Is Protocol-Driven COVID-19 Ventilation Doing More Harm Than Good? | Medscape

I posted a similar thread to this yesterday, with the news article also from Medscape, but I think one of the findings of this one warrants its own thread. From the article:
**In the editorial, Dr. Gattinoni and his colleagues explained further that ventilator settings should be based on physiological findings — with different respiratory treatment based on disease phenotype rather than using standard protocols.

[snip]

While not willing to name the hospitals at this time, he said that one center in Europe has had a 0% mortality rate among COVID-19 patients in the intensive care unit when using this approach, compared with a 60% mortality rate at a nearby hospital using a protocol-driven approach.**

I found that to be absolutely stunning. Full article here:
https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/928236

My previous thread here with another medscape article on this subject can be found here:
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-second-look-medscape.570832/#post-1071577122

One that combines the work of both of the articles above can be seen here:
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/possible-developments-in-the-treatment-of-acute-covid-19

Also, I think a small medical publication on the role of porphyrins in this is very important:
https://chemrxiv.org/articles/COVID...e_Metabolism_by_Binding_to_Porphyrin/11938173
An excerpt from that publication:
** At the same time, orf1ab, ORF10, and ORF3a proteins could coordinate attack the heme on the 1-beta chain of hemoglobin to dissociate the iron to form the porphyrin. The attack will cause less and less hemoglobin that can carry oxygen and carbon dioxide. The lung cells have extremely intense poisoning and inflammatory due to the inability to exchange carbon dioxide and oxygen frequently, which eventually results in ground-glass-like lung images. The mechanism also interfered with the normal heme anabolic pathway of the human body, is expected to result in human disease.**