Covid-19 News

  • So keep these numbers in mind when looking at the myocarditis cases after vaccination against Covid-19. A total of 226 cases after vaccination would still make such events very rare and lower than the numbers that might be expected after a Covid-19 coronavirus infection.

    More THH FUD and diversion. We here do not talk about diagnosing unnoticed myocarditis among athletes. The people that got an RNA vaccine had acute myocarditis and some died. Most of these did no high level sports...


    So please not not spread fake news and fake studies!


  • lets not be a vaccine fanatic.


    In the UK it is a fine decision with arguments on both sides. In the US you should factor in the fact that the inexorable rise of the delta variant alters that balance towards vaccinating down to a younger age - evn though it will always be a judgement call how young is too young.


    In Missouri apparently the vaccination rate is only 40% or so. Delta will spread there very quickly.


    https://abcnews.go.com/US/delt…-kansas/story?id=78375257


    Whatever the IFR of original COVID, we had +40% from alpha variant and now another +60% (?) from delta, so it is getting more deadly as it gets more transmissable - understandably so.


    We can just hope that vaccines keep up. We are very lucky to be in countries where vaccines are available...

  • More THH FUD and diversion. We here do not talk about diagnosing unnoticed myocarditis among athletes. The people that got an RNA vaccine had acute myocarditis and some died. Most of these did no high level sports...


    So please not not spread fake news and fake studies!


    There were both figures in what I linked and quoted. The 0.26% figure (those with symptoms) is still much higher than the vaccine side-effect figures.


    Don't you think on this argument those pouring unfounded doubts on vaccines are more guilty of spreading FUD? I'm trying to work out what in my arguments is making you afraid...

  • here goes The “sticky skin” and “friction against the skin” theories:

    I've discovered that my skin is fairly sticky (at least a coin readily sticks to me on the vertical), and I just tried a battery as per the video. Same results as the girl : with the battery pointed almost vertically, it can roll left or right on the skin without falling down. To me this still comprises stickiness. The coefficient of sliding friction is very much greater along the battery's long axis.


    On another note, yesterday afternoon my 89 year old uncle (who lives a 10 minute drive away) called 911 because, according to a neighbour, he was experiencing increasing shortness of breath since his second vaccination on Tuesday. I just got off the phone with a nurse and they will be moving him from the emergency section to the cardiac section later today or tomorrow as he's now diagnosed with congestive heart failure with fluid around the heart. Because of Covid, no visitors allowed until he's moved, sigh.




  • I live in the us and the delta variant is on the rise. I have already been vaccinated for reasons you are aware of. If I didn't have those considerations I probably still would get it. I have advised my kids, all in their 30s and in good shape to wait it out for the summer and check the Covid landscape at the beginning of fall. All have a tube of ivermectin and have been taking 5000 units a day of vitamin d and all 3 have been considered essential workers and chances are they already have contacted Covid. Cases are rising slightly in uk and us but I have already said this is expected and by mid July cases will drop again only to rise again in late august early September. COVID IS SEASONAL.


  • India has been hard-hit by COVID - with no doubt many more infections than cases due to lack of complete testing, and many more deaths than recorded.


    You would need the details on your figures of 7X and 100X, ans also to look at the shape of the COVID infections curves, and crucially the composition of those infections in terms of variants since delta has a much higher R number than alpha.


    Then you get these rises and falls in overall rate for each variant based on its transmissability, extent of herd immunity from (vaccine + those who have caught COVID), and local and seasonal factors that affect how people mix.


    So i can't explain anything without a lot of info i don't have. More to the point, why do you consider those figures (I still don't know what they mean since a bit vague) surprising without the supposition of Ivermectin being effective?

  • Whatever the IFR of original COVID, we had +40% from alpha variant and now another +60% (?) from delta, so it is getting more deadly as it gets more transmissable - understandably so.


    India has no problems after using IVERMECTIN!

    More deadly really?? Typical UK nonsense or big pharma vaccine promotion fantasies. UK 1.171 was less deadly and the India version (1.614) will be even less deadly. Cases go up because you need less virus for an infection. Less virus = less severe symptoms. Unluckily not for strong cases that did live with a partner that did bring it home. (>10 hours close exposition) Here only Dr. Mengele helps... Or terrorist governments that force people to stay home.


