A study published in British Medical Journal (BMJ) looked at 7195 permanent residents living in 60 residential aged-care facilities in Australia.
Over a two year period, they provided residents in half the facilities (30 facilities) with additional milk, yoghurt, and cheese. The residents in the remaining 30 facilities who served as controls had their usual menus.
The study found that the additional calcium in diet is beneficial.
Improving calcium and protein intakes reduced the risk of falls and fractures that commonly occur in aged care residents.
References: Effect of dietary sources of calcium and protein on hip fractures and falls in older adults in residential care: cluster randomised controlled trial BMJ 2021; 375 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n2364 (Published 21 October 2021) Cite this as: BMJ 2021;375:n2364
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 sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog are NOT, in way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice. The blog is NOT previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed, in any way, by any organisation that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog likely represents some of the author’s personal views held at the time of drafting the blog and MAY CHANGE overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light.
Many people report that they have seen many of their friends and family and work colleagues have caught the COVID virus during the recent wave.
Why did so many vaccinated people catch the infection?
It’s because of two reasons. (1) the vaccines are not 100% effective and (2) there is substantial reduction in vaccines effectiveness over time.
A large U.K. study looked at vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic disease caused by the omicron and delta variants in England.
Frighteningly, No effect against the omicron variant was noted from 20 weeks after two Astra Zeneca vaccine doses, and the effectiveness of two Pfizer vaccine was only marginally better with 8.8% protection at 25 or more weeks after two Vaccine doses.
Vaccine effectiveness improved to about 65% protection at 2 to 4 weeks after a third Pfizer booster but this was not long lasting and the effectiveness decreased to about before decreasing to 44% at 10 or more weeks after Vaccination.
In summary, Vaccination with two doses of AstraZeneca or Pfizer vaccine provided limited protection against symptomatic disease caused by the omicron variant.
A third booster with Pfizer or Moderna vaccine substantially increased the protection, but even that protection gradually decreased over time.
This study, published in the Prestigious NEJM journal, was Funded by the U.K. Health Security Agency and hence highly reliable.
One has to hope that any new variants do not bypass the vaccine protection and cause much more severe disease than omicron!
Nature magazine. Iketani, S., Liu, L., Guo, Y. et al. Antibody evasion properties of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron sublineages. Nature (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-04594-4 ( substantial loss in neutralizing activity against omicron variant)
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 sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog are NOT, in any way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice. The blog is NOT previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed, in any way, by any organisation that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog likely represents some of the author’s personal views held at the time of drafting the blog and MAY CHANGE overtime, partic
Diclofenac is sometimes overlooked as a pain killer before people go on to stronger morphine-like prescription pain killers.
A study published in BMJ suggests that Diclofenac tablets take by mouth is effective for pain due to arthritis.
Overall, Diclofenac, taken by mouth, seem to be effective and generally safer than Opiod drugs. But caution is needed particularly in elderly people with multiple other medical problems.
Interestingly, Diclofenac Cream applied over the skin and Joints seem to be particularly effective for Knee arthritis pain.
Applying the cream also overcomes the problem of Diclofenac side effects, since very little of Diclofenac reaches other parts of the body.
The authors recommend Diclofenac Skin Cream as first line pharmacological treatment for knee osteoarthritis.
References
BMJ. Effectiveness and safety of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and opioid treatment for knee and hip osteoarthritis: network meta-analysis BMJ 2021; 375 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n2321 (Published 12 October 2021) Cite this as: BMJ 2021;375:n2321
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 sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog are NOT, in way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice. The blog is NOT previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed, in any way, by any organisation that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog likely represents some of the author’s personal views held at the time of drafting the blog and MAY CHANGE overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light.
A UK Biobank study analysed more than 325,000 individuals of European ancestry. The study found that people with low mood are at higher risk of developing heart and blood sugar problems. [ medical terms- coronary artery disease (CAD), type 2 diabetes (T2D) and atrial fibrillation].
Individuals with depression in this study were more likely to be current smokers; reported less vegetable and fresh fruit intake, less exercise and sleep; and had higher body weight (body mass index – BMI).
Even though the study adjusted the statistics for various baseline factors, one cannot help wonder whether there are yet unidentified factors at play.
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 sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog are NOT, in any way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice. The blog is NOT previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed, in any way, by any organisation that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog likely represents some of the author’s personal views held at the time of drafting the blog and MAY CHANGE overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light.
In this study involving more than 33 million people, the long term protection of Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines was assessed.
Vaccine effectiveness against any SARS-CoV-2 infection significantly decreased from 82% to 33% at about 7 months after the second dose.
Vaccine effectiveness against severe covid-19 (admission to hospital or death) was much better though. The effectiveness decreased but to a much lesser extent, from 96% to 80%.
This Italian study confirms that a booster dose of vaccine six months after the primary vaccination cycle is the best way forward.
Reference: Effectiveness of mRNA vaccines and waning of protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe covid-19 during predominant circulation of the delta variant in Italy: retrospective cohort study BMJ 2022; 376 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2021-069052 (Published 10 February 2022) Cite this as: BMJ 2022;376:e069052
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 sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog are NOT, in any way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice. The blog is NOT previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed, in any way, by any organisation that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog likely represents some of the author’s personal views held at the time of drafting the blog and MAY CHANGE overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light
Vitamins are absolutely essential nutrients and vitamin deficiency causes various illness.
But a high dose of vitamin, far too much than needed by the body, is also bad.
Everything in moderation is good. Even an abundance of a good thing is bad.
It is similar to food. Lack of food would cause starvation and even death in the extreme. But too much of food causes obesity and other health problems. Same principle applies to vitamins.
A Cochrane review looked at the ability of vitamins to prevent lung cancer. The review concluded that there is “no beneficial effect of supplements for the prevention of lung cancer and lung cancer mortality in healthy people”
Worryingly, the review also found that the following:
– Vitamin A supplements increase lung cancer incidence and mortality in smokers or persons exposed to asbestos”.
– Vitamin C increases lung cancer incidence in women.
– Vitamin E increases the risk of haemorrhagic strokes.
So if you are having a healthy balanced diet, be careful with vitamin supplements.
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 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 that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog are not, in way whatsoever, 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 sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog are NOT, in way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice. The blog is NOT previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed, in any way, by any organisation that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog likely represents some of the author’s personal views held at the time of drafting the blog and MAY CHANGE overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light
Andrew Gregory Health editor Fri 19 Nov 2021 12.29 GMT
A word of caution applies to all ‘food and disease’ association reports. Almost every week there are newspaper reports of studies exploring associations between “various food/drink” with “various diseases”. Some of them are conflicting and confusing with a positive study followed by a negative study !
So don’t be surprised if there is a completely different news report next week !
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 sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog are NOT, in way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice. The blog is NOT previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed, in any way, by any organisation that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog likely represents some of the author’s personal views held at the time of drafting the blog and MAY CHANGE overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light.
Two new drugs, one from Pfizer and another from Merck promise to provide a new way to fight the virus in vulnerable people.
The oral pills from Pfizer is called Paxlovid. Paxlovid is a combination of two drugs. One drug is a new antiviral drug developed by Pfizer and is called PF-07321332. Another drug is called ritonavir, and ritonavir is already being used to treat HIV/Aids.
The Merck drug is known by the brand name Lagevrio [chemical name is molnupiravir]. This drug is approved by U.K. regulators and is ready to be used in the NHS. The Pfizer drug is yet to be evaluated by authorities for approval.
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 sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog are NOT, in way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice. The blog is NOT previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed, in any way, by any organisation that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog likely represents some of the author’s personal views held at the time of drafting the blog and MAY CHANGE overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light.
“Alpha linolenic acid (ALA) and linoleic acid is a essential polyunsaturated fatty acids commonly extracted from plants”
These fatty acids are found in “soybean, nuts, canola oils, flaxseed, and other plant foods”.
A recent study published in BMJ shows that these dietary fatty acids are good for overall health and reduces risk of death. The study found benefits in terms of reducing strokes and heart problems but paradoxically these fatty acids slightly increased the risk of death from cancer .
A word of caution applies to all ‘food and disease’ association reports. Almost every week there are reports of studies exploring associations between “various food/drink” with “various diseases”. Some of them are conflicting and sometimes confusing with a positive study followed by a negative study. So take all food related studies with a pinch of salt !
Reference: Dietary intake and biomarkers of alpha linolenic acid and risk of all cause, cardiovascular, and cancer mortality: systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of cohort studies BMJ 2021; 375 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n2213 (Published 14 October 2021) Cite this as: BMJ 2021;375:n2213
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 sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog are NOT, in way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice. The blog is NOT previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed, in any way, by any organisation that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog likely represents some of the author’s personal views held at the time of drafting the blog and MAY CHANGE overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light.
A study in the BMJ open journal reports that “Higher coffee consumption was significantly associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer”
The authors further report that “the risk of prostate cancer was reduced by nearly 1% for each extra one cup of coffee per day”
But a word of caution!
Almost every week there are newspaper reports of studies exploring associations between “various food/drink” with “various cancers/diseases” and some of them conflicting and confusing.
So conclusions of most individual studies relating to food and drink need to be taken with a dose of healthy scepticism.
Jacobsen BK , Bjelke E , Kvåle G , et al . Coffee drinking, mortality, and cancer incidence: results from a Norwegian prospective study. J Natl Cancer Inst 1986;76:823–31.pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3457969
Nomura A , Heilbrun LK , Stemmermann GN . Prospective study of coffee consumption and the risk of cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1986;76:587–90.doi:10.1093/jnci/76.4.587 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3457196
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, according to a recent U.K. study which assessed the combination of Flu vaccines and COVID vaccines.
The well designed study found the combination to be safe. The study also found “the side effects of giving both vaccines together were generally well tolerated and acceptable”
There is a worry that Flu might cause severe problems this year compared to last year.
Everyone’s attention has been focused on COVID booster and many old people have not been thinking much about their yearly Flu shots.
