Category: Covid-19

Page 125«..1020..124125126127..130140..»

After a pandemic slump, outfitters see a much better landscape for the year ahead – CBC.ca

December 10, 2023

Newfoundland & Labrador

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share by Email

Posted: December 08, 2023

COVID-19 brought many obstacles to Newfoundland and Labrador's outfitting industry, but the head of the province's outfitting association says things are about to change for the better.

The Newfoundland and Labrador Outfitters Association has been hosting its annual general meeting in Deer Lake this week, with 65 companies represented.

Association president Brad LeDrew says it's great to see people return and enter the fold.

"We finally get a chance to see each other. Talk about the trials, tribulations, and also how everything went," LeDrew said.

All 250 of the province's outfitters closed at the beginning of the pandemic, but LeDrew said business is starting to expand once again. He says it gave operators time to reset and rethink their strategies which should pay off now that clients from other countries, particularly the United States, are booking again with family and friends.

"It's a chance that people took to maybe put some work into their lodges, maybe put some time into their business planning [and] marketing," LeDrewsaid.

WATCH| This outfitter is looking forward to what he thinks could be a banner season in 2024:

Show more

"Right now Newfoundland is on the world's bucket list. It always has been," he said.

"I think people are taking the chance now and saying 'let's go there', and we are seeing numbers of bookings that are higher than before. I think '24and 2025 have a good chance of being bumper years. "

But the pandemic isn't the only thing that has had a negative impact on outfitters in recent years.

Parts of the province have declining moose populations, lowersalmon stocks and warming rivers. That concern was most prevalent near the end of July, when the Department of Fisheries and Oceans restricted or closed fishing at certain rivers after reports of dead salmon washing up on localbeaches.

While outfitters like LeDrew say they're watching temperature patterns each year, they aren't panicked about the future of the industry.

"We expect that this year will be totally different. And we will know in the next couple of years if there is a pattern," he said.

"I wouldn't worry about it. We had some great fishing."

Speaking to CBC News, Fisheries, Foresrtry and Agriculture Minister Elvis Loveless said outfitting is an important industry to the province and is looking forward to the season beginning.

"2023 was a good year for our our outdoors, and we look forward to 2024 absolutely," Loveless said.

"And I want to thank them, thank them for what they do for this province and bringing people from outside to explore and enjoy what we have."

Download our free CBC News app to sign up for push alerts for CBC Newfoundland and Labrador. Click here to visit our landing page .

See the rest here:

After a pandemic slump, outfitters see a much better landscape for the year ahead - CBC.ca

Long COVID-19 Syndrome: Insights From a Major Tertiary Center in the UK on Who Is at Greater Risk – Cureus

December 10, 2023

Specialty

Please choose I'm not a medical professional. Allergy and Immunology Anatomy Anesthesiology Cardiac/Thoracic/Vascular Surgery Cardiology Critical Care Dentistry Dermatology Diabetes and Endocrinology Emergency Medicine Epidemiology and Public Health Family Medicine Forensic Medicine Gastroenterology General Practice Genetics Geriatrics Health Policy Hematology HIV/AIDS Hospital-based Medicine I'm not a medical professional. Infectious Disease Integrative/Complementary Medicine Internal Medicine Internal Medicine-Pediatrics Medical Education and Simulation Medical Physics Medical Student Nephrology Neurological Surgery Neurology Nuclear Medicine Nutrition Obstetrics and Gynecology Occupational Health Oncology Ophthalmology Optometry Oral Medicine Orthopaedics Osteopathic Medicine Otolaryngology Pain Management Palliative Care Pathology Pediatrics Pediatric Surgery Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Plastic Surgery Podiatry Preventive Medicine Psychiatry Psychology Pulmonology Radiation Oncology Radiology Rheumatology Substance Use and Addiction Surgery Therapeutics Trauma Urology Miscellaneous

Read the original here:

Long COVID-19 Syndrome: Insights From a Major Tertiary Center in the UK on Who Is at Greater Risk - Cureus

How More Prompt Action Could Have Saved Thousands of U.S. COVID-19 Deaths – Managed Healthcare Executive

December 10, 2023

Though the United States saved over 40,000 lives due to COVID-19 from September 2021 to June 2022 from the help of boosters, 29,000 lives could have been saved if the U.S. moved at a faster speed resembling Israels booster rollout.

According to a study recently released in Health Affairs, Israel was the first country in the world to launch COVID-19 boosters, in late July 2021, with strong public health messaging.

The booster campaign in Israel successfully turned increasing infection rates associated with the Delta variant, leading to a decrease in hospitalizations and death.

However, the U.S. booster rollout was slower with a rollout in mid-September 2021, and public health messaging was mixed.

Researchers of the study compared each countrys experience to ask the question: How many lives could the U.S. have saved if boosters were authorized sooner?

In attempt to answer this question, a two-step observational approach, utilizing individual-level mortality data and COVID vaccination records for Milwaukee County, Wisconsin, was conducted from 2017 to 2022.

Milwaukee, with a diverse population of 928,000 in 2021, provided vaccination and mortality data for the entire adult population.

Applying the Milwaukee-based data to national data, researchers estimated that among 300,791 COVID deaths in people aged 55 years and older, 56,566 were among vaccinated, booster-eligible individuals, with 52% potentially preventable deaths if operated under an Israeli strategy.

Researchers also explored different scenarios. They estimated potential lives saved if the U.S. booster campaign had matched Israel's uptake speed, considering later initiation, and examined the additional lives lost with a slower U.S. booster authorization.

Weekly analyses were done on non-immunocompromised individuals aged 55 and older, categorized by age groups. Researchers then factored a four-week lag after vaccination to consider vaccine effectiveness against death.

Israeli vaccination rates came from TIMNA, while Milwaukee data relied on linked vaccination and mortality records.

Using a Markov model with states representing vaccination status and COVID death, researchers looked at transition probabilities based on CDC data and mortality risk estimates specific to Milwaukee.

The model effectively replicated actual U.S. data, with a 1.5% difference in predicted deaths (296,412) compared to actual deaths (300,791) over the study period.

A breakdown by vaccination status revealed 51% were unvaccinated, 14% were one-dose recipients, 29% were fully vaccinated and 5% were booster recipients.

The study estimated 77,156 deaths among vaccinated individuals without a booster and 28,821 deaths with a booster.

Data revealed that a faster booster rollout could have potentially saved approximately 29,418 lives if the U.S. matched Israel's pace.

Delaying booster approval cost around 800 lives per week, but even an eight-week delay would have saved 22,900 lives, the study found.

Overall, booster authorization ultimately saved 41,639 lives by June 30, 2022.

Additionally, it was found weekly estimates revealed notable effects during the Delta-Omicron wave in the end of 2021 and early 2022. The benefits of prompt action and the drawbacks of delayed responses leveled as the Delta-Omicron wave eased off in the spring of 2022.

Delayed booster authorization would have left more people vulnerable during the Omicron period.

Researchers noted limitations within the study.

Some of these limitations include the limited sample size in Milwaukee that led to uncertainties in their estimates, potentially not representative of the entire U.S.

Researchers also focused on Pfizer and Moderna recipients, acknowledging potential variations for Johnson & Johnson.

They also noted their assumption that boosters wouldn't alter infection rates may have led to conservative projections, due to challenges in modeling.

Though researchers didn't specifically measure the effects on various racial and ethnic groups, higher COVID-19 mortality rates in these populations suggest the timing of booster shots might have a bigger impact on them.

See original here:

How More Prompt Action Could Have Saved Thousands of U.S. COVID-19 Deaths - Managed Healthcare Executive

Staying healthy during the holidays amid rising cases – Spectrum News

December 10, 2023

RALEIGH, N.C. As we gear up to get down with family and friends this holiday season, an infectious disease specialist from UNC-Chapel Hill is sharing tips on how to celebrate safely amid a rise in COVID-19 cases across the country.

Almost 23,000 people were in hospital with COVID-19 in the week following Thanksgiving.

That rise coincides with an increase in respiratory illnesses across North Carolina, with 506 people being admitted to the hospital in the last week due to COVID-19, according to the state Department of Health and Human Services.

Dr. David Wohl, an infectious disease expert from UNC-Chapel Hill, recommends people stay vigilant and get the updated COVID-19 vaccine.

It's a lot like your iPhone, right? Like you get an update once in a while to kind of keep up with the technology. And here we're updating our vaccines to keep up with the variants that are circulating, Wohl said.

The good news is we're nowhere near at the case level we've seen in the past. Hospitalizations are nowhere near as severe as they were in the past, earlier in the pandemic, Wohl said, So, that's the good news. The bad news is, is the trends are showing us that things are getting a little worse as expected during the winter season.

For those who have recently had COVID-19 and have not been vaccinated with the new booster, Wohl says its less urgent to get the shot right now.

I will say topping our protection up by getting boosted to me makes a lot of sense, especially if you haven't been infected for a long time, because then the kind of infection you had doesn't look as much like the virus that's circulating now, he said.

Meanwhile, Wohl says he expects the vaccines to get to a point where people can get vaccinated on a yearly basis, like the flu, and potentially have those vaccines combined into one shot.

I'm a big believer in vaccines. I think they help us a lot, and I think they're extremely, extremely safe, Wohl said.

If youre planning on traveling or being in a crowded area, Wohl recommends wearing masks and keeping your hands clean.

Most of us get infected with other things besides COVID, like the stomach virus that's going around right now or flu from our hands, more so than people breathing on us in some cases, he said. So, keeping your hands clean and keeping the Purell close by, masking, especially if you're vulnerable to really severe disease from respiratory illnesses, then I think that makes sense.

See the article here:

Staying healthy during the holidays amid rising cases - Spectrum News

"In Memory Of" mosaic honoring lives lost to COVID-19 – KVOA Tucson News

December 10, 2023

TUCSON, Ariz. (KVOA) - You can witness the unveiling of an "In Memory Of" mosaic on Sunday. It will feature the names of over 200 loved ones lost to COVID-19 and other diseases among the pandemic.

