Coronavirus

[jeremyp]

Well it's not all bad.

BBC: Sexually transmitted infections fall during pandemic

[Dicky Underpants]

Given that this is a global pandemic with pretty well every country on the planet prioritising dealing with the pandemic, including harnessing the best minds on the planet do you not think that they'd have come up with an effective alternative to vaccination if one existed.

Obviously not. Jair Bolsonaro, Neil Oliver and Spud know better.

[Nearly Sane]

Another country has a hypocritical prick for a PM


https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-58471685

[Dicky Underpants]

I don't agree with that philosophy anyway. I wouldn't take aspirin unless I was in severe pain.

Aspirin would be pretty useless for dealing with severe pain.

[Spud]

That is complete nonsense - have you actually read the source data:

These data are merely for people who died within 7 days of having the vaccine, not people who died due to a vaccine adverse effect. The rate of deaths is basically exactly what you'd get in the normal population, adjusted for the demographics of those having the vaccine.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-vaccine-adverse-reactions/coronavirus-vaccine-summary-of-yellow-card-reporting#annex-1-vaccine-analysis-profile

'Based on age-stratified all-cause mortality in England and Wales taken from the Office for National Statistics death registrations, several thousand deaths are expected to have occurred, naturally, within 7 days of the many millions of doses of vaccines administered so far, mostly in the elderly.

The MHRA has received 509 UK reports of suspected ADRs to the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine in which the patient died shortly after vaccination, 1,060 reports for the COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca, 15 for the COVID-19 Vaccine Moderna and 28 where the brand of vaccine was unspecified.

Hmm, I'm not sure. Suppose someone is living with heart failure, and they're given the jab because it will decrease their risk of catching Covid. They develop a fever, a common adverse reaction, and their heart stops due to the increase in rate and strength of contraction during the fever. One could easily dismiss this as 'he was about to go anyway', but still, the death was caused by the jab. Maybe they have accounted for such incidences, I don't know.

[Spud]

Sometimes you can't address the cause.

My partner had a heart attack some 10 years ago now. He had none of the risk factors associated with heart disease. He didn't smoke, wasn't overweight, drank very moderately, took exercise and yet he had a heart attack. Why you may well ask? We found out it was because of an unusually narrow artery that made him more susceptible to the plaque that builds up in all of us at a certain age. The consultant told him there are three main groups of people who have heart attacks - the lifestyle group = smoking, drinking, overeating, lack of exercise - the elderly who are just more likely to suffer cardiac issues because of their age, and a smaller group which the consultant called the "what the fuck am I doing here?" group which make up perhaps 5% of the cases they see - these are people who look after themselves, aren't elderly but have drawn a short straw genetically speaking in cardiac terms.

There is no way to address that cause. As is the case with many other diseases. For example, most of us will know, or at least be aware of people who have had lung cancer but never smoked a cigarette in their lives.

Covid, for a lot of people, only has one partial answer, and that is the vaccine. It would be great if we can find other treatments but none of the ones mentioned are a complete fix. Staying healthy and having vitamin D hasn't worked for a sizeable number of younger people who caught covid and died. It is a most peculiar virus. It can take the healthy sometimes and leave my Aunt's sister who is 95 virtually untouched by it. She had the disease but said she's had worse colds - and she truly is a creaking gate, in case you thought she was some nonagenarian wonder woman.

That's a long way round for saying there are some things you simply cannot address in the manner you have described.

I know several men who, around middle age or at least before old age, fall into the category where you wouldn't expect them to suffer a heart attack but they do. Maybe some of those had a narrowed coronary artery -I think there would have been warning signs preceding the heart attack that could have been picked up by a diligent practitioner. I know someone who had a massive intra-cerebral bleed; the doctors said most probably caused by high blood pressure, even though her BP was normal. When I mentioned a history of severe migraines they shrugged. Interestingly she hasn't had a migraine since the bleed. I know what factors combined to cause the migraines, and I think they could have been prevented. The fact that they weren't is evidence that the medical profession, maybe through no fault of its own, isn't doing a thorough job.

[Spud]

Fantasy land - the only options to reduce disease severity in unvaccinated people that come close to vaccination are:

1. Lock downs and self isolation to prevent disease tranmission and:
2. Enough other people being vaccinated with consequential reduction in viral transmission to unvaccinated people.