    Geneva with most delta cases now has empty hospitals...

  • I live in the us and the delta variant is on the rise. I have already been vaccinated for reasons you are aware of. If I didn't have those considerations I probably still would get it. I have advised my kids, all in their 30s and in good shape to wait it out for the summer and check the Covid landscape at the beginning of fall. All have a tube of ivermectin and have been taking 5000 units a day of vitamin d and all 3 have been considered essential workers and chances are they already have contacted Covid. Cases are rising slightly in uk and us but I have already said this is expected and by mid July cases will drop again only to rise again in late august early September. COVID IS SEASONAL.

    Thanks for that information - which makes your personal judgement here clear.


    The figures I have for COVID being seasonal are a +20% increase in winter R number - obviously it is variable depending on people's behaviour out doors / in doors. and where mixing happens.


    Delta variant is giving a +60% increase over alpha.


    So while winter other things being equal will be worse, all you need is R > 1 and you have exponential increase till herd immunity starts to kick in.


    In the UK here (Summer) we have a doubling of infections every 11 days or so.


    Exponentials get big pretty quickly, though the whole population numbers do not look exponential because they are average of many different areas with different infection rates, vaccination rates, and social mixing.

  • I should just add, the (vaccination + recovered) rate for herd immunity from delta looks to be a lot higher than it needs to be for alpha, and maybe up to 80-90%. In the US you will get that, and it is not something to be happy about, from lots of people catching COVID I guess.

  • Some vaccine experts having 2nd thoughts about rushing to inoculate kids


    https://triblive.com/news/heal…ushing-to-inoculate-kids/



    From the earliest days of the pandemic, doctors and public health officials have seen widespread vaccination as the most effective way to stop covid-19 in its tracks. But a growing contingent of medical experts is now questioning whether that conventional wisdom ought to apply to children.


    Their doubts are not borne of conspiracy beliefs, but couched in the carefully calibrated language of risk and benefit. And they’re expected to get a public airing next week as advisers to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ponder a spate of post-vaccine heart problems in adolescents and young adults.

    No one is arguing that covid-19 immunizations for kids should stop altogether. Rather, a debate has erupted over the need to inoculate healthy children as soon as possible and according to the two-dose regimen authorized by the Food and Drug Administration.


    The vaccines made by Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna have been administered safely to millions of adults and been vetted in several thousand adolescents. But neither has been subjected to exhaustive testing in diverse pediatric populations, as is typically required for a vaccine intended for universal use in kids.


    The FDA authorized the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine for emergency use in adolescents as young as 12 on May 10. In the weeks that have followed, the safety monitoring systems managed by the FDA and CDC detected dozens of cases of a possible side effect in newly vaccinated teens: an inflammation of the heart muscle known as myocarditis.


    The cases typically developed in older adolescents, most of them boys, three to four days after they got a second dose. Virtually all were considered mild, presenting as chest pain and tightness that resolved after treatment with over-the-counter medications. None of the patients appear to have died or suffered serious cardiac malfunction, though it’s too early to know whether they will suffer long-term effects.

    As of June 10, the government’s vaccine monitoring systems detected 226 cases of myocarditis or a related condition called pericarditis after vaccination in people younger than 30. Normally, fewer than 100 cases would be expected for this age group, said Dr. Tom Shimabukuro, deputy director of the CDC’s Immunization Safety Office.


    More investigation is needed to determine whether the vaccine caused these heart problems or if the timing was merely a coincidence, he said.


    Dr. Paul Offit, a pediatrician and vaccine specialist at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, said the reports will give the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices an opportunity to “give people a clinic on relative risk” — as it did after the covid-19 vaccine made by Johnson & Johnson was linked to a rare blood-clotting disorder in younger women but still deemed safe for use.


    Offit said he doubts the myocarditis cases will upend the longstanding certainty that kids should be vaccinated quickly.


    “I’d give it to my child in a second,” he said.


    Others aren’t so sure. The possibility that children getting the vaccine — especially a second dose — could put their hearts at risk has amplified calls for more debate before parents, schools and others embrace the conviction that all healthy children need to get vaccinated.


    It’s not just the prospect of a surprise side effect that has prompted the sudden surge in vaccine caution.


