according to the summary of deliberations.

Article content

They considered a number of potential risks to the outlook for economic growth and inflation, including housing and immigration, according to summary of deliberations.

The central bankers discussed the risk that housing market activity could accelerate and further boost shelter prices and acknowledged that easing monetary policy could increase the likelihood of this risk materializing. They concluded that their focus on measures such as CPI-trim, which strips out extreme movements in price changes, allowed them to effectively look through mortgage interest costs while capturing other shelter prices such as rent that are more reflective of supply and demand in housing.

Recommended from Editorial

  1. Bank of Canada governor Tiff Macklem during a news conference in Ottawa.

    BoC ‘committed to finishing the job’ on inflation:‘ Macklem

  2. Bank of Canada governor Tiff Macklem at a press conference in Ottawa.

    Time for Macklem to turn before it’s too late

  3. Canada's inflation rate picked up slightly in March, but the consumer price index (CPI) release suggested that core inflation continued to slow.

    ‘Welcome news’ on inflation raises odds of rate cut

They also agreed to keep a close eye on immigration in the coming quarters due to uncertainty around recent announcements by the federal government.

“The projection incorporated continued strong population growth in the first half of 2024 followed by much softer growth, in line with the federal government’s target for reducing the share of non-permanent residents,” the summary said. “But details of how these plans will be implemented had not been announced. Governing council recognized that there was some uncertainty about future population growth and agreed it would be important to update the population forecast each quarter.”

• Email: bshecter@nationalpost.com

Bookmark our website and support our journalism: Don’t miss the business news you need to know — add financialpost.com to your bookmarks and sign up for our newsletters here.

Share this article in your social network

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Meta shares sink after it reveals spending plans – BBC.com

Published

 on


Woman looks at phone in front of Facebook image - stock shot.

Shares in US tech giant Meta have sunk in US after-hours trading despite better-than-expected earnings.

The Facebook and Instagram owner said expenses would be higher this year as it spends heavily on artificial intelligence (AI).

Its shares fell more than 15% after it said it expected to spend billions of dollars more than it had previously predicted in 2024.

300x250x1

Meta has been updating its ad-buying products with AI tools to boost earnings growth.

It has also been introducing more AI features on its social media platforms such as chat assistants.

The firm said it now expected to spend between $35bn and $40bn, (£28bn-32bn) in 2024, up from an earlier prediction of $30-$37bn.

Its shares fell despite it beating expectations on its earnings.

First quarter revenue rose 27% to $36.46bn, while analysts had expected earnings of $36.16bn.

Sophie Lund-Yates, lead equity analyst at Hargreaves Lansdown, said its spending plans were “aggressive”.

She said Meta’s “substantial investment” in AI has helped it get people to spend time on its platforms, so advertisers are willing to spend more money “in a time when digital advertising uncertainty remains rife”.

More than 50 countries are due to have elections this year, she said, “which hugely increases uncertainty” and can spook advertisers.

She added that Meta’s “fortunes are probably also being bolstered by TikTok’s uncertain future in the US”.

Meta’s rival has said it will fight an “unconstitutional” law that could result in TikTok being sold or banned in the US.

President Biden has signed into law a bill which gives the social media platform’s Chinese owner, ByteDance, nine months to sell off the app or it will be blocked in the US.

Ms Lund-Yates said that “looking further ahead, the biggest risk [for Meta] remains regulatory”.

Last year, Meta was fined €1.2bn (£1bn) by Ireland’s data authorities for mishandling people’s data when transferring it between Europe and the US.

And in February of this year, Meta chief executive Mark Zuckerberg faced blistering criticism from US lawmakers and was pushed to apologise to families of victims of child sexual exploitation.

Ms Lund-Yates added that the firm has “more than enough resources to throw at legal challenges, but that doesn’t rule out the risks of ups and downs in market sentiment”.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending