![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
temporaryreality) wrote2021-08-31 01:27 pm
IM Doc pt9
Eduardo
IM Doc I will say I am personally much more comfortable with this approach to a vaccine.
Furthermore, one thing to note. Unlike the AZ Oxford approach which uses just one adenovirus vector, this Sputnik has two different doses each having a completely antigenically different adenovirus vector. There is always the chance the patient may already have immune exposure to one adenovirus and using two at different times mitigates that possibility.
The actual efficacy numbers are far more consistent with other vaccines making me feel better the numbers have not been gamed. And note this editorial is far more “just the facts” than the Pfizer and Moderna ones were in NEJM. It makes the reader feel they are not reading corporate propaganda.
And it appears they bothered to include people in the trial who were elderly and had comorbid conditions.
And these could be easily distributed on our existing ice cream cold chain transport systems.
Again, I would be much more comfortable to recommend this vaccine to my patients. I am just not sure I will have that opportunity.
Internist with boots on the ground.
Our vaccinated cohort so far in my area has been basically nursing home patients and workers, about half the medical staff, and now working through the 75 and up that want it. So not the general population.
I have frankly been stunned by the number of people who become COVID positive with symptoms within a day or two of the first dose. Many HCW and fully 25-30% of the nursing home patients. I do not believe this is related to behavior because these are mostly a captive audience still following protocols in the NH, HCW who are still under directives for PPE, and the 75 and up crowd I know are still taking things very seriously. This was such an issue that they tested all our shot-givers and all were negative.
In other words, we are not vaccinating thirtysomethings who then go out to party. Nor are the shot-giving personnel seem to be infected and giving it to the patients.
Again, this is a very clear pattern. Vaccine is given and within 2 days they are coughing or fevering and are COVID positive.
I want to reiterate – THERE IS NO WAY THAT COVID is BEING GIVEN TO PATIENTS BY THE VACCINE. Simply not possible. I am beginning to become increasingly confident that something is happening with the immune response and a process called viral reactivation. Some viral families like herpes do this for a living. This is known to happen in coronaviruses. Vaccine administration is one of the things that is known to cause this. As we know from the cycle threshold PCR tests, many of us have deactivated viral particles laying around the respiratory tract. Could they be being reactivated by the vaccine and its effect on our immune system? Unknown – but needs to be found out. This phenomenon would be consistent with that happening.
Interestingly, most but not all of these patients have a fairly mild case – some however are really ill. The more concerning thing is proceeding with the 2nd dose on time. Many of these patients in this situation become very very ill after that 2nd dose. I am advising people to wait for a few weeks and to put them all on aspirin to help with blood clots.
If this happens to you – becoming COVID positive after the first dose – please talk to your physician before that 2nd dose. Do not just blindly follow the timing of vaccinations dictated by the Health Dept or Walgreen’s.
Alternate Delegate Dear IM Doc, I ran the viral reactivation hypothesis past a geneticist of my acquaintance.
They think viral reactivation is an unlikely explanation in this case. Other vaccines consist of inactivated virus, but these new ones contain large amounts of RNA. The RNA could be causing false positive RT-PCR Covid test results.
Could the clinical symptoms, separate from the positive tests, be consistent with a reaction to the vaccine?
The 1889–1890 flu pandemic, also known as the “Asiatic flu” or “Russian flu”, was a pandemic that killed about 1 million people worldwide, out of a population of about 1.5 billion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1889%E2%80%931890_pandemic
I found this comment by “Dagan68” on The Market Ticker……
“I am a medical historian – I know what I am talking about. Go look up CORONAVIRUS OC43 – one of the 4 that circulate yearly as common colds. You can find this information online, far too much to go into here – but genetic sequencing and mutation analysis has made it clear – this virus emerged between 1887-1889. It just so happens that the biggest pandemic in the 19th century – started in 1889-1890. It was called the “Great Russian Flu” but when you read the symptoms – especially the neuro and cardiac ones – it is virtually identical to COVID. This was very likely the birthing of OC43. And like all pandemics, it did not cause what happened in the 1890s but it sure exploded the folly that was already going on. A huge economic panic/depression occurred, the railroads failed, the retailers failed, the anarchists became a major force leading to the assassination of McKinley later that decade, the British Monarchy was completely disrupted. The events of this economic crisis led directly to the establishment of the Federal Reserve. It was a big deal – that occupied the attention of the world.
But WE DO HAVE RECORDED HISTORY OF A CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC – and I think there is another essential fact that we must begin to recognize. The pandemic of the 1890s came in 4 large waves – each lasting 12-24 months. It was not fully done until 1897 – and even today – elderly people die from this virus. Viruses like COVID tend to behave in a similar fashion as their family members.
These 1890s waves ended as if the virus fell off the cliff. Not unlike what we are seeing now. Then months/years later, like a thief in the night, would re-emerge with a vengeance – without rhyme nor reason.”
I actually attended a lecture earlier this fall about this very subject. It had always been thought that the “Great Russian Flu”, the largest pandemic of the 19th Century was actually influenza. There is no way to confirm with tissue samples. We only know what we know about the Spanish Flu of 1918 because bodies of Eskimos were literally frozen and the viral particles preserved. We know of no Eskimos from the 1890s.
It turns out very creative viral work was done and completed in the past few years. This coronavirus OC43 was found to have likely emerged from cattle right before this pandemic in the 1890s. The symptoms as this writer states are indeed much more consistent with COVID than any flu. Especially problematic for the flu diagnosis are the severe neurologic issues that occurred in the 1890s: fatigue, insomnia, headaches, inattention. Sound familiar? And it lasted for months. Again, sound familiar?
We will never know for certain unless actual tissue is found. However, it is very likely this virus was the 1890s culprit. Furthermore, the coronavirus wave pattern discussed is quite germane to our current situation. Is COVID going to be like SARS-2003 and just completely disappear after the first wave? Or is it going to be more like OC43 and come back even worse after months of complete quiet? And what will our vaccine efforts have done?
The history of that decade was quite tumultuous. Pandemics are often the thing which rips the veil off systemic societal problems. They very rarely are the cause.
The speaker in the lecture that I attended this fall brought up a very fascinating topic about the 1890s that may have everything to do with the OC43 virus. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle was almost assuredly infected with this virus – having severe cough and fever – followed by chronic lifelong headaches and insomnia. He wrote about how ill he was in some of his journals. And the speaker showed several examples where these symptoms were “gifted” to both Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson in the canon. I seem to remember a passage where Dr. Watson referred to this illness specifically.
The Lancet: Sputnik V COVID-19 vaccine candidate appears safe and effective.