You can find the event at Mission Manor Park (6100 S 12th Avenue), just south of Drexel. It's happening from 2 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. Sunday afternoon. There will be music, refreshments, a name reading, and a candle lighting ceremony.

Excerpt from:

"In Memory Of" mosaic honoring lives lost to COVID-19 - KVOA Tucson News

House GOP seeks reforms of WHO amid COVID-19 failure – Washington Examiner

December 10, 2023

The congressional investigation into the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic has led members of the House to call for reforms to the World Health Organization on the issue of strengthening safety standards and protocols for biological research.

The Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic is holding a hearing on Wednesday on WHO reforms, an event originally planned for late October but postponed. The subcommittee plans to hear from officials from the State Department, Department of Health and Human Services, and USAID.

FDAAPPROVES WORLD'S FIRST CRISPR GENE-EDITING DRUG FOR SICKLE-CELLDISEASE

With the United States among the largest financial contributors to the WHOgiving approximately $700 million in 2021, 65% above the annual membership duesRepublicans on the subcommittee are questioning the return on investment based on the organization's failures with respect to COVID-19, particularly the outsize influence exerted on the organization by the Chinese Communist Party.

Instead of prioritizing honesty, transparency, and the health of citizens worldwide, the World Health Organization became subject to overwhelming undue influence from the Chinese Communist Party and placed its political interests ahead of its international duties," wrote Subcommittee Chairman Brad Wenstrup (R-OH) ahead of the postponed Oct. hearing. "Should Americans rely on the WHO when disaster strikes in the future? At this point in time, is it possible for the WHO to be productively reformed?"

Wenstrup said he aims to ensure that the organization cannot be manipulated by the power of one large nation, whether the U.S. or China.

"I want to see some ideas of how we can make the WHO more independent, totally free from political influence," Wenstrup previously told the Washington Examiner. Wenstrup also said that he would like to soon have a meeting with WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, particularly to discuss the necessity of increasing compliance with biosafety measures for dangerous pathogen research.

Josh Michaud, a global health expert at healthcare policy think tank KFF, says that Congress has little role in engagement with WHO policies, as that responsibility falls on the White House and executive public health agencies.

In May 2020, then-President Donald Trump threatened to withdraw U.S. funding and membership from the WHO, citing the organization's failure in not properly preparing the world for COVID-19 before widescale spread. At that time, the U.S. had given $400 million to the WHO, 15% of the organization's operating budget.

Two months later, Trump canceled $62 million in funding to the WHO and set the U.S. withdrawal date for July 2021, which was quickly reversed by the incoming President Joe Biden.

Although a president can unilaterally withdraw the U.S. from the organization or unilaterally, making internal reforms to the function of WHO becomes even harder.

As a recurring member of the WHO's executive board, Michaud said the U.S. does hold an "oversized influence compared to smaller countries" in terms of setting WHO policy but thinks it is "not enough to completely sway the organization."

"Any policy changes are approved at the World Health Assembly, which is the annual meeting of all of the different member states of the WHO, and the US is just one country among 194 [members], so the influence only goes so far," said Michaud.

During the Select Subcommittee's prior hearings on biosafety standards for pathogen research, several committee members suggested the need for stronger enforcement of existing policy. Others suggested establishing unilateral agreements with countries conducting U.S.-funded research to strengthen safety in laboratories and limit types of experimentation.

Michaud said that although oversight of large multilateral organizations like the WHO is difficult, establishing unilateral agreements between individual countries like the US and China on biosafety or other topics would present its own types of challenges without some of the benefits of a global forum on public health.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

The U.S. has several global public health programs that are completely under the control of the U.S. government, such as USAID and the PEPFAR HIV/AIDS prevention program. Developing an equivalent program for biosafety and viral research "would be a tall order and would take time and investment," said Michaud, especially within the constraints of Congress's annual appropriations process.

"In the WHO case, they have a role to play [as a] sort of coordinating mechanism ... and serves as a meeting point for countries to discuss health policy issues of international importance, and to make recommendations based upon the knowledge of experts from across the world," said Michaud. "There's a legitimacy to the global efforts say of who that bilateral program may not have."

Read more here:

House GOP seeks reforms of WHO amid COVID-19 failure - Washington Examiner

Home Test to Treat program extends nationwide – National Institutes of Health (.gov)

December 10, 2023

Media Advisory

Wednesday, December 6, 2023

Program now offers testing, telehealth and treatment for COVID-19 and flu.

The federal government has expanded the Home Test to Treat program, an entirely virtual community health program that offers free COVID-19 health services: at-home rapid tests, telehealth sessions and at-home treatments, to eligible participants nationwide. Home Test to Treat, which is a collaboration among the National Institutes of Health, the Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, launched as a pilot in select locations earlier this year.

With its expansion, the Home Test to Treat program will now offer free testing, telehealth and treatment for both COVID-19 and for influenza (flu) A and B. It is the first public health program that includes home testing technology at such a scale for both COVID-19 and flu. The program initially will provide the LUCIRAbyPfizerCOVID-19 & Flu Home Test, the first U.S. Food and Drug Administration-authorized test that can detect both viruses in a single test at home.

