CORONA Main Coronavirus thread

Zoner

Veteran Member
Every night when I post, I check the medical journal reporting pages. Both sites I check report all the new medical journal articles for the day, I look for the COVID ones. So the answer to your question is that most of them are from the medical 'establishment'. As I've said before on this thread, I would click 'dislike' on a lot of the posts I made but you can't dislike your own posts. Especially the ones that advocate vaccines for pregnant women. I don't post these articles because I agree with them, I post them because as I said, this is an archive thread, not a 'what is HD'S opinion on Covid' thread. I think it's important to keep a running historical archive of what is being reported and when it was being reported. The articles that appear to be anti-Geert are not directed at him or his research, they're just studies that if you read them appear to negate what he is saying. I pointed them out because I give Geert a lot of credence and those 'medical establishment' studies contradict him. I read them carefully and I thought he was asked about them and explained why they were wrong so wanted to point that out in a separate, non-news, my opinion only post. [ETA: but after thinking about it some more, I don't think he addressed all my concerns, see next paragraph]

As for your last point in the above quote, actually it does. Because Geert is saying the neutralizing antibodies of the vaxx no longer neutralize Omicron and the articles that presented tests of the vaccines say the blood of vaxxed did neutralize Omicron. That's a direct contradiction and if he got that wrong, maybe his theory is wrong. Geert did answer why the non-vaxxed's blood doesn't kill the virus in a test tube - he said it's because the innate and acquired antibodies are the ones that will protect the unvaxxed, and those lay low until confronted, and are reactive so won't show up in an already drawn blood sample which is confronted with virus in that test tube (vs. the body). But actually the more I think about it (and this is my 3rd edit of this paragraph) if his theory is correct, the vaxxed blood in the test tube should not be working against omicron in the test tube because he says the vaxx recognizes the wuhan strain but not so much the omicron strain. So I don't have an answer to this. i'm not a scientist and this is really confusing!. Maybe you can figure it out and help me out here.... [ETA: this is the 3rd edit of this paragraph as I try to figure this out]



I agree with you, you won't get an argument from me on this.




Agree on this too. and thank you. I found 3 articles that totally trash Geert. I will post them later on down the thread. I didn't even read them, but maybe there is a reader of this thread who wants to know the counter argument, and for posterity sake I am posting them. We'll see who is right in a few months....

HD
I appreciate your being objective and for making it clear that this is an archival thread more than an opinion thread. Point taken.

i’ll just state that I’m not really interested in reviewing the scientists since this is not my field. The good doctor wrote a 45 page white paper to be peer reviewed. The responses to that paper is what would be interesting but according to the good Doctor No one has challenged the science that’s in that paper. So you can have medical people and even scientist with an agenda arguing with his doctor without really arguing the science that’s in that paper.

so the question is who you’re going to believe.

Geert has been upfront since the very beginning about the danger of vaccinating in the middle of a pandemic and he’s been proven right.

I heard him say in another interview that just contagious variant that will also be very deadly could pop up at any time so there should be no time restraints like in a month or two or even by the fall ...it could happen at any time.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
Zoner - here's a perfect example of a post that if I could dislike my own post, I'd dislike it. But it's news and it is reflective of what the scientific community believed and disseminated as of May 2022...


(fair use applies)

Pfizer says 3 COVID shots protect children under 5
LAURAN NEERGAARD - AP
Mon, May 23, 2022, 6:46 AM

Three doses of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine offer strong protection for children younger than 5, the company announced Monday, another step toward shots for the littlest kids possibly beginning in early summer.

Pfizer plans to submit the findings to U.S. regulators later this week. The Food and Drug Administration already is evaluating an application by rival Moderna to offer two-dose vaccinations to tots — and set June 15 as a tentative date for its independent scientific advisers to publicly debate the data from one or both companies.

The news comes after months of anxious waiting by parents desperate to vaccinate their babies, toddlers and preschoolers, especially as COVID-19 cases once again are rising. The 18 million youngsters under 5 are the only group in the U.S. not yet eligible for COVID-19 vaccination.

Pfizer has had a bumpy time figuring out its approach. It aims to give tots an extra low dose — just one-tenth of the amount adults receive — but discovered during its trial that two shots didn’t seem quite strong enough for preschoolers. So researchers gave a third shot to more than 1,600 youngsters — from age 6 months to 4 years — during the winter surge of the omicron variant.

In a press release, Pfizer and its partner BioNTech said the extra shot did the trick, revving up the children's levels of virus-fighting antibodies enough to meet FDA criteria for emergency use of the vaccine with no safety problems.

Preliminary data suggested the three-dose series is 80% effective in preventing symptomatic COVID-19, the companies said, but they cautioned the calculation is based on just 10 cases diagnosed among study participants by the end of April.
The study rules state that at least 21 cases are needed to formally determine effectiveness, and Pfizer promised an update as soon as more data is available.

While the vaccine effectiveness likely could change somewhat, “all of this is very positive for those parents who are looking forward to having a vaccine for their younger children in the coming months,” said Dr. William Moss of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, who was not part of the study.

If FDA confirms the data, the vaccine could “be an important tool to help parents protect their children,” agreed Dr. Jesse Goodman of Georgetown University, a former FDA vaccine chief. But he cautioned that it’s essential to track how long protection lasts, especially against serious disease.

What’s next? FDA vaccine chief Dr. Peter Marks has pledged the agency will “move quickly without sacrificing our standards” in evaluating tot-sized doses from both Pfizer and Moderna.

Comparing the two companies' approaches to vaccinating the littlest kids promises to be challenging.

Moderna asked FDA to authorize two shots, each containing a quarter of the dose given to adults. While that spurred good levels of virus-fighting antibodies, Moderna's study found effectiveness against symptomatic COVID-19 was just 40% to 50% during the omicron surge, much like for adults who’ve only had two vaccine doses.

“We've learned in older children and adults that ... we really need three doses to get protection” against newer variants like omicron, Moss said.

That's something Moderna plans to study, and Moss said he didn't expect the question would hold up FDA authorization of the first two doses.

Complicating Moderna’s progress, the FDA so far has allowed its vaccine to be used only in adults. Other countries allow it to be given as young as age 6, and the company also is seeking FDA authorization for teens and elementary-age kids.

The FDA has tentatively planned for its expert panel to consider Moderna's vaccine for older kids a day before taking up the question of shots for the littlest.

If FDA clears either vaccine or both, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention would have to recommend whether all kids under 5 should receive the shots or only those at high risk.

While COVID-19 generally isn’t as dangerous to youngsters as to adults, some children do become severely ill or even die. And the omicron variant hit children especially hard, with those under 5 hospitalized at higher rates than at the peak of the previous delta surge.

It’s not clear how much demand there will be to vaccinate the youngest kids. Pfizer shots for 5- to 11-year-olds opened in November, but only about 30% of that age group have gotten the recommended initial two doses. Last week, U.S. health authorities said elementary-age children should get a booster shot just like everyone 12 and older is supposed to get, for the best protection against the latest coronavirus variants.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

Pfizer/BioNTech to seek Covid vaccine authorization for children under age 5
By Helen Branswell
May 23, 2022

Vaccine makers Pfizer and BioNTech said they will complete their submission for emergency use authorization of their Covid-19 vaccine for children under the age of 5 this week after a study of a third dose found it improves the efficacy of the vaccine.

Just hours after the news was made public, the Food and Drug Administration announced it expects to convene its independent vaccine advisers, the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee, on June 15 to review the submission.

The companies said that, with three doses, the vaccine performed about as well in young children as it does in adults. The vaccine was well-tolerated, induced a strong immune response, and was 80.3% effective at preventing Covid infections at a time when the Omicron variant of the SARS-CoV-2 virus was circulating.

“The study suggests that a low 3-[microgram] dose of our vaccine … provides young children with a high level of protection against the recent Covid-19 strains,” Ugur Sahin, CEO and co-founder of BioNTech, said in a statement.

Children 6 months to 4 years of age are the last group for which Covid vaccines have yet to be authorized. The FDA has been under pressure from anxious and frustrated parents to fill this gap.

Moderna has already completed a submission for its Covid vaccine for children aged 6 months to 6 years, based on study of a two-dose vaccine. The two 25-microgram shots, given four weeks apart, generated immune responses similar to what was seen in adults 18 to 25 years old after two doses. But the vaccine efficacy was 43.7% in children aged 6- to 24-months and 37.5% in children aged 2 to under 6 years. When the company announced the results in March, it said it was going to study the efficacy of a booster shot in these age group, but results have not been made public to date.

The FDA said Monday that VRBPAC will meet on June 14 to review Moderna’s application to authorize its vaccine for children and teens aged 6 to 17 years of age. The following day the committee will review Pfizer’s submission for use of its vaccine in children under the age of 5 and Moderna’s application for authorization of its product for children under the age of 6.

Assuming one or both are approved, that could mean parents of children under 5 who have been anxiously waiting to have their children vaccinated may finally be able to do so around the beginning of the fourth week of June.

The Pfizer dosage for children under age 5 is one-tenth of the dose used in its vaccine for adults. As with adults, the first two doses are given 21 days apart, but the third dose is given at least two months after receipt of the second. In adults, the third dose is given at least five months after the second dose.

The Phase 2/3 trial was conducted in 1,678 children. A month after receipt of the third dose, antibody titers from a subset of the children were compared to those seen in people aged 16 to 25 years after they had received two doses of the vaccine. The antibody levels were “non-inferior” in children ages 6 to 24 months, and also among those children ages 2- to 4-years old, the companies said.

“Our Covid-19 vaccine has been studied in thousands of children and adolescents, and we are pleased that our formulation for the youngest children, which we carefully selected to be one-tenth of the dose strength for adults, was well tolerated and produced a strong immune response,” Albert Bourla, Pfizer chairman and CEO, said in a statement.

Pfizer and BioNTech had hoped to get their vaccine authorized months ago for children under 5. But the companies announced late last year that the two-dose regimen it tested did not generate a similar level of protection in the children ages 2 to 4 as it did in young adults ages 16 to 25, the immunogenicity measurement the FDA had agreed to use as a sign that the vaccine was likely protective. Paradoxically, the same dose did induce an adequate response in children ages 6 to 23 months.

At the time, the company announced it would test the impact of adding a third dose before applying to the FDA for authorization. But in early February, the agency asked Pfizer and BioNTech to submit their data on a rolling basis, suggesting they might move to allow the first two doses to be used while awaiting the results of the third-dose study.

Parents keen to vaccinate their children during the early crush of the Omicron wave were thrilled, but some experts worried that the move could further erode confidence in the vaccines among parents who have been reluctant to vaccinate children against Covid. Only about 28% of children ages 5 to 11 have received two doses of Covid vaccine. (Boosters for this age group were only authorized last week.)

In mid-February, the FDA announced it would wait for the third-dose data before reviewing the Pfizer-BioNTech application for authorization of its vaccine for children under the age of 5.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

Top Airline Pilot Suffers Cardiac Arrest Between Flights Post Mandatory COVID Vaccination
By Enrico Trigoso
May 23, 2022

Robert Snow, a pilot for American Airlines, one of the top 3 largest airlines in the country, has 31 years of commercial airline experience and additionally seven years of experience as a U.S. Air Force pilot.

Snow says that he might not be able to fly again after he suffered a cardiac arrest only 6 or 7 minutes after landing a plane he piloted from Denver to Dallas Fort Worth (DFW).

He still had two more flights scheduled on April 9.

He believes that his cardiac arrest is connected to the Johnson and Johnson COVID vaccine he was forced to take in order to keep his job on Nov. 4, 2021, even though he already had natural immunity from previously contracting the virus.

Dr. Peter McCullough, a world-renowned cardiologist, told Newsmax that Snow’s case fits a “pattern.”

“There is no other explanation,” McCullough said about Snow’s case since Snow has no coronary disease.

“The MRI pattern is consistent,” the doctor said. “Indeed, it may have been vaccine-induced myocarditis with a late manifestation of cardiac death.”

In addition, he told The Epoch Times that he has received “several phone calls and communications from friends in the industry that do think that they might have had issues with a vaccine.”

Most alarming is that some pilots are “afraid to raise the flag and say, ‘Hey, I think I might have an issue because they’re afraid they’ll either lose their medical certification to fly, which if we lose our medical, we can no longer operate. We can’t be a commercial pilot anymore. And in worst-case scenario, which is what right now probably what I’m experiencing is you can’t fly at all. Period,” Snow said.

“I would just tell you that there are other pilots out there that have had concerns, not just pilots, also because it was an employee mandate. So we have flight attendants, we have mechanics, we have dispatchers, we have gate agents, you name it. Of course, for pilots, we consider that a safety-sensitive job so we’re a little bit more concerned from the standpoint of aviation safety; but yes, I have received calls from other pilots and other communications stating that they have concerns but because of the nature of this, they’re afraid to come forward.”

The veteran pilot had serious questions about the novel COVID vaccines that are supposed to prevent infection from the Chinese Communist Party virus, but are now known to provide little protection against infection after the Omicron virus variant became dominant.

Vaccine booster efficacy also wanes over time.

What’s more, cases of myocarditis—inflammation of the heart muscle, and pericarditis—inflammation of the lining outside the heart have spiked dramatically since the COVID vaccines started being administered worldwide.

He did not want to get the shot, but being the sole provider for his family, decided to take the risk.

Amid short sighs, Snow told The Epoch Times: “Initially, my employer was not going to force the vaccine on its employees. They subsequently changed their mind on approximately October 1, in conjunction with the executive office here in the United States mandate on federal contractors. They decided that now that they would enforce the vaccine mandate on all employees of the airline. And in regard to that, we were told that if we did not receive the vaccination we would be terminated. There was no question as to the sincerity at that time of their statement.”

Airlines, which are government contractors, were affected by President Joe Biden’s executive order from September that states all employees of those companies have to be vaccinated against the CCP virus.

The Epoch Times reported on December last year that the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) was breaking its own rule that states pilots should not fly after having taken medications that have been approved for less than a year, according to a group of attorneys, doctors, and other experts; including another pilot who says his career ended due to adverse reactions from a vaccine.

“So I elected, after some serious consideration given that I was the sole source of income for my family, that I would go ahead and receive the vaccine. I didn’t want to,” Snow said.

“I had serious questions as to the safety and the efficiency and the effectiveness of the vaccine. I’d already had COVID. I’d already tested positive for antibodies, and really didn’t see the rationale for it. But, the only solution that might have been available to me to not receive the vaccine was to request a religious or medical exemption. Neither of which did I really feel like I should request. Medical exemption, I didn’t have any reason to not to, scientifically speaking, not receive it, other than the fact that it was issued under an EUA and not fully tested. And as far as a religious exemption, I didn’t see any reason to request that because I don’t really have a religious belief that would prevent me from receiving this particular vaccination. So for moral and ethical reasons, absolutely. But that wasn’t considered a valid reason not to get the vaccine.”

The veteran pilot had a sore arm for 10 days after getting the jab, and later experienced a strange pain that spread through his upper body.

Snow said that his arm became “pretty sore,” for 10 days, something which he didn’t experience with any previous vaccinations. For other vaccines for travel or in the military, he would usually have soreness for two or three days maximum.

Things returned to normal until January, then he recalled:

“I was on that course of a flight and noticed a strange pain while I was working on the overhead panel. … I got a strange pain in my right shoulder, seemed to spread down to my lower right quadrant and then up into my chest and through my shoulder blades, which I thought was very strange, but I just kind of chalked it up to manipulating myself oddly on the overhead panel, maybe tweaked a nerve or something like that, because I really had no history of that whatsoever that I’d ever experienced. And so [the] pain went away after one or two minutes and then back to normal.

“When we finished that flight, I actually tested positive again for COVID for the second time, [the] first time I had it was in March of 2021. Second time then would have been in January of 2022—this is postvaccination mind you— and that was what I presumed to be the Omicron variant because it presented itself basically as just allergies, I kept sneezing a lot, runny nose and that was it, no fever, no chills, no nothing, no loss of taste and smell like I had the first time. So I went back to work, after the mandatory amount of time, and I started getting the pain again, only a little bit more frequently this time. So actually, with a history of gastrointestinal issues, I went to see a gastroenterologist he elected to do an endoscopy to take a look to see if I had maybe a hiatal hernia or something that was aggravating the vagus nerve. We also did an abdominal CAT scan.

“During the course of awaiting the results of the abdominal CAT scan, that’s when I had my sudden cardiac arrest and that was after the course of a flight from Denver to DFW. We had been on the gate just a few minutes after shutting the aircraft down, probably about six minutes, six, seven minutes after touchdown. And I stood up to collect my bags to proceed to the next aircraft. We were to finish up with another turn to a different city to come back and then finish the trip on day four. And that’s the last I remember, standing up collecting my luggage. And at that point, witnesses say I collapsed in the flight deck. And that’s all I know at this point. When I woke up, I was in the ICU at Baylor Scott and White in Grapevine Texas, having suffered a sudden cardiac arrest.”

He now has to wear an automatic external defibrillator or “life vest” that monitors his heartbeats, except when he showers when he is supposed to be monitored by a family member. The life vest is designed so that if the heart rhythm becomes abnormal, it will send a small shock to get it back to sinus rhythm, and if it detects full atrial fibrillation, ventricular fibrillation, or any sort of fibrillation, it would send a much stronger shock to try to get it back to the right rhythm.
Albeit all this trauma, Snow feels very fortunate because he was able to get professional care immediately, which is not the case for many other people.

According to heart.org: “Cardiac arrest is when the heart stops beating. Some 350,000 cases occur each year outside of a hospital, and the survival rate is less than 12 percent. CPR can double or triple the chances of survival.”

“If you look at the numbers … I try not to look too closely at them because it’s rather intimidating.” Snow said, referring to the survival rate of cardiac arrests.

“The thing that concerns me, is [that] this happened in the right place at the right time. Because if it had happened … any other time where I was either alone or beyond reasonable response time for a medical response, I wouldn’t be here having this conversation.”

John Pierce Law, who previously represented many prominent conservatives, is going to sue 18 major airlines, including American Airlines, focusing on the alleged unconstitutionality of the vaccine mandates that were imposed on the airline employees.

The Epoch Times has reached out to Johnson and Johnson for comment.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


VSS Scientific Updates During Pandemic Times #21
by Geert Vanden Bossche
May 23, 2022

1. 99.6% of Deaths in Vaccinated, 70% Boosted According to Health Canada Weekly Numbers

“Health Canada has just updated their COVID dashboard. 99.96% of the COVID deaths in the last 1 week period were Vaccinated. 70% BOOSTED!”

99.6% of Deaths in Vaccinated - 70% Boosted


2. As Vaccine Demand Collapses, U.K. Faces £4 Billion of Waste With 80% of its 650 Million Dose Stockpile Unused

“This gross misuse of taxpayers’ money must be examined in the independent inquiry and by Government so the lessons can be learned and in future a robust management system applied in real time so that even stocks purchased in haste and with urgency are kept in reasonable proportion to anticipated demand.”

