Tag Archives: COVID-19

Could there be hidden immune weakness found in 14% of gravely ill COVID-19 patients?

Hidden resistant weakness found in 14% of gravely sick COVID-19 patients through the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic, boffins baffled by the disease’s ferocity have wondered or perhaps a body’s vanguard virus fighter; a molecular messenger called kind I interferon, is missing doing his thing in some severe cases. Two papers were posted online in Science this week to make sure suspicion. They reveal that in a significant minority of patients with serious COVID-19, the interferon response has been crippled by genetic flaws or rogue antibodies that encounter interferon itself.


A health care worker in protective gear collects a swab sample to be tested for the coronavirus disease.

There has been none infectious illness explained at this level by a factor within the body. Moreover, it is not an isolated cohort of Europeans. Patients are from all over the world, all ethnicities.” Another finding that 94% of the patients with interferon-attacking antibodies were male also helps explain why men face a higher risk of severe disease.


The paired studies have immediate practical implications. Long used to treat other diseases, might assist some at-risk patients, like other therapies targeted at removing the damaging antibodies. A typical antibody test could be quickly developed and return responses in hours. Those discovered to be at high risk of developing severe COVID- 19 could take precautions to prevent exposure or be prioritized for vaccination.


The findings also raise a red flag for plasma contributions from recovered patients. As it may be rich in antibodies to the virus, “convalescent plasma” is currently provided to some patients to fight the infection. However, some contributions could harbor interferon-neutralizing antibodies.

The kind I interferons are manufactured by every cell in the body and be vital leaders of the antiviral battle early in the illness. They launch an immediate, intense local response each time a virus invades a cell, triggering infected cells to create proteins that attack the virus. They also summon immune cells towards the site and alert uninfected neighboring cells to prepare their defenses.


In one study, an infectious illness geneticist and his team analyzed blood examples from 987 gravely ill patients from across the world. In 10.2% of the patients, the scientists identified antibodies that attacked and neutralized the clients’ type I interferon. A subgroup of affected clients had low or undetectable blood levels of this interferon. Lab studies confirmed the antibodies knocked on the interferon out of action, and cells exposed to the patients’ plasma did not fight invasion by the brand new coronavirus. At the least 10per cent of critical COVID-19 is an autoimmune assault.


None of the 663 individuals in a control group with mild or asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 illness had those harmful antibodies. The antibodies were also scarce in the general population, showing up in only 0.33percent greater than 1200 healthier individuals tested. “What this means is that at minimum 10% of critical COVID-19 can be an autoimmune assault from the immune system itself.


The preponderance of male patients ended up being a shock because ladies have more incredible prices of an autoimmune condition. “Women with two X chromosomes are protected, and guys, with one, are perhaps not.” Supporting that suspicion, one girl with a rare condition that silences one X chromosome was among the ill patients with autoantibodies.


If these striking results hold up, they might also assist explain the boosted vulnerability of older many people to severe COVID-19: Half the gravely sick clients with autoantibodies were older than 65.


The second paper found genetic flaws in patients that led towards the same outcome: a grossly inadequate interferon response to SARS-CoV-2 illness. The team sequenced DNA from 659 critically ill COVID-19 patients and 534 controls with a mild or asymptomatic condition. They examined 13 genes, chosen because flaws in them impair the body’s manufacturing or use of type I interferon; mutations in the genes underlie life-threatening influenza or other viral illnesses. The scientists unearthed that 3.5% of critically ill patients harbored uncommon mutations in eight of these genes. In patients for whom blood samples were available, interferon amounts were vanishingly small. No members of the control group carried any of the mutations. “This could be the first paper to pin down indisputably disease-causing mutations underlying serious COVID-19.


Many other damaging mutations, interferon related and not, may influence the development of severe COVID-19. The patients who made antibodies versus interferon or had the mutations had a brief history of life-threatening viral illnesses requiring hospitalization. “This recommends that we have been more reliant on type I interferons to defend ourselves against SARS-CoV-2 versus other viral infections.“That makes it crucial to try therapies aimed at boosting type I interferon responses.” Dozens of randomized clinical trials are now deploying interferons against SARS-CoV-2. One reported promising findings in a small group of hospitalized COVID-19 patients. However, artificial interferons will not help patients who harbor mutations that prevent interferons from working, or those with antibodies that attack them.


Some scientists caution that the interferon-neutralizing antibodies could be an effect instead compared to a cause of severe COVID-19. “It is possible that they develop during the disease. There is a strong case for causality. Preexisting blood samples from the handful of patients revealed they had the antibodies in their blood before contracting SARS-CoV-2. He contends that, in reaction to illness, it is unlikely that the body could quickly generate high levels of anti-interferon antibodies.


Reference
Hidden immune weakness found in 14% of gravely ill COVID …. https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/09/hidden-immune-weakness-found-14-gravely-ill-covid-19-patients

Do you believe that three scientists give their finest suggestions about how to protect oneself from COVID-19?

Within the last several months, there was a debate on the method SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, travels from a contaminated person to others. While formal guidance has often been not clear, some aerosol boffins and public health experts have maintained that the spread of this virus in aerosols traveling through the air at distances both less than and higher than 6 feet is playing a far more significant role than appreciated.


In July 239, scientists from 32 countries urged the World Health Organization (WHO) to acknowledge the workable part of airborne transmission into the spread of SARS-CoV-2.


Three times later on, who did, therefore, stating that under specific conditions, “short-range aerosol transmission, especially in specific indoor places, such as crowded and inadequately ventilated spaces over a prolonged period with contaminated persons, cannot be ruled out.”

Many scientists rejoiced on social media as soon as the CDC appeared to agree, acknowledging for the initial time in a September 18 site enhance that aerosols perform a meaningful role in the spread associated with the virus. The change stated that COVID-19 could spread “through respiratory droplets or tiny particles, such as those in aerosols, produced when an infected person coughs, sneezes, sings, talks or breathes. These particles can be inhaled into the nose, lips, airways, and lung area and cause infection. That is regarded as the primary way the virus spreads.”


However, controversy arose once more whenever, three times later, the CDC took down that guidance, saying a mistake had posted it without proper review.


The CDC website does not acknowledge that aerosols typically spread SARS-CoV-2 beyond 6 feet, instead of saying: “COVID-19 spreads mainly among individuals who have been in close contact (within about 6 feet) for a prolonged period. Spread occurs when an infected individual coughs, sneezes, or talks, and droplets from their mouth or nose are launched into the air and land in the mouths or noses of people nearby. The droplets can also be inhaled into the lungs.”

  • Trending News
  • The coronavirus death toll surpasses 1 million worldwide
  • The child’s death led to the detection of brain-eating amoeba in the water
  • Brain-eating amoeba found in Texas city’s water supply

The site claims that respiratory droplets can land on various surfaces, and individuals can become infected from touching those surfaces then pressing their eyes, nose, or mouth. It states, “Current information does not support the long-range aerosol transmission of SARS-CoV-2, such as seen with measles or tuberculosis. Short-range inhalation of aerosols is a possibility for COVID-19, as with many respiratory pathogens. However, this cannot easily be recognized from ‘droplet’ transmission based on epidemiologic patterns. Short-range transmission is a possibility, particularly in crowded medical wards and inadequately ventilated spaces.”


Confusion has surrounded the use of terms like “aerosols” and “droplets” because they have not been consistently defined. Moreover, “airborne transmission may readily spread your message “airborne” takes in special meaning for infectious condition experts and public health officials because of whether.” If SARS-CoV-2 is readily spread by airborne transmission, more rigorous infection control measures would need to be adopted, as is done with airborne diseases such as measles and tuberculosis. However, the airborne spread is playing a role with SARS-CoV-2, the role does not seem to be almost as crucial as airborne infections like measles and tuberculosis.


All this may sound like the wonky scientific discussion is deep in the weeds — and it is also — but it is significant implications as people try to figure out just how to stay safe during the pandemic. Some pieces of advice are intuitively obvious: wear a mask, wash on hands, avoid crowds, keeps one’s distance from others. Outside is safer than indoors. However, how about that “6-foot rule for maintaining social distance? If a virus can travel indoors for distances greater than 6 feet, isn’t it logical to wear a mask indoors whenever you are with people who are not part of your “pod” or “bubble?” Understanding the basic science behind how SARS-CoV-2 travels through the air should help us techniques for remaining safe. Unfortunately, there are many open questions. For example, if aerosols made by a contaminated person can float across an area, and even though the aerosols contain some viable virus, how can we all know how significant a role that mode of transmission is playing in the pandemic? Acknowledging that the science is still not set in stone, they will have generously agreed to give us their most useful suggestions about how to think about protecting ourselves, based on their current comprehension of the way SARS-CoV-2 can spread.

Clearing the atmosphere
Compared to very early thinking about the importance of transmission by contact with large respiratory droplets, it turns out that a significant way people become infected is by inhaling the virus. This is most typical of an individual who stands within 6 feet of an individual who has COVID-19 (with or without symptoms), but it can also happen from more than 6 feet away.