But the second relies on a massive vaccination programme and the first is not risk-free as the risks of lockdowns and self isolation even on health are major, let alone on restrictions on basic liberties.

The vaccine is, without doubt, the best balance between effective reduction in covid disease severity and minimisation of associated risk. Nothing else comes close. Given that this is a global pandemic with pretty well every country on the planet prioritising dealing with the pandemic, including harnessing the best minds on the planet do you not think that they'd have come up with an effective alternative to vaccination if one existed.

I posted my views on covid disease prevention measures a year ago. One was good dental hygiene, which has been linked with a reduction in respiratory and other disease. I would have mentioned other measures but because of the reaction here I didn't bother.

I'm open to you being right. But not for me - I adopted a philosophy that invasive intervention should be reserved as a last resort, because the body has a self-repair mechanism that intervention should first seek to utilize. That means, from an osteopathic perspective, ensuring the muscles and joints are working properly. The current vaccines fundamentally modify the self-repair mechanism.That may be appropriate if the patient's mechanism is weak.

[Spud]

The way to the answer isn't always through scientific understanding. Sometimes you notice that something works, then try to understand how it works.

[Aruntraveller]

. Maybe some of those had a narrowed coronary artery -I think there would have been warning signs preceding the heart attack that could have been picked up by a diligent practitioner.

Partner had no warning signs before MI. The only way to pick it up would be via a diagnostic procedure such as an angiogram. As these aren't routinely done, and it would be very costly to screen the entire population, not to mention logistically impossible, then your suggestion is nonsense.

[SteveH]

I posted my views on covid disease prevention measures a year ago. One was good dental hygiene, which has been linked with a reduction in respiratory and other disease. I would have mentioned other measures but because of the reaction here I didn't bother.

I'm open to you being right. But not for me - I adopted a philosophy that invasive intervention should be reserved as a last resort, because the body has a self-repair mechanism that intervention should first seek to utilize. That means, from an osteopathic perspective, ensuring the muscles and joints are working properly. The current vaccines fundamentally modify the self-repair mechanism.That may be appropriate if the patient's mechanism is weak.

Irresponsible, anti-scientific bullshit.

[ProfessorDavey]

I adopted a philosophy that invasive intervention should be reserved as a last resort, because the body has a self-repair mechanism that intervention should first seek to utilize.

You are correct - the body does have a self repair mechanism. The problem is that for many infections (including covid) and many people that self repair mechanism is not sufficient to prevent the infection causing very severe disease and sometimes death. Indeed, if you actually understood anything about the biology underlying the disease you would understand that the actual cause of death is directly related to the actions of that repair system - the virus doesn't kill you, your response to the virus does.

And that is why the approaches to help control the virus involve dampening down that self-repair mechanism (e.g. dexamethasone) or providing a highly controlled exposure to part of the virus that results in the development of a level of immunity but without severe side effects, such that when the body is actually exposed to the virus it's already augmented self-repair mechanism (the immune system) is better able to deal with the virus without creating dangerous or even fatal effects.

[Spud]

Partner had no warning signs before MI. The only way to pick it up would be via a diagnostic procedure such as an angiogram. As these aren't routinely done, and it would be very costly to screen the entire population, not to mention logistically impossible, then your suggestion is nonsense.

Sure, I understand, just think it's strange there was no sign nor symptom at all if there was plaque build up. If the heart is not getting enough blood supply its muscle becomes ischaemic and chest pain or tightness is felt on exertion. Regarding taking daily low-dose aspirin, yes perhaps, if someone has already had an MI, or is experiencing chest pain and could be due for one. But as far as I know it's not recommended for everyone as it can increase the risk of internal bleeding. It's primarily a pain killer.

[Aruntraveller]

Sure, I understand, just think it's strange there was no sign nor symptom at all if there was plaque build up

Not strange at all.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/06/080616124938.htm

For those who don't want to bother with the article, this is the main takeaway:

As many as 50 percent of all cardiac deaths due to disease in the heart's vessels occur in individuals with no prior history or symptoms of heart disease.

This may have improved since 2008 with diagnostic tools but there will be a sizeable % of MI patients who still fall into this category.

