Covid19-Sources

— Vipin M. Vashishtha (@vipintukur)

We have discussed the LIGHTNING PROCESS before: The ‘Lightning Process’: implausible, unproven, hyped and expensive The ‘Lightning Process’ (LP), an effective therapy for ME? Now, the BBC reports that it is promoted as a treatment of Long-COVID. Oonagh Cousins was offered a free place on a course run by the Lightning Process, which teaches people

BackgroundEmerging evidence reveals that SARS-CoV-2 possesses the capability to disrupt the gastrointestinal (GI) homeostasis, resulting in the long-term sym...

Many COVID-19 patients suffer from gastrointestinal symptoms and impaired intestinal barrier function may play a key role in Long COVID. Despite its importance, the impact of SARS-CoV-2 on intestinal epithelia is poorly understood. To address this, we established an intestinal barrier model integrating epithelial Caco-2 cells, mucus-secreting HT29 cells and human Raji cells. This gut epithelial model allows efficient differentiation of Caco-2 cells into microfold-like cells, faithfully mimics intestinal barrier function, and is highly permissive to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Early strains of SARS-CoV-2 and the Delta variant replicated with high efficiency, severely disrupted barrier function, and depleted tight junction proteins, such as claudin-1, occludin and ZO-1. In comparison, Omicron subvariants also depleted ZO-1 from tight junctions but had fewer damaging effects on mucosal integrity and barrier function. Remdesivir and the TMPRSS2 inhibitor Camostat prevented SARS-CoV-2 replication and thus epithelial barrier damage, while the Cathepsin inhibitor E64d was ineffective. Our results support that SARS-CoV-2 disrupts intestinal barrier function but further suggest that circulating Omicron variants are less damaging than earlier viral strains. The data that support the findings of this study are openly available in Mendeley Data; DOI: 10.17632/n2cyh3pk4h.1.

COVID-19 has a wide range of clinical manifestations. Apart from respiratory symptoms, neurological manifestations and cognitive impairment are commonly seen. Due to lack of a clear consensus on the definition of long COVID a pragmatic approach of assessing change from neurological baseline has become prevalent. We present the case of a high functioning woman in her late 40s who had a mild course of acute illness but developed cognitive difficulties. No organic causes for her cognitive difficulties were found. Neuropsychological testing showed impairment in right frontal lobe functioning. The patient showed a response to empirical treatment with Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) medications. Repeat neuropsychological testing 1 year later showed continued dysfunction in executive functioning. We present the details of her test findings and discuss the proposed pathophysiology behind neurocognitive effects of long COVID.

Like other infections, a SARS-CoV-2 infection can also trigger Post-Acute Infection Syndromes (PAIS), which often progress into myalgic encephalomyelitis/chr...

The composition and function of the gut microbiota constantly influence health. Disruptions in this delicate balance, termed gut microbiota dysbiosis, have been implicated in various adverse health events. As the largest global epidemic since 1918, the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) had devastating consequences. While the primary impact of Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been on the respiratory system, a growing body of research has unveiled the significant involvement of the gastrointestinal tract as well. Emerging evidence underscores notable alterations in the gut microbiome of COVID-19 patients. In addition, the gut microbiome is also characterized by an abundance of opportunistic pathogens, which is related to disease manifestations of COVID-19 patients. The intricate bidirectional interaction between the respiratory mucosa and the gut microbiota, known as the gut-lung axis, emerges as a crucial player in the pathological immune response triggered by SARS-CoV-2. Here, we discuss microbiota-based gut characteristics of COVID-19 patients and the long-term consequences of gut microbiota dysregulation. These insights could potentially transform the development of long-term interventions for COVID-19, offering hope for improved outcomes and enhanced patient recovery.

npj Vaccines - SARS-CoV-2 vaccination may mitigate dysregulation of IL-1/IL-18 and gastrointestinal symptoms of the post-COVID-19 condition

Auch lange nach den groß angelegten Impfungen gegen Covid-19 geistern Schauermeldungen über mögliche Folgen durch soziale Netzwerke. Bei genauerer Betrachtung bleibt davon oft wenig übrig.

Innerhalb kürzester Zeit gibt es deutlich mehr Pflegebedürftige. Dies wird sich wohl auf die Pflegeversicherung auswirken. Der Minister wirbt für einen anderen Umgang mit finanzieller Hilfe.

To study the association between COVID-19 vaccination and the risk of post-COVID-19 cardiac and thromboembolic complications. Methods We conducted a staggered cohort study based on national vaccination campaigns using electronic health records from the UK, Spain and Estonia. Vaccine rollout was grouped into four stages with predefined enrolment periods. Each stage included all individuals eligible for vaccination, with no previous SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 vaccine at the start date. Vaccination status was used as a time-varying exposure. Outcomes included heart failure (HF), venous thromboembolism (VTE) and arterial thrombosis/thromboembolism (ATE) recorded in four time windows after SARS-CoV-2 infection: 0–30, 31–90, 91–180 and 181–365 days. Propensity score overlap weighting and empirical calibration were used to minimise observed and unobserved confounding, respectively. Fine-Gray models estimated subdistribution hazard ratios (sHR). Random effect meta-analyses were conducted across staggered cohorts and databases. Results The study included 10.17 million vaccinated and 10.39 million unvaccinated people. Vaccination was associated with reduced risks of acute (30-day) and post-acute COVID-19 VTE, ATE and HF: for example, meta-analytic sHR of 0.22 (95% CI 0.17 to 0.29), 0.53 (0.44 to 0.63) and 0.45 (0.38 to 0.53), respectively, for 0–30 days after SARS-CoV-2 infection, while in the 91–180 days sHR were 0.53 (0.40 to 0.70), 0.72 (0.58 to 0.88) and 0.61 (0.51 to 0.73), respectively. Conclusions COVID-19 vaccination reduced the risk of post-COVID-19 cardiac and thromboembolic outcomes. These effects were more pronounced for acute COVID-19 outcomes, consistent with known reductions in disease severity following breakthrough versus unvaccinated SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Cognitive impairment is often reported after SARS-CoV-2 infection, yet evidence gaps remain. We aimed to (i) report the prevalence and characteristics…

SUMMARYThis narrative review and meta-analysis summarizes a broad evidence base on the benefits—and also the practicalities, disbenefits, harms and personal, sociocultural and environmental impacts—of masks and masking. Our synthesis of evidence from over ...

Cognitive impairment, brain shrinkage, heart attacks, strokes, kidney damage, lung damage, diabetes, clots & other blood disorders, immunological & neurological disorders. It is multisystem, acute & potentially chronic (1 in 10 infections)🧵 — Prognostic Chats (@PrognosticChats)

Objective To assess the effects of COVID-19 vaccines in women before or during pregnancy on SARS-CoV-2 infection-related, pregnancy, offspring and reactogenicity outcomes. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources Major databases between December 2019 and January 2023. Study selection Nine pairs of reviewers contributed to study selection. We included test-negative designs, comparative cohorts and randomised trials on effects of COVID-19 vaccines on infection-related and pregnancy outcomes. Non-comparative cohort studies reporting reactogenicity outcomes were also included. Quality assessment, data extraction and analysis Two reviewers independently assessed study quality and extracted data. We undertook random-effects meta-analysis and reported findings as HRs, risk ratios (RRs), ORs or rates with 95% CIs. Results Sixty-seven studies (1 813 947 women) were included. Overall, in test-negative design studies, pregnant women fully vaccinated with any COVID-19 vaccine had 61% reduced odds of SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.75; 4 studies, 23 927 women; I2=87.2%) and 94% reduced odds of hospital admission (OR 0.06, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.71; 2 studies, 868 women; I2=92%). In adjusted cohort studies, the risk of hypertensive disorders in pregnancy was reduced by 12% (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.92; 2 studies; 115 085 women), while caesarean section was reduced by 9% (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.85 to 0.98; 6 studies; 30 192 women). We observed an 8% reduction in the risk of neonatal intensive care unit admission (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.87 to 0.97; 2 studies; 54 569 women) in babies born to vaccinated versus not vaccinated women. In general, vaccination during pregnancy was not associated with increased risk of adverse pregnancy or perinatal outcomes. Pain at the injection site was the most common side effect reported (77%, 95% CI 52% to 94%; 11 studies; 27 195 women). Conclusion COVID-19 vaccines are effective in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection and related complications in pregnant women. PROSPERO registration number CRD42020178076. No data are available.

Scientific Reports - Increased risk of fetal left–right asymmetry disorders associated with maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection during the first trimester

Nature - Imprinting of serum neutralizing antibodies by Wuhan-1 mRNA vaccines

SARS-CoV-2 genome data analysis.

By signing up, you acknowledge and agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Service. You may unsubscribe at any time by following the directions at the bottom of the email or by contacting us here. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

AbstractAims. We evaluated the incidence and relative risk of major post-acute cardiovascular consequences of SARS-CoV-2 infection in a large real-world po

DMZ – JUSTIZ ¦ Sarah Koller ¦ Berlin- Die Wirksamkeit, Akzeptanz und Sicherheit von Masken und anderen Gesichtsbedeckungen gehören zu den wissenschaftlichen Themen der COVID-19-Pandemie. Eine neue wissenschaftliche Übersicht untersucht nun den aktuellen Stand der Forschung und beleuchtet die Komplexität der Masken-Debatte. Historische und wissenschaftliche Perspektive Masken werden seit Jahrhunderten genutzt, um die Übertragung von Atemwegserkrankungen zu reduzieren, von der europäischen Pest im 17. Jahrhundert bis zur COVID-19-Pandemie. Eine jüngste Cochrane-Übersicht von 2023 sorgte für Aufsehen, indem sie auf randomisierte kontrollierte Studien (RCTs) beschränkt war und teilweise missinterpretiert wurde, dass „Masken nicht wirken“ und „Maskenpflichten nichts brachten“. Der Chefredakteur von Cochrane stellte klar, dass die Ergebnisse der Übersicht eine solche Schlussfolgerung nicht unterstützen. Vielschichtige Evidenzlage Die Übersicht zeigt, dass die Wirksamkeit von Masken durch eine Vielzahl von Faktoren beeinflusst wird. Masken sind nicht gleich Masken: Sie variieren stark in Material und Design. Klinische Studien, die Masken und Atemschutzmasken bewerten, haben oft Defizite in der Definition und Optimierung der Interventionen sowie in der Messung, ob Masken tatsächlich getragen wurden. In nicht-randomisierten Studien ist es schwierig, den Effekt des Maskentragens von anderen Einflussfaktoren zu trennen. Kulturelle und politische Dimensionen Masken sind nicht nur Schutzgeräte, sondern auch kulturelle und politische Symbole, die starke Emotionen hervorrufen. Die Meinungen über Masken können durch Fehlinformationen beeinflusst werden, die weit verbreitet sind. Maskenpflichten wurden in verschiedenen Regionen und soziokulturellen Kontexten unterschiedlich umgesetzt und akzeptiert. Umweltbelastung durch Einwegmasken Ein weiteres großes Problem ist die Umweltbelastung durch Einwegmasken und Atemschutzmasken, die aus nicht biologisch abbaubaren synthetischen Polymeren bestehen und zu Mikroplastikverschmutzung führen. Schätzungen zufolge werden weltweit jährlich 15 Billionen Masken verwendet, was 2 Megatonnen Abfall verursacht. Die Entsorgung dieser Masken trägt zur Umweltverschmutzung bei, insbesondere in marinen Ökosystemen, wo Mikroplastik Schaden anrichtet. Lösungsansätze für die Umweltproblematik Die Übersicht schlägt mehrere Maßnahmen zur Minderung der Umweltbelastung vor: Öffentliches Bewusstsein steigern: Die Umweltgefahren durch weggeworfene Masken müssen klar kommuniziert und umweltfreundliche Entsorgungsmethoden gefördert werden. Abfallmanagement verbessern: Spezielle Entsorgungsbehälter und systematische Dekontamination könnten das Recycling erleichtern. Maskenabfall recyceln: Innovative Ansätze zur Wiederverwertung von Maskenabfall, z.B. in Baustoffen oder als Brennstoff, sind vielversprechend, aber noch nicht weit verbreitet. Wiederverwendung und verlängerte Nutzung fördern: Atemschutzmasken sind für eine längere Nutzung ausgelegt und könnten mehrfach verwendet werden, was den Abfall erheblich reduziert. Biologisch abbaubare und wiederverwendbare Masken entwickeln: Forschung zu neuen Materialien wie Polylactid (PLA) zeigt vielversprechende Ergebnisse. Zukünftige Forschung und Entwicklung Die Übersicht betont die Notwendigkeit weiterer Forschung zu verschiedenen Aspekten von Masken, einschließlich der Entwicklung besserer Materialien und Technologien. Die Verwendung von Nanofasern und anderen innovativen Materialien könnte die Leistungsfähigkeit und Akzeptanz von Masken verbessern. Auch die Integration von intelligenten Technologien in Masken und die Anpassung an individuelle Gesichtsstrukturen sind potenzielle Zukunftsentwicklungen. Fazit Die Studie zeigt, dass Masken eine wichtige Rolle bei der Eindämmung von Atemwegserkrankungen spielen können, insbesondere bei luftübertragenen Pathogenen. Trotz ihrer Herausforderungen und Umweltbelastungen bieten sie eine einfache und sichere Methode, um die Übertragung zu reduzieren. Ein umfassender Ansatz, der die Verbesserung von Maskendesigns, das Recycling und die öffentliche Aufklärung umfasst, ist notwendig, um ihre Wirksamkeit und Akzeptanz weiter zu steigern. Zur Studie