As Vaccine Demand Collapses, U.K. Faces £4 Billion of Waste With 80% of its 650 Million Dose Stockpile Unused – The Daily Sceptic

3. FOI reveals Pfizer and Medicine Regulators Hid the Dangers of Covid-19 Vaccination During Pregnancy

“A ‘Freedom of Information’ request alongside an in-depth dive into the only pregnancy/fertility study performed on the Pfizer Covid-19 injection has revealed that Medicine Regulators and Pfizer chose to publicly cover-up alarming abnormalities of the developing foetus and falsely downgraded the actual risk of Covid-19 vaccination during pregnancy by suppressing documented findings of the clinical data.”

FOI reveals Pfizer and Medicine Regulators hid the dangers of Covid-19 Vaccination during Pregnancy because Study found it increases risk of Birth Defects & Infertility

628bb6e230abc8379934de47_VSS22_Afbeelding3.png


4. Did Moderna Trial Data Predict ‘Pandemic of the Vaccinated?

“A new study based on Moderna’s Phase 3 clinical trial data suggests recipients of Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine may be more likely to suffer repeated infections, perhaps indefinitely.”

Did Moderna Trial Data Predict ‘Pandemic of the Vaccinated?’


5. Hepatitis outbreak in children: What’s the cause? What is adenovirus 41?

“A mysterious hepatitis outbreak in children has now spread to 10 states and at least a dozen countries. Public health experts are asking parents to pay attention but not panic as they try to find what’s causing so many children — the majority just toddlers — to become ill.”

Hepatitis outbreak in children: What’s the cause? What is adenovirus 41?

6. New Tennessee Law: Natural Immunity Against COVID-19 Must Be Recognized

The bill states, “the immune protection gained from a prior COVID-19 infection is at least as protective against COVID-19 as a COVID-19 vaccine.” It continues, adding, “there is, therefore, no rational basis to treat individuals who have had a previous COVID-19 infection differently than individuals who have received a COVID-19 vaccine.”

New Tennessee Law: Natural Immunity Against COVID-19 Must Be Recognized - UncoverDC


7. Germany's Top Hospital: Half A Million Germans Experienced Serious Adverse Events after COVID-19 Vaccination

“Serious AE's in 8 out of every 1,000 vaccinated; 40x underreporting factor for severe adverse events; government urged to take vaccine injury seriously, find solutions.”

Germany's Top Hospital: Half A Million Germans Experienced Serious Adverse Events after COVID-19 Vaccination

 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

Epidemic Spread and Treatment Results in DPRK
Date: 24/05/2022 | Source: KCNA.kp (En) | Read original version at source

Pyongyang, May 24 (KCNA) -- According to information of the state emergency epidemic prevention headquarters, more than 134,510 fevered persons (about 33,130 less than the previous day), over 213,680 recoveries (about 53,950 less than the previous day) and no death were reported from 18:00 of May 22 to 18:00 of May 23 throughout the country.

As of 18:00 of May 23 since late April, the total number of fevered persons is over 2,948,900, of which more than 2,548,590 (86.425%) have recovered and at least 400,230 (13.573%) are under medical treatment.

The death toll stands at 68 and the fatality rate is at 0.002%. -0-

www.kcna.kp (Juche111.5.24.)
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

N.Korea says no new fever deaths, COVID situation under control
By Soo-hyang Choi - Reuters
Mon, May 23, 2022, 5:20 PM·3 min read


SEOUL (Reuters) -North Korea said on Tuesday there were no new deaths among fever patients in the country, the first time since it flagged a COVID-19 outbreak nearly two weeks ago, adding that it was seeing a "stable" downward trend in pandemic-related cases.

The COVID-19 wave, which North Korea first declared on May 12, has fuelled concerns over a lack of vaccines, inadequate medical infrastructure and a potential food crisis in the country of 25 million.

But the North said it was reporting "successes" in stemming the spread of the virus, and that there was no new fever death reported as of Monday evening despite adding 134,510 new patients.

It marked a third consecutive day the daily figure stayed below 200,000 and the first time for the North to report no new deaths since announcing the number of daily fever patients, according to the official KCNA news agency.

Apparently deprived of testing supplies, North Korea has not confirmed the total number of people testing positive for the coronavirus, instead, reporting the number with fever symptoms.

The total number of such cases, tallied since late April, rose to 2.95 million, while the death toll stood at 68, according to KCNA.

"In a few days after the maximum emergency epidemic prevention system was activated, the nation-wide morbidity and mortality rates have drastically decreased and the number of recovered persons increased, resulting in effectively curbing and controlling the spread of the pandemic disease and maintaining the clearly stable situation," KCNA said.

CREDIBILITY DOUBTED

Many analysts, however, doubt the credibility of the figures, saying they only demonstrate how hard it is to assess the actual scale of the COVID-19 wave in the isolated country.

"Through a mix of inadequate testing, disincentives at lower administrative levels to report serious outbreaks, cases, deaths, and whatever political motivations the top echelons may harbour, we have stats that are essentially nonsense," Christopher Green, a Korea specialist at Leiden University in the Netherlands, wrote on Twitter.

North Korea has said authorities were distributing food and medicine across the country, with military medics deployed to help distribute drugs and conduct health exams.

The KCNA also said North Korea was expanding the production of essential medicine supplies, though it did not elaborate exactly what types were being produced.

South Korea and the United States have proposed to help North Korea fight the pandemic, including with vaccines, but Pyongyang has not responded to the offer.

"Statistically speaking, the daily announcement is hardly comparable to international standards and appears more aimed at the domestic audience," said Moon Jin-soo, an associate professor at Seoul National University College of Medicine, referring to the North's reported fatality rate of 0.002%.

South Korea's COVID-19 fatality rate stood at 0.13% as of Tuesday.

South Korea's spy agency earlier told lawmakers the daily figure announced by North Korea appears to include non-COVID-19 patients as a number of waterborne diseases were already widespread in the country before it announced the coronavirus outbreak.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

Coronavirus cases in California rising fast, with some regions seeing infections double
Rong-Gong Lin II, Luke Money
Mon, May 23, 2022, 8:00 AM

The number of coronavirus cases in California has significantly worsened this past week, hitting a level not seen since the winter's Omicron surge and raising concerns about the possibility of a big jump in infections this summer.

Weekly coronavirus cases roughly doubled across wide swaths of California, including Riverside and Santa Barbara counties, as well as the Central Valley and Silicon Valley. They rose by roughly 85% in Orange, San Bernardino and Ventura counties.

Statewide, the increase was 63%, bringing the case rate to 231 for every 100,000 residents. A rate of 100 and above is considered a high rate of transmission.

Hospitalization rates, while increasing for the last four weeks, remain low. Hospitals in two of California's most populous regions, L.A. County and the San Francisco Bay Area, are not under strain, and the rate of new weekly coronavirus-positive hospitalizations has remained at only a fraction of the number seen in New York and some other East Coast cities.

California officials remain hopeful that a relatively robust effort to get residents to take booster shots plus suggestions to wear masks and get tested frequently can help the state avoid the kind of intense surge those cities have experienced.

"The task in front of us is similar to work we had to do at other points over the past 2½ years: slowing transmission," L.A.
County Public Health Director Barbara Ferrer said in a statement. "We know what works—masking, testing, and vaccination, along with systems and policies that support the use of these and other effective safety measures."

Nationally over the past two weeks, coronavirus cases have risen by more than 50% and hospitalizations by more than 30%, said Dr. Peter Chin-Hong, a UC San Francisco infectious-disease expert.

The San Francisco Bay Area is currently home to California's worst coronavirus case rate. The region is likely being hit hard with new infections now because of the "latest supercharged transmissible variant," whose contagiousness is approaching that of measles, one of the most readily transmitted diseases for humans, Chin-Hong said in a briefing he gave to campus staff Friday.

Another factor behind the soaring case rates could be that a relatively large number of people in the Bay Area have not been exposed to the coronavirus until this point of the pandemic because of the region's intensive efforts to keep the virus at bay.

Dr. Robert Kosnik, director of UC San Francisco's occupational health program, said at the briefing that he expects coronavirus cases to continue going up for at least the next couple of weeks.
"I know that's not good news, but that's kind of what the data is pointing to," he said.

The latest surge has been so disruptive that the Berkeley public school system has "only been able to fill about 50% of our teacher absences with substitute teachers," the school district said in a statement. That has forced administrators to help out in classrooms.

Berkeley schools announced Friday a new order to reinstate an indoor mask mandate for students and staff for the remainder of the school year, effective Monday, including indoor graduations.

UC San Francisco is beginning to require universal masking at all large events with 100 or more attendees.
San Francisco had the highest case rate this past week of any California county: 460 for every 100,000 residents. The Bay Area overall is reporting 369 cases per 100,000.

The rate in the greater Sacramento area was 213; the San Joaquin Valley, 140; and rural Northern California, 139.
The overall rate for Southern California was 201, with Los Angeles County's rate at 224; San Diego County, 214; Ventura County, 201; Orange County, 171; Riverside County, 163; and San Bernardino County, 147.

Los Angeles County's week-over-week case count was up 16%; San Diego County's was up by 33%.

Officials and experts in California cannot say with certainty why the state's increasing coronavirus case rates have not translated into larger numbers of hospitalizations, leaving the state in a much better spot than the East Coast.

One possibility is that California is simply behind the East Coast, as has been the case at earlier points in the pandemic.
But it's also possible that a combination of booster shot rates among seniors and masking practices might be playing a role and that California could reasonably hold out hope for a less severe spring and summer wave than New York.
About 67% of seniors in L.A. County and more than 80% of seniors in San Francisco have received a booster shot, compared with 58% of seniors in New York City.

The elderly are at highest risk of dying from COVID-19. Among those seniors who have been vaccinated but are still dying of COVID-19, most haven't received a booster shot, Chin-Hong said.

Broader use of masks in parts of California, especially among older people, might also be keeping a lid on the kinds of infections that can send people to the hospital.

L.A. County and the Bay Area implemented local universal indoor masking orders for at least six months since last summer's Delta wave, while New York City declined to do so last summer and was under a statewide masking order for only two months during the fall and winter.

A longer duration of masking rules in L.A. County and the Bay Area may have influenced more people to continue wearing masks even after universal mask mandates ended in the state.

A greater use of masks among vulnerable people can reduce the number of people who need hospitalization, and even if a masked person gets infected, the mask can reduce the amount of virus that enters the body and thereby reduce the severity of the illness.

"And of course, California has a little bit of better weather. But it's still decent in New York now, so it's not like a huge difference," Chin-Hong said.

In L.A. County, so far, the oldest residents have had among the lowest coronavirus case rates, while younger adults and teenagers have the highest case rates. Those trends could change; but that could be one explanation for why hospitals are not seeing signs of strain locally for now.

Even if case rates worsen dramatically in California, having a later spring wave than New York may be beneficial given that anti-COVID drugs like Paxlovid are now widely available — which wasn't the case earlier this year — and healthcare providers and the public are more aware about getting them.

Paxlovid, a five-day course of pills manufactured by Pfizer, needs to be taken within a few days of symptom onset. It reduces the risk of hospitalization or death from COVID-19 by 89% among higher-risk adults who haven't been hospitalized.

This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

How Three Mutations Work Together To Spur New COVID-19 Variants
By American Chemical Society
May 23, 2022

Like storm waves battering a ship, new versions of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, which causes COVID-19, have buffeted the world one after another. Recently, scientists keeping tabs on these variants noticed a trend: Many carry the same set of three mutations. In a new study published in the American Chemical Society’s Biochemistry journal, researchers examined how these mutations change the way a key piece of the virus functions. Their experiments show how this triad alters traits it needs to cause and sustain COVID-19 infection.

The SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus has driven human cells to copy its genetic code countless times over the past couple of years, and, in the process, errors have emerged. These genetic errors, or mutations, are the raw material for new variants. Scientists have found that nearly half of the genetic sequences within variants contain three mutations at positions called K417, E484, and N501. All of these changes tweak the same part of the virus, known as the receptor binding domain, which enables SARS-CoV-2 to infect human cells by latching onto their ACE2 protein.

The widespread presence of this combination suggests that together, these mutations provide the virus with benefits not possible with a single change. Vaibhav Upadhyay, Krishna Mallela, and colleagues wanted to tease out the advantages — and drawbacks — of each of these three mutations individually and in combination.

As a first step, the researchers produced domains containing the mutations and studied their effects in cells grown in Petri dishes. The team looked at how well cells could produce the domain, as well as the domain’s stability, ability to bind to ACE2, and ability to evade antibodies.

The results showed that each mutation enhances at least one of these characteristics, but at a cost. The K417 change, for example, increased the production and stability of the domain, while also improving its ability to escape one type of antibody. However, it also decreased the domain’s ability to attach to ACE2. The other two mutations had differing strengths and weaknesses. But, when put all together, the changes mitigated one another’s negative effects.

Domains with all three mutations could bind ACE2 tightly and escape two types of antibodies, yet also were produced at similar levels as the original virus and were just as stable. By revealing the details of how natural selection can favor a combination of mutations, these results offer new insight into virus evolution, according to the researchers.

Reference: “Convergent Evolution of Multiple Mutations Improves the Viral Fitness of SARS-CoV-2 Variants by Balancing Positive and Negative Selection” by Vaibhav Upadhyay, Casey Patrick, Alexandra Lucas and Krishna M. G. Mallela, 5 May 2022, Biochemistry.

DOI: 10.1021/acs.biochem.2c00132

The authors acknowledge funding from the University of Colorado Skaggs School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

Population-scale study highlights ongoing risk of COVID-19 in some cancer
patients despite vaccination

by University of Oxford
May 23, 2022

A study co-led by the Universities of Oxford, Birmingham and Southampton and the U.K. Health Security Agency (UKHSA), published in Lancet Oncology today by the U.K. Coronavirus Cancer Evaluation Project, has found that while COVID-19 vaccination is effective in most cancer patients, the level of protection against COVID-19 infection, hospitalization and death offered by the vaccine is less than in the general population and vaccine effectiveness wanes more quickly.

Dr. Lennard Lee, Department of Oncology, University of Oxford who led the study said: "We know that people with cancer have a higher risk of severe COVID-19 disease and that the immune response in cancer patients following COVID-19 vaccination is lower. However, no study has looked at vaccine effectiveness and its waning in cancer patients at a population level. We have undertaken the largest real-world health system evaluation of COVID-19 in cancer patients globally."

This study analyzed 377,194 individuals with active or recent cancer who had received two doses of the COVID-19 vaccine and undergone a SARS-CoV-2 PCR test in England. The numbers of breakthrough COVID-19 infections and COVID-19-associated hospitalizations and deaths in this cohort of cancer patients were compared to a control population without active or recent cancer.

The overall vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 infection in the general population after two doses of the COVID-19 vaccine over the study period was 69.8% whereas, in the cancer cohort, overall vaccine effectiveness was slightly lower (65.5%). This indicates that COVID-19 vaccination is effective in most cancer patients. However, vaccine effectiveness wanes more quickly in cancer patients. At 3–6 months following the second vaccine dose, vaccine effectiveness reduced by nearly a third from 61.4% in the general population to 47.0% in the cancer cohort.

While the vaccine offers higher protection against COVID-19-associated hospitalization (83.3%) and death (93.4%) than against breakthrough infections in the cancer cohort, this protection also waned by 3–6 months following the second vaccine dose.

Looking at the differences between people with different types of cancer, vaccine effectiveness is lowest and wanes most quickly in those with the blood cancers lymphoma and leukemia.

The type of treatment that people with cancer receive also impacts both overall vaccine effectiveness and waning. In cancer patients that were treated in the last 12 months with chemotherapy or radiotherapy, vaccine effectiveness is lower and waned more by 3–6 months than in cancer patients that did not receive these treatments or were treated more than a year ago.

Professor Peter Johnson, Professor of Medical Oncology, University of Southampton commented: "This study shows that for some people with cancer, COVID-19 vaccination may give less effective and shorter-lasting protection. This highlights the importance of vaccination booster programs and rapid access to COVID-19 treatments for people undergoing cancer treatments."

Helen Rowntree, Director of Research, Services and Engagement at Blood Cancer U.K. said: "For our community, COVID-19 very much has not gone away and many people remain in their homes due to the threat of COVID-19 highlighted in this important study. We know how important the vaccines are for people with blood cancer. This study importantly shows that immunity wanes faster in people with blood cancer, who are entitled to five vaccine doses, and we'd encourage everyone with blood cancer to make sure they are getting these doses."
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

Breakthrough COVID infections more likely in cancer and Alzheimer's patients, studies find
by Case Western Reserve University
May 23, 2022

Breakthrough COVID-19 cases resulting in infections, hospitalizations and deaths are significantly more likely in cancer and Alzheimer's patients, according to two new studies from researchers at the Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine.

People within these diseases are often more susceptible to infection in general, the researchers explained, and are among the population's most vulnerable to severe health outcomes from COVID-19 infections as well. The studies come as the U.S. total of COVID-19 deaths since the pandemic began surpassed 1 million.

Examining breakthrough infection rates in cancer patients

The first study, published recently in Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) Oncology, analyzed electronic health records to track the number of breakthrough COVID infections, hospitalizations and mortality rates among vaccinated patients with cancer.

A "breakthrough infection" is when a fully vaccinated person contracts COVID, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

The research team counted people diagnosed with the 12 most common types of cancer: lung, breast, colorectal, bladder, liver, endometrial, skin, prostate, thyroid and blood cancers. These participants received COVID-19 vaccinations between December 2020 and November 2021 and had not previously been infected. The control group consisted of vaccinated participants without cancer.

The researchers compared breakthrough COVID-19 infections between cancer and non-cancer participants, matching for comorbidities, social determinants of health, age and gender, and other demographics. The team analyzed the records of more than 636,000 vaccinated patients, including more than 45,000 vaccinated people with cancer.

"This study showed significantly increased risks for COVID-19 breakthrough infection in vaccinated patients with cancer, especially those undergoing active cancer care, with marked variations among specific cancer types," said Rong Xu, professor of biomedical informatics at the School of Medicine and coauthor of this study.

Study coauthors include David Kaelber, professor at the School of Medicine and chief medical informatics officer at The MetroHealth System.

The team found:
  • The overall risk of breakthrough COVID infections in vaccinated people with cancer was 13.6%, compared to 4.9% for vaccinated people without cancer.
  • The highest risk of breakthrough infections was in people with pancreatic cancer at 24.7%, liver cancer 22.8%, lung cancer 20.4% and colorectal cancer 17.5%.
  • Cancers with lower risk of breakthrough infections included thyroid 10.3%, endometrial 11.9%, and breast 11.9%
  • The overall risk for hospitalization following a breakthrough infection, in study participants with cancer, was 31.6%, compared to a rate of with 3.9% in those without cancer.
  • The risk of death was 6.7% following a breakthrough infection, compared to 1.3% in patients without cancer.
"Breakthrough infections in patients with cancer were associated with significant and substantial risks for hospitalizations and mortality. These results emphasize the need for patients with cancer to maintain mitigation practice, especially with the emergence of different virus variants and the waning immunity of vaccines," said Xu and study coauthor, Nathan Berger, the Hanna-Payne Professor of Experimental Medicine at the School of Medicine.

Health outcomes in patients with Alzheimer's disease following COVID infection

In a second, separate School of Medicine study, researchers analyzed electronic health data to examine the incidence rate of breakthrough COVID-19 infections in those diagnosed with some subtypes of dementia. The study was recently published in the journal, Alzheimer's & Dementia.

The researchers chose to examine data on breakthough COVID-19 cases in those with dementia because, while vaccines are effective, breakthrough infections are possible, and older adults with dementia were underrepresented in vaccine clinical trials.

For example, in the clinical trial for Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, the median age for the 37,706 participants was 52 years and included only 18 people with dementia, or just 0.05%, according to the study.

The researchers examined anonymous electronic health data from more than 262,847 adults 65 or older vaccinated between December 2020 and August 2021, and who didn't have the infection before being vaccinated. Of that number, 2,764 people were diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease; 1,244 with vascular dementia, 259 with Lewy body dementia, 229 with frontotemporal dementia and 4,385 with mild cognitive impairment.

The researchers compared the overall risks of breakthrough infections in vaccinated patients with dementia to those without any congitive impairment.

Vaccinated patients with dementia had an overall risk for breakthrough infections ranging from 10.3% for Alzheimer's disease to 14.3% for Lewy body dementia, significantly higher than the 5.6% in the vaccinated older adults without dementia.

"Patients with dementia have a significantly higher rate of breakthrough COVID infections after vaccination than patients of the same age and risk factors other than dementia," said Pamela Davis, the Arline H. and Curtis F. Garvin Research Professor at the School of Medicine. "Therefore, continued vigilance is needed, even after vaccination, to protect this vulnerable population. Caregivers should consider ongoing masking and social distancing, as well as booster vaccines to protect these individuals."
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

Effects of COVID-19 infection on the thyroid gland still present after one year
by European Society of Endocrinology
May 23, 2022

Severe COVID-19 disease affects thyroid function through a variety of mechanisms according to a new study from Dr. Ilaria Muller and colleagues from the University of Milan, Italy. The study followed patients with thyroid dysfunction correlated to COVID-19 disease for one year, to better characterize such thyroid involvement and to follow its evolution over time. During moderate-to-severe COVID-19 disease the occurrence of thyroiditis (inflammation of the thyroid gland) plays an important role in thyroid dysfunction, in addition to other well-known mechanisms mainly acting on the hypothalamus-pituitary-thyroid axis. The hormone imbalance is usually mild but increases in severe cases of COVID-19. Their study was presented during the 24th European Congress of Endocrinology on May 23 in Milan, Italy.

The thyroid function is crucial to the human body's metabolism, growth, and development. By continuously releasing a stable amount of thyroid hormones into the bloodstream, it aids in the regulation of numerous body functions. The thyroid gland generates extra hormones when the body needs more energy in particular situations, such as when it is growing, cold, or pregnant.

The study looked at more than 100 patients admitted to hospital with severe COVID-19, analyzing their thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) and other indicators. Thyroiditis occurred frequently in the COVID-19 patient population and the thyroid function, as well as inflammatory indicators, returned to normal in nearly all instances shortly after the end of their COVID-19 illness. However, after 12 months thyroiditis regions remained visible at thyroid ultrasound in half of the individuals, even if reduced in size. The thyroid uptake of technetium or iodine, an indicator of thyroid function, was still reduced in four out of six individuals at nine months, although it had mostly recovered after 12 months. The long-term clinical consequences, if any, are unknown.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

Study finds COVID-19 subvariant BA.2 does not cause more severe illness than BA.1
by Kelly April Tyrrell, University of Wisconsin-Madison
May 23, 2022

In a study published in Nature on May 16, a research team led by University of Wisconsin–Madison virologist Yoshihiro Kawaoka and colleagues in Japan show that the BA.2 subvariant of omicron is similar to BA.1 in both the severity of illness it causes and in its ability to cause infection.

Omicron is now the dominant version of the virus that causes COVID-19 worldwide and BA.2 is the dominant subvariant in nearly seven dozen countries.

The peer-reviewed findings contrast with a recent study from another research team that relied on recombinant virus bearing spike proteins from BA.1 and BA.2.

"That study indicated BA.2 may be more pathogenic than BA.1," says Kawaoka, professor of pathobiological sciences at the UW School of Veterinary Medicine and a professor at the University of Tokyo. "But when we used authentic virus, we found that BA.2 is not more pathogenic."

Kawaoka and Veterinary Medicine research associate professor and co-author Peter Halfmann, say their findings suggest that other parts of the omicron virus may lessen, or attenuate, the pathogenicity of its spike proteins alone.

Relying on rodent models for the disease, researchers and their collaborators tested viruses isolated from human samples. Both subvariants of omicron caused less severe illness compared to earlier strains, including delta and the original strain of the virus that emerged in late 2019.

The study team also found that existing therapeutic monoclonal antibodies and antiviral drugs remain effective against BA.2.

However, plasma from vaccinated individuals and from people who recovered from earlier infections was less effective at neutralizing both subvariants of omicron relative to earlier virus strains, and plasma from people infected with BA.1 was less effective at neutralizing BA.2.

But the researchers also found that plasma from people who were vaccinated and then infected with BA.1 or earlier variants exhibited a smaller decrease in effectiveness against BA.2.

"If you're vaccinated and then infected, you're protected against many different variants," says Kawaoka, especially compared to prior infection alone or vaccination alone.

The researchers are now testing the newest sub-variants of omicron, including BA.2.12.1, which recently began spreading quickly in New York state.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

Heart inflammation found in one in eight patients after hospitalization with COVID-19
by University of Glasgow
May 23, 2022

One in eight people who were hospitalized with COVID-19 between May 2020 and March 2021 were later diagnosed with myocarditis, or heart inflammation, according to major new research into the clinical long-term effects of COVID-19.

The largest study of its kind to date was led by the University of Glasgow in collaboration with NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde (NHS GGC), and followed for one year, in real time, 159 patients after they were hospitalized with COVID-19. The results, which show that patients hospitalized with COVID-19 between May 2020 and March 2021 have a number of ongoing health conditions, are published in Nature Medicine.

The study also looked at why some patients suffer long-term ill health after hospitalization with COVID-19. Until now it has been speculated that previous underlying health conditions may be linked to the severity of post-COVID long-term effects. However, this new landmark study suggests that it is the severity of the COVID-19 infection itself which is most closely correlated to the severity of a patient's long-COVID symptoms, rather than pre-existing health problems.

The CISCO-19 (Cardiac Imaging in SARS Coronavirus disease-19) study, which was funded in May 2020 as part of a Scottish Government Chief Scientist Office Rapid Research Response aimed at increasing the understanding of the coronavirus pandemic, followed patients in real time after hospitalization with COVID-19 and compared their health to those in a control group of individuals of similar age, sex and medical background. Assessments included blood tests, and CT and MRI scans of multiple organs, including the heart, kidneys and lungs, as well as measuring patients' own opinions on their own ongoing health via questionnaires. Clinical outcomes including survival, hospital readmission and referral to outpatient clinics were also assessed. The study is ongoing, supported by NHS GGC, and will continue to follow up with patients at 18 months and 5 years post hospitalization.

Hospitalization with COVID-19 was found to cause a number of long-term health problems. Researchers found 1 in 8 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 have heart inflammation, while inflammation across the body and damage to the other organs such as the kidneys was also common. These problems clustered in individuals pointing to the overall severity of COVID-19 as being the main driver of illness. Exercise capacity and health related quality of life were markedly impaired initially after discharge from hospital and remained reduced one to two months after discharge—this was especially the case in patients with heart inflammation.

During a period of 450 days after discharge from hospital, one in seven patients died or were readmitted to hospital, and two in three patients required NHS outpatient care.

Patients were given questionnaires on the same day they underwent blood tests and scans, before they had been given clinical results, in order to gain a true understanding of how they were feeling post hospitalization. From these questionnaires, having been hospitalized with COVID-19 was associated with a worse health-related quality of life as well as with anxiety and depression.

Professor Colin Berry, principle investigator of the CISCO-19 study and professor of Cardiology and Imaging at the University of Glasgow, said: "COVID-19 is a multi-system disease, and our study shows that injury on the heart, lungs and kidneys can be seen after initial hospitalization in scans and blood tests. These results bridge a vital knowledge gap between our current understanding of post-COVID-19 syndromes, such as Long COVID, and objective evidence of ongoing disease.

"One of the most important findings of the CISCO study is that it is the severity of a patient's COVID-19 infection—not their underlying health conditions—that is most closely correlated with the severity of any ongoing health outcomes post discharge. We found that previously healthy patients, without any underlying health conditions, were suffering with severe health outcomes, including myocarditis, post hospitalization.

"The reasons for this are unclear, but it may be that a healthy person who is hospitalized with COVID-19 is likely to have a worse COVID infection than someone with underlying health conditions who is hospitalized. More work needs to be done here to understand the risks, and also on how we can better support patients who have ongoing health outcomes after being hospitalized with COVID-19."

Long COVID has been found to predominately affect females. CISCO found that female sex was associated with myocarditis, which in turn was linked with lower mental and physical well-being. Researchers believe these findings provide some answers that could explain the physical limitations experienced by some female patients post COVID-19 hospitalization.

Considering clinical translation into healthcare, the results highlight the need for focused use of medical tests, new therapy development and rehabilitation. The results also highlight the importance of avoiding severe COVID-19 such as by vaccination.

Professor Julie Brittenden, Director of Research and Innovation at NHSGGC, said: "NHSGGC is pleased to have played an important role in this study, which has further enhanced our understanding of the long term effects of COVID-19 in patients who required to be hospitalized.

"I would like to thank all of our patients who have taken part in this study, as well as the wider research teams who continue to work to improve knowledge, develop treatment options and improve outcomes of patients with COVID-19 "

Professor David Crossman, Chief Scientist (Health) for Scotland at the time the study was funded, said: "This study provides important insight into the longer-term effects of COVID-19 infection, and will help inform approaches to treatment going forward. The Chief Scientist Office is pleased to have funded this research as part of the £5 million Rapid Research in COVID-19 program."

The CISCO study focuses on people hospitalized with COVID-19, however other studies looking at community COVID infections—infections not severe enough to result in hospitalization—have reported more encouraging data on long term health recovery. Patients in this study were enrolled during the first and second waves of the pandemic, until March 2021, and as a result they were mainly unvaccinated.

Among the patients enrolled in the study, risk factors for heart disease were common, including overweight or obesity, high blood pressure and pre-diabetes or diabetes.

Staff from several hospitals in the West of Scotland supported the project, including the Queen Elizabeth University Hospital and the Royal Infirmary in Glasgow, the Royal Alexandra Hospital in Paisley, Hairmyres Hospital in NHS Lanarkshire and the NHS Golden Jubilee in Clydebank.

Dr. Kenneth Mangion, clinical lecturer in cardiology at the University of Glasgow, and co-senior author, said: "We are grateful for the support from the Chief Scientist Office, NHS GG&C, NHS R&D. We are also grateful to all co-investigators, clinicians, research nursing staff, scientists, lab technicians radiographers, who have all worked together to help deliver this project."

The study, "Multisystem, cardio-renal investigation of post-COVID illness," is published in Nature Medicine.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

AI helps diagnose post-COVID lung problems
by King Abdullah University of Science and Technology
May 23, 2022

A new computer-aided diagnostic tool developed by KAUST scientists could help overcome some of the challenges of monitoring lung health following viral infection.

Like other respiratory illnesses, COVID-19 can cause lasting harm to the lungs, but doctors have struggled to visualize this damage. Conventional chest scans do not reliably detect signs of lung scarring and other pulmonary abnormalities, which makes it difficult to track the health and recovery of people with persistent breathing problems and other post-COVID complications.

The new method developed by KAUST—known as Deep-Lung Parenchyma-Enhancing (DLPE)—overlays artificial intelligence algorithms on top of standard chest imaging data to reveal otherwise indiscernible visual features indicative of lung dysfunction.

Through DLPE augmentation, "radiologists can discover and analyze novel sub-visual lung lesions," says computer scientist and computational biologist Xin Gao. "Analysis of these lesions could then help explain patients' respiratory symptoms," allowing for better disease management and treatment, he adds.

Gao and members of his Structural and Functional Bioinformatics Group and the Computational Bioscience Research Center created the tool, along with artificial intelligence researcher and current KAUST Provost Lawrence Carin and clinical collaborators from Harbin Medical University in China.

The method first eliminates any anatomical features not associated with the lung parenchyma; the tissues involved in gas exchange serve as the main sites of COVID-19–induced damage. That means removing airways and blood vessels, and then enhancing the pictures of what is left behind to expose lesions that might be missed without the computer's help.

The researchers trained and validated their algorithms using computed tomography (CT) chest scans from thousands of people hospitalized with COVID-19 in China. They refined the method with input from expert radiologists and then applied DLPE in a prospective fashion for dozens of COVID-19 survivors with lung problems, all of whom had experienced severe disease requiring intensive care treatment.

In this way, Gao and his colleagues demonstrated that the tool could reveal signs of pulmonary fibrosis in COVID long-haulers, thus helping to account for shortness of breath, coughing and other lung troubles. A diagnosis, he suggests, that would be impossible with standard CT image analytics.

"With DLPE, for the first time, we proved that long-term CT lesions can explain such symptoms," he says. "Thus, treatments for fibrosis may be very effective at addressing the long-term respiratory complications of COVID-19."

Although the KAUST team developed DLPE primarily with post-COVID recovery in mind, they also tested the platform on chest scans taken from people with various other lung problems, including pneumonia, tuberculosis and lung cancer. The researchers showed how their tool could serve as a broad diagnostic aide for all lung diseases, empowering radiologists to, as Gao puts it, "see the unseen." The research appears in Nature Machine Intelligence.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

Medicine for inflammatory bowel disease may protect against severe COVID-19
by Cedars-Sinai Medical Center
May 23, 2022

Getting the COVID-19 vaccination strengthened one type of immune response to the SARS-CoV-2 virus in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients even though they were taking immunosuppressant medication, according to investigators at Cedars-Sinai.

The findings of two studies focused on this topic have been published in the journals IBD, of the Crohn's & Colitis Foundation, and Frontiers in Immunology.

"We found that with COVID-19 vaccination most of the main immunosuppressive treatments for IBD preserved the T-cell response, with one notable exception: anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) drug therapy. This biologic treatment actually elevated T-cell activity in the vaccinated patients. We think this may help protect them from severe disease after breakthrough infection," said Gil Melmed, MD, a principal study investigator and director of Inflammatory Bowel Disease Clinical Research at Cedars-Sinai.

Biologics such as anti-TNF are medications that suppress inflammation, the body's protective response to injury and disease, which can make IBD worse when it becomes chronic. T-cells, a type of white blood cell, develop in the bone marrow and play a critical role in fighting off viruses.

"Augmentation of the T-cell response by anti-TNF therapy may partially explain the recently reported association of biologics with reduced hospitalizations or death from COVID-19. The T-cell immune response is important for reducing severity of disease after COVID infection," said Dalin Li, Ph.D., first author of the IBDstudy and an IBD research scientist at Cedars-Sinai.

The study authors note that the findings point to the potential of developing clinical T-cell response tests that could be used to monitor new vaccine and booster outcomes.

"The benefit of anti-TNF on vaccine T-cell responses is a surprise. Efforts now should assess if it reduced hospitalizations after patients on this therapy had breakthrough infection. And we want to better understand the scientific mechanism, which could provide clues to enhance the T-cell side of the vaccine response," said Dermot McGovern, MD, Ph.D., co-author of the two studies and director of Translational Research in the Inflammatory Bowel and Immunobiology Research Institute at Cedars-Sinai.

The takeaway for people receiving immunosuppressant therapies for disease is encouraging, according to the investigators.

"This should be important reassurance to vaccinated IBD patients who are receiving treatment; their therapies may be offering important protection from serious illness or hospitalization if they get a breakthrough infection. It should also encourage them, and their doctors, to maintain their treatment during this phase of the pandemic and to keep up with their booster shots," said Jonathan Braun, MD, Ph.D., a corresponding author.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

Air pollution associated with more severe COVID-19
by Canadian Medical Association Journal
May 24, 2022

Some common air pollutants, such as ground-level ozone, are associated with more severe outcomes after SARS-CoV-2 infection, including admission to the intensive care unit (ICU), according to new research in CMAJ (Canadian Medical Association Journal) .

To determine whether there was an association between long-term exposure to air pollution and COVID-19 severity, researchers analyzed data on all 151 105 people aged 20 years and older with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in 2020 in Ontario, Canada, not living in a long-term care facility. They modelled historical exposure to three common air pollutants before the pandemic—fine particulate matter (PM2.5), nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and ground-level ozone (O3). The authors adjusted for date of diagnosis, sex and age, being part of an outbreak, essential worker status, neighborhood socioeconomic status, health care access including previous influenza vaccination history, previous outpatient visits and other factors.

"We observed that people with SARS-CoV-2 infection who lived in areas of Ontario with higher levels of common air pollutants (PM2.5, NO2 and O3) were at elevated risk of being admitted to the ICU after we adjusted for individual and contextual confounding factors, even when the air pollution level was relatively low," writes Dr. Hong Chen, Health Canada and ICES, with coauthors.

They also found an elevated risk of hospitalization with chronic exposure to PM2.5 and O3, and an increased risk of death from COVID-19 with chronic exposure to O3.

These results add to the growing reports linking air pollution to COVID-19 severity from other countries, including Spain and Mexico.

"Given the ongoing pandemic, our findings that underscore the link between chronic exposure to air pollution and more severe COVID-19 could have important implications for public health and health systems," write the authors.

As to the mechanisms of how long-term exposure to air pollution may be influencing severity of COVID-19, the researchers call for more research.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

COVID cases are high and winter is coming. We need to stop ignoring COVID
by Nancy Baxter and Nicholas Talley, The Conversation
May 23, 2022

In a poll conducted by The Guardian in August of 2021 about the number of deaths Australians would be willing to accept as restrictions eased, only 3% of respondents felt that 5,000 or more COVID-related deaths per year would be acceptable.

Sadly, we have surpassed that milestone in the first four months of this year alone.

Each day, an average of 45,000 Australians are reporting cases of COVID, a number that is rising and likely a substantial underestimate.

Yet where are the sensible public health measures to stem the tide of illness and death?

People are dying of COVID

Sadly we are now leading the world in COVID cases per capita.