For those indicated, treatment must begin within a limited window from onset of symptoms, underscoring the importance of continuity of care, from diagnosis to treatment. In addition, providing these services virtually, while individuals remain at home, is intended to expedite the time to treatment and the convenience of accessing services virtually from home.

Any adult (18 years and older) with a current positive test for COVID-19 or flu can enroll to receive free telehealth care and, if prescribed, medication delivered to their home. Adults who do not have COVID-19 or flu may enroll and receive free tests if they are uninsured or are enrolled in Medicare, Medicaid, Veterans Affairs health care system, or the Indian Health Services. If recipients test positive at a future time, they can receive free telehealth care and, if prescribed, treatment.

Visit Home Test to Treatfor more information. Home Test to Treat is operated under a NIH/ National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (NIBIB) contract with VentureWell, with a subcontract to eMed.

NIBIB Director Bruce Tromberg, Ph.D., who leads the RADx Tech program, is available for comment.

To arrange an interview, contactnibibpress@mail.nih.govor call 301-496-3500.

Home Test to Treat is a component of the Rapid Acceleration of Diagnostics (RADx) Tech program of the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (NIBIB) at NIH. NIBIB also leads the research component of Home Test to Treat, which aims to assess the benefits for patients and identify factors that are crucial to broad adoption of home test to treat services. The Rapid Acceleration of Diagnostics (RADx) Program is a registered trademark of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

About the Rapid Acceleration of Diagnostics (RADx) initiative:The RADx initiative was launched on April 29, 2020, to speed innovation in the development, commercialization, and implementation of technologies for COVID-19 testing. The initiative has four programs: RADx Tech, RADx Advanced Technology Platforms, RADx Underserved Populations and RADx Radical. It leverages the existing NIHPoint-of-CareTechnology Research Network. The RADx initiative partners with federal agencies, including the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Health, Department of Defense, the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, and U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Learn more about theRADx initiative and its programs.

About the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (NIBIB):NIBIBs mission is to improve health by leading the development and accelerating the application of biomedical technologies. The Institute is committed to integrating the physical and engineering sciences with the life sciences to advance basic research and medical care. NIBIB supports emerging technology research and development within its internal laboratories and through grants, collaborations, and training. More information is available at theNIBIB website.

About the National Institutes of Health (NIH): NIH, the nation's medical research agency, includes 27 Institutes and Centers and is a component of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. NIH is the primary federal agency conducting and supporting basic, clinical, and translational medical research, and is investigating the causes, treatments, and cures for both common and rare diseases. For more information about NIH and its programs, visit http://www.nih.gov.

NIHTurning Discovery Into Health

###

More:

Home Test to Treat program extends nationwide - National Institutes of Health (.gov)

Why you should be vaccinated even if you have had COVID-19 – EurekAlert

December 1, 2023

image:

Top: A person is infected by the Alpha variant of SARS-CoV-2. Within a few weeks, antibodies are made that protect the person against the Alpha variant as well as Beta and Gamma variants which are very similar to the Alpha variant. Bottom: A person who (1) has recovered from COVID-19 and who (2) has received mRNA vaccine with components of the Alpha variant develops a strong immune response within a few weeks. The antibodies that are made in the body protect against the Alpha variant, the closely related Beta and Gamma variants as well as the more distantly related Delta and Omicron variants. People who have recovered from COVID-19 and then received the mRNA vaccine are also protected against new variants of SARS-CoV-2. Ill: Gerda Kaynova

Credit: Gerd Kaynova

Vaccines help boost the production of antibodies, providing effective protection against serious illness and death, says Mona Hyster Fenstad.

Fenstad is a senior consultant at the blood bank at St. Olavs Hospital in Trondheim.

We are already well into autumn, and the COVID-19 virus is rife all over Norway. The Norwegian Institute of Public Health recommends people in risk groups to get vaccinated.

They point out that elderly people in particular will be vulnerable to serious illness if they are infected with COVID-19. However, since the vast majority of us have already had COVID-19 at least once, do we really need to think about getting vaccinated?

Yes, say the scientists.

The saying what doesnt kill you makes you stronger is not true in this context. The inflammation that occurs in the body during infections such as influenza, COVID-19 and pneumonia can be harmful. Especially for people with heart or lung disease, or where other risk factors are involved, says Fenstad.

Fenstand and her international colleagues have recently published a study that looked at the effect of vaccination on people who became ill with COVID-19 before vaccines were available. This work has been closely linked to the search for antibodies that can be used as medicine against COVID-19.

At the beginning of 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) asked scientists and therapists around the world to look for treatments for COVID-19. Among the treatments proposed was convalescent plasma therapy, which uses plasma from blood donors who have recovered from the illness. Along with colleagues from NTNU (the Norwegian University of Science and Technology), we chose to take a closer look at how the antibodies in this plasma were able to neutralize new virus variants that emerged, says Fenstad.

While big pharmaceutical companies were working hard to develop vaccines and medicines, scientists had already begun to look at the use of blood plasma from COVID-19 patients as a possible treatment.

