Post-Covid Brain fog

Health & Diet Health & Diet: In The News
, ,
21

About once a week someone comes out with a statement that I concur with, and really wish I’d have written that…:069:

Congratulations Morty, this week it’s you…:038:
And further to your comment about 1918…Some of the world’s population were lying dead in the mud over in France…So I would think that in the absence of the NHS, the medical profession would have been a little ‘Stretched’ to say the least…

This virus is perhaps a symptom of the way we live these days, overcrowded cities, and overseas travel, are all adding to the severity and rapid spread of Covid.

22

Not that I can link to but, at that time, the death rate was the worst in Europe, with over 1,200 people a day dying in the UK from COV-ID (recorded figures only) , so an extrapolation to at least 200,000 deaths would have seemed reasonable at the time (500,000 seems excessive). As we know, deaths from COVID-19 have been reduced to 80 a day (but increasing) in the UK

However, back in April, daily new cases in the UK were running at a (then) record of 5,500 and lockdown was in full force - the infection rate dropped and most people were led to believe that the virus was under control but it’s back with a vengeance - a (new) record of 17,540 new cases per day (08/10) and a 7-day average of 13,000+ (recorded figures), 20,000+ (ONS Survey estimate) - no-one “extrapolated” that in April … but “extrapolating” from it, when the government seems to have lost control, does lead to some alarming figures … :shock:

So, it seems, deaths and infections are, to a greater or lesser extent, “known” but “long covid” is, to all intents and purposes, an “unknown”, at least until the “second wave” is over and “results” can be collated and compiled … :expressionless:

23

I think while ever we are trying to contain the virus we are just postponing the inevitable Omah. I’m a big believer in protecting the vulnerable but allowing the virus to burn itself out in the community. I believe that’s how viruses usually come to end. When it runs out of infectable people and thereby preventing the links.

It’s like dowsing a bushfire while ever there is still flammable material left to reignite. Most of the moors and forestry where I walk have firebreaks to prevent out of control fires. The young people could be allowed to be our covid firebreak Omah, and the economy need not suffer any more, otherwise we might be better off letting the virus take us.

24

You are, of course, entitled to that viewpoint but it is one that I consider to be blinkered and, coincidentally, one that Donald Trump seems to endorse by inviting 2,000 people to gather, unmasked and undistanced, on the grounds of the (already infected) White House … :shock:

So, far, 37 White House staff and other contacts have tested positive, 11 of them being connected to the Amy Coney Barrett nomination event on Sept. 26 in the Rose Garden, White House, from which many attendees flew home to other states to, unknowingly, infect others - the White House, i.e. Trump, has refused to provide tracking details for contacts of the known infected … :!:

25

Hi

Omah, I value your posts.

I think you misunderstand OGF.

He would not wish ill on anyone, he is just being realistic.

26

No, I don’t misunderstand him … he has a different viewpoint to mine … :102:

27

Such doom and gloom. We are postponing until we have a) a vaccine and b) a cure. People around the world are working on both. Nobody should be encouraged to go an catch a disease which has proved to be randomly deadly, randomly disabling and with no understanding of the long term prognosis of those who recover.

Back in Feb I read a report on a research paper’s findings. The report described what Covid does to the cells of the lung and how it can then damage the kidneys, heart, brain and other internal organs. It was frightening. This was at a time when many were comparing it to flu. It was enough to convince me that I don’t ever want to contact this if at all possible and I am eagerly awaiting the vaccine. None of us know what card we will be dealt with on infection but the older you are the more severe it is. That much is known.

28

Great post Annie.

29

I don’t think there will ever be a “cure” for Covid-19, at least not in the conventional sense. Look at HIV-AIDS, that’s been around for, what, 35-40years or so that we know about, and there’s still no effective cure, just a series of drugs that control it’s impact on the body. There is no effective vaccine for it yet.

I’m HOPING a vaccine for C-19 is easier to develop than that and I’ll be clamouring for a shot as soon as it becomes available to the general public. In the meantime it’s mask, hands and space for V and me.

30

Omah, I don’t think for one moment that anyone is advocating ignoring sensible precautions such as face masks and distancing … unless of course, like Trump, you believe catching covid is a blessing from God. Stupid man. He’ll be forever remembered for suggesting people inject with disinfectant.

But . … and this ‘but’ will get bigger and more relevant as time goes on … how long will localised lockdowns be sustainable ?
Ideally, the whole world ought to simply ‘stop’ ‘stay at home’ ‘do nothing’ come to a total standstill to stop the virus in its tracks or at least confine it until not one person remains alive with it to transmit it to someone else…
That is just not doable.

I suspect we’re going to have to learn to live with it instead, much like flu or Aids.
To handle the necessary medical backup required to do that we don’t need an economy crippled onto its knees because it was bankrupted paying people to stay at home.

It makes for horrific reading.