It is important that elderly have the flu shots this year.
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 sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog are NOT, in way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice. The blog is NOT previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed, in any way, by any organisation that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog likely represents some of the author’s personal views held at the time of drafting the blog and MAY CHANGE overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light.
A new antiviral pill for COVID is very promising. It may be used widely to control the infection in people suffering from early stages of illness.
But the pill does NOT seem to work very well in people with severe illness.
It is important to note that “Prevention is better than cure”. That’s why using COVID vaccines to prevent the disease in first place is a better option.
COVID Vaccines will continue to play the lead role in controlling the COVID pandemic.
The antiviral pill by the made by the company Merck is likely to become the first approved oral medication effective against coronavirus. But other companies, including Pfizer, are also developing new oral antiviral medications.
Dexamethasone and other steroid pills, which can help COVID illness, do NOT have direct antiviral activity.
Overall, this antiviral pill is another promising step towards complete 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 sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog are NOT, in way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice. The blog is NOT previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed, in any way, by any organisation that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog likely represents some of the author’s personal views held at the time of drafting the blog and MAY CHANGE overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light.
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 sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog are NOT, in way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice. The blog is NOT previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed, in any way, by any organisation that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog likely represents some of the author’s personal views held at the time of drafting the blog and MAY CHANGE overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light.
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 sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog are NOT, in way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice. The blog is NOT previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed, in any way, by any organisation that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog likely represents some of the author’s personal views held at the time of drafting the blog and MAY CHANGE overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light.
Previously, the UK vaccine expert committee (JCVI) decided that would NOT advice COVID vaccines to healthy 12 to 15-year-olds because the “direct individual benefit” to their health was only marginal.
But the Chief Medical officers have decided the other way now. The UK Government is now offering 12-15 year olds COVID vaccination and believes that this is the way out of the pandemic.
This is a very finely balanced decision. Decision seem to have been made on “public health grounds” rather than “individual” benefit.
In England, children aged 12 to 15 will be offered one dose of the Pfizer and BioNTech vaccine ( one dose instead of the usual two doses so as to minimise risks).
Lot of Vaccines offered for many other childhood illnesses have much greater benefit than COVID vaccines.
A nice article in Guardian by a Paediatrician discusses the benefits and risks of COVID vaccines in the 12 to 15 year olds. Boys seem to be more at risk of Heart side effects compared to Girls.
It would be difficult decision for lot of parents with healthy children.
References
Guardian. As a paediatrician, I believe it’s right to vaccinate young people aged 12 to 15 Russell Viner There are no simple solutions to Covid, but children themselves will, on balance, benefit from being vaccinated. Russell Viner is a paediatrician and professor at the UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health Tue 14 Sep 2021 14.31 BST
BMJ. Covid-19: Vaccinating children will help end pandemic, says minister BMJ 2021; 374 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n2254 (Published 14 September 2021) Cite this as: BMJ 2021;374:n2254
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 sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog are NOT, in way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice. The blog is NOT previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed, in any way, by any organisation that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog likely represents some of the author’s personal views held at the time of drafting the blog and MAY CHANGE overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light.
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 sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog are NOT, in way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice. The blog is NOT previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed, in any way, by any organisation that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog likely represents some of the author’s personal views held at the time of drafting the blog and MAY CHANGE overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light.
Can the noisy traffic outside your home increase your risk of getting dementia ?
Possibly yes.
A study from Denmark looked at “exposure to road traffic and railway noise” and “risk of dementia” in later life.
They found “traffic noise” is associated with risk of dementia.
A word of caution though!
This study does NOT conclusively prove that noise caused dementia. In science, association does not prove causation.
It is known that some people with hearing loss are more likely to develop dementia in later life.
It is possible that people with hearing loss were NOT bothered with traffic noise and carried on living in places with traffic noise.
On the other hand, people with good hearing were bothered by traffic noise and moved away from areas with traffic noise to live in a quieter area with less traffic noise.
This natural human behaviour could have affected the results of this study from Denmark
So, it may appear, at first glance, that traffic noise caused dementia. But deeper examination shows that the results of Denmark study are not conclusive and more confirmatory studies are needed.
References
Residential exposure to transportation noise in Denmark and incidence of dementia: national cohort study BMJ 2021; 374 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n1954 (Published 09 September 2021)Cite this as: BMJ 2021;374:n1954
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 sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog are NOT, in way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice. The blog is NOT previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed, in any way, by any organisation that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog likely represents some of the author’s personal views held at the time of drafting the blog and MAY CHANGE overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light.
Ivermectin tablets are used in human beings to treat a disease called onchocerciasis (river blindness) and various infections caused by parasites. It is also sometimes used for “difficult-to-treat’ scabies. Ivermectin is also used as skin cream for certain skin conditions.
Ivermectin tablets are used in veterinary medicine to treat various parasitic infections.
There is genuine scientific interest in evaluating Ivermectin as a COVID treatment. But the evidence is not good enough for widespread use outside the clinical trials.