Many of these patients had large amounts of antibodies in their blood. Plasma containing these antibodies was therefore given to seriously ill patients to help them fight the virus. It turned out that convalescent plasma therapy was primarily effective in patients who had immunodeficiencies, says Fenstad.

We were looking for so-called super-neutralizers, people who develop specific antibodies that effectively neutralize different variants of SARS-CoV-2, says Denis Kainov, a professor in NTNUs Department of Clinical and Molecular Medicine who was part of the research team.

These antibodies were eventually cultivated and cloned, and then turned into medicines used to fight COVID-19.

In Norway, the first COVID-19 outbreak occurred in February 2020. The first Alpha variant was quickly followed by new, mutated variants named Beta and Delta. Omicron, which is currently the prevailing variant, was first reported in late 2021.

By April 2020, blood banks across Norway had begun collecting blood plasma from patients who had recovered from COVID-19. At St. Olavs Hospital, 72 patients were selected for a more detailed study of the antibodies in their blood plasma.

It turned out that half of these patients had serum containing antibodies that effectively neutralized the Beta variant, says Kainov.

Kainov has been searching for active substances to use in the treatment of COVID-19 and other viral diseases.

He is now looking for antibodies that could provide wider protection, including against new COVID-19 variants that might emerge.

They noticed that four patients had antibodies that effectively neutralized the COVID-19 variant that was dominant in Trondheim at the time.

We followed up by taking new samples from these patients and found that their antibodies also neutralized other COVID-19 variants. In fact, they were also effective on new virus variants, says Kainov.

The conclusion is thus that it is a good idea to get vaccinated even if you have already had COVID-19 and even if the virus has mutated since the vaccine was made.

Out of the four patients, the scientists picked the one whose antibodies had been least effective against the Omicron variant. This patient had received their first vaccine dose four months after recovering from COVID-19. The efficacy of the vaccine was striking.

The vaccine boosted the production of immune cells and antibodies against all tested variants of the virus, including Omicron, says Kainov.

Kainovs colleagues in Estonia could then proceed with blood plasma from the patient, cloning and cultivating antibodies that neutralised COVID-19 viruses on a wide scale.

The results have also provided the scientists with useful knowledge about the effect of the vaccine on convalescents.

When it comes to vaccines, it is always a race. The virus is always one step ahead, and the vaccines and medicines will never be completely up to date, Fenstad said

Our study is an in-depth study of just one patient, and it constitutes only a tiny piece of research in this field. However, large studies in other countries confirm our findings. Vaccines boost the production of antibodies that are also effective against new variants of the virus, she said.

The finding demonstrate that it is a good idea to get vaccinated even if you have already had COVID-19 and even if the virus has mutated since the vaccine was made. It may not prevent you from being reinfected, but it will provide protection against serious illness and death.

When you get sick with COVID-19, you develop antibodies, but the effects of these diminish and are gone after six to nine months. This is why people can get infected again and again by new variants of SARS-CoV-2. The virus mutates to avoid the immune response we have developed through previous infections or vaccines, says Kainov.

That is why vaccination is important now that we are heading towards winter.

The studies we have conducted here on COVID-19 patients are extremely important, because there will be new outbreaks of the virus. Almost seven million people have died from COVID-19. We must avoid getting into the same situation again, says Kainov.

Reference: Mona Hyster Fenstad et al.:Boosted production of antibodies that neutralized different SARS-CoV-2 variants in a COVID-19 convalescent following messenger RNA vaccination a case study.International Journal of Infectious Diseases. Volum 137, December 2023 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2023.10.011

International Journal of Infectious Diseases

Experimental study

People

Boosted production of antibodies that neutralized different SARS-CoV-2 variants in a COVID-19 convalescent following messenger RNA vaccination - a case study

1-Nov-2023

Visit link:

Why you should be vaccinated even if you have had COVID-19 - EurekAlert

Published studies misrepresented by cardiologist Peter McCullough to push false claim that COVID-19 vaccines cause … – Health Feedback

December 1, 2023

CLAIM

Published studies show that COVID-19 mRNA vaccines cause metabolic cardiomyopathy and sudden cardiac death

DETAILS

Misrepresents source: None of the three studies found that COVID-19 mRNA vaccines increase the risk of sudden death or metabolic cardiomyopathy, as McCullough claimed. One study of autopsies of vaccinated people clarified that none of the deaths were caused by the vaccine; another study was performed in people who showed no symptoms of heart problems and didnt report any deaths, while the other study used very high doses of vaccine that arent comparable to doses used in vaccination.

KEY TAKE AWAY

Studies so far havent shown any association between COVID-19 vaccines and mortality risk or sudden death. All medical interventions come with side effects and COVID-19 vaccines are no exception. COVID-19 mRNA vaccines are linked to an increased risk of heart inflammation in adolescent and young adult males. However, the risk of heart complications and other health problems associated with COVID-19 is well-documented to be higher than that associated with vaccination. On balance, COVID-19 vaccines offer more benefits than drawbacks.

During the interview, McCullough claimed that three studiesone from Krauson et al., another from Nakahara et al., and the other from Schreckenberg et al.were evidence that the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines caused a form of metabolic cardiomyopathy that could explain sudden cardiac death[1-3].