For the current financial year (April 2020 to April 2021), it could be anywhere from £263bn to £391bn, according to the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), which keeps tabs on government spending.

And that article was dated August 11th … so will be out of date.

Imagine if the NHS had been awarded even half of that to help it cope, though a song and dance was made of the governments largesse by writing off its £13.4 billion of debt in April.
At the outset there were some who advocated letting the NHS run ‘hot’ rather than that awful jingoistic … Protect the NHS.
It’s going to ruin more lives trying to avoid/contain/cure Covid than the actual damage caused by the virus itself.

31

Of course they’re not - they don’t want appear stupid … :wink:

But, if everyone obeys the rules and takes precautions how are 70% of the population to be infected in the shortest possible time in order to achieve the mythical “herd immunity” … :?:

Is herd immunity really a panacea whose time has come? Can it lift the curse of Covid from the world? Many UK scientists counsel caution.

As they point out, only 8% or so of the British population has been infected with the Covid-19 virus. “To get to herd immunity we would need that to reach around 70%,” said Sir Robert Lechler, president of the Academy of Medical Sciences. “Not only are we a huge way off this but we now know that immunity to Covid-19 decreases over time, and that people can be re-infected with the virus.”

For this reason, scientists argue that it is very unlikely that herd immunity could be sustained without a vaccine or regular reinfection. More to the point, if attempts were made to achieve herd immunity by lifting lockdown restrictions, there would be a vast increase in excess deaths, mainly among the old and the vulnerable. NHS services would be overwhelmed while high numbers of “long Covid” cases would have long-term consequences even for those who suffer only mild initial symptoms.

32

Thing is Omah … you tell me then how you think it should be handled?

Were there a limitless amount of money to fund vaccine development, support the economy, support the NHS … it would be a no-brainer.
Clearly you believe everyone should stay at home until Covid has gone.
So how long would that take? Any idea what that would cost?

Especially as you’ve recently started another thread telling us the virus can live for 28 days on paper and phone screens and hard surfaces.

I’m afraid it is you that is blinkered.
The financial cost can’t really be overlooked in favour of a simplistic happy clappy view.

33

I wouldn’t be so presumptuous … :lol:

Don’t be afraid - I’m not … :roll:

34

Clearly, I don’t … :018:

35

So what you’re saying is … you’re tenaciously hoping for the best outcome , whilst I’m observing the governments flim flam and realistically preparing for the worst.

I’m just distrustful by nature … :smiley: you know it’s those damn bushy caterpillar eyebrows you’ve got that do it.

36

Ah progress. So you do have an opinion on what direction the government should take then?

  • This is like pulling teeth * :-p
37

I leave that up to experts - presumably you are one … :wink:

38

Now now cheeky … I guess you’ll just have to place your faith in the government then.
You did say experts didn’t you? But not , specifically, experts at what.

39

I wasn’t saying that … and I don’t see a “best outcome” but I am closely observing BJ’s debacle while stocking up with beer, biscuits and cheese for the duration … :smiley:

40

Here’s couple:

David Jones - Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, and Harvard T H Chan School of Public Health, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA

Stefan Helmreich - MIT Anthropology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA

and an article which they contributed to The Lancet:

A history of herd immunity

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31924-3/fulltext (extract)

The phrase, herd immunity, seems to have first appeared in the work of American livestock veterinarians concerned about “contagious abortion”—epidemics of spontaneous miscarriage—in cattle and sheep. By the 1910s, it had become the leading contagious threat to cattle in the USA. Farmers destroyed or sold affected cows. Kansas veterinarian George Potter realised that this was the wrong approach. Writing with Adolph Eichhorn in 1916 in the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, he envisioned “herd immunity”. As he wrote in 1918, “Abortion disease may be likened to a fire, which, if new fuel is not constantly added, soon dies down. Herd immunity is developed, therefore, by retaining the immune cows, raising the calves, and avoiding the introduction of foreign cattle.”

The appeal of herd immunity is easy to understand: if it is reached, an epidemic ends. But the illness and death such an approach would require invariably prompts a strong backlash. The language of herd immunity is part of the problem. A herd usually describes domesticated animals, especially livestock. Herd animals like cows, goats, or sheep are sacrificed for human consumption. Few humans want to be part of that kind of herd.

With potential vaccines for COVID-19 still likely to be many months away, and with lockdowns and social distancing causing social and economic disruption, there are no ideal options. British public health expert Raj Bhopal likened the situation to being in zugzwang, “a position in chess where every move is disadvantageous where we must examine every plan, however unpalatable”. He sought to overcome the animal connotations of “herd immunity” by encouraging the use of “population immunity” instead. Changing the label of herd immunity might remove the connotations but not fix the problem. Without a vaccine, many people would have to die from COVID-19 before population immunity is achieved.

Of course, no-one wants their granny to die but, in the pursuit of herd immunity, she probably will … :frowning: