Yes, there is a risk of serious harm from “unauthorised” COVID treatments that are not officially authorised by competent regulatory authorities such as MHRA in UK or FDA in USA.
India is going to a rough patch. People with COVID are desperate for treatment. There is shortage of oxygen which is a commonly used treatment.
Apart from oxygen for respiratory support, only Two treatments have been proven to be of significant help in COVID-19 pneumonia. (1) Steroids (2) An arthritis drug called Tocilizumab
Many antivirals drugs have not shown any meaningful benefit. Various other drugs are still in trials.
It is rapidly evolving area and the BMJ has a COVID guideline which is being frequently updated during this pandemic.
This is significant risk of harm from drugs which are NOT properly assessed in clinical trials.
Anecdotally there has been lot of sudden deaths in India. Lot of unproven treatments such as Azithromycin, ivermectin, antivirals agents,chloroquine, and other agents widely used in india.
Although there is no definitive proof, One cannot help wondering whether poor outcome in at least some Indian patients is related to combinations of unproven drugs that are used widely in unregulated private healthcare sector.
BMJ. Drug treatments for covid-19: living systematic review and network meta-analysis BMJ 2020; 370 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m2980 (Published 30 July 2020) Cite this as: BMJ 2020;370:m2980
BMJ. A living WHO guideline on drugs for covid-19 BMJ 2020; 370 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m3379 (Published 04 September 2020).
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is NOT a expert medical opinion on various topics. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog are not in way intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
An apple a day might not keep the doctor away. But a good public health team can keep the doctors away for many people!
Public health is about prevention and promotion of health in the society.
Public health is largely responsible for the significant improvements in life expectancy over the last 150 years.
Providing people with clean drinking water, removal of rubbish from houses and streets, good sewage system, and vaccination has saved many millions of lives over the years.
The recent smoking ban in work-places, public places and indoor venues is a modern example of public health activity.
The one area where public health has not been hugely successful is obesity. It may be because of the reliance on nudging the individual to change rather than dealing with underlying structural problems.
BMJ. Lifestyle and socioeconomic group on health Public health needs to go back to basics, not rely on nudge theory BMJ 2021; 373 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n1153 (Published 06 May 2021) Cite this as: BMJ 2021;373:n1153
BMJ. Short term impact of smoke-free legislation in England: retrospective analysis of hospital admissions for myocardial infarction BMJ 2010; 340 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c2161 (Published 08 June 2010) Cite this as: BMJ 2010;340:c2161
BMJ. Associations of healthy lifestyle and socioeconomic status with mortality and incident cardiovascular disease: two prospective cohort studies BMJ 2021; 373 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n604 (Published 14 April 2021) Cite this as: BMJ 2021;373:n604
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is NOT a expert medical opinion on various topics. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog are not in way intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
BMJ. News Analysis. Covid-19: Is the UK heading towards mandatory vaccination of healthcare workers? BMJ 2021; 373 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n1056 (Published 21 April 2021) Cite this as: BMJ 2021;373:n1056
BMJ News. Covid-19: Italy makes vaccination mandatory for healthcare workers BMJ 2021; 373 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n905 (Published 06 April 2021) Cite this as: BMJ 2021;373:n905
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is NOT a expert medical opinion on various topics. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog are not in way intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
COVID-19 is still raging like wild fire in various parts of world particularly in India now.
But, in U.K, it does look like the “beginning of the end” for the COVID pandemic. Vaccines seem to have greatly aided this end.
On Tuesday, UK reported 1,946 new infections and only four deaths within 28 days of a positive test.
So unless there is a new variant which overcomes the protective shield of the Vaccines, there may be no more lockdowns and life may go back to some sort of normality.
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is NOT a expert medical opinion on various topics. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog are not in way intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
In the indoor settings, wearing masks can help to reduce the risk of getting COVID-19 infection.
But in the outdoor setting, masks may not be very helpful as the risk of getting COVID-19 infection from others, in outdoor settings, is considerably smaller.
Apart from infection prevention, I can see some additional benefits for voluntarily wearing masks in the streets.
The streets of major cities have significant air-pollution. So facial masks can help to reduce inhalation of toxic chemicals.
More and more surveillance street-cameras are now deploying facial-recognition software to deter criminals. But the cameras may also track movements of ordinary law-abiding people for marketing and advertising reasons. So face-masks may also be helpful to those with privacy concerns.
Read the article and submit your views through BMJ rapid response section.
BMJ . Coronavirus Transmission Should masks be worn outdoors? BMJ 2021; 373 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n1036 (Published 28 April 2021) Cite this as: BMJ 2021;373:n1036
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is NOT a expert medical opinion on various topics. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog are not in way intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
Combination therapy with Hormone therapy and Radiotherapy is used with curative intent for treatment of prostate cancer.
There is some debate which treatment should be started first. At present, the hormone therapy is started first and radiotherpy is started second at a later date.
This is because many previous clinical trials, which found beneficial effects for the combination therapy, involved starting hormones first.
One advantage of starting hormone therapy immediately and delaying the start date of radiotherpy is that hormone therapy shrinks the size of prostate before radiotherpy . This greatly helps when image-guided Radiotherpy is planned later on.
A group of high Calibre researchers and authors from Canada and USA have published paper arguing in favour of radiotherpy starting first and starting hormones afterwards.
Some of the authors behind this paper in Journal of Clinical oncology have previously published seminal, practice changing, papers in field of prostate cancer.
My personal view, is that we have to wait for confirmatory evidence before changing the current practice.
I have to resort to the megaphone of a provocative headline grabbing title so that oncologists won’t uncritically accept the conclusion of the paper
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is NOT a expert medical opinion on various topics. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog are not in way intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
CPR or cardiopulmonary resuscitation is a medical procedure that is often misunderstood. It causes lot of anguish and distress to patients and family unnecessarily.
It is sometimes colloquially known as “kiss of life” as “mouth to mouth resuscitation” was previously used in pre-COVID era along with “chest compressions”.
CPR may involve “electric shocks to heart” when needed if machines are available. CPR in hospital may involve “tubes pushed down the throat” to enable air get into lungs. CPR almost always involves someone “pressing hard on the chest repeatedly with both hands” so as to help air get into lungs.
Overall, it can appear a bit brutal but it can be a life saver. That’s why the work places, train stations, airports and some public parks have the automatic defibrillators.
CPR is a wonderful medical first aid, which, delivered promptly, can save lives. It is highly successful in previously fit people with a sudden cardio respiratory arrest due to a “reversible or treatable” illness.
Television serials and Hollywood movies often portray CPR as a highly successful procedure.
But, unfortunately, in routine hospital practice, the success rates are low.
In particular, success rates are very low in “terminally ill” cancer patients and in frail patients with “multiple irreversible medical conditions”.
Because many people believe CPR is hugely successful in “everyone”, patients and families understandably get very upset when the medical team talk about “do not attempt resuscitation (DNAR)“.
When CPR is NOT used appropriately, it prevents peaceful death and stops terminally ill patients from gently fading away surrounded by their loved ones.
In cancer patients, when cancer treatments are not working, death occurs after the body has been overwhelmed by cancer. Trying to re-start the heart and lungs after the organs have stopped working due to cancer is often futile. More importantly, CPR can make death more traumatic for patients and family.
Other than educating people about benefits and limitations of CPR, there is no easy way to make this misconception about resuscitation go away.
Read my BMJ letter on this topic and contribute your views on the rapid response section of BMJ.
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is NOT a expert medical opinion on various topics. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog are not in way intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is NOT a expert medical opinion on various topics. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog are not in way intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
In USA, about 5800 “breakthrough” COVID-19 infections has been reported so far among the roughly 77 million people who had been fully vaccinated. That’s less than 0.008% cases.
A much more smaller minority among this minority group had serious infections. Among the 5800 cases, 396 patients were admitted to hospital and 74 patients died from COVID-19. That’s less than 0.0001% deaths.
1. BMJ News. Covid-19: Infections fell by 65% after first dose of AstraZeneca or Pfizer vaccine, data show BMJ 2021; 373 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n1068 (Published 23 April 2021) Cite this as: BMJ 2021;373:n1068
2. BMJ news. Covid-19: US reports low rate of new infections in people already vaccinated BMJ 2021; 373 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n1000 (Published 16 April 2021) Cite this as: BMJ 2021;373:n1000
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is NOT a expert medical opinion on various topics. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog are not in way intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
If someone has recovered from a COVID-19 infection, they would have some protection against getting another COVID-19 infection.
But, even if someone has recovered very well from a previous infection, vaccination is necessary because there is still a significant risk of getting COVID-19 infection again.
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is NOT a expert medical opinion on various topics. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with. The authors views are not in way intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
Like everything else in medicine, risks and benefits needs to be assessed in each individual case.
For instance, a doctor won’t give toxic treatments for a self limiting flu. But, on the other hand, a doctor will try toxic chemotherapy to control advanced lung cancer.
No vaccine or medicine is ever going to be 100% safe.
