Coronavirus Health - Health and Wellbeing

[csearle]

My (totally limited) understanding of it is that because of the lack of accuracy of the rapid test it only really makes sense if many people use it, so that on balance the reproduction rate reduces. Just one person doing is of much smaller significance. C.

Well yes that is the whole point of them AIUI.

I'm not sure I understand your point about individual results being of little value. If an individual person was otherwise going to work on a given day day regardless of whether they are carrying an infection (because currently they have no way of knowing), how can even a fairly high rate of inaccuracy cause any harm?

A positive Rapid Test in the morning would result in staying off work and applying for an accurate PCR test. A negative Rapid Test even if false, results in one going to work that day just as one would have done anyway, without the Rapid Test being available.

Perhaps you could you answer over on the coronavirus thread if I'm missing something as this is DAK. Thanks.

Hi, no I am certainly no expert as I hope you appreciate. Far from it! Deliberately didn't suggest it was of "little value" but rather "of much smaller significance". My reasoning is that based on the test detecting about three quarters of actual positives then sometimes you will correctly reduce the spread, which is better than nothing I agree. but doing it alone has a much smaller effect that if everyone in your town were to be doing it before setting off out of the house. Chris

[GrahamPlatt]

Olumiant is an arthritis drug found to reduce death from covid by two thirds in older patients!

This is today,s good news!

https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/2020 ... two-thirds

And another one - https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... nts-in-icu

[look]

This post is about the use of acetyl cysteine to cobat the coronavirus, but please let me talk a bit firtst.

Bad guys assaulted me in my house at. 3 a.m. They beat me many times on the head. i Theu wanted golds and other things that i don't have. Brazil needs strong laws against the robbers, the robbers are idos here for a long time. To change that we need strong laws that are the contrary that europeans want to the world. They need individual jails with low carbon diet (famine), no shower, no visit, and several things to made their live in jail very nasty. Otherwise they will continue to be idols.

after suffering this assault i search what i could do for save my head. Then i come to NAC n acetiyl cysteine. It seems it's good for covid.

I have fear that i have hemorragy in the brain, for that it seems there's no alternative solution.

https://www.dovepress.com/n-acetylcyste ... ticle-TCRM

[look]

i ask google: can n acetyl cysteyne help to combat covid?

the answer:

N-acetylcysteine (NAC) is inexpensive, has very low toxicity, has been FDA approved for many years, and has the potential to improve therapeutic strategies for COVID-19. NAC administered intravenously, orally, or inhaled, may suppress SARS-CoV-2 replication and may improve outcomes if used timely

[redsturgeon]

i ask google: can n acetyl cysteyne help to combat covid?

the answer:

N-acetylcysteine (NAC) is inexpensive, has very low toxicity, has been FDA approved for many years, and has the potential to improve therapeutic strategies for COVID-19. NAC administered intravenously, orally, or inhaled, may suppress SARS-CoV-2 replication and may improve outcomes if used timely

This is the clinical date sheet. N-acetylcysteine is a "Mucolytic adjuvant in the therapy of respiratory disorders associated with thick, viscous, mucus hypersecretion."

It is a POM in the UK (prescription only medicine). I'd imagine repiratory physicians are well versed in its use where appropriate.

https://www.medicines.org.uk/emc/product/2488/smpc#gref

John

[look]

John, it seems that you didn't read the link of dovepress.

here an excerpt:

N-Acetylcysteine, a Forgotten Immune-Modulating Agent
N-acetylcysteine (NAC), a precursor of the antioxidant glutathione, has been used to loosen thick mucus in the lungs and treat acetaminophen overdose for decades. However, NAC can also boost the immune system, suppress viral replication, and reduce inflammation. Despite these valuable features, NAC has been mostly overlooked throughout SARS-Cov and MERS-Cov epidemics, as well as the current COVID-19 pandemic.

[Dod101]

Now that it seems that the Pfizer vaccine has been approved with roll out starting next week apparently, dak how long this process will take until we get back to normal? Can someone who has had the two jabs start behaving normally again?

Dod

[AsleepInYorkshire]

If two jabs will help me behave normally I'm all in

*I'll get my coat

AiY

[Mike4]

If two jabs will help me behave normally I'm all in

*I'll get my coat

AiY

Lol, who wants to be 'normal' anyway?!!