[Spud]

Not strange at all.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/06/080616124938.htm

For those who don't want to bother with the article, this is the main takeaway:

This may have improved since 2008 with diagnostic tools but there will be a sizeable % of MI patients who still fall into this category.

That's interesting, and I can't find anything on clinical signs (as distinct from symptoms) of coronary occlusion. So I can believe it - but (correct me if I'm wrong) it doesn't follow that everyone should take aspirin, nor be vaccinated against a disease that not everyone is at serious risk from.

[Aruntraveller]

No it doesn't in the case of aspirin. That is the risk/benefit equation in one group of patients. It is still relevant as you are making the case for not having the vaccine for some people even though it is an infection that threatens all of us.

As I have already highlighted perfectly healthy fit 40 year olds can be killed by it and 95 year old creaking gates can survive it, therefore the only way to ensure fewer deaths/long term illness currently is the vaccine.

In the case of coronavirus, please explain to me how you know who is and is not at risk? 

[Spud]

In the case of coronavirus, please explain to me how you know who is and is not at risk?

In Reply #4554 I linked to this large study showing 94% of hospitalized covid patients had one or more 'co-morbidities'.

You are correct - the body does have a self repair mechanism. The problem is that for many infections (including covid) and many people that self repair mechanism is not sufficient to prevent the infection causing very severe disease and sometimes death. Indeed, if you actually understood anything about the biology underlying the disease you would understand that the actual cause of death is directly related to the actions of that repair system - the virus doesn't kill you, your response to the virus does.

And that is why the approaches to help control the virus involve dampening down that self-repair mechanism (e.g. dexamethasone) or providing a highly controlled exposure to part of the virus that results in the development of a level of immunity but without severe side effects, such that when the body is actually exposed to the virus it's already augmented self-repair mechanism (the immune system) is better able to deal with the virus without creating dangerous or even fatal effects.

I'm reading up on the biology. Yes the hyper-inflammatory response is a big problem, and I think there is a way in which it can be dampened without drugs. The other problem is how to prevent the virus from reaching the lungs. I think the first step is awareness of the natural barriers to respiratory infection, such as nasal hair and the mucociliary system.

[Aruntraveller]

In Reply #4554 I linked to this large study showing 94% of hospitalized covid patients had one or more 'co-morbidities'.

Ok so 6% of the 130,000 that have died in the UK thus far is 7,800 people that will die without comorbidities. Are you willing to risk being one of the 7800?

I know for sure I am not given the unpredictable nature of covid.

Of course, that is not the only factor you need to consider. There is also the continued spread of the disease and infection of friends and relatives and also the possibility of Long Covid and all the stress that puts on an already overstretched health service.

The figure of 7800 looks large against the deaths reported from vaccination side effects of 1,632 as of 1st September. Of course, you have to weigh all the other lives saved by vaccination against that as well.

[ProfessorDavey]

The figure of 7800 looks large against the deaths reported from vaccination side effects of 1,632 as of 1st September. Of course, you have to weigh all the other lives saved by vaccination against that as well.

It isn't the case that 1,632 people have died from vaccine side effects - that number is the number of people who died within 28 days of having a jab regardless of whether there is any link whatsoever with the jab. And of course people die all the time, and with the vaccine roll out starting with the oldest and most vulnerable it isn't unexpected that quite a few of those people will die within 28 days of a jab dose, and indeed would have died regardless. The rate of deaths in the vaccine jabbed people is basically in line with deaths in a 28 period adjusted for the age profile etc of the vaccinated people.

See here:

https://fullfact.org/health/daily-expose-covid-deaths-vaccine-deaths/

And also here where you can link to the latest date on deaths:

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/monthlymortalityanalysisenglandandwales

This provide data on deaths from March 2020 - July 2021 (the latest data) where an adverse reaction to the vaccine was a cause of death as indicated on the death certificate. The total number of deaths due to adverse vaccine reaction as a contributory factor in England and Wales up to July 2021 is 4. Yes that's right, just 4 from about 90 million doses of the vaccine given. And when you are more specific, whether adverse reaction to the vaccine was the underlying cause of death the number of death is ... zero, yup none.

In comparison the equivalent data for covid as a case of death on death certificates was over 135,000 up to July.

