You must log in or register to comment.

WalkingTalker t1_j8bptsr wrote

Abstract looks like a pretty well run study with lots of candidates tested:

Evaluation of 1867 extracts and 18 compounds for virus spike protein binding to host cell ACE2 receptors in a SARS-CoV-2 pseudotyped virus system identified 310 extracts derived from 188 species across 76 families (3 fungi, 73 plants) that exhibited ≥ 50% viral entry inhibition activity at 20 µg/mL. Extracts exhibiting mammalian cytotoxicity > 15% and those containing cardiotoxic cardiac glycosides were eliminated. Three extracts were selected for further testing against four pseudotyped variants and infectious SARS-CoV-2 and were then further chemically characterized, revealing the potent (EC50 < 5 µg/mL) antiviral activity of Solidago altissima L. (Asteraceae) flowers and Pteridium aquilinum (L.) Kuhn (Dennstaedtiaceae) rhizomes.


CocktailChemist t1_j8cctne wrote

Will be interesting to see what the active compounds are and what their prevalence in the extracts was. Because if you assumed that they were pure compounds 5 ug/mL is probably somewhere in the 10 uM range, which is not what you’d hope for from a potential hit.


SaltZookeepergame691 t1_j8colfg wrote

Aye, Figure 3 showing the efficacy vs remdesivir is basically all we need to see. Huge difference in observed 'potency', even accounting for their presentation of different units... and this against a drug that is far from optimal anyway.

>Because if you assumed that they were pure compounds 5 ug/mL is probably somewhere in the 10 uM range, which is not what you’d hope for from a potential hit.

Indeed. 99% of SciRep papers reporting successful anti-SARS-CoV-2 activity fall over completely at the first glance of the concentrations used/required.

Guarantee no one is gonna want to/be physiologically able to consume enough of these extracts to achieve 10 uM lung tissue concentrations, even if these extracts are absorbable, survive the GI tract, accumulate in lung, and don't kill or maim you first.


CocktailChemist t1_j8ei0qg wrote

I’ll give them some wiggle room since it’s entirely possible that some minor but extremely active constituent is giving all the response (this has happened to me where I remade a compound that turned out to be inactive compared to previous preparations because it was too pure and didn’t have the active impurities of what had been made before), but it is useful to have that perspective about the potential limitations of what they’re seeing. Such are the challenges of natural product chemistry.


chaoticidealism t1_j8brzbk wrote

Guess it's worth a try. Just gather up a bunch of plants, throw the kitchen sink at it, and see what works.

Odds are against it getting from this early cell-culture thing to an actual pharmaceutical. But if a lot of people are testing a lot of different substances, you never know... in the end you might end up with a useful medication.

At least they remembered to control for multiple comparisons.


PhillipBrandon t1_j8c0dix wrote

Could someone describe the entry inhibition mechanism of these extracts? What's going on a cellular (molecular?) level to keep SARS-CoV-2 out?


xElMerYx t1_j8df0od wrote

Probably the next paper or two, this is the "bruh we observed something, can we get some money to observe it more please?" paper


Darkhorseman81 t1_j8chhbd wrote

Banlec is pretty good, too. A Lecithin found in Banana. Bird Flu, Covid, Pneumonia, slows down herpes viruses and rna viruses.

We really need better analysis of all the chemical constitutients of plants, and their uses.


Slapbox t1_j8cbeqe wrote

Is tall goldenrod different than goldenrod?


QuantumFork t1_j8cc3p5 wrote

It’s goldenrod, but tall.

Actually, “goldenrod” is apparently a genus, Solidago, while “tall goldenrod” is one of its species (Solidago altissima, appropriately enough). TIL.


Moneyley t1_j8cdb9f wrote

Regular goldenrod is 5'11, tall goldenrod mogs at 6'2


oldbabygravymaker t1_j8ckl7s wrote

But only one can get a date for potential reproduction on "Only Golden Rods"


jjjam t1_j8ed73f wrote

Eagle fern would specifically NOT be a wildflower. Ferns don't flower.


zzthealchemist t1_j8bwkeh wrote

I think I read some studies on chamomile blocking coronavirus


TikkiTakiTomtom t1_j8fnav5 wrote

As a guy who loves this stuff, I just have to wonder where people just come up with this stuff? Like how do you just one day decide to investigate, wildflowers and test if they have potential uses for Covid treatments?


DuePomegranate t1_j8h5ul1 wrote

You actually assemble a bunch of extracts from all kinds of different plants (or moulds, or sponges, or insects or whatever), and then you license or offer it to any scientist/pharma who wants to screen your library for activity against whatever disease or enzyme they are interested in. That's how research in natural products is done.


GiovanniResta t1_j8hp7tv wrote

They analyzed 1867 extracs to find 2 that have (possibly) some effect.


TJSnider1984 t1_j8hautx wrote

Uhm, perhaps I've missed something but I'm troubled by the statement "Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) was used in the screen as a positive control of viral entry inhibition via the spike-ACE2 complex", given that hydroxychloroquine has been proven to be ineffective against Covid, ( )... How are they asserting that it's a "positive control" aka "some other treatment that is known to produce the expected effect"...

Is this some backhanded way of getting HCQ back on the "effective" list? And if they're using it improperly as a control, doesn't that sadly invalidate the study?

Please understand that I'm actually a believer in and student of Herbal medicine, but sadly know from experience how many false cures and panacea have been promoted.

So, have I missed or misunderstood something?


GiovanniResta t1_j8hps85 wrote


I'm not an expert, but from reference (4) in the article you cited, it appears that Hydroxychloroquine "is effective in inhibiting SARS-CoV-2 infection in vitro". So it was appropriate for this "in vitro" study.

Unfortunately effective "in vitro" does not always translate in effective "in vivo".


AutoModerator t1_j8boaln wrote

Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our normal comment rules apply to all other comments.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.


oh8oh8eighty8 t1_j8flv6t wrote

Pharmaceutical companies trying to make a profit on natural remedies once again…


LoquatBear t1_j8ccxov wrote

aren't their ancient depictions of what historians think is extinct species of goldenrod for many ancient treatments. Neat!


luckyLindy69 t1_j8emd32 wrote

Meanwhile … I’m using raw, local honey and bee pollen


FullMaxPowerStirner t1_j8dtne7 wrote

Ok so... there was a near-total blackout for more than two years over artemisia annua's curative effects against Covid, but now this? I don't get it.


slickhedstrong t1_j8bxidm wrote

pharma companies already lobbying to make this treatment illegal and this research be branded misinformation