    As the pandemic appears to be winding down across the United States and its limited toll on children has been tallied, it’s no longer clear that immunizing children will bring the outbreak to a faster close, said Dr. Martin Makary, a public health expert at Johns Hopkins University.


    Makary is urging his colleagues to “think twice” before recommending universal covid-19 vaccination of healthy kids. Given the data in hand, “there’s no compelling case for it right now,” he wrote this month in MedPage, a website widely read by physicians.


    In an interview, Makary said his concerns might be allayed with a more thorough examination of the safety data.


    “But no one is thinking like this,” he said. “We’ve converted now from being pro-vaccine to vaccine fanaticism.”


    Given the general decline in new infections and hospitalizations, there’s time for a thorough FDA vetting of the vaccines for children and adolescents, Makary said. Even if it takes months, it could wind up protecting more children from harm.


    The emerging debate threatens to divide a community that’s largely been united by the pandemic.


    From the moment that the first covid-19 vaccine started going into Americans’ arms, one certainty has seemed almost beyond questioning: As soon as enough doses were available, the nation’s children would roll up their sleeves.


    There are strong arguments for that position too.


    Although it’s clear covid-19 has largely spared children from severe illness, the CDC says 456 American kids have died of the disease, though that is considered a conservative estimate.


    At least 20,000 — and as many as 100,000 — kids have been hospitalized with covid-19. Indeed, the CDC reports that even as adult hospitalizations declined in March and April, the rate at which adolescents were admitted ticked upward. Nearly one-third were treated in intensive care units, undercutting the argument that severe illness rarely happens in this age group.


    Covid-19’s toll on some children also lingers well beyond a bout of infection. As of mid-May, at least 4,018 in the U.S. have developed a condition called multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children, or MISC, that frequently appears four to six weeks after a child has cleared his or her infection and typically requires hospitalization.


    Myocarditis is common in these very sick children, and roughly 1% die.


    If covid-19 were a disease seen only in children, statistics such as these would galvanize medical professionals and public health officials to find a way to protect them, New York pediatrician Dr. Risa Hoshino wrote in a MedPage commentary sparked in part by Makary’s views.


    By any definition, covid-19 has been an emergency for the nation’s children and the FDA’s emergency use authorization is an “appropriate pathway” for getting vaccines to young Americans, she added.


    At Children’s Hospital Los Angeles, pediatric cardiologist Dr. Jodie Votava-Smith has seen the wreckage of covid-19 firsthand, and she has no doubts about the value of vaccinating kids.


    In the last month, she has helped treat a patient who developed myocarditis after a dose of vaccine, she said. The child’s symptoms were mild and readily treated with ibuprofen.


    Votava-Smith said her assessment of vaccines’ value has been more profoundly shaped by the dozens of children treated at CHLA for serious heart muscle inflammation as a result of having cvid-19. These children were severely ill and now face potentially enduring health effects. The disease was the cause of their misery, she said, not the vaccine.


    The mother of two children who are 5 and 7, Votava-Smith said she “can’t wait” to get them vaccinated. “They know they’ll be getting their shot when it’s their turn,” she said.


    Dr. H. Cody Meissner, a Tufts University pediatrician who advises the FDA on vaccines, said it’s a mistake to evaluate covid-19 vaccines for children in the same way as it was cleared for emergency use in adults.


    “The risk calculation for vaccinating an adult is pretty easy,” he said. When as many as 4,000 adults a day were dying of covid-19, “even if there was a little risk of vaccine, most people would accept that.”


    But for children, he said, “the calculus is a bit different.” Although they seem to contract the coronavirus pretty readily, they’re far less likely than adults to get sick or die. So even if instances of post-vaccination myocarditis are rare, they still change the risk-benefit analysis.


    “The data are not sufficient to say that the benefit of these covid-19 vaccines outweighs the risk in children and adolescents,” Meissner said. “We may get there. But we’re not there now.”

  • Look to last year's data and you will see the same rise of alpha that you are seeing with delta during the approaching summer equinox and soon, like last year you will see a decrease only to have it start rising again in September. The # 1 driving force of this pandemic is the Sun!!! Countries still dealing with large case loads are all still in their flu seasons, India, brazile, African continent, south and central America. Interesting, the virus seems to gain strength as each season equinox approaches and wanes shortly after. Check the data

  • Look to last year's data and you will see the same rise of alpha that you are seeing with delta during the approaching summer equinox and soon, like last year you will see a decrease only to have it start rising again in September. The # 1 driving force of this pandemic is the Sun!!! Countries still dealing with large case loads are all still in their flu seasons, India, brazile, African continent, south and central America. Interesting, the virus seems to gain strength as each season equinox approaches and wanes shortly after. Check the data

    So - i'd warn you against that type of argument.


    You are right that COVID rises sometimes correlate with winter: but they sometimes also correlate with Summer, as in the delta variant rise now in the UK which is quite startling! Given a relatively small seasonal variation you don't expect anything else.


    As COVID stabilises into something like flu we will probably get a clearer seasonal variability with new strains propagating in the winter and largely defused through herd immunity and lower inherent R in the Summer.


    We both agree there is an effect. you could read the studies trying to estimate how large it is if you are interested. I also agree all this estimation is a bit uncertain. as is most things in medicine, which is why conspiracy theories flourish. people tend to classify true/uncertain/false and then give the same value to 99.9% as they do to 0.1%.

  • As I said, it's interesting that the virus seems to gain strength as each seasonal equinox approaches but in summer weather falls as fast as it rises. Watch UK cases over the next 3 weeks to see if this is the case. Nothing conspiratorial at all in this. I don't believe that the vaccine has been the driving force in the cases dropping, it has some effect but the driving force is Covid is seasonal. Explain India, 29% vaccinated yet cases are dropping.

    • Official Post

    I was interested in the reasons why the "its cheap, and it does not harm, so why not use it even though there is no valid evidence for it" argument does not dominate decisions.

    There is evidence to support both sides of this debate. If there was "no valid evidence" as you say, Ivermectin would have lost it's appeal long ago and we would not be discussing it now. I believe the preponderance of evidence supports it being effective, as do many doctors, and now whole nations.


    As Wytten says, just the speedier viral clearance alone should be enough to keep the naysayers at bay, and cause them to lower the barriers they have erected to it's free, and widespread distribution. As long as there are X number of valid studies supporting it's safe, effective use, I do not understand this incessant campaign against it. Why?


    Store shelves are filled with expensive vitamins that studies show are ineffective, but they are still there. Yet as a recent article headlined: "Why has Ivermectin become a dirty word?", it is the one under attack. I just do not understand it all. And when something does not make sense to me, it is usually because the topic has been booted into the realm of politics.


    Politics is not about facts, but about agendas, and I think opposition to Ivermectin, and HCQ is all about political agendas, and not about the science.

  • Shane - here are some facts - as I understand them. I'm happy to be corrected, in medicine facts are a good deal less certain than other areas.


    I disagree about appeal implying effectiveness. Strongly. The history of medicine is dominated by treatments which doctors have believed effective but which have in the end turned out not to be. there are good reasons for this - as a doctor you desperately want something that will help your patients - and they desperately want you to do something. For all the known reasons evaluating whether what you do actually helps is difficult - but psychologically it feels much better than not doing it.


    I agree. Much speedier viral clearance would be a big deal if significant. The trouble is we do not have clear data from reliable trials, and unreliable trial data is (inevitably) skewed positive.


    I find this interesting: a paper looking in an unbiassed way at possibilities for mechanisms and also the risk/reward. I'd go along with it. There are possible anti-viral mechanisms, not yet validated. There are also possible bad side-effects if it is used in severe COVID, again not validated. Its use as prophylactic or in early disease is less likely problematic but care would be needed. Do we really know the long-term effects in humans of IVM dosing at high levels? It has not been as carefully studies for that as vaccines, but the perils would be similar.