For that matter, Life is full of risks. Getting out of bed can be risky. Not getting out of bed everyday is also risky.
Older adults who are at high of COVID related death and COVID related complications should have the vaccine during this pandemic and not worry too much about rare serious side effects.
But young adults, who are a low risk, can avoid Astra Zeneca vaccine based on the available data, if alternatives are available.
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is NOT a expert medical opinion on various topics. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with. The authors views are not in way intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
Vitamins and Minerals are absolutely essential nutrients for a Healthy body and a Healthy mind. Anyone not eating a healthy balanced should look what nutrients they might be missing.
But on the other hand, taking too much of vitamins and minerals, when they are not needed, could be harmful to the body.
There is widespread use of dietary supplements during cancer treatment, in the hope they can reduce side effects but many do not think about the disadvantages.
An American study of Breast cancer patients undergoing Chemotherapy looked at the effect of taking dietary supplements such as anti-oxidants, iron, vitamin B12, and omega-3 fatty acids.
Breast cancer patients who took the dietary supplements during chemotherapy were found be harmed by them. They had a higher chance of cancer coming back compared to people who did not take these supplements. The supplements also increased risk of death in those the supplements.
Beware supplements when used improperly, can be harmful.
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you.
The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and is likely to change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not necessarily endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with and views are not substitute for professional advice.
A recent study published in the esteemed Lancet Oncology Journal shows that the vaccine is well tolerated in patients having immunotherapy.
Unlike cancer chemotherapy, immunotherapy works differently. It works by releasing the in-built brakes holding down the immune system thereby boosting the body’s immune system against cancer.
There has been some theoretical concerns whether this might lead to COVID vaccine causing more side effects.
Reassuringly, the Vaccine side effects were NO different from those seen in people not having immunotherapy. The Vaccine also did NOT increase the immunotherapy side effects.
So the study is good news for tens of thousands of patients on immunotherapy and any cancer patient who has hesitated before, should seriously consider having the vaccine now
COVID infection could be very nasty in cancer patients and all evidence points to the benefits of vaccine far outweighing any risks from the Vaccine.
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is NOT a expert medical opinion on various topics. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with. The authors views are not in way intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
BMJ News. Covid-19: Pfizer reports 100% vaccine efficacy in children aged 12 to 15 BMJ 2021; 373 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n881 (Published 01 April 2021) Cite this as: BMJ 2021;373:n881
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is NOT a expert medical opinion on various topics. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with. The authors views are not in way intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
Many millions of people have now been vaccinated against COVID-19.
The COVID-19 vaccines are highly effective but the next important question is how long would the vaccines continue to protect.
Some vaccines for other viral diseases offer life long protection but others like flu vaccines need annual boosters. COVID-19 Studies are still ongoing.
A recently released Pfizer vaccine study data indicates that protection with Pfizer vaccine lasts for many months as a minimum. To be precise, so far, Pfizer vaccine was found to have 91% efficacy for up to six months. Ongoing studies would clarify whether booster vaccines are needed in future.
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is NOT a expert medical opinion on various topics. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you.
The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with. The authors views are not in way intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
COVID-19 is not a self limiting illness particularly if you have been poorly enough to be hospitalised the first time around.
Even after recovering from a COVID-19 infection, many people remain at high risk of death.
A recent UK study published in the BMJ found that “ Nearly a third of people who have been in hospital before were readmitted after discharge for further treatment in the following four months”.
“And worryingly one in ten patients died during the follow up period after hospital discharge”.
The increase in risk was not confined to the elderly. So everyone still needs to be careful as the lockdown is being gradually eased.
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is NOT a expert medical opinion on various topics. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you.
The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with. The authors views are not in way intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
A recent study published in BMJ shows increase in heart and lung related deaths due to traffic pollution.
Reference:
BMJ. Short term associations of ambient nitrogen dioxide with daily total, cardiovascular, and respiratory mortality: multilocation analysis in 398 cities. BMJ 2021; 372 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n534 (Published 24 March 2021) Cite this as: BMJ 2021;372:n534
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is NOT a expert medical opinion on various topics. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with. The authors views are not in way intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
Nutritional supplements are often tried to prevent cancer. But well- designed rigorously conducted clinical trials have NOT shown any benefit in prevention of many cancers.
Selenium was suggested as a preventative supplement for skin cancer.
A clinical trial compared Selenium against placebo in United States. The results were disappointing.
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you.
The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and is likely to change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not necessarily endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with and views are not substitute for professional advice.
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is NOT a expert medical opinion on various topics. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you.
The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with. The authors views are not in way intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you.