But did these people die of or with COVID? This question is raised often by those who wish to diminish the impact of the pandemic, including former prime minister Scott Morrison.

The evidence, however, is clear—of all people who died "of" or "with" COVID during the pandemic in Australia, 90% have died of COVID.

Died FROM 90%
Died WITH 10%
Australia : 5,940 deaths where *people* died with or from #COVID19 by 30 April 2022.
Only 605 people died of other causes (e.g. cancer) & were COVID-19 positive at the time.
— Dr Miller—vax kids asap (@drajm) May 18, 2022

Even if we concern ourselves only with excess death rates (that is, deaths exceeding what would usually be expected) COVID is a major killer. The Australian Bureau of Statistics evaluated deaths in January 2022, around the time of the peak in COVID cases during the first omicron wave in Australia. Comparing the observed mortality rate to the usual pre-COVID rate, they found 22% more deaths in that month than expected.

COVID is currently on track to be one of the leading causes of death in Australia this year.

Long COVID will affect many Australians infected, perhaps up to 30%. And the other long-term effects of COVID are not yet known.

The number of deaths and long COVID are only part of the story. The health care system right now is in crisis throughout the country with people dying waiting for ambulances, record levels of ambulance ramping (where patients wait with paramedics for medical attention), prolonged emergency stays for patients in overcrowded departments, and hospital staff shortages.

Add to that we are now facing our first flu season in two years, with weekly numbers now exceeding the average for the past five years.

Coupled with a lower-than-average uptake of the flu vaccine this year, the flu season is shaping up to potentially be a severe one—potentially resulting in up to 30,000 people requiring admission to hospital.

With winter coming, and more people gathering indoors as the weather turns cold, COVID cases may also rise in tandem with influenza.

We can reduce cases

This looming disaster can be averted: we can reduce transmission and "flatten the curve" with simple actions.

We have seen the impact the relaxation of public health restrictions and protections like mask-wearing mandates have made in terms of driving transmission.

In Western Australia, relaxation of public health measures including mask wearing and household contact isolation occurred on April 29. Within days of these changes, case numbers reached record highs—there are now 100 more people hospitalized with COVID every day than before these changes went into effect.

It would stand to reason reinstating these two measures would have the opposite effect—fewer cases, fewer people in hospital, and fewer people dying of COVID.

The Australian Medical Association has called for an increase in voluntary use of masks, yet its pleas are being ignored. It seems without mandates most people are unwilling to wear masks, so reinstating these mandates for indoor gatherings should be considered.

Boosters and treatments are vital

We also need to use the tools we have to prevent serious disease in people who contract COVID.

Although vaccinations have maintained effectiveness for serious illness, hospitalization, and death, our protection has waned over time and has also been reduced due to Omicron's increased immune-evasion.

The impact of a booster dose is substantial, with high levels of protection against severe outcomes demonstrated with a third dose. Yet only 70% of the population of Australia has received a booster and numbers are not increasing.

For those who have been boosted, the fourth dose prevents severe disease in those most at-risk, but to date, most eligible people are yet to receive it.

If delivered early to those most at risk of severe disease, antiviral medications can reduce the risk of hospitalization. But to access these medications, patients must have access to testing and a knowledgeable care provider all within five days of the onset of symptoms. The GP community is trying, but inequitable distribution of these treatments will occur without more education and support for the clinicians at the coalface.

A clearly articulated vision of what is at stake and what actions we need to take to avert disaster is the leadership we need right now.

A few simple public health measures such as mask mandates and reinstating isolation for household contacts of positive cases could make a major difference saving lives. And ensuring provision of boosters and early antiviral therapy for those at-risk despite vaccination will also save lives.

Pretending the pandemic is in the rear-vision mirror will help no one.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
I appreciate your being objective and for making it clear that this is an archival thread more than an opinion thread. Point taken.

i’ll just state that I’m not really interested in reviewing the scientists since this is not my field. The good doctor wrote a 45 page white paper to be peer reviewed. The responses to that paper is what would be interesting but according to the good Doctor No one has challenged the science that’s in that paper. So you can have medical people and even scientist with an agenda arguing with his doctor without really arguing the science that’s in that paper.

so the question is who you’re going to believe.

Geert has been upfront since the very beginning about the danger of vaccinating in the middle of a pandemic and he’s been proven right.

I heard him say in another interview that just contagious variant that will also be very deadly could pop up at any time so there should be no time restraints like in a month or two or even by the fall ...it could happen at any time.


I post the news every night to keep the news part updated but this isn't just a news thread - all opinions are very much welcomed. As a matter of fact, as it seems the majority of TB is done with Covid and is not interested in hearing that it's coming back, stronger and worse than before (based on an active thread going on right now on MAIN) this may be the only place to opine on Geert without poo-pooing from those reading. Like you, I also think Geert is right. I think everyone is going to know he's right in a few more weeks/months. I just pray for them it's not too late.

HD
 

Zoner

Veteran Member
Zoner - here's a perfect example of a post that if I could dislike my own post, I'd dislike it. But it's news and it is reflective of what the scientific community believed and disseminated as of May 2022...


(fair use applies)

Pfizer says 3 COVID shots protect children under 5
LAURAN NEERGAARD - AP
Mon, May 23, 2022, 6:46 AM

Three doses of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine offer strong protection for children younger than 5, the company announced Monday, another step toward shots for the littlest kids possibly beginning in early summer.

Pfizer plans to submit the findings to U.S. regulators later this week. The Food and Drug Administration already is evaluating an application by rival Moderna to offer two-dose vaccinations to tots — and set June 15 as a tentative date for its independent scientific advisers to publicly debate the data from one or both companies.

The news comes after months of anxious waiting by parents desperate to vaccinate their babies, toddlers and preschoolers, especially as COVID-19 cases once again are rising. The 18 million youngsters under 5 are the only group in the U.S. not yet eligible for COVID-19 vaccination.

Pfizer has had a bumpy time figuring out its approach. It aims to give tots an extra low dose — just one-tenth of the amount adults receive — but discovered during its trial that two shots didn’t seem quite strong enough for preschoolers. So researchers gave a third shot to more than 1,600 youngsters — from age 6 months to 4 years — during the winter surge of the omicron variant.

In a press release, Pfizer and its partner BioNTech said the extra shot did the trick, revving up the children's levels of virus-fighting antibodies enough to meet FDA criteria for emergency use of the vaccine with no safety problems.

Preliminary data suggested the three-dose series is 80% effective in preventing symptomatic COVID-19, the companies said, but they cautioned the calculation is based on just 10 cases diagnosed among study participants by the end of April.
The study rules state that at least 21 cases are needed to formally determine effectiveness, and Pfizer promised an update as soon as more data is available.

While the vaccine effectiveness likely could change somewhat, “all of this is very positive for those parents who are looking forward to having a vaccine for their younger children in the coming months,” said Dr. William Moss of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, who was not part of the study.

If FDA confirms the data, the vaccine could “be an important tool to help parents protect their children,” agreed Dr. Jesse Goodman of Georgetown University, a former FDA vaccine chief. But he cautioned that it’s essential to track how long protection lasts, especially against serious disease.

What’s next? FDA vaccine chief Dr. Peter Marks has pledged the agency will “move quickly without sacrificing our standards” in evaluating tot-sized doses from both Pfizer and Moderna.

Comparing the two companies' approaches to vaccinating the littlest kids promises to be challenging.

Moderna asked FDA to authorize two shots, each containing a quarter of the dose given to adults. While that spurred good levels of virus-fighting antibodies, Moderna's study found effectiveness against symptomatic COVID-19 was just 40% to 50% during the omicron surge, much like for adults who’ve only had two vaccine doses.

“We've learned in older children and adults that ... we really need three doses to get protection” against newer variants like omicron, Moss said.

That's something Moderna plans to study, and Moss said he didn't expect the question would hold up FDA authorization of the first two doses.

Complicating Moderna’s progress, the FDA so far has allowed its vaccine to be used only in adults. Other countries allow it to be given as young as age 6, and the company also is seeking FDA authorization for teens and elementary-age kids.

The FDA has tentatively planned for its expert panel to consider Moderna's vaccine for older kids a day before taking up the question of shots for the littlest.

If FDA clears either vaccine or both, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention would have to recommend whether all kids under 5 should receive the shots or only those at high risk.

While COVID-19 generally isn’t as dangerous to youngsters as to adults, some children do become severely ill or even die. And the omicron variant hit children especially hard, with those under 5 hospitalized at higher rates than at the peak of the previous delta surge.

It’s not clear how much demand there will be to vaccinate the youngest kids. Pfizer shots for 5- to 11-year-olds opened in November, but only about 30% of that age group have gotten the recommended initial two doses. Last week, U.S. health authorities said elementary-age children should get a booster shot just like everyone 12 and older is supposed to get, for the best protection against the latest coronavirus variants.
Child abuse plain and simple
These people are insane
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

BOLDING IN ORIGINAL (not mine)

More Evidence for Early Treatment
Malfeasance and collusion by the WHO, Governments, TNI and old media
Robert W Malone MD, MS
20 hr ago

Trial Site News knocked it out of the park with their May 22, 2022 article entitled: “Opinion: What have We Learned about Early Treatment During the COVID-19 Pandemic?”

I strongly encourage people to read the full article, but the quoted sections of the article below highlight key points. For the many of articles published by Trial Site News, one needs to register with the organization for viewing. But this is a simple step, and Trial Site really has been a non-biased truth teller for both this pandemic, medicine and for clinical research in general.

The article starts with

Early calls for use of repurposed drugs that appeared to work—at least according to preliminary studies and hundreds to thousands of doctors on the front lines of the pandemic—were mostly ignored by organized medicine. This was primarily because even in pandemic times, organized medicine will not deviate from the existing stringent approaches and protocols to developing medical evidence. They will demonstrate flexibility with well-capitalized, staffed entities with track records, such as key players in the pharmaceutical industry.
Yet during a pandemic, an urgency called for unorthodox approaches, and according to many front-line physicians, that’s their job in the first place—find ways to treat patients that, in the judgment of the physician—work. It is truly unfortunate that a parallel trajectory couldn’t be employed during the pandemic---that is, in parallel organized, methodical evidence inquiries while also supporting bottom-up physician-led efforts to find repurposed therapies that make a difference.​

It goes on:

(Physicians) Working to treat thousands of patients around the country, organized medicine launched a vicious attack against physicians simply working to find safe treatments in the real world. Many doctors have lost their well-paid jobs for taking a stand. While hit squads attack them for sacrificing their stable employment for politicized media attention, with a select few at the top of the list-making up for lost income on Substack. But much of the public is starting to see through this unfortunate agenda—vilifying doctors that overwhelmingly sought to help patients before there were any treatments.
While health authorities and organized medicine have opted to ignore the positive ivermectin (and other) studies – out of 82 total ivermectin studies, most of them have some positive results—the establishment rather focuses on a few key studies that failed to show efficacious results such as the TOGETHER study. IN this latter case, critics have emerged highlighting the problems associated with this study. Some have even declared fraudulent intent… TrialSite does suspect the study was underdosed, as compared to regimen used in various countries, including in India.Much of the original awareness of these alternative approaches originated mostly in low-and-middle-income countries (LMICs), and organized medicine in the “First World” frowned at the use of such data to make medical decisions. A sense that a pious medical elite hierarchy exists became apparent to the common folk.
Even a solid investigation in America--the ICON study conducted at Broward County Health early on during the pandemic that demonstrated ivermectin reduced the COVID-19 mortality rate was mostly shunned even though reported in peer-reviewed journal Chest. Because it was a case series and not a sufficiently powered randomized controlled trial, the results wouldn’t matter—unless, of course, you were one of the patients saved thanks to the study led by the husband-wife team of Drs. Jean-Jacques Rajter and Juliana Cepelowicz and team at Broward County Health.
There was also the pharmacist at Adventist health that developed a protocol that was demonstrating success. That program was shut down as, among other things, a contract with Pfizer precluded such hearsay.[/QUOTE]

One of the key takeaways of the article is the apparent malfeasance of the World Health Organization, governments, Trusted News Initiative (TNI) and old media to silence the successes of Ivermectin in countries like India.

But as stated above, randomized clinical trials that have been underpowered, started late within the disease time course (after viral load is gone already largely cleared- important for an anti-viral drug for instance) and/or under dosed have been rampant. Normally, most drug studies have pre-clinical animal studies and dose escalation studies that significantly address these issues prior to clinical trial start date. But time and again, these types of studies have not been concluded prior to the start of the trial. Instead, intuition and opinion seems to be driving clinical trial study design. There is no “gold standard” in that. Garbage in, garbage out.

How does a randomized clinical trial for an anti-viral set an enrollment initiation date for initial administration of the anti-viral AFTER the known date of viral elimination by the body? Yet, time and again during this pandemic, this is what has happened in these “gold standard” randomized clinical trials!

Studies that are underpowered, started late within the disease time course and/or under dosed seem par for the course from organizations and institutions that know better. Many note that these studies seem “designed to fail.” This is a pretty strong accusation, and yet there does not seem to be any other explanation for some of these clinical trial designs.

Inquiring minds want to know? What Institutional Review Board (IRB) - that determines that a study is appropriated designed, dosed and powered are approving these clinical trials? There needs to be some accountability.
The article goes on:

Groups of physicians around the world have persisted that early treatment with already approved off-label therapies under investigation (e.g., Ivermectin, Fluvoxamine, Famotidine, or Hydroxychloroquine in combination treatments) would have saved many lives during the pandemic.
This presumption was based initially either on lab findings, previous research associated with other viruses, or localized real-world data at first and then case series, observational studies, and some initial randomized controlled studies.
Much of the original awareness of these alternative approaches originated mostly in low-and-middle-income countries (LMICs), and organized medicine in the “First World” frowned at the use of such data to make medical decisions. A sense that a pious medical elite hierarchy exists became apparent to the common folk.

To this day, I personally am convinced that this suppression of the successes of treatment for COVID-19 had more to do with the promotion of the vaccines. Absurdly, early treatment and prophylactic treatments are seen as competition to vaccination.

One would hope if this was truly a catastrophic pandemic, the need for a gold standard randomized clinical trial before recommendation of a repurposed safe and effective drug would not be necessary. One would hope that safe, licensed drugs that showed some efficacy would be promoted and distributed by world health organizations and governments across the world.

But so much of this pandemic of the elderly and immune suppressed has been hyped. Fear porn is still rampant.

The article goes on:

Repurposed approved generic drugs were seemingly used effectively to combat the pandemic, but this is not acknowledged in the West. For example, in select states in India, ivermectin was put to use by state and municipal public health agencies in population-wide treatment cohorts, such as in Uttar Pradesh, India’s most populous state.
While this mainstream media classifies the reporting of the Uttar Pradesh effort as misinformation, the opposite is actually true. This media platform—independent of any corporate advertising or contribution-- tracked these events closely and found the levels of censorship in the West to be, frankly, shocking. In fact, at this time, TrialSite had no revenue and continued to report on these matters based on its founder’s own finances. For most of TrialSite’s short history (since late 2018), the media platform and fledgling social network centering on medical research was completely founder financed.
When other countries authorized ivermectin for emergency use for a period time—such as Slovakia—any attempt by TrialSite to share the public proof of that event was immediately censored on social media, including Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter.

The question remains, why and who is behind the censorship? Who made the decisions that any information on treatment for COVID by countries such as India, Brazil and Mexico have been removed from social media and censored from old media.

Clearly, this has been a coordinated effort.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

URGENT: The Pandemic's Wrongest Man, an occasional series
Alex Berenson
10 hr ago

From the Department of Are You ****ing Kidding Me*

CNN just ran a piece explaining that “scientists are urgently trying to solve” the question of whether the endless waves of Covid we now have “may be a result of the mRNA technology used to build some Covid-19 vaccines.”

Not making this up:


SOURCE

Oh? You don’t say? Now “scientists” are “urgently trying” to figure out if the “mRNA technology” is the problem and not the solution?

Now?

NOW?

Maybe they can urgently try to build a time machine too, or an unvaccine machine.



The article also includes this gem, from Dr. Anthony Fauci:



Oh, Tony! T-Dog! Allow me to translate:

I’m not saying it doesn’t work it at all, okay? Not out loud. I’d be absolutely insane to say that out loud after telling A BILLION PEOPLE TO TAKE IT. I’m just saying it could be better. And by better I mean actually work. But I didn’t say that.



And finally this:



Yes, apparently we’ll “need to administer booster shots… [or] rollout an entirely new vaccine altogether”?

What you’re seeing here is the first steps toward an official acknowledgement that the mRNA vaccines have failed and new vaccines are coming sooner or later.

Booster shots? Remember, booster shots are available everywhere now. SECOND booster shots are available everywhere. And despite endless badgering from media and public health authorities, uptake has been close to zero for months.

The side effects are at least as bad with the third and fourth doses as the original two - that is, worse than Covid for many if not most people - and everyone knows the shots will not stop anyone from getting Covid in any case.

Thus the booster campaigns will be allowed to molder, probably within months. The White House will excuse the failure of the vaccines as a failure of public opinion, claiming that “mRNA vaccine hesitancy has risen to unsustainable levels,” or some such, and that we need new vaccine technology. (By new I mean old, most likely.) They may even be cynical enough to blame those of us who were right all along for said hesitancy.

The great mRNA experiment will come to an end, not with a bang but with 200 million expired doses in freezers. The most likely but by no means certain outcome is: zero long-term benefit, zero to some long-term harm, and $100 billion-plus for Pfizer and the gang.

Heads science wins, tails you lose:



This has been The Pandemic’s Wrongest Man, an occasional series!
 

Zoner

Veteran Member
(fair use applies)

BOLDING IN ORIGINAL (not mine)

More Evidence for Early Treatment
Malfeasance and collusion by the WHO, Governments, TNI and old media
Robert W Malone MD, MS
20 hr ago

Trial Site News knocked it out of the park with their May 22, 2022 article entitled: “Opinion: What have We Learned about Early Treatment During the COVID-19 Pandemic?”

I strongly encourage people to read the full article, but the quoted sections of the article below highlight key points. For the many of articles published by Trial Site News, one needs to register with the organization for viewing. But this is a simple step, and Trial Site really has been a non-biased truth teller for both this pandemic, medicine and for clinical research in general.

The article starts with

Early calls for use of repurposed drugs that appeared to work—at least according to preliminary studies and hundreds to thousands of doctors on the front lines of the pandemic—were mostly ignored by organized medicine. This was primarily because even in pandemic times, organized medicine will not deviate from the existing stringent approaches and protocols to developing medical evidence. They will demonstrate flexibility with well-capitalized, staffed entities with track records, such as key players in the pharmaceutical industry.
Yet during a pandemic, an urgency called for unorthodox approaches, and according to many front-line physicians, that’s their job in the first place—find ways to treat patients that, in the judgment of the physician—work. It is truly unfortunate that a parallel trajectory couldn’t be employed during the pandemic---that is, in parallel organized, methodical evidence inquiries while also supporting bottom-up physician-led efforts to find repurposed therapies that make a difference.​

It goes on:

(Physicians) Working to treat thousands of patients around the country, organized medicine launched a vicious attack against physicians simply working to find safe treatments in the real world. Many doctors have lost their well-paid jobs for taking a stand. While hit squads attack them for sacrificing their stable employment for politicized media attention, with a select few at the top of the list-making up for lost income on Substack. But much of the public is starting to see through this unfortunate agenda—vilifying doctors that overwhelmingly sought to help patients before there were any treatments.
While health authorities and organized medicine have opted to ignore the positive ivermectin (and other) studies – out of 82 total ivermectin studies, most of them have some positive results—the establishment rather focuses on a few key studies that failed to show efficacious results such as the TOGETHER study. IN this latter case, critics have emerged highlighting the problems associated with this study. Some have even declared fraudulent intent… TrialSite does suspect the study was underdosed, as compared to regimen used in various countries, including in India.Much of the original awareness of these alternative approaches originated mostly in low-and-middle-income countries (LMICs), and organized medicine in the “First World” frowned at the use of such data to make medical decisions. A sense that a pious medical elite hierarchy exists became apparent to the common folk.
Even a solid investigation in America--the ICON study conducted at Broward County Health early on during the pandemic that demonstrated ivermectin reduced the COVID-19 mortality rate was mostly shunned even though reported in peer-reviewed journal Chest. Because it was a case series and not a sufficiently powered randomized controlled trial, the results wouldn’t matter—unless, of course, you were one of the patients saved thanks to the study led by the husband-wife team of Drs. Jean-Jacques Rajter and Juliana Cepelowicz and team at Broward County Health.
There was also the pharmacist at Adventist health that developed a protocol that was demonstrating success. That program was shut down as, among other things, a contract with Pfizer precluded such hearsay.

One of the key takeaways of the article is the apparent malfeasance of the World Health Organization, governments, Trusted News Initiative (TNI) and old media to silence the successes of Ivermectin in countries like India.

But as stated above, randomized clinical trials that have been underpowered, started late within the disease time course (after viral load is gone already largely cleared- important for an anti-viral drug for instance) and/or under dosed have been rampant. Normally, most drug studies have pre-clinical animal studies and dose escalation studies that significantly address these issues prior to clinical trial start date. But time and again, these types of studies have not been concluded prior to the start of the trial. Instead, intuition and opinion seems to be driving clinical trial study design. There is no “gold standard” in that. Garbage in, garbage out.

How does a randomized clinical trial for an anti-viral set an enrollment initiation date for initial administration of the anti-viral AFTER the known date of viral elimination by the body? Yet, time and again during this pandemic, this is what has happened in these “gold standard” randomized clinical trials!

Studies that are underpowered, started late within the disease time course and/or under dosed seem par for the course from organizations and institutions that know better. Many note that these studies seem “designed to fail.” This is a pretty strong accusation, and yet there does not seem to be any other explanation for some of these clinical trial designs.

Inquiring minds want to know? What Institutional Review Board (IRB) - that determines that a study is appropriated designed, dosed and powered are approving these clinical trials? There needs to be some accountability.
The article goes on:

Groups of physicians around the world have persisted that early treatment with already approved off-label therapies under investigation (e.g., Ivermectin, Fluvoxamine, Famotidine, or Hydroxychloroquine in combination treatments) would have saved many lives during the pandemic.
This presumption was based initially either on lab findings, previous research associated with other viruses, or localized real-world data at first and then case series, observational studies, and some initial randomized controlled studies.
Much of the original awareness of these alternative approaches originated mostly in low-and-middle-income countries (LMICs), and organized medicine in the “First World” frowned at the use of such data to make medical decisions. A sense that a pious medical elite hierarchy exists became apparent to the common folk.

To this day, I personally am convinced that this suppression of the successes of treatment for COVID-19 had more to do with the promotion of the vaccines. Absurdly, early treatment and prophylactic treatments are seen as competition to vaccination.

One would hope if this was truly a catastrophic pandemic, the need for a gold standard randomized clinical trial before recommendation of a repurposed safe and effective drug would not be necessary. One would hope that safe, licensed drugs that showed some efficacy would be promoted and distributed by world health organizations and governments across the world.

But so much of this pandemic of the elderly and immune suppressed has been hyped. Fear porn is still rampant.

The article goes on:

Repurposed approved generic drugs were seemingly used effectively to combat the pandemic, but this is not acknowledged in the West. For example, in select states in India, ivermectin was put to use by state and municipal public health agencies in population-wide treatment cohorts, such as in Uttar Pradesh, India’s most populous state.
While this mainstream media classifies the reporting of the Uttar Pradesh effort as misinformation, the opposite is actually true. This media platform—independent of any corporate advertising or contribution-- tracked these events closely and found the levels of censorship in the West to be, frankly, shocking. In fact, at this time, TrialSite had no revenue and continued to report on these matters based on its founder’s own finances. For most of TrialSite’s short history (since late 2018), the media platform and fledgling social network centering on medical research was completely founder financed.
When other countries authorized ivermectin for emergency use for a period time—such as Slovakia—any attempt by TrialSite to share the public proof of that event was immediately censored on social media, including Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter.

The question remains, why and who is behind the censorship? Who made the decisions that any information on treatment for COVID by countries such as India, Brazil and Mexico have been removed from social media and censored from old media.

Clearly, this has been a coordinated effort.
[/QUOTE]
This is why I believe in evil and why I believe in God, or Goodness. God is good. Truly we are at the end of the age.
 

Zoner

Veteran Member
(fair use applies)

BOLDING IN ORIGINAL (not mine)

More Evidence for Early Treatment
Malfeasance and collusion by the WHO, Governments, TNI and old media
Robert W Malone MD, MS
20 hr ago

Trial Site News knocked it out of the park with their May 22, 2022 article entitled: “Opinion: What have We Learned about Early Treatment During the COVID-19 Pandemic?”

I strongly encourage people to read the full article, but the quoted sections of the article below highlight key points. For the many of articles published by Trial Site News, one needs to register with the organization for viewing. But this is a simple step, and Trial Site really has been a non-biased truth teller for both this pandemic, medicine and for clinical research in general.

The article starts with

Early calls for use of repurposed drugs that appeared to work—at least according to preliminary studies and hundreds to thousands of doctors on the front lines of the pandemic—were mostly ignored by organized medicine. This was primarily because even in pandemic times, organized medicine will not deviate from the existing stringent approaches and protocols to developing medical evidence. They will demonstrate flexibility with well-capitalized, staffed entities with track records, such as key players in the pharmaceutical industry.
Yet during a pandemic, an urgency called for unorthodox approaches, and according to many front-line physicians, that’s their job in the first place—find ways to treat patients that, in the judgment of the physician—work. It is truly unfortunate that a parallel trajectory couldn’t be employed during the pandemic---that is, in parallel organized, methodical evidence inquiries while also supporting bottom-up physician-led efforts to find repurposed therapies that make a difference.​

It goes on:

(Physicians) Working to treat thousands of patients around the country, organized medicine launched a vicious attack against physicians simply working to find safe treatments in the real world. Many doctors have lost their well-paid jobs for taking a stand. While hit squads attack them for sacrificing their stable employment for politicized media attention, with a select few at the top of the list-making up for lost income on Substack. But much of the public is starting to see through this unfortunate agenda—vilifying doctors that overwhelmingly sought to help patients before there were any treatments.
While health authorities and organized medicine have opted to ignore the positive ivermectin (and other) studies – out of 82 total ivermectin studies, most of them have some positive results—the establishment rather focuses on a few key studies that failed to show efficacious results such as the TOGETHER study. IN this latter case, critics have emerged highlighting the problems associated with this study. Some have even declared fraudulent intent… TrialSite does suspect the study was underdosed, as compared to regimen used in various countries, including in India.Much of the original awareness of these alternative approaches originated mostly in low-and-middle-income countries (LMICs), and organized medicine in the “First World” frowned at the use of such data to make medical decisions. A sense that a pious medical elite hierarchy exists became apparent to the common folk.
Even a solid investigation in America--the ICON study conducted at Broward County Health early on during the pandemic that demonstrated ivermectin reduced the COVID-19 mortality rate was mostly shunned even though reported in peer-reviewed journal Chest. Because it was a case series and not a sufficiently powered randomized controlled trial, the results wouldn’t matter—unless, of course, you were one of the patients saved thanks to the study led by the husband-wife team of Drs. Jean-Jacques Rajter and Juliana Cepelowicz and team at Broward County Health.
There was also the pharmacist at Adventist health that developed a protocol that was demonstrating success. That program was shut down as, among other things, a contract with Pfizer precluded such hearsay.

One of the key takeaways of the article is the apparent malfeasance of the World Health Organization, governments, Trusted News Initiative (TNI) and old media to silence the successes of Ivermectin in countries like India.

But as stated above, randomized clinical trials that have been underpowered, started late within the disease time course (after viral load is gone already largely cleared- important for an anti-viral drug for instance) and/or under dosed have been rampant. Normally, most drug studies have pre-clinical animal studies and dose escalation studies that significantly address these issues prior to clinical trial start date. But time and again, these types of studies have not been concluded prior to the start of the trial. Instead, intuition and opinion seems to be driving clinical trial study design. There is no “gold standard” in that. Garbage in, garbage out.

How does a randomized clinical trial for an anti-viral set an enrollment initiation date for initial administration of the anti-viral AFTER the known date of viral elimination by the body? Yet, time and again during this pandemic, this is what has happened in these “gold standard” randomized clinical trials!

Studies that are underpowered, started late within the disease time course and/or under dosed seem par for the course from organizations and institutions that know better. Many note that these studies seem “designed to fail.” This is a pretty strong accusation, and yet there does not seem to be any other explanation for some of these clinical trial designs.

Inquiring minds want to know? What Institutional Review Board (IRB) - that determines that a study is appropriated designed, dosed and powered are approving these clinical trials? There needs to be some accountability.
The article goes on:

Groups of physicians around the world have persisted that early treatment with already approved off-label therapies under investigation (e.g., Ivermectin, Fluvoxamine, Famotidine, or Hydroxychloroquine in combination treatments) would have saved many lives during the pandemic.
This presumption was based initially either on lab findings, previous research associated with other viruses, or localized real-world data at first and then case series, observational studies, and some initial randomized controlled studies.
Much of the original awareness of these alternative approaches originated mostly in low-and-middle-income countries (LMICs), and organized medicine in the “First World” frowned at the use of such data to make medical decisions. A sense that a pious medical elite hierarchy exists became apparent to the common folk.

To this day, I personally am convinced that this suppression of the successes of treatment for COVID-19 had more to do with the promotion of the vaccines. Absurdly, early treatment and prophylactic treatments are seen as competition to vaccination.

One would hope if this was truly a catastrophic pandemic, the need for a gold standard randomized clinical trial before recommendation of a repurposed safe and effective drug would not be necessary. One would hope that safe, licensed drugs that showed some efficacy would be promoted and distributed by world health organizations and governments across the world.

But so much of this pandemic of the elderly and immune suppressed has been hyped. Fear porn is still rampant.

The article goes on:

Repurposed approved generic drugs were seemingly used effectively to combat the pandemic, but this is not acknowledged in the West. For example, in select states in India, ivermectin was put to use by state and municipal public health agencies in population-wide treatment cohorts, such as in Uttar Pradesh, India’s most populous state.
While this mainstream media classifies the reporting of the Uttar Pradesh effort as misinformation, the opposite is actually true. This media platform—independent of any corporate advertising or contribution-- tracked these events closely and found the levels of censorship in the West to be, frankly, shocking. In fact, at this time, TrialSite had no revenue and continued to report on these matters based on its founder’s own finances. For most of TrialSite’s short history (since late 2018), the media platform and fledgling social network centering on medical research was completely founder financed.
When other countries authorized ivermectin for emergency use for a period time—such as Slovakia—any attempt by TrialSite to share the public proof of that event was immediately censored on social media, including Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter.

The question remains, why and who is behind the censorship? Who made the decisions that any information on treatment for COVID by countries such as India, Brazil and Mexico have been removed from social media and censored from old media.

Clearly, this has been a coordinated effort.
[/QUOTE]
Truly Dr. Malone, Dr. McCullough, Dr. Martenson, and the Frontline Doctors joined with Dr. Geert to stand up against the medical community who were in lockstep with Big Pharma, WHO, CDC and Fauci. God bless those who stood up to tell the truth.
 

Zoner

Veteran Member
(fair use applies)

URGENT: The Pandemic's Wrongest Man, an occasional series
Alex Berenson
10 hr ago

From the Department of Are You ****ing Kidding Me*

CNN just ran a piece explaining that “scientists are urgently trying to solve” the question of whether the endless waves of Covid we now have “may be a result of the mRNA technology used to build some Covid-19 vaccines.”

Not making this up:


SOURCE

Oh? You don’t say? Now “scientists” are “urgently trying” to figure out if the “mRNA technology” is the problem and not the solution?

Now?

NOW?

Maybe they can urgently try to build a time machine too, or an unvaccine machine.



The article also includes this gem, from Dr. Anthony Fauci:



Oh, Tony! T-Dog! Allow me to translate:

I’m not saying it doesn’t work it at all, okay? Not out loud. I’d be absolutely insane to say that out loud after telling A BILLION PEOPLE TO TAKE IT. I’m just saying it could be better. And by better I mean actually work. But I didn’t say that.



And finally this:



Yes, apparently we’ll “need to administer booster shots… [or] rollout an entirely new vaccine altogether”?

What you’re seeing here is the first steps toward an official acknowledgement that the mRNA vaccines have failed and new vaccines are coming sooner or later.

Booster shots? Remember, booster shots are available everywhere now. SECOND booster shots are available everywhere. And despite endless badgering from media and public health authorities, uptake has been close to zero for months.

The side effects are at least as bad with the third and fourth doses as the original two - that is, worse than Covid for many if not most people - and everyone knows the shots will not stop anyone from getting Covid in any case.

Thus the booster campaigns will be allowed to molder, probably within months. The White House will excuse the failure of the vaccines as a failure of public opinion, claiming that “mRNA vaccine hesitancy has risen to unsustainable levels,” or some such, and that we need new vaccine technology. (By new I mean old, most likely.) They may even be cynical enough to blame those of us who were right all along for said hesitancy.

The great mRNA experiment will come to an end, not with a bang but with 200 million expired doses in freezers. The most likely but by no means certain outcome is: zero long-term benefit, zero to some long-term harm, and $100 billion-plus for Pfizer and the gang.

Heads science wins, tails you lose:



This has been The Pandemic’s Wrongest Man, an occasional series!

Great find and response HD.

And how many have died or been injured because of these evil people? A very good friend of mine just 52 died in January after taking a booster shot. He left a wife, beautiful small children and a great life behind. We still grieve. These men sold out for money and an agenda. They knew these vaccines weren't safe but they had Trump give them immunity from being sued. Trump was naive and just wanted to save his economy. He was taken for a ride and so were the people.
Non-believers got in my face telling me I didn't believe in Science. No, I didn't believe in Big Pharma! They never understood that. I took my antivirals and purchased Noromectin and trusted in God not Big Pharma science. These people have blood on their hands and they will all have to stand before God one day. They're not getting away with a thing. But I still weep over those who have died and been injured. Hundreds of thousands dealing with vaccine related issues.
 
Last edited:

Zoner

Veteran Member
CV19 Vax Causing Extreme Disease – Dr. Betsy Eads
By Greg Hunter On May 21, 2022 In Political Analysis 221 Comments

Dr. Eads says, “Let me read you the latest Department of Defense numbers, and these just came out: “Myocarditis is up 2,800%, cancer is up 900%, infertility both genders is up 500%, miscarriage is up 300%, neurological disorders are up over 1,000%, demyelinating disorders are up over 1,000%, Multiple Sclerosis is up 600%, Guillain-Barré, which is a progressive paralysis, that’s up 500%, HIV is up 500%, pulmonary embolism, which are blood clots in the lungs, are up over 400%. Those are the equivalent of the VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) for the Department of Defense.”

Dr. Eads says there are treatments for vax injury, but Dr. Eads says totally stopping the ill effects from the CV19 injections are not known. Dr. Eads says, “We don’t know what the mechanism is to turn this off. Right now, there is no way documented to turn that off. So, if you got the Pfizer or the Moderna, that mRNA is going to continue to make spike protein. We do not know the endpoint. We need to study this, and we are in the process of doing that. . . . but we know the effect of the spike protein on the immune system and the fact it is dysregulating . . .and causing cancers. We are two years out, and my feeling is we are going to continue to have spike proteins made over the next x-number of years until we figure a way to turn off the lipid nano mRNA envelope.”

Video of the interview:
 

psychgirl

Has No Life - Lives on TB
(fair use applies)

Effects of COVID-19 infection on the thyroid gland still present after one year
by European Society of Endocrinology
May 23, 2022

Severe COVID-19 disease affects thyroid function through a variety of mechanisms according to a new study from Dr. Ilaria Muller and colleagues from the University of Milan, Italy. The study followed patients with thyroid dysfunction correlated to COVID-19 disease for one year, to better characterize such thyroid involvement and to follow its evolution over time. During moderate-to-severe COVID-19 disease the occurrence of thyroiditis (inflammation of the thyroid gland) plays an important role in thyroid dysfunction, in addition to other well-known mechanisms mainly acting on the hypothalamus-pituitary-thyroid axis. The hormone imbalance is usually mild but increases in severe cases of COVID-19. Their study was presented during the 24th European Congress of Endocrinology on May 23 in Milan, Italy.

The thyroid function is crucial to the human body's metabolism, growth, and development. By continuously releasing a stable amount of thyroid hormones into the bloodstream, it aids in the regulation of numerous body functions. The thyroid gland generates extra hormones when the body needs more energy in particular situations, such as when it is growing, cold, or pregnant.

The study looked at more than 100 patients admitted to hospital with severe COVID-19, analyzing their thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) and other indicators. Thyroiditis occurred frequently in the COVID-19 patient population and the thyroid function, as well as inflammatory indicators, returned to normal in nearly all instances shortly after the end of their COVID-19 illness. However, after 12 months thyroiditis regions remained visible at thyroid ultrasound in half of the individuals, even if reduced in size. The thyroid uptake of technetium or iodine, an indicator of thyroid function, was still reduced in four out of six individuals at nine months, although it had mostly recovered after 12 months. The long-term clinical consequences, if any, are unknown.
Oops delete
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

Philadelphia school district reinstates mask requirement
A rise in COVID-19 cases in the Northeast prompted the Philadelphia School District's decision
by Sophie Mann
Updated: May 24, 2022 - 10:38am

The Schools District of Philadelphia announced that beginning this week students and staff must once again don COVID-19 masks in classrooms. The move was prompted by a general rise in virus case numbers across the country, and especially concentrated in the Northeast.

The district made the announcementFriday, citing the rise in case numbers and a recommendation from the Philadelphia Department of Public Health for universal mask-wearing.

Masks will be required at all times on school campuses and while traveling to-and-from schools in buses and vans.
"As we’ve learned since the pandemic began, the coronavirus continues to evolve and so too will our response to it," said Superintendent Willian Hite. "As we work together to minimize the spread, please remember that our Health and Safety Protocols are still in effect, including the importance of notifying the District if you test positive for COVID-19."

The return of the mask requirement for Pennsylvania's largest school district followed the announcement last week that some neighboring districts would also require masks again. Though several of those districts have instituted strong recommendations for mask usage, as opposed to requirements.

The current 14-day average of daily reported coronavirus cases in Philadelphia is 2,851, up from 1,722 one month prior. The city's school district flirted with the idea of brining back the mandate in mid-April, but ended the effort except for children who are not yet eligible for a vaccine.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

San Diego Unified Plans to Reinstate Mask Mandates
By City News Service
May 24, 2022

SAN DIEGO—With increases in COVID-19 cases in schools and communities, the San Diego Unified School District has a plan to reinstate mask mandates starting Wednesday if specific conditions are met in individual schools.
The district sent a letter, obtained by KUSI, to parents and families informing them of the plan to require students at specific schools to wear masks indoors for at least two weeks under the following conditions:

—Within 14 days, at least three outbreaks, defined as three or more cases in an individual classroom or stable group, occur in the school, and more than 5 percent of the school population is affected

—In a three consecutive-day span, 10 percent or more of the student population is absent each day due to illness.

“Over the past several weeks there has been a steady increase in COVID-19 cases in our schools, our local communities in San Diego County, and across our country as a whole,” the district stated in its letter to families, according to KUSI. “While this is not the rapid surge we saw in January, it is still a concern and a trend that we expect to continue.”

According to the letter, the district will mandate indoor masks universally if San Diego County reaches the “high” level of COVID cases as defined by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The county is currently in the “low” category.

As of May 11, 1,570 students in the district were reported absent because of COVID-19 symptoms.

For the week of May 15–21, 1,112 positive COVID-19 cases from students and staff were reported in the district.

According to data provided by the district, 47 percent of students ages 5–11 have received at least one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine, 71 percent of students ages 12–15 have received at least one dose of the vaccine, and 84 percent of students ages 16 and older have received at least one dose of the vaccine.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

COVID-19 Is Treatable and Preventable With Vitamin D: Dr. Robert Malone
By Meiling Lee and Jan Jekielek
May 24, 2022

COVID-19 can be treated and prevented with vitamin D, according to the pioneer of mRNA vaccine technology and president of the Global COVID Summit, Dr. Robert Malone.

“There are virtually no deaths from this disease in people who have vitamin D levels in their blood above 50 ng/mL [nanograms per milliliter],” Malone said on EpochTV’s “American Thought Leaders” program. “There’s actually many studies out now, including double-blind randomized placebo-controlled trials.”

A 2021 meta-analysis study published in the peer-reviewed journal Nutrients found that there was “strong evidence that low D3 is a predictor rather than just a side effect of the [COVID-19] infection” and suggested a serum vitamin D level “above 50 ng/mL to prevent or mitigate new outbreaks due to escape mutations or decreasing antibody activity.”

Malone explains that 50 nanograms per milliliter of vitamin D “seems to be the threshold where there’s a big change in mortality” according to the data he and other front-line doctors have looked at.

“Fifty [ng/mL] seems to be the cutoff where the curve goes from one to another, and when you get above that, it appears that virtually there is no mortality from COVID-19,” Malone said.

Other studies have shown that vitamin D has important functions beyond just bone health, which include regulating immune function and inflammation.

As early as 2010, a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial from Japan examining the impact of vitamin D supplementation on the occurrence of seasonal influenza A in children aged 6 to 15 between December 2008 and March 2009, “showed a significant preventative effect against influenza A.”

“Influenza A occurred in 18 of 167 (10.8%) of children in the vitamin D3 group compared with 31 of 167 (18.6%) children in the placebo group,” the authors wrote. “In children with a previous diagnosis of asthma, asthma attacks as a secondary outcome occurred in 2 children receiving vitamin D3 compared with 12 children receiving placebo.”

The participants received 1,200 international units of vitamin D3 daily, with no serious adverse effects, or a placebo.

With COVID-19, the fat-soluble vitamin or hormone has been found to prevent the disease, and reduce mortality and admission to the intensive care unit. People deficient in vitamin D were also found to be 14 times more likely to have severe or critical COVID-19, according to an Israeli study.

Regardless of the growing evidence of the effectiveness of vitamin D, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) does not recommend it for COVID-19 because they claim there is not enough data.

“There is insufficient evidence to recommend either for or against the use of vitamin D for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19,” the federal medical research agency wrote, citing only a small Brazilian study that found no significant difference in the length of hospital stay between the vitamin D group and the placebo.

About 240 hospitalized patients with moderate or severe COVID-19 were given either a single large dose of 200,000 international units of vitamin D or a placebo. Researchers said that their findings did “not support the use of a high dose of vitamin D3 for treatment of moderate to severe COVID-19.”

The NIH did mention that the study had several limitations due to its small sample size, enrollment of “participants with a variety of comorbidities and concomitant medications,” and the “time between symptom onset and randomization was relatively long, with patients randomized at a mean of 10.3 days after symptom onset.”

The NIH has not updated its recommendation since April 21, 2021, and did not respond to The Epoch Times’ inquiry on whether it will make an update as more trials have been published.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has also not issued guidance to encourage vitamin D intake. In its “how to protect yourself & others” webpage, the CDC only recommends getting the COVD-19 injections, wearing a well-fitted mask, staying six feet away from others, and testing, among other things.

Discovery of Vitamin D for Influenza

In addition to sunlight, you can also get vitamin D from various foods including certain fish and mushrooms. (Caroline
Vitamin D’s positive impact on the immune system, particularly in terms of infection prevention, was first discovered in 2006, according to Malone.

“I had a call out of the blue from a physician, an older retired physician who was an Army doc, he used to work for the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences … has intelligence community ties, and he was a long-standing DoD [U.S. Department of Defense] researcher in the area of respiratory disease, particularly influenza,” Malone said.

He added, “To the DoD, they have not forgotten about H1N1 in 1918 because there’s a strong case to be made, it was actually the soldiers coming back from the trenches that brought that virus with them into North America. So the morbidity and mortality associated with influenza is near and dear to the DoD’s heart and has been for decades.”

Malone said that the DoD researcher was involved in a study in the mid-2000s (pdf), analyzing the morbidity and mortality records from the “Department of Defense’s health system for warfighters” to determine what cofactors differentiated those debilitated by influenza from those who simply shrugged it off and continued to function.

“What he discovered was clear, statistically rigorous proof that vitamin D levels explain those differences,” Malone said, adding that the researcher was told by his superiors to present the data to Dr. Anthony Fauci.

Fauci, appointed as the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease (NIAID) in 1984, is in charge of coordinating research to prevent, diagnose, and treat infectious diseases, immune-related ailments, and allergies.

“The story he tells me is that he was assigned to go visit Dr. Fauci and he met with Dr. Fauci, presenting the data thinking he’s going to get a: ‘job well-done soldier, this is important information, we’re going to invest all kinds of money and promote vitamin D based on your exceptional work and findings of your team,’” Malone said.

“Instead, what he got told by Tony Fauci, per his relating the story to me, was the phrase, ‘we don’t use drugs to treat influenza, we treat influenza with vaccines only.’ And with that, it died.”

Fauci did not respond to The Epoch Times’ request for comment by press time.

Throughout the pandemic, Fauci’s message on how to prevent COVID-19 has for the most part been in line with the CDC’s guidelines. But on Sept. 9, 2020, he recommended vitamin D and C for immune health during an Instagram live interview with actress Jennifer Garner.

“So, if a child is deficient, there are two vitamins among the many … for example, if you are deficient in vitamin D, that does have an impact on your susceptibility to infection. So I would not mind recommending and I do it myself, taking vitamin D supplement,” Fauci said in response to a question on what mothers could do to boost their children’s immune systems. He also recommended giving vitamin C supplements as “it is a good antioxidant.”

Fauci would also share in an email several days later of the “6,000 international units [of vitamin D] per day” he was taking to Kari Hjelt, the head of innovation at Graphene Flagship. Hjelt then forwarded his email exchange with Fauci to John Campbell, a retired nurse educator, who shared it on his YouTube channel.

According to Malone, vitamin D “at sufficient levels, is necessary to support the health, particularly of your T-cell population.” T-cells have two basic functions: they coordinate the immune response and kill virus-infected cells.

Researchers from Denmark knew in 2010 that vitamin D was essential for activating our immune system defenses, and without it, the immune system’s killer T-cells would not be able to react to and fight off serious diseases in the body.

“When a T-cell is exposed to a foreign parthogen, it extends a signaling device or ‘antenna’ known as a vitamin D receptor, with which it searches for vitamin D,” Dr. Carsten Geisler, professor at the Department of International Health, Immunology and Microbiology at the University of Copenhagen, said in a press release.

“This means that the T-cell must have vitamin D or activation of the cell will cease. If the T-cells cannot find enough vitamin D in the blood, they won’t even begin to mobilize,” he added.

Vitamin D deficiency affects over 1 billion people worldwide, including 42 percent of Americans, with darker complexion having a higher risk of vitamin D deficiency: 82 percent of blacks and 69 percent of Latinos have inadequate levels.

Malone says it is important that people don’t self-administer vitamin D before talking to their doctor and getting a simple blood test to measure the levels of vitamin D in their blood.

“It is important to get your blood levels tested,” Malone said. “You can get toxic from too much vitamin D and different people absorb vitamin D at different levels.”

Vitamin D toxicity, a rare condition, causes an accumulation of calcium in your blood and may cause symptoms that include nausea, vomiting, loss of appetite, weakness, and high blood pressure. Kidney failure may later occur if calcium is deposited in the organs. Treatment involves stopping the supplements and giving intravenous fluids and certain drugs.

Similar to Malone, Dr. Dennis Walker, a radiologist, says that people taking vitamin D supplements should get their vitamin D levels checked six to eight weeks after beginning the supplement, adding that “for every 5,000 IU of D3 consider 100 mcg of K2” as vitamin K2 “helps to ensure calcium transported by the vitamin D is absorbed by bones rather than deposited in arteries.”
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
Beijing Locks Down Tiananmen Square, 9 Districts Under Strict 'Zero-COVID' Measures
(fair use applies)

Beijing Locks Down Tiananmen Square, 9 Districts Under Strict ‘Zero-COVID’ Measures
More Than 11-Million Residents Forced to Stay Home
By Alex Wu
May 25, 2022

Tiananmen Square—China’s political center and symbol of the communist regime’s power—has been placed under strict lockdown as a COVID-19 outbreak hits Beijing.

Chinese authorities have tightened control measures in the capital as per its official “Zero-COVID” policy with nine city districts being included in the lockdown orders.

The Beijing Tiananmen District Management Committee announced via its website on Tuesday that Tiananmen Square would be closed from Wednesday till June 15 as part of anti-COVID measures. This is the first time that Tiananmen Square has been locked down due to the pandemic.

The authorities also announced that starting Tuesday, control measures would be upgraded in the nine districts of the city’s total of 16, including Chaoyang, Haidian, Fengtai, Shijingshan, Tongzhou, Shunyi, Changping, Fangshan, and Mentougou.

In these districts, all residents are restricted from free movement and are ordered to work from home until May 28.

The order affects 11.8 million people among the total 21.88 million residents of Beijing.

Beijing authorities had already locked down most areas in Chaoyang and Fengtai districts since May 5.
More than 154 bus lines and 101 subway stations have also been shut down.

Meanwhile, residents have complained via social media about unannounced lockdowns in many areas.

All indoor retail cultural, entertainment and sports-related venues are all temporarily closed during the time, as are outdoor parks, offline training institutions, welfare institutions, and nursing homes.

Residential communities and commercial buildings have likewise been shut.

Couriers and deliveries including food are not allowed to enter residential communities in the districts, which has resulted in mass complaints from citizens.

According to official numbers released by the authorities, from Monday to Tuesday, there were 71 new COVID-19 cases reported in Beijing. Since April 22, a total of 1,591 cases have been reported in the city, involving 15 districts.

“I don’t know if the official data is true or not,” a Beijing resident surnamed Li told The Epoch Times. “Anyway, this time Beijing [its lockdown and control] is stricter than Shanghai.”

In recent days, it’s been reported in Beijing that the doors of residential buildings have been welded shut and thousands of residents have been forcefully transferred from their homes to centralized isolation facilities.

The Epoch Times obtained a video showing the entrance of a residential building in Beidatun of Chaoyang district being welded shut due to a case of COVID-19 being found among its residents.

Gao Rui, a resident who lives near Jingliang Road in Changyang Town of Fangshan District, told The Epoch Times that tens of thousands of people live in the ten-plus communities in the area.

“There is not a single COVID case in our communities, and it is still being locked down, which is very unreasonable,” Gao said.

They had already been under lockdown for five days prior to Monday. The authorities have not provided residents with food or supplies, and they can only get supplies by buying them online when possible.

Affected citizens have complained about the new control measures via Chinese social media Weibo.

“Why do they prohibit delivery and takeaway from low-risk areas from entering the residential community?” one citizen questioned in a Weibo post.

“Some communities are old and have no elevator. There are elderly people living alone at home. How would they get food [without delivery]?” another asked.

“Delivery and couriers are not allowed to enter the community, and residents have to gather at the entrance to pick up their deliveries, [the authorities] have created mass gathering,” another said.

At least six rounds of COVID-19 nucleic acid testing have been done for all residents in 14 districts of the city so far.

Virologist Chang Rongshan said there is a risk of cross-infection when residents go downstairs to line up for nucleic acid testing. Chang said that the regime’s goal of clearing the city of COVID-19 by June is “frankly impossible” as the number of daily new infections is rising.

Meanwhile, Shanghai’s lockdown still hasn’t been lifted despite it beginning in late March. The important northern city of Tianjin went into lockdown on Saturday, causing disruptions to its port operations.

Yan Huixin, deputy chief executive of the WTO Center of the China Economic Research Institute, told The Epoch Times that China’s lockdown has caused a plunge in the country’s economy.

It has likewise disrupted the global supply chain and further affected China’s main exporting destinations—the United States and European markets, Yan said.

Lin Cenxin, Luo Ya, Xu Meng’er, and Hong Ning contributed to the report.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

Supreme Court Rejects NY Parents’ Appeal for Religious Exemption From Schoolchildren Vaccinations
By Lorenz Duchamps
May 24, 2022

The U.S. Supreme Court has rejected an appeal from parents who sought to challenge New York lawmakers’ decision that eliminated religious exemptions to vaccine requirements for schoolchildren.

On Monday, the nation’s high court released an order (pdf) announcing their decision not to hear arguments in the case F.F., as Parent of Y.F. v. New York, which centers on a lawsuit challenging a 2019 law repealing religious exemptions for vaccines.

The rejection of the appeal lets stand a lower court decision that concluded that the parents’ arguments lacked merit, the Christian Post reported.

A group of 55 families filed a lawsuit in July 2019 asking the New York State Supreme Court to stop the statewide repeal of the religious exemption to vaccines.

The lawsuit came after then-Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed into law a bill on June 13, 2019, that repealed the personal belief vaccine exemptions for children. The Democratic governor signed the measure minutes after the final vote amid a measles outbreak that impacted dozens of states.

“The science is crystal clear: Vaccines are safe, effective and the best way to keep our children safe,” Cuomo said at the time after signing the bill. “While I understand and respect freedom of religion, our first job is to protect public health.”

While the measure left medical exemptions in place, the law no longer allows exemptions for students whose parents or guardians hold genuine religious beliefs that do not permit the child to receive vaccinations.

The state law only applies to students under 18 in both public and private schools and doesn’t require students older than 18 or any other adult in the school environment to be vaccinated. With the repeal enacted, unvaccinated children may not attend school or daycare in the state.

The group of families—including those from the Jewish, Christian, and Muslim faiths—argue that the repeal of the exemption violated their First Amendment rights, exhibited hostility toward religion, and breached protections under the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause, among other issues. The families contended that the policy forced them to either violate their beliefs or homeschool their children.

“In lobbying for its passage, numerous legislators publicly mocked and ridiculed those seeking religious exemptions for their children, and the legislature left intact a medical exemption,” the parents’ appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court reads (pdf).

“There is no dispute the repeal has put tens of thousands of students to the Hobson’s choice of violating their sincerely-held religious beliefs or being denied the right to attend any manner of in-person schooling.”

In March 2021, the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York’s Third Department upheld a similar decision as Acting Albany County Supreme Court Justice Denise Hartman in August 2019, who denied the families a preliminary injunction. Officials concluded that the repeal was “motivated by a prescient for public health” and was not about “active hostility towards religion.”

The only other states that prohibit K-12 schools from granting exemptions on religious grounds are California, Mississippi, West Virginia, Connecticut, and Maine, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. New York first required schoolchildren to be vaccinated in 1860.

California removed personal belief vaccine exemptions for children in both public and private schools in 2015, after a measles outbreak at Disneyland sickened 147 people and spread across the United States and into Canada.

From NTD News
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

Vaccines bring optimism as COVID cases soar in South America
DANIEL POLITI = AP
Tue, May 24, 2022, 3:36 PM

BUENOS AIRES, Argentina (AP) — After a reprieve of months, confirmed cases of COVID-19 are surging in the southern tip of South America. But officials in Argentina, Chile and Uruguay hope high vaccination rates mean this latest wave will not be as deadly as previous ones.

At the same time, there is concern that many people are not ready to once again take on the prevention measures that authorities say are needed to ensure cases remain manageable.

Cases have been steadily increasing for weeks, largely fueled by the BA.2 version of the omicron variant. In Chile, the number of weekly confirmed cases more than doubled by late May when compared to the beginning of the month. In Argentina, cases rose 146 percent in the same period, while in Uruguay, the increase was almost 200 percent.

Although the number of positive tests remain far lower than in previous waves, experts say the increase in the number of confirmed COVID-19 cases is a reminder that the pandemic is far from over.

Argentina’s health minister, Carla Vizzotti, recently said that Argentina is “starting a fourth wave of COVID-19” while in Chile, Health Minister Begoña Yarza characterized the current moment as “an inflection point in the pandemic” and in Uruguay, President Luis Lacalle Pou, said he was “worried” and called on everyone to be “vigilant.”

The countries are part of a regional trend as cases have been rising across the continent.

“COVID is again on the rise in the Americas,” Carissa Etienne, the head of the Pan American Health Organization, said during an online news conference last week.