Viruses in small, airborne particles called aerosols can infect individuals at both close and extensive range. We could regard aerosols as cigarette smoke. As they are most concentrated close to anyone who has the disease, they could travel farther than 6 feet, linger, build up in the air, and remain infectious for hours. As a result, to lessen the chance of inhaling this virus, it is crucial to take all of this following steps:
Indoors:
Training physical distancing — the farther, the more remarkable.
Wear a nose and mouth mask whenever you are with others, even if you can keep physically distancing. Face masks lessen the amount of virus coming from those with the disease and reduce the possibility of you inhaling the virus.
Improve ventilation by opening windows. Learn how to clean the air effortlessly with methods such as filtration.

Out-of-doors:
Wear a nose and mouth mask if you cannot see distance physically by at the very least 6 feet or, preferably, more.
Go to group activities outside.

Whether you are indoors or in the open air, remember that your risk increases using the duration of other’s experience.
With the question of transmission, it ‘is not just the public that has been confused. There is also confusion among researchers, doctors, and public health officials because they have often used the words “droplets” and “aerosols” differently. To handle the confusion, participants in an

August workshop on the airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2 at the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine unanimously agreed on these definitions for respiratory droplets and aerosols:

Droplets are more extensive than 100 microns and fall to the ground within 6 feet, traveling like tiny cannonballs.
Aerosols are smaller than 100 microns, are highly concentrated close to an individual, can travel farther than six legs, and may linger and build up into the air, especially in rooms with poor ventilation.

All breathing activities, including breathing, talking, and performing, produce far more aerosols than droplets. An individual is far more likely to inhale aerosols than to be sprayed with a droplet at a short-range. The precise percentage of transmission by droplets versus aerosols is still to be determined. However, we understand epidemiologic, and other data, especially super-spreading occasions, that infection happens through aerosols’ inhalation.

Reference
Three scientists give their best advice on how to protect …. https://health4everyday.com/2020/09/three-scientists-give-their-best-advice-on-how-to-protect-yourself-from-covid-19-cbs-news/

Do you believe that Fauci said: ‘We’re Nowhere Near Herd Immunity’ In The U.S.?

In a now-viral change at a U.S. Senate committee hearing Wednesday, Paul interrupted Fauci wanting to state New York City possessed a low Covid-19 illness rate as it has achieved herd resistance.Dr. Anthony Fauci elaborated on his reviews to Sen. Rand Paul Wednesday night, saying the U.S. features a “long way to go” to achieve herd resistance against Covid-19.

Photo by Anna Shvets on Pexels.com

But Fauci said Wednesday evening in a conversation using the star Alan Alda at a live-streamed Smithsonian Associates event that the U.S. is a long way from any herd resistance, which may need to have significantly more than 70% regarding the U.S. population either vaccinated against Covid-19 or infected using the virus.

“We are nowhere near herd immunity yet,” Fauci, who’s the director for the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, told Alda during the digital occasion. “The suggestion in the united kingdom is just about two to three%.”

Fauci said herd immunity happens when a particular percentage of this population is immune or protected against infection by either vaccination or infection. Vaccines against Covid-19 being manufactured by Moderna, Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson, and AstraZeneca come in final-stage medical trials; therefore, herd immunity from vaccination is a long distance off. Americans might not get vaccines until later on in 2010 or well into 2021.

Reference:

Fauci: ‘We’re Nowhere Near Herd Immunity’ In The U.S.https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucejapsen/2020/09/23/fauci-were-nowhere-near-herd-immunityin-the-us/#4002c01a79f3

Blood Test May Show the ones at Risk of Severe COVID

If you’re unfortunate enough to be admitted to your hospital with COVID-19, a typical blood marker may predict how severe your illness might become. New research shows.

The blood marker is named “red cell distribution width” (RDW) — basically, the greater the variance within the measurements of red blood cells, the poorer an individual’s prognosis, the study authors explained.

A COVID-19 patient’s RDW test result “was positively correlated with patient mortality, and the correlation persisted when controlling for other identified risk factors like patient age, several other lab tests, and some pre-existing illnesses.

The newest study was published online Sept. 23 in JAMA Network Open and was led by Dr. John Higgins, a pathologist investigator during the hospital and associate professor of systems biology at Harvard Medical School.

“We desired to help find approaches to identify high-risk COVID patients early and easily that is likely to become severely ill that will take advantage of aggressive interventions, and which hospitalized patients will probably get worse most quickly,” Higgins said in a hospital news release.

To take action, they looked at blood tests for more than 1,600 adults identified as having SARS-CoV-2 infection who’d been admitted to at least one of four Boston-area hospitals in March and April 2020.

Higgins, along with his team, had expected that they might need to ferret out some obscure blood marker that may predict poor outcomes from COVID-19. But they quickly unearthed that RDW — already used in standard blood tests — easily suit you perfectly.