The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not necessarily endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with and views are not substitute for professional advice.
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is NOT a expert medical opinion on various topics. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you.
The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with. The authors views are not in way intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
The study presented at the ASCO ( American Society of Clinical Oncology) virtual scientific symposium in 2020,
“The VITamin D and OmegA-3 TriaL (VITAL) was a high quality study. The study randomly assigned patients to Vitamin D3 supplements and/or omega-3 fatty acid supplements and/or both or placebo in 25,871 men and women.
The study found that “vitamin D supplementation decreased risk of developing advanced cancers by 17% compared with placebo ”
“Omega-3 supplementation did not reduce the incidence of advanced cancer.”
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you.
The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and is likely to change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not necessarily endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with and views are not substitute for professional advice.
More good news on the vaccine front in the fight against the coronavirus.
Two new vaccines have reported positive results.
The NOVAVAX vaccine is first Vaccine to report efficacy against the new variants. It is 95.6% effective against the original strain of coronavirus.
NOVAVAX is 86% effective at protecting against the new UK variant, which is very reassuring. But the Vaccine is only, 60% effective against South African variant of the virus. The efficacy against Brazilian variant is unknown.
The Janssen vaccine, produced by the US giant Johnson & Johnson, is a single-dose vaccine and has proved 66% effective against Covid-19. The vaccine was just 57% effective in the South African part of the trial.
The reduction in efficacy of both vaccines against new variants is a bit worrying and indicates that if further new variants emerge in future, existing vaccines could be less effective and vaccines would need to be updated.
The Janssen vaccine uses a common cold virus and uses a approach similar to the Oxford Astra Zeneca Vaccine.
Novavax vaccine differs from existing vaccines and it uses a artificially produced COVID-19 spike protein, which is then assembled into nanoparticles to make them look like coronavirus.
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is NOT a expert medical opinion on various topics. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you.
The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with. The authors views are not in way intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is NOT a expert medical opinion on various topics. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you.
The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with. The authors views are not in way intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
Read the excellent article in BMJ and contribute your views through the rapid response section of BMJ
Reference
Too little, too late: social media companies’ failure to tackle vaccine misinformation poses a real threat BMJ 2021; 372 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n26 (Published 21 January 2021) Cite this as: BMJ 2021;372:n26
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is NOT a expert medical opinion on various topics. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you.
The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not necessarily endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with and the authors views are not in way intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is NOT a expert medical opinion on various topics. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you.
The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not necessarily endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with and the authors views are not in way intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
A significant minority of people have an unhealthy scepticism about all vaccines in general fuelled by misinformation on social media. Some people in western world, who haven’t seen the horrors that can be wrecked by infectious diseases, have an ill-informed view about all Vaccines.
Vaccines have played a significant role in protection against various deadly infections diseases in the past century. The infectious diseases of childhood have become less prevalent even in developing countries now. But there is a risk of Vaccine Hesitancy spreading to these third world developing countries.
The concerns of people with Vaccine Hesitancy particularly relating to COVID Vaccine is genuine. The COVID vaccines have been rapidly developed and there are no long term efficacy or toxicity data. Because it is a global emergency, countries are forced to begin COVID vaccination based on the available excellent short term efficacy and safety data. Only time can tell whether the Governments got it right over long term.
But there is no evidence to suggest secrecy or conspiracy surrounding development of various vaccines including COVID vaccines. For instance, two reports of severe allergies due to COVID vaccine was immediately brought to the attention of everyone by Regulatory authorities in UK.
It is now reported that Norway is investigating deaths after coronavirus vaccination in very frail elderly people. Any adverse report on vaccines will be investigated and made public.
It is very important to remember that life is full of risks. People make decisions every day based on benefits versus risks ( eg driving a car). People need to understand that the benefits from most vaccines against infections diseases significantly outweighs the risks of various vaccine side effects. While a handful have serious side effects, many millions do benefit from the all vaccines.
“Vaccines hesitancy” is also not helped Historic mistrust of government in sections of population which regrettably can make things difficult in terms of achieving good vaccine coverage at population level.
If you have concerns about vaccines –
“Do read information about Vaccines with an open mind and pay attention to high quality population level studies assessing risks versus benefits and ignore individual unsubstantiated stories”.
“Do speak to your doctor about your concerns with an open mind”.
“Do NOT always seek information that affirms your views and Worries. Do seek reliable information that challenges your views on vaccines before you make your choice”.