In fact, McCullough has repeatedly drawn on these studies to build the case that COVID-19 mRNA vaccines are dangerous and linked to deaths, as evidenced by these tweets. We explain in this review how his claims distort and misrepresent the findings of these studies in a bid to push the false narrative that COVID-19 vaccines are dangerous.

McCullough interpreted the study by Krauson et al. as showing that messenger RNA is directly in the human heart and that this has been identified with inflammation around it. While both statements on their own are true, they leave out important details that contradict McCulloughs wider claim of harm from the vaccine mRNA.

Krauson and colleagues collected tissue from the lymph nodes, liver, spleen and heart muscle during autopsies of patients who had also been recently vaccinated with COVID-19 mRNA vaccines[1]. The aim was to assess how long mRNA from the vaccines could persist in different parts of the body.

Twenty patients who were vaccinated and five who were unvaccinated were included (as a control). The authors clarified that In none of the vaccinated patients was the cause of death linked to the vaccine.

The authors reported that they didnt detect vaccine mRNA in the spleen and liver. But in the case of heart tissue, vaccine mRNA could be detected in three of the 20 vaccinated patients. All three had been vaccinated within 30 days of their death.

The authors wanted to understand what set these three patients apart from the other vaccinated patients who had also been vaccinated within 30 days of death but showed no vaccine mRNA in the heart.

We reached out to the studys corresponding author, James Stone, an associate professor of pathology at Harvard Medical School, to better understand the studys findings.

Stone explained that while they did observe inflammation in the heart of these three patients, it was not the right type of inflammation for myocarditis. He also clarified that The vaccine was associated with the presence of healing myocardial injury that was present at the time of vaccination and that in at least one of the three patients, the injury had clearly occurred before vaccination. Simply put, these results indicate that the heart injury occurred before vaccination and wasnt caused by the vaccine.

Moreover, the study contains an analysis of the likely cause of death in these three patients. One had an intracranial bleed and lung cancer; one had a history of heart failure and died from non-ischemic cardiomyopathy; and the third died from severe coronary artery disease. Thus, all three patients had medical conditions that could result in heart injury.

The study did find that vaccine mRNA tended to be located around areas of heart injury, but given that the heart injury was already present at the time of vaccination, the authors hypothesized that vaccine mRNA had been carried to these areas by immune cells reacting to the heart injury as a result of inflammation.

Stone emphasized that none of these deaths were found to be caused by the vaccine.

To summarize, the study by Krauson et al. detected vaccine mRNA in the heart tissue of three of 20 vaccinated patients. Vaccine mRNA was detected specifically in areas of the heart that were injured, but the studys findings indicated that the injury had occurred before vaccination and that all three had pre-existing medical conditions that could explain the injury. None of the deaths were linked to the vaccines.

Therefore, the study doesnt support McCulloughs claim that COVID-19 mRNA vaccines damage the heart and cause sudden cardiac death. In fact, the studys findings speak against his claim.

McCullough asserted that the study by Nakahara et al. showed the cardiac muscle changes its preference from free fatty acids to glucose, calling it a very disturbing study. But a closer look at the studys findings places this interpretation into question.

This was a retrospective study, published in the journal Radiology, that took advantage of a large database of existing PET/CT scans to see if people who received the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines but didnt develop myocarditis also showed changes in the heart[2]. The scans were performed on a mix of patients, such as cancer patients and people undergoing a medical checkup.

The PET/CT scans used by the researchers relied on the radioactive marker called fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose, or 18F-FDG for short. It is a glucose analog used to visualize tissues that rely on glucose as an energy source or whose dependence on glucose increases due to disease. As such, it is used for cancer imaging, as well as imaging of the heart and brain. It can also be used to detect inflammation in the heart.

Because this method of imaging is sensitive to the way our body metabolizes glucose, certain preparations need to be made beforehand to ensure accurate results. An editorial in the journal, commenting on the study by Nakahara et al., explained that in routine clinical practice, 18F FDG PET/CT is a terrible tracer with which to evaluate myocardial inflammation. This is because glucose is the normal source of energy for the myocardiumalmost all patients have high myocardial uptake. We can contrast this with McCulloughs claim implying that heart tissue using glucose is abnormal.

Heart cells can use alternative sources of energy, such as lipids, when a person is in a fasting state. The editorial went into more detail: In the fasting state, the preferred myocardial energy source is lipids rather than glucose. The trick is to combine a low carbohydrate and high fat diet the day before the FDG PET scan with 12 hours of fasting immediately before imaging.

This was indeed the approach taken with the 18F-FDG PET/CT scans analyzed by Nakahara et al. Using this method, they found that vaccinated people who showed no signs of myocarditis had a greater uptake of 18F-FDG in the heart than people who werent vaccinated. This increase could be seen regardless of the patients age, sex, and the vaccine brand received.

Thus, the editorial explained, the findings suggest that mild levels of heart inflammation may be more common than we ever expected in people who received a COVID-19 mRNA vaccine, and that the minority of vaccinated people who developed myocarditis simply experienced more severe inflammation than the majority that didnt develop myocarditis.