In reality, patients whose RDW values were above the normal range once they were first admitted to your hospital had a danger of death that was 2.7 times compared to patients whose test outcomes were in the normal range, the researchers found. Overall, 31% of patients with above-normal RDW test outcomes died compared with 11% of the with expected RDW test outcomes.

And in case an individual’s RDW rate was standard upon admission but then slowly started initially to rise to above-normal levels, that correlated with an increase within the patient’s odds of death, the research found.

Reference

Blood Test May Show Who Is at Risk of Severe COVID. https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20200923/blood-test-could-spot-those-at-highest-risk-for-severe-covid-19?src=RSS_PUBLIC#1

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention modified its COVID-19

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention modified its COVID-19 advice to acknowledge the risk that the coronavirus can be carried through airborne breathing contaminants — but then modified its website once again Monday morning to take that facts down, suggesting it was still being evaluated.

Prior to it was taken down, the modified direction stated the coronavirus is most commonly dispersed “through respiratory minute droplets or small contaminants, such as those in aerosols,” which are developed when an infected individual coughs, sneezes, sings, speaks or even simply breathes, and which can stay airborne for a period of time. The virus can then disperse to different people who breathe it inside their breathing passages.

Reference:

CDC updates guidance to warn coronavirus can be transmitted through the air by breathing — but then removes it. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cdc-covid-guidance-coronavirus-transmitted-by-breathing/

The herd immunity technique to combat the pandemic could be ‘dangerous, ‘ professionals say. Here’s exactly why

About 2 million Americans could die in the time and effort to accomplish herd immunity to the coronavirus.

Experts had “huge issues” regarding a herd immunity strategy, and much continues to be unknown about how long immunity to Covid-19 may last.
Suppose we are waiting until 60% to 80% of individuals own it. We are discussing 200 million-plus Americans getting this — with a fatality price of 1%, suppose, that is 2 million Americans will die with this effort to get herd immunity. Those are usually preventable deaths.

What is herd immunity, and why some think it might finish the coronavirus pandemic?
Throughout a media briefing in Geneva the other day, that “herd immunity” is generally discussed in vaccinations — much less a response to some pandemic. Whenever we talk about herd immunity, we discuss just how much of the populace must be vaccinated to possess immunity to the herpes virus towards the pathogen so that transmission cannot happen or is very problematic for a virus or perhaps a pathogen to transmit among people.

If we consider herd immunity within the organic sense of letting a virus run, it is dangerous. The virus infects many people, lots of people will require hospitalizations, and several people will pass away.

Reference
A herd immunity coronavirus strategy can be ‘dangerous. https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/a-herd-immunity-coronavirus-strategy-can-be-dangerous-experts-say/ar-BB18ztE8

If you have coronavirus, did you know the CDC updates list of COVID-19 symptoms?

A gets a coronavirus test

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention made six additions to its established listing of COVID-19 symptoms today to help doctors and patients much better realize which might be sickened because of the unique coronavirus.

The recently included medical indications include chills, repeated quivering with chills, muscle mass discomfort, frustration, throat pain, and new loss of taste or odor. They were on the list of COVID-19 signs displaying the U.S. public wellness agency early in the outbreak: temperature, coughing, and length of breathing or shortness of breath. For those who had any of these symptoms — and particularly if you have a few of them — it’s a good idea to call the doctor, wellness experts said.

Resource
“United States: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Nordic Bioscience Announce NASH Biomarker Partnership Deal.” MENA Report, Albawaba (London) Ltd., Apr. 2017, p. n/a.

Are patients with certain cancers are nearly three times as likely to die of covid-19, study says?

Nurse Maria Charri hugs Osmar Grave as they sing along to live music April 27 at a temporary quarantine and isolation facility for the homeless in North Miami. (Lynne Sladky/AP)

Cancer patients — in particular those with bloodstream or lung malignancies, or cancers that have propagated through the body — had a higher risk of death or any other extreme problems from COVID-19 compared with those without cancer, based on a learn published Tuesday. The research, which involved 14 hospitals in Hubei province in central China, where the epidemic emerged, included 105 cancer patients and 536 non-cancer patients of the same years — all of whom experienced COVID-19, the disease caused by the novel coronavirus.

The co-authors, from China, Singapore, and also the United States, learned that cancer patients who evolved COVID-19 experienced nearly a threefold higher death price from the virus compared to a two to three percent rate calculated for the general population. Cancer patients always had been more likely to experience “severe events,” such as to be admitted to intensive worry models and requiring mechanical ventilation than people without cancer. Risk aspects included not just years, but also the sort of cancer, the phase, and also the treatment.

Resource:
Cancer patients are nearly three times more likely to die …. https://www.reddit.com/r/Coronavirus/comments/g9mu01/cancer_patients_are_nearly_three_times_more/