BMJ. The rush to create a covid-19 vaccine may do more harm than good. BMJ 2020; 370 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m3209 (Published 18 August 2020)Cite this as: BMJ 2020;370:m3209
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is NOT a expert medical opinion on various topics. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you.
The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not necessarily endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with and the authors views are not in way intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
The first problem is supply of Vaccines. There are limited initial supplies globally. It will take many months even for richer countries to get their full supply.
Secondly, Vaccines take many weeks to become very effective. In clinical trials, more than 90% effectiveness was noted for some Vaccines a few weeks after the second dose.
Millions in the UK are yet to receive the first dose. Lots of people would not get the second dose until 10-12 weeks after first dose. A UK minister predicts a September vaccination target for all adults.
So it will take time for the full Vaccine effect to kick in at both individual as well as society level.
Thirdly, there is a potential problem of “Vaccines hesitancy” in sections of the society. A significant minority of people have a unhealthy scepticism about Vaccines fuelled by misinformation on social media.
Fourthly, it has to be pointed out that “No Vaccine works perfectly”. A Vaccine does not offer 100% protection. The high efficacy rates noted in young healthy volunteers participating in various trials might not be observed in real world population, and efficacy rates might be lower in elderly people.
Finally, the most serious potential risk and hurdle would be loss of Vaccine efficacy if new variants of Coronavirus are not protected by existing Vaccines.
Keep the mask; a Vaccine won’t end the COVID-19 crisis right away !
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is NOT a expert medical opinion on various topics. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you.
The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not necessarily endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with and the authors views are not in way intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is NOT a expert medical opinion on various topics. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you.
The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not necessarily endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with and the authors views are NOT in way intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is NOT a expert medical opinion on various topics. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you.
The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not necessarily endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with and the authors views are not in way intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
Yes and No. It depends on how important your hospital visit is.
Recent news reports say that a significant number of patients acquired COVID during their hospital stay. Hospital acquired infections are a serious concern.
Yes, avoid, if you are trying to visit a family member admitted for a routine or elective medical procedure and is doing well.
Yes, avoid, if you can have a satisfactory phone or video consultation with medical team.
No, you should NOT avoid if you have any serious illness like heart attacks, stroke or cancer.
Everything in medicine depends on an assessment of risks versus benefits. For many patients with serious illness, on the whole, the benefits of proper treatment are likely to outweigh the risks of serious problems from COVID and risks can be managed.
If in doubt, ask your doctors or nurse about it. Do not take any action without discussing your concerns with your medical team.
JAMA: Richterman A, Meyerowitz EA, Cevik M. Hospital-acquired SARS-CoV-2 infection: lessons for public health. JAMA2020;324:2155-6. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.21399. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2773128. pmid:33185657
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you.
The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not necessarily endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with and the authors views are not in way intended to be a substitute for professional advice
It might seem foolish to ask the question “Anything good from this COVID-19 pandemic?” when so many people across the world has been so badly affected by the coronavirus pandemic.
There is some truth in the proverb that “every dark cloud has a silver lining” and no matter how bad the current pandemic is now, human spirit and endeavour would get something positive out of it.
One possible good thing that has come out of the pandemic is the “mRNA technology”.
The successful use of RNA technology for Coronavirus Vaccines would hopefully enable the versatile RNA technology to be further developed and successfully used a cancer treatment in near future.
Further clinical trials in cancer patients would be done to provide proof of their potential.
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you.
The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not necessarily endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with and the authors views are not in way intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
The study involved healthcare workers from hospitals across the UK. The study recruited mainly Young and Middle age people ; it is not known whether the study findings would apply to older age people who are the most vulnerable.
The protection is not 100%. The protective effect was noted for only 83% . So there is still a chance someone who has recovered from the 1st infection might still get a 2nd infection.
The other big concern is “the risk of reinfection from the new Covid variants spotted in the UK, South Africa and Brazil”.
The study continues and more information would be available later this year ”
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you.
The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not necessarily endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with and the authors views are not in way intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
A large study of 309,123 participants found that Spirit drinking was associated with higher risk of early death compared to red wine drinking.
Beer/cider drinkers were also found to be at a higher risk of early death.
Alcohol consumption without food was associated with higher risk of early death compared to consumption with food.
Binge drinking with Alcohol consumption over 1–2 times/week was more risky compared to drinking spread out over 3–4 times/week.
But the study doesn’t seem to have looked at teetotallers. The study specifically excluded Abstainers and infrequent alcohol consumers. It is quite possible that avoiding alcohol altogether may be more beneficial but that might not be acceptable to many people !
As usual most of studies relating to food and drink need to be taken with a dose of healthy scepticism.