    https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s43440-020-00195-y


    From the evidence that is available and our artificial intelligence and molecular dynamics simulations based studies, ivermectin can be thought of as a potential drug for the treatment of COVID-19. Beneficial results have been observed with ivermectin in clinical studies. However, great diligence and regulatory review is required for testing of ivermectin in severe COVID-19 because of various reasons. As ivermectin targets the invertebrate’s glutamate gated chloride channels, it can also cross-target mammalian GABA-gated chloride channels in the CNS. In normal conditions, this is prevented by BBB; however, in individuals having hyper-inflammatory state, endothelial permeability at BBB may be enhanced, leading to drug leakage into the CNS and neurotoxicity. Furthermore, anti-retroviral drugs used against SARS-CoV-2 like lopinavir/ritonavir and darunavir/cobicstat potently inhibit cytochrome P450 3A4 (ivermectin’s main metabolic pathway) and if used concurrently with ivermectin can increase the systemic exposure to ivermectin. Ritonavir and cobicistat also inhibits P-glycoprotein efflux pump in BBB [34]. Moreover, well-controlled dose response study needs to be considered for carrying out a clinical trial of ivermectin. Schmith et al. carried out simulations with the help of available population pharmacokinetic model for predicting total and unbound plasma concentration–time profiles of ivermectin (200 µg/kg, 60 mg, and 120 mg) after administration of single and repeat fasted dose. According to their results, the IC50 value of ivermectin as reported by Caly et al. was much higher than the maximum plasma concentration achieved after administration of the above mentioned three doses of ivermectin when administered fasted. Hence, the chances of success of a trial that use the approved ivermectin dose (200 µg/kg) are less. They further suggested evaluation of use of combined therapy in vitro and ivermectin’s inhaled treatment if feasible [35]. Furthermore, Momekove et al. also reported that according to pharmacokinetic data that is available from clinically relevant and excessive dosing studies SARS-CoV 2 in vitro inhibitory concentrations (5 µM/L) are not probable to be achievable in humans [36]. Next, ivermectin’s cellular uptake by endothelial cells is limited, because it is highly bound (93%) to plasma proteins. Furthermore, ivermectin’s total lung concentration reached only 100 ng/g (around 0.1 μM) in lung tissue in calves injected with 200 μg/kg, suggesting that accumulation of ivermectin would not be enough to accomplish the antiviral effect with conventional doses [37]. Jermain et al. developed a minimal physiologically-based pharmacokinetic model to simulate ivermectin’s exposure to human lungs post oral doses (12, 30, and 120 mg). The simulated exposure of ivermectin to lungs achieved a concentration of 772 ng/mL, lower than the reported IC50 for ivermectin in vitro (1750 ng/mL) [38].

    In molecular dynamics simulation studies, the interaction of ivermectin with multiple (four) viral targets with relatable specificity and nature of interaction suggest, i.e., which majorly involves rich H-bonds, can show inhibitory actions resembling the estimated outcomes from the MD simulations prototyped in physiological conditions. The binding coordinates of ivermectin observed were at the prime regions crucial for the activity of particular SARS-CoV proteins. The least structural deviation with the nucleocapsid protein N terminal domain (1.89 Å ± 0.33) and high interaction ratio points toward the suggestion that ivermectin exhibits relatively high affinity for N protein. The nucleocapsid shuttling has been proposed to be facilitated via human Importin α/β into the nuclear matrix [39, 40]. The reported binding of ivermectin to importin α/β and notably low infection in ivermectin treated patients, might also possibly suggest that there is noticeable binding with the nucleocapsid cargo itself.

    • Official Post

    On side affects of drugs I draw the line at oily discharge! (Lipitor)

    Well THH is not taking the bait. :) The drug with all those bad side effects is caffeine, not Lipitor. Yes my friends, that cup of coffee can kill! I could go down a huge list of commonly used OTC drugs, vitamins, pain relievers and foods that when overused can do harm.


    My point is Ivermectin has the potential to fight off COVID, and save the lives of millions, whereas the others won't (except food of course). Yet the worlds health governing bodies, and media are doing everything they can to block it.


    Like the Wuhan lab leak, something is wrong with this picture. They say "follow the science" but they themselves do not. They follow their politics.

  • Well THH is not taking the bait. :) The drug with all those bad side effects is caffeine, not Lipitor. Yes my friends, that cup of coffee can kill! I could go down a huge list of commonly used OTC drugs, vitamins, pain relievers and foods that when overused can do harm.


    My point is Ivermectin has the potential to fight off COVID, and save the lives of millions, whereas the others won't (except food of course). Yet the worlds health governing bodies, and media are doing everything they can to block it.


    Like the Wuhan lab leak, something is wrong with this picture. They say "follow the science" but they themselves do not. They follow their politics.

    Aspirin kills 3000 Americans every year, but that's an acceptible number?