Unfortunately, there is widespread promotion of ivermectin in certain countries and there is a significant risk that people may be harmed by this promotion. (Side effects: Ivermectin data sheet).
That’s why the FDA and European regulators have advised against the use of Ivermectin outside clinical trials.
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 sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog are NOT, in way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice. The blog is NOT previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed, in any way, by any organisation that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog likely represents some of the author’s personal views held at the time of drafting the blog and MAY CHANGE overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light.
At present, this is a difficult question to give a straightforward answer.
For most of “middle to old age” people, the benefits of COVID vaccines are far greater than potential side effects from vaccines.
On the other hand, in case of 12-15 year olds, the benefits are marginally better than risks and individual circumstances need to be taken into account.
UK’s vaccine advisory body is called JCVI. ( Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation ).
JCVI on Friday declined to recommend universal vaccination of all 12-15 year olds. This is because the chances of children becoming seriously ill from COVID-19 is very small. This needs to be balanced against a tiny risk of myocarditis, or inflammation of the heart in young people due to the vaccines. It is a matter of weighing up disease versus vaccine.
But, this does not mean COVID vaccines are not being given to 12-15 year olds.
USA, France, Italy, Israel and Ireland are offering vaccines to this group.
In U.K., vulnerable children with heart and lung problems, blood disorders, diabetes and various other diseases are eligible for the COVID vaccine. Children living with extremely vulnerable adults are also eligible.
BMJ news. Covid-19: JCVI opts not to recommend universal vaccination of 12-15 year olds BMJ 2021; 374 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n2180 (Published 03 September 2021) Cite this as: BMJ 2021;374:n2180
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 sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog are NOT, in way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice. The blog is NOT previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed, in any way, by any organisation that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog likely represents some of the author’s personal views held at the time of drafting the blog and MAY CHANGE overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light.
But until recently there has been hardly any direct clinical studies comparing different vaccines.
A recent study conducted in Belgium compared the Moderna and Pfizer COVID vaccines.
The study looked at antibody responses following vaccination in Health care workers. Antibody levels were measured prior to vaccination as well as 6 to 10 weeks after the second dose.
Higher antibody levels were observed in people vaccinated with Moderna vaccine compared with those vaccinated with Pfizer vaccine.
Future research is needed to see how these differences affect the general population.
Both Moderna and Pfizer vaccines are based on same technology (mRNA based vaccines).
If significant differences exist between between vaccines of same technology, then it is likely that differences would exist between vaccines of different technology (eg Pfizer vs Astra Zeneca).
The public health authorities would need to decide whether booster vaccinations should be done with a different 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 sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog are NOT, in way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice. The blog is NOT previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed, in any way, by any organisation that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog likely represents some of the author’s personal views held at the time of drafting the blog and MAY CHANGE overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light.
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 sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog are NOT, in way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice. The blog is NOT previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed, in any way, by any organisation that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog likely represents some of the author’s personal views held at the time of drafting the blog and MAY CHANGE overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light.
Compared to other adults, teachers were NOT found to be at increased risk of severe COVID or at increased risk of hospital admission with COVID-19
References
BMJ Research. Risk of hospital admission with covid-19 among teachers compared with healthcare workers and other adults of working age in Scotland, March 2020 to July 2021: population based case-control study BMJ 2021; 374 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n2060 (Published 02 September 2021) Cite this as: BMJ 2021;374:n2060
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 sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog are NOT, in way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice. The blog is NOT previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed, in any way, by any organisation that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog likely represents some of the author’s personal views held at the time of drafting the blog and MAY CHANGE overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light.
Two contrasting news about COVID vaccine and disease recently.
First, a New Zealand woman dies after COVID vaccine. Death was attributed to heart inflammation caused by the vaccine.
Second, a 40 year vaccine-sceptic dies of COVID disease and sadly, leaves behind a pregnant wife.
How to interpret this information?
Remember everyday life is full of risks. Almost nothing is risk free. People balance risks and benefits everyday for most things in life. The same approach should be used for COVID vaccines.
It is understandable that some people are worried about side effects of vaccines. These concerns are REAL There is still lot unknown about long term efficacy and side effects of COVID vaccines.
If you are worried about vaccines and yet to have the vaccine, do note that the available evidence indicates that it is in your interests to have the vaccine.
If you are a vaccine sceptic, do NOT believe everything that is said on social media. Sometimes people put wrong information on social media. Sometimes people post information that is out of context.
What to do?
Ignore information that is not directly relevant to COVID vaccines.
Do NOT mix politics with Vaccines.
Beware that social media can make you paranoid about COVID vaccines.
Read official information. Available scientific evidence now indicates that the benefits of COVID-19 vaccine faroutweighs the risks for vast majority of adults.
In particular, if you are above 50 years, do consider having the vaccine as a matter of urgency without further delay.
This is because in England, the Schools and Universities are going to open this month. Data from Scotland shows that COVID cases will spike after schools and Universities open.
Be selfish and do what is right for you and your family. Do not worry about “loss of face” on social media because you have changed your mind about vaccines.