Guardian. Study finds one small alcoholic drink a day raises risk of irregular heartbeat. Researchers examined heart health and drinking habits of 108,000 people aged 24 to 97 over 14 years The report found people who consumed equivalent to a 330ml beer, a 120ml glass of wine, or 40mls of spirits were 16% more likely than teetotallers to develop atrial fibrillation. Ian Sample Science editor @iansample Wed 13 Jan 2021 06.00 GMT
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you.
The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not necessarily endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with and the authors views are not in way intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
People who have recovered from a COVID-19 infection are expected to have some protection against another repeat infection by the COVID-19 Coronavirus.
The protection comes from patients own antibodies present in their blood.
Previously, there was a concern that this protection might not last very long and that the levels of protective antibody may drop off quickly and this in turn can lead to repeat infections.
This news indirectly might also be good news for COVID-19 vaccines .
Vaccines work by tricking the body into thinking that there is a virus infection and the body then produces the protective antibodies and cells.
Based on this study, one can logically hope that the protection by vaccines can be long lasting as well. Of course, nothing is certain and further vaccine data is awaited to confirm this.
References: (1) Lumley SF, O’Donnell D, Stoesser NE, et al., Oxford University Hospitals Staff Testing Group. Antibody status and incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in health care workers. N Engl J Med2020. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2034545. pmid:33369366
(2) BMJ news: Covid-19: Antibodies protect against reinfection for at least six months, study finds. BMJ 2020; 371 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m4961 (Published 30 December 2020) Cite this as: BMJ 2020;371:m4961
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you.
The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not necessarily endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with and views are not substitute for professional advice.
Now the regulatory authorities have approved a third vaccine. The third vaccine from Moderna along with two other vaccines should help to bring the pandemic to an end.
The Moderna vaccine is a new technology like the Pfizer Vaccine. (based on mRNA technology).
Like the two vaccines, the short term data for Moderna vaccine is very encouraging.
Over long term, one hopes that the protective effect of all the three vaccines is long lasting and that they remain effective against any new variants of coronavirus that might emerge in the coming months.
Overall, there is certainly ‘light at end of the tunnel’ and the world can emerge out of this horrific pandemic in a short period.
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you.
The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not necessarily endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with and the authors views are not in way intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
Possibly yes, if food is not properly handled during preparation, packaging and delivery.
It is likely the risks from properly prepared food and food packaging itself are minimal. There is more risk from interaction with the delivery person.
If you are shielding or a very old person, there is a chance the food delivery person might pass on the infection to you. Stay at safe distance, use gloves and masks, and advice the delivery to be left at door for collection. Wipe Clean outside packaging and transfer contents to your own containers.
But for young adults the risk is likely to be very small.
Most importantly, it has to pointed out that everything in life has some risks. If you are not buying a takeaway, you might have to go shops or supermarkets to buy food for cooking and eating. There is a risk of catching cornovirus from other people while shopping !
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you.
The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not necessarily endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with and the authors views are not in way intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
More good news in fight against COVID-19 pandemic !
Steroids were previously proven to be effective against severe Coronavirus (COVID-19) infection. The steroids are believed to work by dampening the inflammation caused by coronavirus.
The two drugs “tocilizumab and sarilumab” may become available for treatment of severe COVID-19 shortly.
All these additional drug treatments are needed ONLY for severe Coronavirus (COVID-19) infection. Mild COVID-19 infections do NOT need these drug treatments.
BMJ. Dexamethasone in management of covid -19. BMJ 2020; 370 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m2648 (Published 03 July 2020) Cite this as: BMJ 2020;370:m2648
BMJ. Rapid Recommendations. A living WHO guideline on drugs for covid-19. BMJ 2020; 370 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m3379 (Published 04 September 2020). Cite this as: BMJ 2020;370:m3379
BMJ. Covid-19: Arthritis drugs improve survival in intensive care patients, shows study BMJ 2021; 372 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n61 (Published 08 January 2021) Cite this as: BMJ 2021;372:n61
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you.
The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not necessarily endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with and the authors views are not in way intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
It is quite difficult to give a single reason why some people believe COVID-19 is a hoax.
Since the coronavirus pandemic started, there has been so much anxiety, stress and severe disruption to the everyday life.
Most people like certainty with everyday life. Most people do not wake up and think that there is very very tiny chance I might die today (even though that’s true).
Thinking about bad things all the time can make you feel very stressed and exhausted . In a way, it is healthy NOT to focus on all the bad things that can happen everyday.
