Hmmm. The Common Definition of Antidote is: ...a way of preventing or acting against something bad.

Virus, Bad.

High Dose Vitamin-C (in China):
https://www.sciencedirect.com/...

(Seems to be helping).

Hydroxychloroquine:
https://blogs.sciencemag.org/p...

(Seems to be very a effective treatment. So good it could almost be called an antidote...)

Except for our ecology has important reasons for having mosquitoes:

https://thewire.in/environment...

We need more research on what medicines in our vast established library of expired patent pharmaceuticals (public domain) are effective antidotes for this virus.

Hello Dopamina,

Thankyou for taking your time to review to review my post.

I would like to first point out this being the medium of Slashdot, I assumed the reader would not welcome a barrage of links and references: hence I curated two of the most-relevant examples firstly for background information:

1. A Special lecture at the world creditable university in Melbourne. By the extremely qualified Dr Devra Davis.

https://youtu.be/BwyDCHf5iCY

If you take the time to see this lecture, you will learn about the dedicate and extremely well-done science that has been done for the decades on this topic.

Secondly, I provided a detailed summary of the evidence:

2. A Literature Review of 86 scientific papers that gives an overview of the pre-existing scientific evidence on this topic.

The âzextraordinary evidenceâoe that you claim is required to change your established view on non-ionising radiation was provided, please take the time to review a representative sample of the 86 well researched papers listed as the references included in the review linked.

Personally, Iâ(TM)m inclined to trust the scientists who are most experienced in this field, sharing their view that the science Is well established. - However, like many other important scientific topics, isnâ(TM)t widely accepted (outside of the arena of electro-biological research).

If you would provide a more detailed account of your concerns; then I would be happy try and help clarify. And/Or direct to more relevant information.

(Sorry, Posted on the incorrect comment before).

Hello Dopamina, Thankyou for taking your time to review to review my post. I would like to first point out this being the medium of Slashdot, I assumed the reader would not welcome a barrage of links and references: hence I curated two of the most-relevant examples firstly for background information: 1. A Special lecture at the world creditable university in Melbourne. By the extremely qualified Dr Devra Davis. https://youtu.be/BwyDCHf5iCY If you take the time to see this lecture, you will learn about the dedicate and extremely well-done science that has been done for the decades on this topic. Secondly, I provided a detailed summary of the evidence: 2. A Literature Review of 86 scientific papers that gives an overview of the pre-existing scientific evidence on this topic. The âzextraordinary evidenceâoe that you claim is required to change your established view on non-ionising radiation was provided, please take the time to review a representative sample of the 86 well researched papers listed as the references included in the review linked. Personally, Iâ(TM)m inclined to trust the scientists who are most experienced in this field, sharing their view that the science Is well established. - However, like many other important scientific topics, isnâ(TM)t widely accepted (outside of the arena of electro-biological research). If you would provide a more detailed account of your concerns; then I would be happy try and help clarify. And/Or direct to more relevant information.

Random361, Thankyou for your kind request. Please take your time to consider the response of this reasonable coward, having educated and hopefully palatable answer: First, I will provide some background information; and then I will conclude with my informed opinion is based upon reasonable research and an understanding professors who are very well more informed than I. My first link is a lecture hosted by the University of Melbourne (Australia). Where Dr Devra Davis talks about the biological effects of non-ioninizing radiation: https://youtu.be/BwyDCHf5iCY My second link is to a recent paper that gives an academic summary of the growing consensus that non-ioninzing radiation is harmful to biological health, even yours. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.go... It is my opinion that COVID-19 is a virus. AND. Significant exposure to RF radiation (in particular 5G, but 4G and others notwithstanding), weakens the immune system; therefore, exasperating the situation. Hence. I consider them probably relatable. Thankyou, and have good health.