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 sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog are NOT, in way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice. The blog is NOT previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed, in any way, by any organisation that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog likely represents some of the author’s personal views held at the time of drafting the blog and MAY CHANGE overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light.
People who are using their brain regularly with stimulating jobs are better off than people who are doing mind numbing jobs when it comes to dementia later in life.
So if your are not using your brain that much in your job, perhaps you need a “brain Gym” outside your work !
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 sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog are NOT, in way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice. The blog is NOT previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed, in any way, by any organisation that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog likely represents some of the author’s personal views held at the time of drafting the blog and MAY CHANGE overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light.
A recent British study reports that nearly a third of middle-aged adults have at least two Health issues.
This is very a depressing statistic.
Lot of people seem to suffering from high blood pressure, mental ill-health and back problems.
It’s important that people take time to look after themselves even if work and life in general is stressful.
It is also important to note that COVID affects people with underlying health issues much more badly.
On the other hand, middle aged people who have health issues should not despair. They are not an exception and think of themselves as very unlucky.
They can see that lots of other people are also suffering. They should get on with their lives and make it better.
This may sound a bit odd at first glance. But some people do find it reassuring to know that lots of other people are also suffering with same health issues.
For example, Some of prostate cancers patients are relieved when they learn that hundreds of thousands of people are out there, living for many years, after a cancer diagnosis. They are not alone.
Cancer Research U.K. website says this: “An estimated 280,500 men who had been diagnosed with prostate cancer between 1991 and 2010 were alive in the UK at the end of 2010”
BMJ. Features of 20 133 UK patients in hospital with covid-19 using the ISARIC WHO Clinical Characterisation Protocol: prospective observational cohort study BMJ 2020; 369 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m1985 (Published 22 May 2020) Cite this as: BMJ 2020;369:m1985
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 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 personal 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 that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog are NOT, in way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
Normally Vaccines that are highly effective (for various other diseases) prevent most vaccinated people from getting the infection completely.
But that does not seem to be the case with COVID vaccines.
The COVID vaccines are highly successful in preventing severe COVID, hospitalisations and deaths. But they seem to be a bit less effective in preventing people from catching mild COVID infections.
So if a vaccinated person gets a mild COVID infection, can they pass it onto others?
This is an important fact for people with vulnerable family members and friends.
If you have mild symptoms, do get tested and be extremely careful when you are with your vulnerable family members ( elderly parents, grandparents etc).
You can pass COVID to them even if you do not have much symptoms.
As vaccines lose some effectiveness over a period of time, do NOT assume that double vaccination would protect your vulnerable family members.
A recent Public Health England report indicates that both vaccinated and unvaccinated people with COVID infection are equally infectious and capable of spreading to others.
A similar report was also published from USA recently.
The end is not in sight yet. Be careful when you are with vulnerable family members !
USA. BMJ. Covid-19: Delta infections threaten herd immunity vaccine strategyBMJ 2021; 374 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n1933 (Published 02 August 2021)Cite this as: BMJ 2021;374:n1933
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 sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog are NOT, in way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice. The blog is NOT previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed, in any way, by any organisation that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog likely represents some of the author’s personal views held at the time of drafting the blog and MAY CHANGE overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light.
According to a recent large study which analysed ‘habitual coffee consumption in 398,646 UK Biobank participants aged 37–73 years’.
The study found that “High coffee consumption was associated with smaller total brain volumes and increased odds of dementia”.
In particular, consumption of >6 cups/day was associated with 53% higher odds of dementia compared to consumption of 1–2 cups/day.
A word of caution applies to all ‘food and disease’ association reports. Almost every week there are newspaper reports of studies exploring associations between “various food/drink” with “various diseases”. Some of them are conflicting and confusing with a positive study followed by a negative study !
This study report is no different in that respect.
A previous review published in 2017 concluded that ‘Drinking Coffee was often associated with Health benefits than harm for a range of health outcomes’.
The 2017 review in particular concluded that ‘Coffee consumption reduced risk of Alzheimer’s disease’.
So how to make sense of these two conflicting study reports ?
A 2021 negative report versus a 2017 positive report.
One can look for quality of studies, pedigree of authors and further confirmatory studies .
But there are no easy answers.
Everything in moderation is perhaps the most sensible thing when it comes to Food and Drink.
BMJ Minerva. Calcification in arteries . . . and other stories BMJ 2021; 374 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n1901 (Published 05 August 2021) Cite this as: BMJ 2021;374:n1901
BMJ. Coffee consumption and health: umbrella review of meta-analyses of multiple health outcomes BMJ 2017; 359 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j5024 (Published 22 November 2017) Cite this as: BMJ 2017;359:j5024
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 sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog are NOT, in way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice. The blog is NOT previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed, in any way, by any organisation that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog likely represents some of the author’s personal views held at the time of drafting the blog and MAY CHANGE overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light.
Lot of Vaccinated people do get infected and the only good news is that “the vaccines offer strong protection against severe disease”
China fights to contain a new outbreak in Wuhan now. There is a possibility of further outbreaks elsewhere as well. That can create favourable conditions for new variants to emerge .