So some people mentally cope by believing the COVID-19 is fake news. Believing COVID-19 is a hoax helps some people to get on with their lives without being very fearful and worried everyday. It is a coping mechanism.
It is true that only about 1% of people with COVID-19 die due to the disease. But if ten million people get infected in a country that means an extra 100,000 deaths. If the whole population of UK were to get the infection, theoretically it could mean at least an extra 500,000 deaths.
Comparative evaluation of clinical manifestations and risk of death in patients admitted to hospital with covid-19 and seasonal influenza: cohort study. BMJ 2020; 371 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m4677 (Published 15 December 2020) Cite this as: BMJ 2020;371:m4677
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you.
The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not necessarily endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with and the authors views are not in way intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
Losing weight is a New yearresolution for many people. There is no doubt that having a normal weight is healthy overall.
But there is always some degree of uncertainty with any health advice and this BMJ paper certainly gives “food for thought”.
Before you read further , you have understand that there are varyingdegrees of being overweight. BMI ( Body mass index) is the scientific way of looking at body weight issues and it is calculated using height and weight.
Based on BMI, people are usuallyclassified into three groups:
But, intriguingly, just being overweight only without being obese does NOT seem to have MAJOR impact on risk of death in adults.
Paradoxically, the study found that “weight loss from middle to late adulthood was associated with increased risk of death”
It is large well designed study but neverthelessresultsof observational studies need to be interpreted with caution.
The message from this study is “do not gainexcessive weight during early adulthood“. Losing the excessive weight later on might not undo the damage already done to the body.
References:
(1) Weight change across adulthood in relation to all cause and cause specific mortality: prospective cohort study.
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you.
The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not necessarily endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with and views are not substitute for professional advice.
Yes. Smoking can cause body pain and make you miserable.
Smoking is bad for various obvious reasons including the risk of developing of cancer. As smoking can make you miserable with pain, it’s time to make a new year resolution to stop smoking.
A large study done in UK shows that current and ex-smokers have a higher degree of bodily pain.
The study involved 223,537 people who were surveyed between 2009 and 2013 by the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) Lab UK Study.
As it is such a big study, the conclusions do need to be taken seriously.
Definitely another reason for quitting smoking this new year !
Reference:
Associations between smoking status and bodily pain in a cross-sectional survey of UK respondents. Addictive Behaviors 102:106229 · December 2019. DOI: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2019.106229
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you.
The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not necessarily endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with and views are not substitute for professional advice.
Lot of diets promoted by Magazines, Social Media Influencers and Celebrities do not have strong scientific evidence in favour of them.
A scientifically sound trial published by the medical journal JAMA ( Journal of American Medical Association) recently, found the Vegan Diet helped weight loss and promoted Good metabolism.
The trial involving 244 participants found that over 16 weeks, body weight decreased on average by 5.9 kg in those having a Vegan Diet. That’s very impressive!
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and is likely to change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not necessarily endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with and views are not substitute for professional advice.
NO, it is not mandatory. The Government is NOT making it compulsory for everyone to have the vaccination. You have to give voluntary consent for Vaccination.
In fact, there is a huge queue of people waiting to have the vaccine. The NHS capacity is limited at present and the NHS is trying the best to give vaccination to those people who are very keen to have it.
So, if you don’t want to have it, no one will force you to have it.
Once the waiting list for vaccination is cleared in early 2021, there might be some changes . If clinical trials show that vaccinated people do not carry virus and pass it to others, then the Government might change its guidelines.
For instance, health professionals working with sick and vulnerable people might be asked to have the vaccine so that they don’t pass the virus to vulnerable people under their care.
But it’s very unlikely vaccination would be made mandatory for General Public.
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you.
The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and may change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not necessarily endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with and views are not substitute for professional advice.
The guidelines indicate that anticipated benefits of vaccine are greater than unknown risks from the Coronavirus vaccines.
The Vaccine trials deliberately included lot of healthy people. Very few people with cancer, particularly cancer patients on active treatment, were included in the COVID-19 trials. So there is not much direct evidence regarding efficacy and safety of Vaccines in cancer patients. But indirect evidence significantly favours Coronavirus vaccination in cancer patients.
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and is likely to change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not necessarily endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with and views are not substitute for professional advice.
Long term, there are some uncertainties. For instance, there is a possibility of loss of efficacy if vaccine effect is not long lasting. But there is no evidence to suggest at present this would happen. As regards long term side effects, once more data is collected and more patients are followed up after vaccination, there will more mature data on side effects.
The available data suggests that very high groups who are a high risk of death from COVID , have good odds of benefitting from vaccine.