The authors did acknowledge some limitations, such as the fact that this was a retrospective study from a single hospital, and so may not apply to the general population.

The editorial also pointed to a few others, such as the fact that the study had no information on the level of myocardial enzyme (a measure of heart injury) or cardiac function in the patients, and that the authors did not scrutinize the oncologic histories and treatments of their patient groups.

Theres no indication in the study that the findings were disturbing, as McCullough put it. Contrary to his claim, the study didnt show that heart tissue had changed its preference from free fatty acids to glucose. It also didnt report metabolic cardiomyopathy or sudden cardiac death in vaccinated people.

McCullough claimed that the study by Schreckenberg et al. showed both the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines, when directly applied on the heart muscle cells, caused [] the heart muscle cells to [contract] in abnormal ways[3]. Again, while in itself true, this statement leaves out the fact that the researchers found this effect only with vaccine doses that were much higher than are given to people.

The aim of this study was to understand how the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines could potentially affect the heart. To do this, they grew heart muscle cells isolated from rats in cell cultures (cells growing in dishes) and added the vaccines directly into the cell cultures.

No changes were seen in the first 24 hours after adding the vaccines, but 48 hours after the vaccines were added, the researchers found that the way the heart muscle cells contracted changed. It should be noted that the amount of vaccine used in this experiment was much higher than what adults receive during vaccination. The two doses tested were one and 3.3 micrograms, added to one milliliter of culture medium (a liquid containing nutrients and other chemicals needed to maintain cell cultures). A microgram is a millionth of a gram.

In contrast, an adult dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine is 30 micrograms and 50 micrograms for the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine. The volume of the average human is about 65 liters; the average human adult has about four to five liters of circulating blood. While we know the vaccine isnt distributed evenly throughout the body, remaining mainly at the site of injection, this is still a far cry from the the experimental conditions in the study.

Marc Veldoen, an immunologist and professor at the University of Lisbon, wrote a thread on X (formerly Twitter) on the study, explaining that This would be like directly injecting in the heart, or a very large quantity of vaccine in the bloodstream to soak the heart with Spike-coding RNA, neither of which occurs during vaccination.

Pediatric cardiologist Frank Han also wrote about the study in a thread on X/Twitter. He wrote that the study was an important project for better understanding vaccine-related myocarditis. But he also pointed out that the researchers had to soak the heart cells in vaccine, to get the effects they found in this experiment. None of us humans are getting the vaccine this way.

All medical interventions come with side effects and COVID-19 vaccines are no exception. COVID-19 mRNA vaccines are linked to an increased risk of heart inflammation in adolescent and young adult males, although most recover without any long-term effects.

However, the risk of heart complications, along with other health problems like blood clotting disorders, associated with getting COVID-19 is well-documented to be higher than that associated with vaccination[4-11]. Therefore, on balance, COVID-19 vaccines offer more benefits than drawbacks.

The scientific evidence thus far doesnt support the claim that COVID-19 mRNA vaccines lead to a greater risk of sudden death or sudden cardiac death. A study performed in Australia found no association between out-of-hospital cardiac arrests and COVID-19 vaccination[12].

A study published in the journal Circulation, which tracked the trends in sudden cardiac deaths in U.S. college athletes over a 20-year period, actually reported a net decrease in sudden cardiac death[13]. Of the 143 cases of sudden cardiac death during the 20 years up to 30 June 2022, just eight were attributable to myocarditis, and only one case occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Published studies so far have also found no association between COVID-19 vaccination and a greater risk of all-cause mortality[14,15].

The claim that these three studies point to COVID-19 mRNA vaccines causing metabolic cardiomyopathy and sudden cardiac death is baseless. As we explained above, McCulloughs statements about the studies misrepresent their findings or leave out important information that contradicts his claim. In fact, none of the studies found any association between COVID-19 mRNA vaccines and sudden cardiac death or metabolic cardiomyopathy. Other published studies have also found no association between COVID-19 vaccination and sudden death or an increase in all-cause mortality.

Read the original post:

Published studies misrepresented by cardiologist Peter McCullough to push false claim that COVID-19 vaccines cause ... - Health Feedback

Pfizer Misrepresented Efficacy of COVID-19 Vaccine, Texas Attorney General’s Office Alleges in Lawsuit – The Texan

December 1, 2023

State Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington Washington D.C. West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming Puerto Rico US Virgin Islands Armed Forces Americas Armed Forces Pacific Armed Forces Europe Northern Mariana Islands Marshall Islands American Samoa Federated States of Micronesia Guam Palau Alberta, Canada British Columbia, Canada Manitoba, Canada New Brunswick, Canada Newfoundland, Canada Nova Scotia, Canada Northwest Territories, Canada Nunavut, Canada Ontario, Canada Prince Edward Island, Canada Quebec, Canada Saskatchewan, Canada Yukon Territory, Canada