So don’t be surprised if new variants emerge in winter and COVID is still the headline news early next year !
BMJ News Covid-19: What new variants are emerging and how are they being investigated? BMJ 2021; 372 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n158 (Published 18 January 2021) Cite this as: BMJ 2021;372:n158
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 sources where cited. Please DO consult your own doctor to discuss concerns and options relevant to you. The views expressed in this blog are NOT, in way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice. The blog is NOT previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed, in any way, by any organisation that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog likely represents some of the author’s personal views held at the time of drafting the blog and MAY CHANGE overtime, particularly when new evidence comes to light.
The results of this study certainly indicates that booster vaccines are needed for the winter months to prevent another wave of deaths.
References
BMJ News. Covid-19: Pfizer vaccine’s efficacy declined from 96% to 84% four months after second dose, company reports BMJ 2021; 374 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n1920 (Published 30 July 2021)Cite this as: BMJ 2021;374:n1920
BMJ News. Covid-19: Millions could be offered booster vaccinations from September BMJ 2021; 374 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n1686 (Published 02 July 2021) Cite this as: BMJ 2021;374:n1686
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 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 personal 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 that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog are NOT, in way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
How long does covid-19 immunity last? BMJ 2021; 373 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n1605 (Published 30 June 2021) Cite this as: BMJ 2021;373:n1605
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 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 personal 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 that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog are NOT, in way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
As the world battles the COVID-19 pandemic , there is another pandemic that been going on for decades without any end in sight.
The other pandemic is obesity !
Obesity has caused far more deaths than the COVID-19 pandemic.
The Vaccines promise to end the COVID-19 pandemic.
Wouldn’t it be wonderful if a vaccine can sort the obesity pandemic ? It does not need to be rhetorical question or wishful thinking.
An article in Science magazine reports an association between obesity and a type of body immune cell called macrophages. This raises the possibility of using immunotherapy for obesity.
There is also another tantalising possibility. Behaviours, emotions and eating wrong type of food are often blamed for obesity. What if the entire scientific thinking about obesity is wrong?
In the past, another widespread condition used to be blamed on wrong food and stress. Stomach ulcers used to be very common and very distressing. Modern stressful life, emotions and wrong type of food were universally blamed for stomach ulcers. Then an Australian team proved stomach ulcers were due to an infection. Now stomach ulcers are routinely treated by antibiotics!
Obesity is common among the disadvantaged people in society. All types of infections are common in disadvantaged people. So it is not beyond the realms of plausiblity to hypothesise (suggest) that obesity could be caused by an infectious agent that affects food intake in some way, by possibly affecting sense of taste or smell of smell or feeling of fullness after eating (satiety).
If an infectious agent (e.g bacteria, virus or prion) is indeed found to be responsible for development of obesity, then the vaccines would provide a very easy way to prevent obesity.
Please note: The science magazine article on immunotherapy is based on excellent, high quality scientific work. But the possibility of an infection being responsible for obesity is merely a scientific hypothesis or scientific suggestion. It is based on a personal hunch. It is NOT based on any direct high quality scientific data at this stage !
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 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 personal 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 that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog are NOT, in way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
BMJ. News Analysis. Covid-19: Should we be worried about reports of myocarditis and pericarditis after mRNA vaccines? BMJ 2021; 373 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n1635 (Published 24 June 2021) Cite this as: BMJ 2021;373:n1635
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 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 personal 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 that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog are NOT, in way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
Cancer cells can float in a person’s blood. But finding them, in the past, used to be like “looking for a needle in a haystack”.
But new smart technology promises to detect these cancer cells easily and much early before a person develops symptoms. Detection of cancer cells at an early stage may be helpful for some patients.
A Californian company called Grail has developed a blood test which seems to have a high degree of accuracy for detection of multiple cancers.
Times newspaper reports that “The NHS will begin a pilot scheme of the test with 140,000 people this year. If that is successful it will be used for millions of patients by 2025”
A word of caution though.
Just because something could be diagnosed early does not always mean that it is a good thing.
The most important thing is whether the early diagnosis can lead to better cure rates and a better quality of life.
If a test detects a cancer early but has no meaningful effect on quantity or quality of life, then it is not a good thing.
For example. Up to 80% of men have prostate cancer which can now be detected by a simple blood test called PSA. There is a good reason why we are NOT using the simple PSA test in every 80 year old.
Most 80 year old men die WITH prostate cancer rather than DUE to prostate cancer.
So why diagnose a cancer that is not causing symptoms if it is not going to make person live longer !
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 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 that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog are not, in way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
It is unlikely to become mandatory in most western countries. It almost certainly would not become mandatory in USA, where Vaccination seems to become tangled with highly divisive politics.
But it is not an impossible scenario in European countries.
Also, it does not have to a direct government policy.
If the governments change the law to allow businesses to demand vaccination proof, then indirectly vaccination becomes mandatory for most people.
Private Businesses and Travel industry may decide to make vaccination mandatory for their employees and customers so as to avoid further disruption to their business.