AIUI, one's immunity will have fully developed six weeks after the second injection.

If it develops at all that is. Bear in mind for 1 in 20 people, it doesn't work.

[scrumpyjack]

But reports I have read, for those who did get Covid, it wasn't severe.

[AleisterCrowley]

From BBC
The vaccine is given as two injections, 21 days apart, with the second dose being a booster. Immunity begins to kick in after the first dose but reaches its full effect seven days after the second dose.
So 28 days first jab to full immunity- "28 Days Later"

[Mike4]

From BBC
The vaccine is given as two injections, 21 days apart, with the second dose being a booster. Immunity begins to kick in after the first dose but reaches its full effect seven days after the second dose.
So 28 days first jab to full immunity- "28 Days Later"

On reflection, I think the six weeks after second injection I wrote above might have been the specification for the AstraZeneca vaccine.

[ReformedCharacter]

Now that it seems that the Pfizer vaccine has been approved with roll out starting next week apparently, dak how long this process will take until we get back to normal? Can someone who has had the two jabs start behaving normally again?

Dod

The provisional timetable - which depends on the authorisation and arrival of millions of vaccines, is as follows:

Care home residents and staff, healthcare workers - from beginning of December;

Ages 80 plus - from mid-December;

Everyone aged 70-80 and ‘clinically extremely vulnerable’ people from late December;

Everyone aged 65-70 - from early January;

All high and moderate risk under 65s - from early January;

Everyone aged 50-65 - from mid January; and

Everyone aged 18-50 - from late January; but with the bulk of this group vaccinated during March.

The plan would see 88.5 million vaccination doses delivered across England, with two doses per person over the age of 18, by the end of April.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/covid-19-vaccine-moderna-oxford-latest-pfizer-when-coronavirus/

(paywalled).

RC

[jfgw]

Personally, I would like to see some priority given to people in public-facing roles such as shop and pub staff, and bus and taxi drivers.

Julian F. G. W.

[Dod101]

Yes I am aware of that which was issued some time ago. My question though is if we oldies have been given both our jabs at which time the bulk of the population will not have been vaccinated, does that mean those who have can resume normal activity in the knowledge that they are protected (if they really are to say 70% or whatever) ?

Dod

[Lootman]

From BBC
The vaccine is given as two injections, 21 days apart, with the second dose being a booster. Immunity begins to kick in after the first dose but reaches its full effect seven days after the second dose.
So 28 days first jab to full immunity- "28 Days Later"

On reflection, I think the six weeks after second injection I wrote above might have been the specification for the AstraZeneca vaccine.

The AZN vaccine seems inferior to the Pfizer vaccine for a number of reasons.

So the old and the vulnerable may be getting the better vaccine, whilst the majority who get jabbed later may get the inferior (but cheaper) one.

[AleisterCrowley]

The AZN vaccine is easier to transport and store
Better to vaccinate 1m with a 90% effective vaccine than 100,000 with a 95% effective vaccine

[gryffron]

AIUI, one's immunity will have fully developed six weeks after the second injection.
If it develops at all that is. Bear in mind for 1 in 20 people, it doesn't work.

I thought the failure rate was far higher than that? But more importantly it doesn't HAVE to work for everyone. That's not the point at all. The point is that if it works for enough people, then it drives the R rate below 1 and the disease dies out. The point of this vaccine is to protect society, not the individual. Which does mean that all this talk of "immunity" and "vaccination passports" is pretty rubbish, but as long as it persuades people to get vaccinated it isn't really a problem.

Normal winter flu vaccines are often as low as 50% effective. Still enough to significantly reduce spread.

Gryff

[TedSwippet]

But reports I have read, for those who did get Covid, it wasn't severe.

At least partly explained by selection bias. Dead people don't report on their experience.

[Urbandreamer]

Yes I am aware of that which was issued some time ago. My question though is if we oldies have been given both our jabs at which time the bulk of the population will not have been vaccinated, does that mean those who have can resume normal activity in the knowledge that they are protected (if they really are to say 70% or whatever) ?

Dod

Well, you can't if normal activities are restricted for everyone. You would have to use a mask inside shops rather than act as normal. If pubs are made to close you can't use them. If, like Boris, you are fingered by track and trace, you'll have to self isolate. I could mention that limitations might also depend more upon where you live than your risk of catching Covid, but that might be a bit political.