For many residents in the region, the sharp increase has meant they suddenly have to think about the coronavirus again.
“There were numerous cases in my family after my birthday last week,” Marina Barroso, 40, said outside a testing center in a Buenos Aires suburb. “The number of cases has really shot up.”

The high increase in cases has yet to translate to significant numbers of hospitalizations and deaths. Officials are crediting high vaccination rates in the region as more than 80 percent of the population in the three countries have received at least two doses.

“We are in a very different situation from the previous waves since so much of the population is immunized,” Claudia Salgueira, the president of the Argentine Society of Infectious Diseases (SADI), said.

In Uruguay, the number of beds in intensive care units occupied by patients has doubled, from 1.5 percent in the beginning of the month to a little more than 3 percent by mid-May.

“Sure, mathematically we doubled the cases but we’re still talking about small numbers,” said Julio Pontet, president of the Uruguayan Society of Intensive Care Medicine who heads the intensive care department at the Pasteur Hospital in Montevideo. “What is protecting us from the serious cases is our high level of vaccination.”

In previous waves, there has been a lag between a rise in cases and hospitalizations “and it’s likely that the same thing will happen now,” said Felipe Elorrieta, a mathematical epidemiology researcher at the University of Santiago. “Still, the death toll will be lower now.”

Chile is at an advantage because it enjoys the highest level of vaccinations in the region and the highest rate of booster shots in the world with more than 80 percent of people having at least a third dose, he said.

Chile has been able to get such a large proportion of its population to receive booster shots by essentially making life very difficult for those who eschew the shots.

Starting in June, Chile will block the “mobility pass” of any adult who received the first booster more than six months ago and has not received a second booster shot. Without the pass, Chileans are not allowed to go to restaurants, bars nor attend large events.

In other countries in the region, some are warning the vaccination campaign is lacking because of how many people have yet to receive boosters.

“There is an enormous percentage of people who don’t have the adequate vaccination, four million people only have one dose, 10 million only have two and there’s a group that does not have any,” said Hugo Pizzi, an infectious disease specialist who is a professor in the medical school at Argentina’s Córdoba National University. “There’s an apathetic, defiant attitude among the population that is really maddening.”

Adriana Valladares, a 41-year-old retail worker in Buenos Aires, says the increase in cases is not going to change how she lives.

“I have three doses so I feel pretty protected,” she said. “I used to be really scared of this virus but now I know lots of people who caught it and they were fine.”

Some are finding that it is not as easy as it once was to get tested.

“There is a huge increase in cases but they aren’t testing anywhere,” José Sabarto said in Avellaneda, Buenos Aires province. Sabarto said his daughter was diagnosed with COVID and a family member wanted to get tested but was having a difficult time finding active testing centers.

It’s important for testing infrastructure to be “maintained and strengthened,” Etienne said.

“The truth is,” she added, “this virus is not going away anytime soon.”
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

A New Study Explores Why the Gym Can Be a COVID-19 Spreading Hotspot
Tara Law - TIME
Mon, May 23, 2022, 3:00 PM

COVID-19 has been frustrating for gym rats. Even before scientists knew much about this particular virus, it was pretty clear that breathing heavily in a confined space with lots of other people around doing the same was an easy way to catch a respiratory illness, and gyms were among the first businesses to close early in the pandemic. These suspicions have since been borne out by science: aerosols—tiny droplets that spread through the air when we breathe—have been identified as a major source of COVID-19 transmission, especially when people are breathing faster and more deeply. Throughout the pandemic, exercise at spin classes, fitness clubs and sports games has been identified as the source of dozens of new cases.

Now a new experiment has given us a more exact sense of just how many aerosols a single person can spew during an intense workout—and the results aren’t pretty. According to research by scientists in Germany published in PNAS on May 23, people emit about 132 times as many aerosols per minute during high intensity exercise than when they’re at rest, which the researchers warn raises the risk of a person infected with COVID-19 setting off a superspreader event. At rest, people emitted an average of 580 particles each minute, but during maximal exercise—in which researchers gradually increased intensity until the subjects were exhausted—people emitted an average of 76,200 particles a minute.

The study authors acknowledge that their work has limitations. First and foremost, the sample size was just 16 people. In addition, none of the subjects were infected by COVID-19; in the paper, the researchers note there was no way to do so safely, due to ethical concerns about the health risks for participants.

Nevertheless, there were some valuable findings to come out of the work. “[As an exercise physiologist], and we knew before that when you exercise, there’s more air coming out of a person,” says Henning Wackerhage, a co-author and professor of exercise biology at Technische Universität München. “But we didn’t know before, and which, quite frankly, I didn’t expect, is that also when we exercise hard: there are more particles per liter of air.”

The unusual experiment design enabled the researchers to get a more exact sense of the particles released. While exercising on a stationary bike, each of the 16 subjects breathed clean air through a silicone face mask, and then exhaled into a plastic bag. This enabled the researchers to eliminate sources of contamination and get more reliable results, says Christian Kähler, a professor at the Institute of Fluid Mechanics and Aerodynamics at Universität der Bundeswehr München who co-authored the study.

Some of the participants also emitted much more aerosols during high-intensity exercise than others; in particular, fitter people with more experience in endurance training emitted 85% more aerosols than people without such training. Dr. Michael Klompas, a hospital epidemiologist and infectious disease physician at Brigham and Women’s Hospital who did not participate in the study, explains that this may be a function of the way individuals’ bodies become more efficient at moving large amounts of air. “They make their muscles do an enormous amount of work, and they need to support that by giving their muscles enormous amounts of oxygen and helping to clear waste products,” he says.

If this gives you pause about your current exercise regimen, keep in mind that not all gyms are alike—and the right policies and set-up can help to keep you safe. For instance, the amount of space per person is essential; large spaces, especially those with high ceilings, give the air more space, says Thomas Allison, director of Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing Laboratories at the Mayo Clinic. Other things to look for at a gym, says Klompas, are a vaccination requirement, a facility that has professionally measured the air flow and put in place air filters, and, ideally, a testing requirement. In Klompas’ opinion, masks are potentially helpful, but aren’t likely to be reliable during workouts—looser masks won’t do much during vigorous exercise, and it’s impractical to expect people to wear N95s while exerting themselves.

The researchers note that factors besides fitness status can also affect how many aerosols people emit. Wackerhage says they are also looking into how factors like body mass index, age, and lung condition play a role.

Ultimately, says Klompas, whether or not you go to a gym comes down to your risk tolerance, and weighing the costs and benefits of going to the gym for you, personally. However, he says, you shouldn’t pretend that working out indoors, and around other people, doesn’t pose risks. “If you’re not willing to get COVID don’t go,” says Klompas. “At a time like now, when there’s a lot of COVID around, it is a high risk proposition.”
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

"Long COVID" symptoms affect 1 in 4 seniors after infection, study finds
Alexander Tin - CBS NEWS
Tue, May 24, 2022, 3:51 PM

As many as one in four seniors and one in five adults under 65 experienced "long COVID" or "post-COVID" symptoms after surviving a coronavirus infection, a new study from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported Tuesday.

The study — published in the CDC's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report — is the latest to try and quantify how many of the millions of Americans who have now tested positive for the virus are facing long-term issues caused by their infection.

By comparing electronic health records in a large national database of patients, the study's authors found 38.2% of COVID-19 survivors "experienced at least one incident condition" — a list that includes heart, lung, kidney and gastrointestinal problems, pain, fatigue, loss of smell or taste, mental health issues, and more — in the months after their infection. By contrast, just 16% of other people were diagnosed with such conditions.

"As the cumulative number of persons ever having been infected with SARS-CoV-2 increases, the number of survivors suffering post-COVID conditions is also likely to increase," the study's authors wrote.

The study only looked at data from March 2020 to November 2021, before the massive Omicron variant surge over the winter. Based on surveys of antibodies, the CDC estimates that the share of Americans who have survived the virus rose to nearly 60% over the winter, up from a third in December.

Among the 26 conditions examined by the study, the most common symptoms were "respiratory symptoms and musculoskeletal pain" in both seniors and other adults.

Among seniors aged 65 years and older, the researchers warned they were at "increased risk for neurological conditions" and other mental health issues ranging from mood disorders to substance abuse.

Another study also published this week, from scientists at Northwestern University, reported that many so-called "long haulers" were facing conditions like brain fog and numbness for more than a year after their initial infection.

The CDC study's authors also note there are some factors that might complicate their estimates.

For example, doctors may have been "more likely to document possible post-COVID conditions" among people who have survived the virus, leading to an overestimate of the risk of these symptoms.

On the other hand, the study's comparison to others without a prior infection was drawn from other patients who were "seeking care." That could lead to an underestimate of the true risk elevated by an infection, the study's authors said, given these others might actually be "sicker" than a true control group.

Previous studies have reached varying estimates of the share of survivors who face long COVID symptoms. Some of that may be the result of the wide range of ways scientists have defined post-COVID in their studies, looking at different time intervals since infection or different symptoms.

"You see numbers out there of like 30, 50 percent. I think that's clearly not quite right in terms of thinking about how many people are really disabled by this in a significant way," Dr. Ashish Jha, the White House's top COVID-19 official, told the "In the Bubble" podcast earlier this month.

"But that said, what that means, unfortunately, is other people minimize long COVID," Jha added.

The latest report is among several ongoing studies the CDC has backed with the aim of understanding the impact of post-COVID symptoms.

The CDC revamped its guidance on post-COVID earlier this month, adding conditions like "depression or anxiety" to the list of commonly reported symptoms. The agency also laid out a list of reasons some people might be at higher risk after surviving COVID-19, like those who have faced a more severe illness or who were unvaccinated.

However, the guidance notes that more research – including both from the CDC and elsewhere at the National Institutes of Health – still needs to be done into how to treat these post-COVID patients.

Advocates said recently that they are in talks with the Biden administration over long COVID plans to be released in August. The NIH has said it plans to launch studies this year into trialing potential drugs to treat post-COVID conditions.

"I think we need to start trying out new therapies. I am interested in questions like, does getting Paxlovid reduce your likelihood of long COVID. Because if you have a much shorter duration of viremia is that going to make a difference?" said Jha.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

Long COVID symptoms lasted a median of 15 months, Northwestern study finds
Stacey Wescott/Chicago Tribune/TNS
Lisa Schencker, Chicago Tribune
Tue, May 24, 2022, 1:00 AM·5 min read

People with long COVID-19 who visited a Northwestern Medicine clinic were still experiencing symptoms such as headaches, dizziness, fatigue and brain fog for a median of 15 months after first falling ill, despite never needing hospitalization, according to a new Northwestern study.

The study looked at 52 patients who were seen at Northwestern’s Neuro COVID-19 clinic between May 2020 and November 2020, who initially had mild COVID-19 symptoms. Study senior author Dr. Igor Koralnik said the study is the first to look, over such a long time period, at neurological symptoms in people who didn’t need to be hospitalized for COVID-19.

The study was published Tuesday in peer-reviewed journal Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology.

“It’s important because ... long COVID is not going to be going away,” said Koralnik, who is chief of Neuro-infectious Diseases and Global Neurology at Northwestern Medicine and oversees the Neuro COVID-19 Clinic.

Researchers believe long COVID may affect up to 30% of people who get COVID-19, which means an estimated 24 million people in the U.S. may be experiencing lingering symptoms, according to the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, though some studies have found that being vaccinated may reduce a person’s risk of developing long COVID if they catch COVID-19.

“This is something people need to know about because it impacts a very large population in the U.S.,” Koralnik said.
In the study, there was no significant change in the frequency of patients experiencing symptoms including brain fog, numbness/tingling, headache, dizziness, blurred vision, tinnitus and fatigue, between their first appointments and when they completed questionnaires six to nine months later.

Loss of taste and smell decreased over time, but heart rate and blood pressure variation and gastrointestinal symptoms increased at follow-up.

The average age of the participants was 43, and nearly two-thirds were women. More than two-thirds were vaccinated, but they were vaccinated after they began experiencing COVID-19 symptoms because the vaccines were not yet available when they first got sick. The vaccines did not seem to worsen or improve their cognitive function or fatigue, according to the study.

For the study, researchers reached out to the first 100 non-hospitalized patients who visited the Northwestern clinic, and the 52 studied were those who completed follow-up questionnaires. Those patients had varying experiences with long COVID, with some mainly experiencing loss of taste and/or smell, while others, like Emily Caffee, struggled with a debilitating litany of symptoms.

Caffee said she likely got COVID-19 at the very beginning of the pandemic while traveling for a rowing competition. She had body aches, fatigue, shortness of breath, chest pain and foggy thinking. Though she felt ill, she wasn’t so sick that she had to be hospitalized.

After her initial bout with COVID-19, she returned to her then-job as a physical therapist for Northwestern, but her symptoms soon worsened, to the point that she took a three-month-long medical leave from work, starting in May 2020.
She was plagued by crushing fatigue, brain fog, heart palpitations, vision issues, pain in her legs and neck and unrelenting anxiety — what she called her “buffet of misery.”

“I couldn’t stand for five minutes without getting so dizzy and nauseous I needed to lay down for an hour,” said Caffee, 36, of Wheaton. “If I knew I had to take a shower or follow a recipe or walk downstairs to get the mail, that was it, that was all I could do all day.”

In August 2020, she returned to work, slowly ramping up her hours. By September 2020, when she saw Koralnik, she was feeling about 50% better, she said. Koralnik told her to continue doing what she was doing, slowly resuming her activities, she said.

The feedback was validating, considering that she had previously been told her problems were related to anxiety. She never tested positive for COVID-19, as testing wasn’t yet widespread when she got sick.

“Just hearing from them, from a physician ... that what I was going through was real and not just anxiety was key for me,” she said.

Caffee, who now works at PT Solutions in Bloomingdale, said she now feels about 95% back to normal. “This took over two years of my life that I feel was just suffering in so many ways, but I consider myself lucky I’ve come through it without any major complications.”

Like Caffee, about half of the patients in the study never tested positive for COVID-19. But Koralnik said it was important to include them because, like Caffee, many likely had COVID-19, based on their symptoms, before testing was readily available.

“Those patients have experienced a lot of rejection and stigma, and those people are often women in their 40s,” Koralnik said. “There are millions of those people who couldn’t get tested in 2020 yet they continued to have long COVID symptoms.”

Koralnik acknowledges that the study has its limitations. The study is based on just 52 patients, but Koralnik said researchers felt it was important to share what they’ve learned so far, rather than wait longer to study a larger group of people. Also, because the study consists of people who visited the Northwestern clinic and chose to participate in the study, it’s not representative of all people with long COVID who didn’t require hospitalization. About 90% of the study participants were white.

Still, Koralnik said Northwestern has had an open-door policy for its clinic, meaning patients did not need to be referred by other doctors or show proof of insurance. The clinic also has seen people from across the country, by performing both in-person appointments and telehealth visits.

The findings in the new study follow up on a Northwestern study published in March 2021 that found that 85% of people with long COVID-19, who did not require hospitalization, experienced four or more neurological symptoms that impacted their quality of life, and, in some cases, their cognitive abilities.

“This study is the first of its kind that was started in a difficult circumstance, in the lockdown in Chicago, and provides very unique and important data on this population of patients,” Koralnik said. “We hope it’s going to help clinicians take care of those patients and further studies are going to be done.”
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

The Never-Ending Battle: New Study Shows Long Covid Can Last At Least 15 Months
Elizabeth Yuko
Tue, May 24, 2022, 1:06 PM

Two years ago today, I was in the midst of my eighth-straight week of Covid-19 misery, wondering what the hell was wrong with me, and why, instead of recovering, I continued to accumulate new symptoms. In addition to those that had been with me from the very beginning — shortness of breath, muscle aches, debilitating exhaustion, chills — my collection expanded to include rashes, hair loss, and multiple neurocognitive symptoms that have since been lumped together and labeled “brain fog.” Complete inadequacy of the term aside, the word “fog” implies that it’s temporary, and soon will lift.

But the results of a study published today in the journal Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology tell a different story: that some people with Long Covid continue to experience neurological symptoms — including cognitive dysfunction, fatigue, headaches, and dizziness — more than a year after their initial Covid-19 infection.

These findings are the latest insights from Igor Koralnik, MD, chief of neuro-infectious diseases and global neurology at Northwestern Medicine, and his team at the hospital’s Neuro Covid-19 Clinic. Their previous study, published in March 2021, reported that 85 percent of the Clinic’s Long Covid patients who sought treatment between May and November 2020 (after relatively mild Covid-19 illnesses that didn’t require hospitalization) had a minimum of four neurological symptoms.

When Koralnik and his colleagues followed up with the same group of patients between 11 and 18 months after their initial Covid infection — the results of which were published today — 81 percent indicated that they were still dealing with at least one neurological symptom; most had several. Of the 52 participants in this arm of the study, the average age was 43, and 73 percent identified as female.

“The main takeaway [from this study] is that patients [an average of] 15 months from disease onset still had a persistence of the most debilitating neurological symptoms, including brain fog, headache, dizziness, fatigue, blurred vision, and ringing in their ears,” says Koralnik, adding that the only symptoms patients reported decreasing over time were the loss of taste and smell.

Adam Kaplin, MD, PhD, a neuropsychiatrist who has worked with Long Covid patients as part of the Johns Hopkins Post-Acute Covid-19 Team and was not involved with the Northwestern study, says that its findings “should absolutely be a wake-up call,” highlighting the fact that these persistent neurological symptoms aren’t limited to those who were hospitalized with life-threatening Covid-19 infections, and include people whose initial illnesses weren’t as severe, “who were just minding their business at home trying to recover.”

Interestingly, the study also found that three symptoms — variation in heart rate and blood pressure, and gastrointestinal issues — became more frequent over time, which Koralnik says suggests that Long Covid may be triggering abnormal autoimmune reactions in some patients, causing their body to attack its own healthy cells. “We know that 16 percent of [participants in our study] had autoimmune disease before Covid, which is higher than the normal U.S. population,” he tells Rolling Stone. “And there may be an autoimmune predisposition in the patients who develop Long Covid.”

Kaplin suggests another possible explanation for the emergence of these cardiovascular and gastrointestinal symptoms, pointing out that they are all potential side effects of medications used to treat other Long Covid symptoms like depression, anxiety, and sleep disturbances. “I’m not quite sure how to interpret the symptoms that didn’t exist and got worse, because [the authors of the study] didn’t clarify who was on what meds,” he tells Rolling Stone.

The research also shed light on how vaccines may impact Long Covid. With 77 percent of the study’s participants fully vaccinated, Koralnik says that vaccination had a neutral effect.

Like everyone else, people with Long Covid may experience short-term side effects after receiving a dose of the vaccine, typically lasting between 24 and 48 hours. “Sometimes people [with Long Covid] say [the vaccine causes] a reawakening of some of their symptoms,” Koralnik explains. “But Long Covid is not triggered by vaccination or made worse by vaccination over time, and the benefits of vaccination are far greater than the inconvenience of a transient reaction to the vaccine.”