In countries, such as Israel and U.K., where there is already high uptake of vaccination, a change in Law may not be needed at present.
But if the present surge in infections continue, and variants emerge, Governments may change their approach.
References
BMJ. Covid-19: Turkmenistan becomes first country to make vaccination mandatory for all adults BMJ 2021; 374 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n1766 (Published 12 July 2021) Cite this as: BMJ 2021;374:n1766
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 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 personal 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 that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog are NOT, in way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
Yes, it is a possibility that a third booster dose of COVID vaccine would be offered later this year.
Vaccination has been tremendously successful so far. But it is too early to declare victory against the virus.
Data from Israel indicates that the current Pfizer vaccine, although still highly active, offers less protection against delta variant.
In June, the vaccine was found to be just 64 percent effective in preventing coronavirus infection whereas during May, when the delta strain was less prevalent, the vaccine was 94.3% effective.
So if more variants emerge, then vaccine boosters may be particularly needed for the vulnerable people.
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 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 that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog are not, in way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
U.K. is on course to lift almost all COVID restrictions in mid July 2021.
A U.K. minister has said that “wearing masks” would become a personal choice.
Just because there is a choice, it does not mean it is always good for you.
Government decisions are often made not only with scientific facts but also with economic and political considerations. Compulsory masks may not be liked by a section of society and Government has to take that into account in a democratic society.
Personally electing to wear masks in crowded public places could be sensible for the following reasons.
– There is some debate about the extent of protection a person gets wearing masks following the Danish mask study. But no robust scientific study has shown significant harm from wearing masks. So it is better to be safe and wear masks even if the extent of protection is debatable.
– Infections are rising now and luckily, vaccines seem to have protected most people from getting severe COVID. But Vaccines are not 100% effective. Moreover, when infection rates go up further and society opens up more, there is a risk of variants emerging that may be partially vaccine resistant. So wearing masks may provide some protection.
– Not all people get poorly when they get COVID. But these people with COVID can still pass infection to other vulnerable family members and people who don’t have the protection from vaccines. So wearing a mask can stop people with mild COVID from spreading the infection to others.
– Some people do not want to wear masks because they think they are not at risk of death or hospitalisation. Remember, COVID related problems affect different people in different ways. Lot of people do recover from COVID without major problems. But some people do develop long-term symptoms from COVID. So it is better to wear masks for COVID protection.
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 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 that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog are not, in way whatsoever, 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 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 that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog are not, in way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
Yes, good masks may help to reduce infections that are spread by airborne particles.
But not all masks are the same.
Cloth masks were promoted during 2020 when the proper surgical masks were in short supply . The effectiveness of cloth masks are not well studied and they are of varying quality depending who made them and how well they were made.
Properly manufactured surgical masks are better than home made cloth masks. But how much protection they can offer is a matter of scientific debate. Surgical masks have been found to give some protection against other respiratory viruses in past. But a recent Danish study found no significant benefit against COVID among the general public.
The high quality FFP3 masks which filter most of the inhaled air is superior to normal surgical masks. A recent study from Cambridge found that Heath care workers who used FFP3 masks had better protection from COVID compared to normal surgical masks in the Hospital.
Overall, clean, well manufactured masks are likely to of some benefit to the public rather than wearing no masks at all. In the hospital setting, FFP3 masks seem to provide superior protection to Health care staff working with COVID patients.
And most importantly people have to understand that masks are not to be used alone. Masks got to be used along with protective measures such as social distancing and Hand-washing.
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 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 that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog are not, in way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
Yes, we should be cautious after the freedom day on July 19th and this is for the following reasons.
1. Vaccines are highly effective but they are NOT 100% effective.
2. Two doses are needed for full protection. Even though, more than two third of adults have had atleast one vaccine, only about half the U.K. population had double vaccination so far.
3. Vaccine Protection against New COVID variants may NOT be as good as it is now. For instance , vaccines are slightly less effective against the delta variant particularly after first dose.
4. Vaccine protection may decrease over time and Vaccines may not give the same level of protection as months pass by.
4. Being cautious now, may helps us to avoid lockdowns during Autumn and would help to save Christmas !
Public Health England. Press release Vaccines highly effective against hospitalisation from Delta variant New analysis by PHE shows for the first time that 2 doses of COVID-19 vaccines are highly effective against hospitalisation from the Delta (B.1.617.2) variant. Published 14 June 2021
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 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 that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog are not, in way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
Yes, people have died after having COVID-19 vaccines.
Recently, a BBC Radio Newcastle presenter, Lisa Shaw was reported to have died after the Astra Zeneca COVID vaccine. Her family is blaming the COVID vaccine for causing clots and ultimately her death.
In India, a Popular Tamil actor and comedian died within 48 hours of receiving a COVID vaccine. His vaccination was broadcast live on TV to encourage public uptake of vaccination but his unfortunate death after vaccination probably ended up causing vaccine hesitancy in some people.
A news article in BMJ reports that the “Pfizer-covid-19 vaccine is “likely” to have been responsible for at least 10 deaths of frail elderly people in nursing homes in Norway”.
