Are we high risk?

[tom in MO]

My Dad passed away 10th January 2020 of lung failure in hospital in Florida. He fell ill on 18th Dec 2019 aboard a Panamanian cruise which departed from Ft. Lauderdale. Family members are still insisting it was COVID-19 related, but the timing is more than a bit off (his illness being so early). As Dad has not been interned yet I'm tempted to try and get a test done post mortem as un-resolved I'll be hearing about it for the rest of my days.

Dornole's note made me think it is possible he was "patient zero" but unlikely as to my knowledge none of the ICU staff were infected (and no family were). How to make a tough situation tougher for sure. Dad was 76 and still working. Issues, like we call accumulate, but I has him pegged for 85. Treasure every interaction.

Tests can be false negative, false positive, there can be sample contamination giving positive results and sample contamination giving negative results. Rest easy, you loved your dad and it was his time.

There could be no "Patient Zero" and the odds are there probably isn't one. People used to say that Gaëtan Dugas is patient zero for HIV in the US, but they found out this wasn't true. He was dubbed "Patient-O" as in the letter "O" for "Out of California" but this was for privacy reasons and was corrupted into Patient Zero. He was just one very active guy that could be easily tracked and wasn't from the US.

It's pretty common for scientists to invent and misrepresent/distort evidence to support their expectations. It's a normal human failing. Most conscientious scientist don't even know when they are doing it.

 

[Protimenow]

I think that conscientious scientists would, of course, know when they're fudging, inventing or misrepresenting their data. Good design and review, use of scientific method, and review by others should reduce these issues.

Studies that are sponsored by companies, schools, or organizations that have a vested interest n the outcome of the studies, or that can put weight on the scientists to swing their conclusions in the favor of the sponsor, make the scientists - perhaps still conscientious but unfair to the public that may accept the conclusions without giving them serious scrutiny.

In some cases, it takes a third party or other scientists (or non-scientists) to question the reach of the conclusions. For example, consider a study of a new valve type. It may show survival rates up to four years -- but who would want to have to replace a valve that fails at five years? In this case, long term survival rates are critical to the choice of a valve. Or, perhaps, a very small population of patients were used in a study with broad reaching conclusions. Would the experience of only a few subjects, or subjects who may have been pre-selected because a particular outcome is expected result in usable results?

I think that most conscientious scientists would avoid falling into this trap, but money, tenure, spots inside a company whose product is being evaluated, and other incentives may cause damage to the presumed objectivity of many scientists.

 

[jcgtok17]

Tests can be false negative, false positive, there can be sample contamination giving positive results and sample contamination giving negative results. Rest easy, you loved your dad and it was his time.

There could be no "Patient Zero" and the odds are there probably isn't one. People used to say that Gaëtan Dugas is patient zero for HIV in the US, but they found out this wasn't true. He was dubbed "Patient-O" as in the letter "O" for "Out of California" but this was for privacy reasons and was corrupted into Patient Zero. He was just one very active guy that could be easily tracked and wasn't from the US.

It's pretty common for scientists to invent and misrepresent/distort evidence to support their expectations. It's a normal human failing. Most conscientious scientist don't even know when they are doing it.

Tom, Very true re: questionable testing along with the angst of getting the test done port mortem would likely more new stress than closure for the family members in question.

 

[Paleowoman]

From BBC (below) study discovering that patients with severe Covid-19 have exceptionally low T-cells. They don’t mention that T-cells (T-lymphocytes) are controlled by Vitamin D by activating intracellular VDR and genes (a couple of links below).

From the BBC: Immune clue sparks coronavirus treatment hope
UK scientists are to begin testing a treatment that it is hoped could counter the effects of Covid-19 in the most seriously ill patients.
It has been found those with the most severe form of the disease have extremely low numbers of an immune cell called a T-cell.
T-cells clear infection from the body.
The clinical trial will evaluate if a drug called interleukin 7, known to boost T-cell numbers, can aid patients' recovery.
It involves scientists from the Francis Crick Institute, King's College London and Guy's and St Thomas' Hospital.
They have looked at immune cells in the blood of 60 Covid-19 patients and found an apparent crash in the numbers of T-cells.
Prof Adrian Hayday from the Crick Institute said it was a "great surprise" to see what was happening with the immune cells.
"They're trying to protect us, but the virus seems to be doing something that's pulling the rug from under them, because their numbers have declined dramatically.
In a microlitre (0.001ml) drop of blood, normal healthy adults have between 2,000 and 4,000 T-cells, also called T lymphocytes.
The Covid patients the team tested had between 200-1,200.