Zip Code

Country United States of America US Virgin Islands United States Minor Outlying Islands Canada Mexico, United Mexican States Bahamas, Commonwealth of the Cuba, Republic of Dominican Republic Haiti, Republic of Jamaica Afghanistan Albania, People's Socialist Republic of Algeria, People's Democratic Republic of American Samoa Andorra, Principality of Angola, Republic of Anguilla Antarctica (the territory South of 60 deg S) Antigua and Barbuda Argentina, Argentine Republic Armenia Aruba Australia, Commonwealth of Austria, Republic of Azerbaijan, Republic of Bahrain, Kingdom of Bangladesh, People's Republic of Barbados Belarus Belgium, Kingdom of Belize Benin, People's Republic of Bermuda Bhutan, Kingdom of Bolivia, Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana, Republic of Bouvet Island (Bouvetoya) Brazil, Federative Republic of British Indian Ocean Territory (Chagos Archipelago) British Virgin Islands Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria, People's Republic of Burkina Faso Burundi, Republic of Cambodia, Kingdom of Cameroon, United Republic of Cape Verde, Republic of Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad, Republic of Chile, Republic of China, People's Republic of Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia, Republic of Comoros, Union of the Congo, Democratic Republic of Congo, People's Republic of Cook Islands Costa Rica, Republic of Cote D'Ivoire, Ivory Coast, Republic of the Cyprus, Republic of Czech Republic Denmark, Kingdom of Djibouti, Republic of Dominica, Commonwealth of Ecuador, Republic of Egypt, Arab Republic of El Salvador, Republic of Equatorial Guinea, Republic of Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Faeroe Islands Falkland Islands (Malvinas) Fiji, Republic of the Fiji Islands Finland, Republic of France, French Republic French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon, Gabonese Republic Gambia, Republic of the Georgia Germany Ghana, Republic of Gibraltar Greece, Hellenic Republic Greenland Grenada Guadaloupe Guam Guatemala, Republic of Guinea, Revolutionary People's Rep'c of Guinea-Bissau, Republic of Guyana, Republic of Heard and McDonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras, Republic of Hong Kong, Special Administrative Region of China Hrvatska (Croatia) Hungary, Hungarian People's Republic Iceland, Republic of India, Republic of Indonesia, Republic of Iran, Islamic Republic of Iraq, Republic of Ireland Israel, State of Italy, Italian Republic Japan Jordan, Hashemite Kingdom of Kazakhstan, Republic of Kenya, Republic of Kiribati, Republic of Korea, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Republic of Kuwait, State of Kyrgyz Republic Lao People's Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon, Lebanese Republic Lesotho, Kingdom of Liberia, Republic of Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Liechtenstein, Principality of Lithuania Luxembourg, Grand Duchy of Macao, Special Administrative Region of China Macedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Madagascar, Republic of Malawi, Republic of Malaysia Maldives, Republic of Mali, Republic of Malta, Republic of Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania, Islamic Republic of Mauritius Mayotte Micronesia, Federated States of Moldova, Republic of Monaco, Principality of Mongolia, Mongolian People's Republic Montserrat Morocco, Kingdom of Mozambique, People's Republic of Myanmar Namibia Nauru, Republic of Nepal, Kingdom of Netherlands Antilles Netherlands, Kingdom of the New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua, Republic of Niger, Republic of the Nigeria, Federal Republic of Niue, Republic of Norfolk Island Northern Mariana Islands Norway, Kingdom of Oman, Sultanate of Pakistan, Islamic Republic of Palau Palestinian Territory, Occupied Panama, Republic of Papua New Guinea Paraguay, Republic of Peru, Republic of Philippines, Republic of the Pitcairn Island Poland, Polish People's Republic Portugal, Portuguese Republic Puerto Rico Qatar, State of Reunion Romania, Socialist Republic of Russian Federation Rwanda, Rwandese Republic Samoa, Independent State of San Marino, Republic of Sao Tome and Principe, Democratic Republic of Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of Senegal, Republic of Serbia and Montenegro Seychelles, Republic of Sierra Leone, Republic of Singapore, Republic of Slovakia (Slovak Republic) Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia, Somali Republic South Africa, Republic of South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands Spain, Spanish State Sri Lanka, Democratic Socialist Republic of St. Helena St. Kitts and Nevis St. Lucia St. Pierre and Miquelon St. Vincent and the Grenadines Sudan, Democratic Republic of the Suriname, Republic of Svalbard & Jan Mayen Islands Swaziland, Kingdom of Sweden, Kingdom of Switzerland, Swiss Confederation Syrian Arab Republic Taiwan, Province of China Tajikistan Tanzania, United Republic of Thailand, Kingdom of Timor-Leste, Democratic Republic of Togo, Togolese Republic Tokelau (Tokelau Islands) Tonga, Kingdom of Trinidad and Tobago, Republic of Tunisia, Republic of Turkey, Republic of Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu Uganda, Republic of Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom of Great Britain & N. Ireland Uruguay, Eastern Republic of Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of Viet Nam, Socialist Republic of Wallis and Futuna Islands Western Sahara Yemen Zambia, Republic of Zimbabwe

Read the original:

Pfizer Misrepresented Efficacy of COVID-19 Vaccine, Texas Attorney General's Office Alleges in Lawsuit - The Texan

Page 125«..1020..124125126127..130140..»