Estrogen antagonists may be a viable treatment for Ebola

Discussion in 'Ebola' started by nograde, Oct 1, 2014.

  1. nograde

    nograde Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2013
    Messages:
    133
    ... and it's not exactly a secret. From http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebola_virus_disease:

     
  2. Such_Saturation

    Such_Saturation Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2013
    Messages:
    7,368
    Reminds me of that study with thyroxine and herpes [Effects of hypo- and hyperthyroid states on herpes simplex virus infectivity in the rat.]

    Actually, <<A 2014 study found that Amiodarone, an ion channel blocker used in the treatment of heart arrhythmias, blocks the entry of ebola virus into cells in vitro.>>

    <<Amiodarone chemically resembles thyroxine (thyroid hormone), and its binding to the nuclear thyroid receptor might contribute to some of its pharmacologic and toxic actions>>

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
  3. LucyL

    LucyL Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2013
    Messages:
    415
    Nitric oxide could be one of the linking pieces.

    Ray Peat wrote in Estrogen and Osteoporosis
    and in private correspondence, as I noted here he wrote
    Is there anything bad estrogen isn't involved in?
     
  4. Suikerbuik

    Suikerbuik Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2014
    Messages:
    700
    How do you define estrogen antagonists?

    From the actual study:
    So if estrogen antagonists are defined as drugs opposing the estrogen receptor and if these drugs do not affect cellular estrogen levels. Then I am not so sure if this has much relevance. The study that finds these drugs to be helpful, also says that these drugs do not work though the classical estrogen receptor, however the drug is termed according to this classical model.

    We know estrogen has non-genomic effects that for example also induce nitric oxide. But these effects are still because of estrogen alpha interacting with other proteins (I mean the induction of NO. The effects on the structure of water are ER indepedant, but this is irrelevant in this context). These drugs may inhibit NO synthesis and therefore you expect (not tested) higher INF, and this may play a possible role in vivo. However cell lines expressing low to no estrogen receptor also get infected easily..

    Mmmhh...? Sure these data on ER expression may be underrated. But, from this study, I absolutely don't think it's that clear that it is all estrogen and not some other properties of these drugs. (drugs do a lot). See below what the study itself come up with. I think this is more likely to be honest.

    EDIT: hopefully my thoughts are somewhat less confusing now.
     
  5. LucyL

    LucyL Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2013
    Messages:
    415
    Here is the link to the study FDA-Approved Selective Estrogen Receptor Modulators Inhibit Ebola Virus Infection

    Perhaps what is really needed is to define "estrogen receptors". From the study:
    In Ray's newsletter on estrogen receptors, he wrote that they (the proteins so identified) were basically a property of normal tissue, and the absence of an "estrogen receptor" is an indication that tissue is abnormal. But generally, Ray doesn't buy the theory of estrogen receptors at all, he says "Estrogen produces many effects without the "receptor".

    Chlomiphene is considered a rather potent anti-estrogen drug, it interrupts estrogen feedback to the hypothalmus.

    In Estrogen and brain aging... Ray writes:
    So much to consider.
     
  6. Suikerbuik

    Suikerbuik Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2014
    Messages:
    700
    Yeah absolutely.

    what I find strange is that estrogen agonists. However at lower maximal effects (41-54%) also lower ebola infection..??

    According to protein atlas, some tissue really do not have estrogen receptive proteins. But like I said maybe this is underrated.. I think it could depend on the context too. With reservation I thought Ray said this is in context of breast cancer tissue?
     
Loading...