In the same period deaths 

[Maeght]

In Reply #4554 I linked to this large study showing 94% of hospitalized covid patients had one or more 'co-morbidities'.
 

I'm reading up on the biology. Yes the hyper-inflammatory response is a big problem, and I think there is a way in which it can be dampened without drugs. The other problem is how to prevent the virus from reaching the lungs. I think the first step is awareness of the natural barriers to respiratory infection, such as nasal hair and the mucociliary system.

How?

[ProfessorDavey]

I'm reading up on the biology. Yes the hyper-inflammatory response is a big problem, and I think there is a way in which it can be dampened without drugs.

It can be dampened down with anti inflammatory agents - some of which are naturally occurring others are synthetic. But in order to give an accurate and specific dose to the right place you need that agent to be delivered in a defined manner. And do you know what we call an anti-inflammatory agent delivered in a defined manner and specific dose - yup, we call them drugs.

The other problem is how to prevent the virus from reaching the lungs. I think the first step is awareness of the natural barriers to respiratory infection, such as nasal hair and the mucociliary system.

Just nonsense - so on nasal hair. Men have significantly greater nasal hair than women - men are also more susceptible to covid infection than women. Clearly nasal hair is preventing infection - not.

[Aruntraveller]

It isn't the case that 1,632 people have died from vaccine side effects - that number is the number of people who died within 28 days of having a jab regardless of whether there is any link whatsoever with the jab. And of course people die all the time, and with the vaccine roll out starting with the oldest and most vulnerable it isn't unexpected that quite a few of those people will die within 28 days of a jab dose, and indeed would have died regardless. The rate of deaths in the vaccine jabbed people is basically in line with deaths in a 28 period adjusted for the age profile etc of the vaccinated people.

Apologies for that. I did think it sounded high, but wherever I got it, it definitely looked as if those were the figures for deaths from vaccines (I'll try and look again and provide the link). Anyway, glad to be corrected in this instance. Just shows how misleading figures are.

Edit: This is where I got it from and it serves me right for skim reading, I totally missed the rather key "died shortly after vaccination"!

The MHRA has received 524 UK reports of suspected ADRs to the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine in which the patient died shortly after vaccination, 1,064 reports for the COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca, 16 for the COVID-19 Vaccine Moderna and 28 where the brand of vaccine was unspecified. The majority of these reports were in elderly people or people with underlying illness. Usage of the vaccines has increased over the course of the campaigns and as such, so has reporting of fatal events with a temporal association with vaccination however, this does not indicate a link between vaccination and the fatalities reported. Review of individual reports and patterns of reporting does not suggest the vaccines played a role in these deaths.

[Spud]

Ok so 6% of the 130,000 that have died in the UK thus far is 7,800 people that will die without comorbidities. Are you willing to risk being one of the 7800?

The 6% figure is for hospitalizations, not deaths.

[Spud]

How?

I've recently suggested one way. Breathing in air that is warm, if the external temperature is cold, or air that is cool, if the external temperature is hot, will help the alveoli to remain within the temperature limits at which they function best.

[Aruntraveller]

The 6% figure is for hospitalizations, not deaths.

Ok apologies for that. The actual figures for deaths (March - June 2020, later data isn't available/easy to find) are here:

https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/ukcovid19deathsbyagewithnounderlyingconditions

8.9% without underlying health conditions died.

A large %  who you seem to want to take a gamble with their lives.

[Spud]

Also, breathing mechanics are altered in patients with, for example, obesity or hyperanxiety. This affects the amount of air reaching different parts of the lungs, causing the parts that expand less to become stagnant. Surfactant in the alveoli reduces surface tension and ensures that they all expand equally, and it also modulates immune cells. (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3025886/)

On a larger scale, if the person is breathing using their upper ribs but not their diaphragm there will be unequal expansion. The virus apparently infects the peripheral alveoli more, and they are the ones in which gas exchange is reduced as a result of poor breathing patterns.

This would explain why acute covid patients benefited from being turned onto their front regularly.

Optimal mechanical functioning and consequent alveolar health will reduce the ability of the virus to infect the type ii pneumocytes that secrete surfactant. Healthy surfactant levels will thus lead to better control of the inflammatory response.