A study of 19 million adults in England reveals demographic and clinical patterns of long COVID, highlighting higher rates among women, middle-aged adults, and those with comorbidities, with vaccination linked to lower incidence.

Wenn Labortests Mangelware sind, kann möglicherweise sogar schon ein Blick auf die Haut den Verdacht auf COVID-19 lenken, wie Dermatologen herausgefunden haben.

Eine SARS-CoV-2-Infektion löst nicht nur eine Pneumonie, sondern offenbar auch eine Endotheliitis in verschiedenen Organen aus – mit fatalen Folgen.

A new study carried out by researchers at the University of York suggests 28% of people who catch COVID-19 will go on to suffer from Long Covid.

The science

This narrative review and meta-analysis summarizes a broad evidence base on the benefits—and also the practicalities, disbenefits, harms and personal, sociocultural and environmental impacts—of masks and masking. Our synthesis of evidence from over 100 published reviews and selected primary studies, including re-analyzing contested meta-analyses of key clinical trials, produced seven key findings. First, there is strong and consistent evidence for airborne transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and other respiratory pathogens. Second, masks are, if correctly and consistently worn, effective in reducing transmission of respiratory diseases and show a dose-response effect. Third, respirators are significantly more effective than medical or cloth masks. Fourth, mask mandates are, overall, effective in reducing community transmission of respiratory pathogens. Fifth, masks are important sociocultural symbols; non-adherence to masking is sometimes linked to political and ideological beliefs and to widely circulated mis- or disinformation. Sixth, while there is much evidence that masks are not generally harmful to the general population, masking may be relatively contraindicated in individuals with certain medical conditions, who may require exemption. Furthermore, certain groups (notably D/deaf people) are disadvantaged when others are masked. Finally, there are risks to the environment from single-use masks and respirators. We propose an agenda for future research, including improved characterization of the situations in which masking should be recommended or mandated; attention to comfort and acceptability; generalized and disability-focused communication support in settings where masks are worn; and development and testing of novel materials and designs for improved filtration, breathability, and environmental impact.

A previous review suggested that masks don’t work. We can assure you – they do.

New research confirms that COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective at reducing the cardiovascular complications that are a hallmark of COVID-19 infection.