But, the most important thing to remember is that deaths are rare after COVID-19 vaccines.
Yes, there are true distressing accounts of vaccine side effects. But what you do not hear is the benefit most people have from vaccines.
Millions of people received vaccines so far with vast majority having no major side effects.
Consider this for context. Think about plane accidents. Millions of people travel by plane without any problems. If People fly safely and reach their destination, it is not headline news. People do not go around saying that they have traveled safely by plane and that they are alive !
But a aeroplane accident which happens rarely is front page news. It would be all over the 24 hour TV news channels across the world. Plane accidents are utterly and unimaginably devastating for those individuals and families involved. But the rare plane accidents do not make most other people avoid flying. The accidents do not mean that no one should travel by plane. The travel by planes has far more benefits than risks for majority of population.
Same with COVID vaccines. Serous Side effects are headline news even if they are very uncommon and rare. The available data indicate benefits are much greater than risks.
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 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 that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog are not, in way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
Worries about vaccines are nothing new. Anti_vaccination groups were formed in 1860s when small pox vaccination was made compulsory. Even when small pox was causing untold devastation, some people were opposed to it.
The Vaccine hesitancy of 19th century is somewhat excusable. Some of the worries were real, and not much was known about the safety of small pox vaccine at that time. Lot of people were ill-informed and did not have access to good sources of information. They didn’t know the immense potential of the vaccination to eliminate distressing diseases.
Vaccines have now successfully eradicated small pox. Many other devastating infectious diseases such as polio have been controlled in many countries across the globe due to the vaccines.
Some of the vaccine hesitancy in west is because western people are not fully aware of the devastating power of infectious diseases (at least until COVID-19 came to the world in 2020).
Vaccine hesitancy is also sustained by “confirmation bias” . Confirmation bias is the tendency of human beings to seek information that confirms what they believe in. If you distrust vaccines, you go looking for information that confirms you beliefs and you disregard information that proves vaccines are hugely beneficial.
Some people wish for a 100% safe vaccine. But there is no such thing as completely risk free vaccine. It is true Vaccines can cause serious side effects. It is true that Vaccines can cause long term side effects. It is true that Vaccines can rarely cause life threatening side effects and even deaths.
It is normal to worry about side effects of vaccines. But the potential for side effects should not be the reason to decline vaccination.
One has to look at benefits as well as risks. Some people focus on everything bad that can happen as a result of vaccines.
COVID-19 vaccines had an unusually short development period. This is because of the pandemic. The available evidence indicate that the benefits of the vaccines are far greater than risks. It is true that there is no long term safety data. But in the middle of a pandemic, which has caused untold misery to millions, waiting for perfect long term data is not an option.
If you are sceptical about vaccines, please do focus on benefits as well as risks. Do not focus on risks only.
References
BMJ. Practice Pointer. Covid-19 vaccination hesitancy. BMJ 2021; 373 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n1138 (Published 20 May 2021) Cite this as: BMJ 2021;373:n1138
BMJ. News. Covid-19: Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine is “likely” responsible for deaths of some elderly patients, Norwegian review finds. BMJ 2021; 373 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n1372 (Published 27 May 2021) Cite this as: BMJ 2021;373:n1372
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 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 that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog are not, in way whatsoever, 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 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 that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog are not, in way whatsoever, intended to be a substitute for professional advice.
But now comes the Variant from India. (the scientific name is B1.617.2 variant of concern).
The Indian variant appears to be more transmissible but no evidence yet that the Indian variant is inherently more deadly than the Kent variant.
Naturally, we are in a better place now than last year because of the vaccination.
But there is some evidence that spontaneous changes (mutations) in the B.1.617.2 variant virus may make it partially resistant to antibodies produced by vaccines.
So how effective are the current vaccines against this Variant from India?
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 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 that the author is associated with. The views expressed in this blog are not, in way whatsoever, 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.
Advanced Cervical cancer which has come back after surgery or radiotherpy is usually treated with chemotherapy.
There is a new immunotherapy treatment option for all advanced cervical cancer patients now .
At the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO 2021) virtual conference, an international team of investigators, presented trial data regarding this new immunotherapy drug called cemiplimab.
One group of patients in the trial received the immunotherapy drug cemiplimab every 3 wks and another group of patients received intravenous chemo (pemetrexed, vinorelbine, gemcitabine, irinotecan or topotecan).
Cemiplimab significantly improved survival of patients and was better than chemotherapy.
This new immunotherapy drug cemiplimab is already being used for skin cancers and vulval skin cancers. Very soon, it would be used in cervical cancer patients.
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.
A Study published in British Medical Journal found that “A longer length of breastfeeding was associated with a reduced risk of cardiovascular disease”
The study also found that women who had certain pregnancy related complications were also at increased risk of heart disease in later life.
In addition, the study also found that taking contraceptive pills (combined pills) in younger age led to increased risk of heart disease and stroke in later life.
Awareness of these risks would help to take steps to reduce the risk from them.
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.
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.
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.
Dr S Sundar 