According to Koralnik, this research has “the longest follow-up period of neurologic symptoms impacting non-hospitalized patients who developed Long Covid anywhere in the world.” And while Kaplin recognizes the importance of the findings, he says that they shouldn’t be seen as representative of all people with Long Covid.

To begin with, the study was limited to participants with Long Covid who actively sought treatment for their ongoing neurological symptoms at a neurology clinic. “Equally as important is that [the participants in the study] were selected because they’ve had symptoms for at least six weeks,” Kaplin explains. “And so [the researchers] were selecting people who were more likely to have a progressive and long course.”

Although there still aren’t definitive statistics on the number of Americans living with Long Covid, as of March 2022, estimates ranged from 7.7 million to 23 million people, according to a report from the Government Accountability Office.
But the condition’s mysteries don’t end there.

A separate study published today in the Annals of Internal Medicine from researchers at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) confirms what is already known — or technically, unknown — about Long Covid: That its cause has yet to be identified, and it remains unclear how or why the wide range of long-term post-Covid symptoms develop.

And while we still don’t know how long a person’s Long Covid symptoms might last, post-Covid clinics like the ones at Northwestern and Johns Hopkins are providing people with the available tools to help them cope with the disruptions to their lives. But for the most part, those aren’t cures or long-term solutions.

For now, the future of the millions of people who, like myself, are living with Long Covid, depends on further research — something Koralnik and his team call for in their article. “The take-home message is that people are suffering,” Kaplin says, “and Long Covid needs to be studied better in order for it to be treated and managed and understood.”
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

Long COVID is a growing problem. More should be done to treat it.
Ned Barnett - The News and Observer
Wed, May 25, 2022, 4:30 AM

As new and more contagious COVID variants drive another rise in infections, there will likely be an increase too in long COVID. Medical experts estimate that this puzzling syndrome with its constellation of symptoms could surface in up to 30 percent of people infected with the virus.

“Anyone who gets COVID is at risk for developing long COVID,” said Dr. John Baratta, founder and co-director of the UNC Covid Recovery Clinic.

A study released Tuesday by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported that one in five people under 65 who had been infected with COVID experienced a health condition associated with long COVID. For people 65 and older, the incidence was one in four.

Long COVID can create new ailments or aggravate preexisting ones, such as arthritis or heart issues. Symptoms include severe fatigue, shortness of breath, “brain fog” and depression, among other things. It can be debilitating.

Joni White, a patient at the UNC clinic, recently told the News & Observer about what hit her weeks after she thought she had recovered from a COVID infection. “All of the sudden the brain fog and the fatigue, you know, the heaviness in the chest. I could not remember anything. I couldn’t add two plus two. It was just so many things,” she said.

White, a Hillsborough resident, said this week that she feels well now, but her recovery took over a year.

Despite such effects, the risk of long COVID – and it’s there even for the vaccinated and those who had mild or asymptomatic infections – is being largely ignored. Concerts, sporting events, restaurants and airplanes are packed and mask mandates are mostly gone.

“The pandemic mindset has ended for many North Carolinians,” Baratta said, “but for those with long COVID, the struggles of the pandemic continue.”

Vaccinations and precautions can’t stop infections completely, but they can reduce the number and severity of infections and the long COVID cases that can follow. Yet, only 55 percent of North Carolina’s population is fully vaccinated with a booster and vaccination rates have plateaued.

Dr. David Wohl, an infectious disease specialist at UNC Health in Chapel Hill, said, “I think long COVID is not getting the attention it needs and the capacity we have to help people with this is limited. We need a really concise definition of what it is and what we can do to help people cope with things we don’t have a good treatment for.”

So far, that’s not happening. The National Institutes of Health will spend $1.15 billion over the next four years to study the causes and treatments of long COVID, but the results of those trials are years away.

Meanwhile, the government, insurers and employers are unclear about how to determine when long COVID qualifies as a disability, the state is not tracking long COVID cases and treatment clinics are not broadly available. “We really still need state or federal funding to expand long COVID care,” Baratta said.

The scarcity of long COVID treatment centers is clear in the range of people coming to the UNC clinic. It has treated patients from 77 of North Carolina’s 100 counties and 14 other states.

“People are really in desperate need of this care. Those with the resources to be able to travel can, but many are not able to do that,” Baratta said.

Naomi Bauer, a physical therapist who heads a clinic that treats long COVID patients at WakeMED in Raleigh, said getting financial help for the treatment and financial burdens of long COVID is an uneven process.

“We have had quite a number of patients who have had to either file for long- or short-term disability, or give up working altogether because their employers either can’t or are unwilling to make accommodations for them to return to work safely,” she said.

Kim Stoltz, a nurse and mother of three in Clayton, had a terrible case of COVID. She was on a ventilator and suffered lung damage. At WakeMED, she’s has recovered her ability to walk and breathe without oxygen. “I said I’m going to walk out of here without oxygen, and I did,” she said.

But Stoltz and her husband had to hire a lawyer to get her retroactive disability benefits and she said the $40 co-pay for clinic visits three times a week is hard to afford.

Bauer is hopeful that research will catch up with this ever morphing infection. “There’s so much money that has been designated to study it and find treatment and cures,” she said.

But until that medical advance comes, there needs to be more immediate assistance, medical and financial, for those who suffer debilitating effects from an encounter with this changing, but still dangerous and persistent virus.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

Why do people get long COVID? A virus that may cause MS could reveal clues
Melina Walling, Arizona Republic - USA TODAY
Mon, May 23, 2022, 9:00 AM

PHOENIX – Melanie Street calls COVID-19 “a lion inside of my body.”

When she was first infected with SARS-CoV-2 in January 2021, just two days before she had an appointment to be vaccinated, the virus hit her nervous system hard. For 23 days, she was in intense pain. She felt like she was choking, that her throat and mouth were swelling, and that she couldn’t breathe.

“It was very painful, like I was being attacked and played with, like a small toy. That's how I describe the waves of pain and the movement of the virus around my body,” says Street, who lives in Flagstaff, Arizona, with her son.

After the acute infection, Street still experienced debilitating symptoms for months. Now, about a year later, those symptoms ebb and flow, but she has still had to give up all the physical activities she once loved. She has chronic fatigue that flares up whenever she exerts herself, causing a tension at the base of her skull, brain fog and pain that reverberates through her body.

“It’s just going on for so long for me, and it's so impactful, and it's terrifying, at a time when the sleeping lion likes to wake up and scratch around,” she said.

Viral facts

• The phenomenon we currently know as “long COVID” highlights a vexing reality of many viral infections: Some people develop serious or chronic symptoms when most others do not.

• A recently confirmed connection between Epstein-Barr virus, which infects many people, and multiple sclerosis, which afflicts only a few, is another example.

• Proving that link lies in confirming a “temporal” connection – in other words, showing definitively that the viral infection happened before the onset of the disease. That can take a generation to confirm.

• Whether or not someone develops severe symptoms related to a viral infection also may depend on other factors such as the microbiome and genetics.

• While research raises the prospect of better treating viral infections, researchers note a lack of access to basic health care may still be the greatest barrier.

Street’s son, a teenager, was ill with COVID-19 too – in fact, Street thinks she got the virus from him. He had some persistent symptoms as well, but they were completely different. He had bouts of swollen glands and rashes, but nothing like the fatigue that sidelined his mother from her work, hobbies and outdoor activities.

Why did her son’s “version” of long COVID, as she calls it, look so different than her own? Street wants to know. “I just think that's what science is going to catch up with ... How the body reacts differently,” she said.

It’s a question that has long intrigued scientists who study all kinds of viruses, particularly latent viruses – the ones that infect nearly everyone, often when we are children, and then stick around in the body for the rest of our lives. Often they are asymptomatic, and we never even notice they’re there. But new research suggests that there might be more late-onset and damaging effects associated with latent viruses than some scientists initially thought.

In one pioneering study this January, researchers at Harvard found a causal link between Epstein-Barr virus (or EBV, which most people contract, and which gives a few unlucky individuals mononucleosis) and multiple sclerosis (MS). The study, which has been over 20 years in the making, has implications for what may one day be revealed about long COVID, said Elizabeth Jacobs, a professor of epidemiology and biostatistics at the University of Arizona whose team has already begun studying COVID-19 long haulers.

“We're expecting decades, decades of research on this,” she said.

Although the mechanisms of SARS-CoV-2 are different from those of true latent viruses – the coronavirus might not stick around in the body as long as or in the same ways as, say, EBV – scientists are looking at reactivation of latent viruses, and other existing post-infection syndromes, for answers about long-haul COVID-19.

Dr. Janko Nikolich-Žugich, the head of the immunobiology department at the University of Arizona and co-director of the Arizona Center on Aging, said he and other researchers are interested in examining the relationship between long COVID and latent viruses because it is “probably the interplay between the host and the viruses that will determine why one person got (long COVID) and the other person just sailed through,” he said. He is part of a team that recently received a $9.2 million grant to study long COVID.

But uncovering temporal and causal connections between latent viruses and long COVID could take a while. That’s why scientists are looking to existing knowledge, like the recently-confirmed connection between EBV and MS, for a glimpse of the future.

EBV and MS: The art of interpretation

Just over 20 years ago, Kassandra Munger, now a senior research scientist at Harvard, was working on her Master’s in epidemiology when she started getting interested in MS research. As a relative of someone with MS, she wanted to learn more about the causes and risk factors for the disease. By 2001, Munger and a colleague had published a paper in the Journal of the American Medical Association establishing a link between higher levels of EBV antibodies and increased risk of MS.

But they needed more evidence to prove there were temporal links between EBV and MS – in other words, that EBV infection itself happens before the onset of MS.

So for two decades, Munger and her team collaborated with the U.S. military, using a cohort over several years that numbered over 10 million people. With a population that size, they were able to find what they really needed – a group of people who, when they were first identified and tested, had not yet contracted EBV. Most of that group were younger than 20 years old at the time of their first blood samples.

The researchers found that 34 of 35 individuals who were EBV-negative at the beginning and developed MS during the study had contracted EBV about 5 to ten years before the onset of MS. All 766 other individuals in the cohort who developed MS were EBV-positive before the study, too, meaning that 800 out of 801 individuals total who developed MS were previously infected with EBV.

Munger said that it’s not clear exactly what’s going on with the one EBV-negative case, but since MS is a collection of symptoms and there is no one laboratory test to diagnose the disease, it’s possible that person was misdiagnosed or that other factors were contributing to their symptoms.

The researchers also tested the association with over 200 other viruses, including over a dozen latent viruses, and found that EBV was the only virus for which those who developed MS had higher antibody levels than controls.

MS is a rare disease, and not everyone who gets EBV will get MS. But the temporal link shows that, in the vast majority of cases, EBV is necessary for MS.

That’s a tangible place to start looking for solutions, and one of those would be obvious: vaccination. If MS almost never occurs without first contracting EBV, a vaccine for the virus should help prevent the later disease. Moderna, which made one of the most effective COVID-19 vaccines, has already started testing an EBV vaccine in clinical trials.

But beyond vaccines, the findings are a solid starting point for understanding the relationship between viruses and long-term effects in our bodies later in life.

What’s more, when they looked at EBV in relation to other viruses, Munger and her team found another fascinating relationship. Among individuals who had EBV, those who had also been infected with cytomegalovirus (CMV) showed a decreased risk of developing MS. It was a finding consistent with existing research, but it still left them with more questions.

“We have no idea what the biological mechanism would be. Maybe…there is some temporal relationship there, that maybe being infected with CMV first provides some sort of protection once you're infected with EBV,” Munger said. “So it's an interesting finding and clearly speaks to the complexity of this. It's easy in a headline to pull out, you know, EBV causes MS. But it's so much more complex than what that captures.”

That complexity – the dazzling abundance of viruses, cells, proteins, bacteria and even fungi that work together, uniquely, within each individual person – means that researchers have to be strategic and extremely specific with their experimental design. Knowing what questions to ask, and where to go next with the answers, is part of the challenge. “There's an art, sometimes, to the interpretation,” Munger said.

She also noted that over the last 20 years, as the research community has become more open to investigating the long-term effects of viruses like EBV, she and her team has had the chance to build on scientific criticisms and find more definitive answers. It’s an iterative process that she says will need to be expanded now that SARS-CoV-2 has arrived on the scene. She thinks scientists will need to ask “big Q questions,” as she puts it, about the relationship between the novel coronavirus, other viruses, and long-term illnesses like MS.

But for now, she expressed appreciation for the definitive results they do have on MS, results that could still be a long time coming for COVID-19.

“It really does feel like the culmination of 20 years of work, like we've climbed Mount Everest,” Munger said. “Maybe we haven't quite reached the peak. There's still a lot that we don't know. But certainly it has been an incremental build over the past 20 years to get to the point where we are now.”

MS and long COVID: Symptoms and similarities

When Jacobs heard about the results from Munger’s team, she had a message.

“In looking at data from our prospective cohort study of COVID19, the Arizona CoVHORT, I have mentioned a few times that some of the symptoms of LongCOVID harmonize with the ones I have with MS,” she tweeted on Jan. 13, along with a link to Munger’s paper in Science.

For Jacobs, better known to her over 13,000 Twitter followers as @TheAngryEpi, the paper was not only relevant to her research on COVID-19 but also to her own experience with MS. She was first diagnosed with MS in 2003, following her sister’s diagnosis, and she says that ever since she has done everything she can to minimize her symptoms, which include fatigue, muscle aches and spasms, double vision and vertigo, as well as more severe issues that have sometimes left her unable to walk for weeks at a time.

While disease-modifying drugs and exercise have helped her keep the most severe degenerative effects of MS at bay, Jacobs said that she has seen her experience of certain symptoms reflected in the testimonials of long COVID patients.

Jacobs said that while she didn’t want to falsely equate long COVID and MS, she says the results she and her team are beginning to see amplified her concerns over the long-term effects of COVID-19 that still remain to be studied. “What it did was break my heart, because I know those symptoms very well, and I was really hoping others would not be experiencing it,” she said.

It’s a concern that other scientists share. “I would be surprised if there were no longer-term sequelae (consequential conditions) of COVID-19, but only time will tell at this point,” Munger said.

In the meantime, Jacobs described her hope for long COVID advocates to keep sharing their experiences, because she has already witnessed a pattern of dismissal of MS symptoms from within and outside of the medical community.

“Anecdotally, I know people with MS who went years without getting a diagnosis where people would brush them off … I am very familiar with that sense of not being believed,” Jacobs said. “It's real. It's happening … Don't just assume right away that this is in their head or something because that is what (has been) done to a lot of MS patients for decades.”

It’s a pattern that other advocacy groups have also highlighted. Patients with myalgic encephalomyelitis and chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), Lyme disease and other post-infection syndromes have taken to social media and other online forums to share their calls for further research and support from the medical establishment.

To that end, Jacobs said the pandemic has brought together infectious disease and chronic disease epidemiologists, which has accelerated collaborative efforts to better understand the long-term effects of SARS-CoV-2. It’s a research area that is not only booming but also growing, changing and gaining more acceptance – and more funding.

“Before we were more siloed,” she said. “COVID in our case has made (interdisciplinary teamwork) more seamless than it was in the past.”

Long road ahead for long haulers

Street doesn’t know what’s causing all of her symptoms. But she does worry about how long they have lasted, and what that could mean for her body in the future.

“(I’m anxious because) I'm not sure if the virus is sitting within me,” Street said. “Is it sitting in my system? Is it going to come back five years from now? That part could be terrifying if you sit and think about it too long.”

She added that she tries to stay positive and move on with her life as best she can. She’s working part-time now, some of her symptoms are getting better, and she has found some relief through acupuncture several times a week. Recently, after 13 months, she says an osteopath diagnosed her with costochondritis, or inflammation of the cartilage that connects the ribs to the breastbone. While she says that the diagnosis doesn’t take the issue away, she is relieved to have more information.

She has also signed up to participate in the University of Arizona CoVHORT study as well as a study on long COVID sponsored by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), as she waits for more answers.

Those answers could be different for her than for others with long COVID, explained Amy Proal, a microbiologist at the PolyBio Research Foundation, in a webinar where she discussed potential biological factors contributing to long COVID, including latent virus reactivation and dysregulation of the microbiome. According to Proal, the condition may very well represent a continuum of different effects within the body.

In one person, for example, a reservoir of SARS-CoV-2 may lurk in the intestinal tissue, sending inflammatory signals to the brain and resulting in sickness, nausea or other nervous system symptoms.

But in another person, the coronavirus could have been cleared from the body, and yet it may have also caused a reactivation of Epstein-Barr virus in the process and disrupted the microbiome – eventually resulting in those same or similar sickness, nausea and nervous system symptoms.

“A takeaway is that if the same circuitry is being impacted, no two long COVID patients have to have the exact same mix of pathogens or inflammatory issues to develop these same sets of common symptoms,” Proal said.

It’s an idea that has been relevant to several other conditions in the past, but is only now being thrust into the limelight, said Michael VanElzakker, a neuroscience researcher at Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School who worked with Proal to outline a list of biological factors that could lead to long COVID.

VanElzakker previously specialized in studying the long-term consequences of acute infections – “years and years,” as he puts it, of trying to convey that some people “don't fully recover from apparently infectious illness…and just trying to get it taken seriously.”

He described how many poorly understood “autoimmune” conditions may really be a consequence of the immune system “trying to get at something that was doing damage.” He echoed the connections some advocates and researchers have drawn between long COVID and other conditions like Lyme disease, MS, and chronic fatigue syndrome, noting parallels in the ways some physicians have dismissed the so-called “vague” symptoms patients with those diseases often report.

VanElzakker added that many of those symptoms are actually clear markers of the immune response, and that breaking down the artificial barriers scientists have drawn between the nervous system and the immune system could lead to breakthroughs that address the root causes of many diseases – root causes that might look different from person to person.

“It’s probably … going to take, you know, some thoughtful, genuinely personalized medicine to figure out what's happening in each person,” he said.

It’s a topic Jacobs has been bringing up in her classes as she asks students to wrestle with questions of justice and healthcare. Personalized medicine is “like the bells and whistles, super space-age-like medicine … but it does ignore what to me is the biggest problem in health care right now, which is lack of access,” she said. “Poverty, for example, is a carcinogen. … I actually believe that (improving access) would be more effective in the next decade than personalized medicine.”

Long COVID patients like Street have taken to social media and to grassroots movements like Survivor Corps, an online network, to find community. Street still says she has felt isolated at times, because no two experiences with long COVID are the same. “That part’s quite lonely,” she said.

But with those unique symptoms come opportunities for better research and care, and VanElzakker is hopeful that the flood of data and innovation that COVID-19 has initiated will make waves in a field that he has been part of for a long time.

“It is a really promising moment,” VanElzakker said. “Because SARS-CoV-2 is new, there's a space for discovery.”
 
Top