It may be that low risk groups such as people in 20s, who have less chance of dying from COVID, may opt for more long term data before having the vaccination.
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you.
The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and is likely to change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not necessarily endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with and views are not substitute for professional advice.
The new mutant is more dangerous because it is more easily transmissible from person to person. The new variant is now spreading very rapidly in London and South East of England.
Emergence of this new mutant (called variant VUI-202012/01 fall) is a certainly a worrying development in this pandemic.
The mutations has made the new strain 70 per cent more transmissible but scientists do not expect these mutations to reduce the effectiveness of vaccines.
Tests are being carried out to confirm that the existing vaccines would still have a high degree of protective affect.
It is an evolving area and we have to hope that the new variant doesn’t make things worse than they are now !
Covid-19: New coronavirus variant is identified in UK. BMJ 2020; 371 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m4857 (Published 16 December 2020) Cite this as: BMJ 2020;371:m4857
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you.
The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and is likely to change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not necessarily endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with and views are not substitute for professional advice.
If you are going to have an emergency surgery, it may be worthwhile asking your surgeon whether it is their birthday on that day.
If you accept the findings of a recent study at face value, one should weigh up the pros and cons of seeking a different surgeon if one is available or request your surgeon to be extra careful.
An intriguing paper published in BMJ recently suggests so. The study looked at the outcome of Medicare patients who underwent emergency surgery in USA. It is a very large study in which 980876 procedures performed by 47489 surgeons were analyzed. Hence the study findings do need to be taken very seriously.
The study found that patients operated by surgeons on the surgeons’ birthday had a higher risk of death.
The study provocatively suggests, without any direct proof, that surgeons were possibly distracted on their birthdays and in their rush to go to their birthday celebration, they might have done “botched emergency surgeries” by not concentrating properly during surgery and by not providing good post-operative care.
The findings are entirely plausible from behavioural psychology point of view and the study authors seem to have done a thorough statistical analysis of various factors that could have spuriously affected the death rates.
Nevertheless, there remains a distinct possibility that the study findings are spurious. For instance, the scientific community is aware of the fact that if “any data is tortured enough”, the dataset will cough up spurious and unexpected results.
Genuine Surgical errors can sometimes lead to death but much more commonly surgical errors can often lead to increase in rate of surgical complications. It is a bit of stretch for the study to suggest that surgeons all over the country are doing “ technically poor surgeries” everyday if that day happens to be their birthday and they are doing it in such a way to cause deaths without causing any surgical complications.
We don’t know whether the study inadvertently looked at male surgeons working on weekends at rural non-teaching hospitals as these factors could have a bearing on death rates.
Sad life events can adversely affect the work performance of any human being. But happy people are more productive at work. So the conclusion by the study that a happy event, such as a birthday, can adversely affect a surgeon’s performance deserves more scrutiny in a well designed study.
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you.
The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and is likely to change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not necessarily endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with and views are not substitute for professional advice.
Air pollution, particularly breathing toxic fumes whether it is from a cigarette or a diesel lorry is bad for the lungs.
Can pollution affect your heart as well ?
Yes, it can.
A large study involving more than 8 million people across 184 major cities in China studied the effect of pollution on heart diseases.
The study reports that “short term exposure to Pollutants in air is associated with increased risk of hospital admissions for major heart problems”.
May be everyone living or working close to major roads or high traffic areas should invest in a good mask !!!
Reference
Association between ambient fine particulate pollution and hospital admissions for cause specific cardiovascular disease: time series study in 184 major Chinese cities
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is purely for information only. See your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant for you.
It is not too late to stop smoking even after a diagnosis of lung cancer.
A Study presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology meeting earlier this year reports that ” No matter when smokers quit, their chance of survival increases following a lung cancer diagnosis”.
References
Quitting Smoking at Any Point, Even Close to a Lung Cancer Diagnosis, Improves Chances of Survival. Virtual scientific program of the 2020 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meeting.
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you.
The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and is likely to change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not necessarily endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with and views are not substitute for professional advice.
In contrast , plant proteins such as nuts and lentils reduced the risk of developing heart disease.
References: Red meat intake and risk of coronary heart disease among US men: prospective cohort study. BMJ 2020; 371 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m4141 (Published 02 December 2020) Cite this as: BMJ 2020;371:m4141
Disclaimer: Please note- This blog is NOT medical advice. This blog is purely for information only and do check the the sources where cited. Please consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog represent the author’s views held at the time of drafting the blog and is likely to change overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light. The blog is not necessarily endorsed by any organisation the author is associated with and views are not substitute for professional advice.