Vitamin D and T-cells:
https://blogs.scientificamerican.co...vitamin-d-is-important-it-gets-t-cells-going/https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4425186/

 

[pekster11]

i'm taking vitamin D3 (4000 iu ) daily...hoping the higher levels of Vitamin D3 in my body keeps my immune system in top condition

i've also ordered Vit K2 aswell

I'm going out quite alot now....went cycling along the River Dee footpath today....loads of people out and about in the great weather

I think it's been accepted that the risk of catching the virus outdoors (as long as you don't engage in close contact for prolonged periods with other people) is very low

 

[Protimenow]

I'm not exactly sure about how safe it is to be outdoors without a mask -- especially if you're cycling along a footpath. How many people may cough or sneeze just before you ride past them, and come within a foot of two? I know that masks are a pain to wear - some more than others - but for your safety, or the safety of those around you - wear a mask.

 

[pekster11]

I'm not exactly sure about how safe it is to be outdoors without a mask -- especially if you're cycling along a footpath. How many people may cough or sneeze just before you ride past them, and come within a foot of two? I know that masks are a pain to wear - some more than others - but for your safety, or the safety of those around you - wear a mask.

when i go cycling tomorrow i will wear one

 

[rich01]

I'm not exactly sure about how safe it is to be outdoors without a mask -- especially if you're cycling along a footpath. How many people may cough or sneeze just before you ride past them, and come within a foot of two? I know that masks are a pain to wear - some more than others - but for your safety, or the safety of those around you - wear a mask.

I don't know if they have established you can get sick from the virus that easily. I think most people will be able to fight off a small dose of the virus unless they have an impaired immune system. With the millions of people who have gone grocery shopping - with and without wearing a mask - you don't hear about hundreds of people catching the virus while shopping. I'm sure Fauci would have run to the media if there were an epidemic of grocery store cases.

ETA: This quote is from an article in NEJM:

"We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection. Public health authorities define a significant exposure to Covid-19 as face-to-face contact within 6 feet with a patient with symptomatic Covid-19 that is sustained for at least a few minutes (and some say more than 10 minutes or even 30 minutes). The chance of catching Covid-19 from a passing interaction in a public space is therefore minimal. In many cases, the desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic."

 

[Keithl]

I'm not exactly sure about how safe it is to be outdoors without a mask -- especially if you're cycling along a footpath. How many people may cough or sneeze just before you ride past them, and come within a foot of two? I know that masks are a pain to wear - some more than others - but for your safety, or the safety of those around you - wear a mask.

There have been recent reports that outside jogging, biking, etc without a mask while social distancing is extremely low risk. All the newer reports are about the viral load you get and passing by someone outside is not a high risk. Indoors gatherings are the higher risk. I would think a mask would be restrictive while outdoor exercising, maybe a face shield would be a decent option and not restrict your breathing?

 

[Keithl]

i'm taking vitamin D3 (4000 iu ) daily...hoping the higher levels of Vitamin D3 in my body keeps my immune system in top condition

i've also ordered Vit K2 aswell

I'm going out quite alot now....went cycling along the River Dee footpath today....loads of people out and about in the great weather

I think it's been accepted that the risk of catching the virus outdoors (as long as you don't engage in close contact for prolonged periods with other people) is very low

I have been Vi 5 deficient for years and take 10,000IU 5 days a week ad that gets me a reading of 47, i have bumped that up to 6 days a week now to help keep my Vit D level elevated.

For more interesting ready look at drcate.com I saw he on TV last week and she was very impressive in how seed oils negatively impact the composition of our body fat and that hurts our immune system. I was enlightened by the olive and avocado oil remark and that I have been buying the wrong avocado oil to make our salad dressing.

You can see her interview on the 5/22 episode of Bill Maher.

 

[rich01]

I have been Vi 5 deficient for years and take 10,000IU 5 days a week ad that gets me a reading of 47, i have bumped that up to 6 days a week now to help keep my Vit D level elevated.

For more interesting ready look at drcate.com I saw he on TV last week and she was very impressive in how seed oils negatively impact the composition of our body fat and that hurts our immune system. I was enlightened by the olive and avocado oil remark and that I have been buying the wrong avocado oil to make our salad dressing.

You can see her interview on the 5/22 episode of Bill Maher.

Let me share a couple of things I experienced.

I need a lower dose of vitamin d(3) in summer as being in the sun will raise vitamin d level. I have to take 15,000 IUs in winter, but if I continue to take that amount in summer, my d goes over 100, so I drop to 10,000 IU. Testing is important.

Vitamin D helps with calcium absorption. It appears that having lots of calcium floating around in your blood, doesn't mean it will necessarily go to your bones and teeth. Vitamin K directs calcium to the bones, so when taking a high dose of vitamin d, I found taking vitamin K is critical. I took high dose vitamin d for years based on my doctor's recommendation, but was never told to take vitamin k. I think vitamin D without vitamin K may have contributed to me getting atherosclerosis.