• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
* * * * - 1 votes

Covid-19 and Influenza vaccination

coronavirus

  • Please log in to reply
57 replies to this topic

#1 albedo

  • Guest
  • 1,801 posts
  • 607
  • Location:Europe
  • NO

Posted 26 July 2020 - 10:54 AM


I thought useful to start a new thread on the subject topic as many of us, including me, need to decide what to do this fall. I recollect sometime this topic discussed (mostly by Dorian Grey?) but cannot retrieve much.

 

The following study is in a relevant cohort (sex, age, travel historic etc...) and quite large. It is from 2019, prior to the SARS-Cov-2 pandemic. Look at Table 5 and OR for coronavirus in particular.

 

Wolff GG. Influenza vaccination and respiratory virus interference among Department of Defense personnel during the 2017-2018 influenza season. Vaccine. 2020;38(2):350-354. doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2019.10.005

https://pubmed.ncbi....h.gov/31607599/

 

"...Examining non influenza viruses specifically, the odds of both coronavirus and human metapneumovirus in vaccinated individuals were significantly higher when compared to unvaccinated individuals (OR = 1.36 and 1.51, respectively) (Table 5). Conversely, all other

non-influenza respiratory viruses had decreased odds in the vaccinated population ..."

 

I am surely discussing this with my doctor in consideration of my personal situation and comorbidities. So far I am still heading to my my flu shot in the fall (as doing since a couple of years) but I admit I am a bit concerned: an OR of 1.36 for coronavirus is pretty high!

 

Comments please!

 

Attached File  Table 5.PNG   330.99KB   0 downloads


  • Informative x 1
  • like x 1

#2 albedo

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,801 posts
  • 607
  • Location:Europe
  • NO

Posted 26 July 2020 - 10:57 AM

A limitation of the study though is "...Study limitations include the assumption of a causal relationship between influenza vaccination and respiratory viruses. Perhaps there were other factors influencing rates of respiratory illnesses..."



#3 pamojja

  • Guest
  • 2,572 posts
  • 585
  • Location:Austria

Posted 26 July 2020 - 11:45 AM

Vaccination is always a personal risk/benefit analysis and decision. Personally at 53 I don't even remember my last flu. The last sickness-leave for 3 days due to a cold was in 2006. Had many other infectious dieseases though (malarias, schistosomiasis, mypericarditis, spondilodiscitis), where no vaccination would be available.

 

My last vaccination was in 1993 before going for 1 1/2 year to Africa (overland). Where the senior regional health-officer accidentally give my the 10 time dose of polio vaccine. Such always possible accidents, and not even remembering my last flu, is decisive in my case not even consider to vaccinate again.

 

Concerning covid, having taken care of comorbidities, the probabilty compared to major killers like CVD and cancer are just too slim. Though as said, that's my personal risk/benefit evaluation only. You might have different experiences, and decide otherwise.


  • Good Point x 5
  • Dangerous, Irresponsible x 1

#4 hype_wagon

  • Guest
  • 11 posts
  • 19
  • Location:US

Posted 27 July 2020 - 05:25 AM

Yes, I think the probabilities are comparable.  Cancer and heart disease only kill 600,000 Americans each annually.  Left unchecked, COVID could easily compare to or even outpace that.

 

Vaccination benefits members of society who believe in it, but are immuno-compromised or otherwise too weak, even, for the vaccine and its usually mild side effects.


  • Agree x 1

#5 Dorian Grey

  • Guest
  • 1,733 posts
  • 699
  • Location:kalifornia

Posted 27 July 2020 - 06:57 AM

In the "Plandemic" video Dr Judy Mikovits PhD pointed out a brand new influenza vaccine, cultured in canine cells rather than eggs was broadly introduced in Italy in 2019, months before the country was decimated by COVID.  This new vaccine was also introduced in the UK, but from what I understand was not as widely adopted.  Still the COVID catastrophies in Italy & UK are legendary.  

 

I've posted on my misadventures with the influenza vaccine here: https://www.longecit...omise-immunity/

 

It's interesting, becoming ill shortly after getting the flu jab is the number one reason cited by those who no longer take it.  This drives the vaccine bullies crazy as they parrot out their mantra the flu shot is an inactivated virus and can not give you the flu.  Not the flu perhaps, but a distracted immune system may predispose other pathogens.  After getting sick 3 years running with astonishing swiftness when I started getting the jab again due to a new job, I said NEVERMORE!  

 

 


Edited by Dorian Grey, 27 July 2020 - 06:58 AM.

  • Dangerous, Irresponsible x 4
  • like x 3
  • Good Point x 1

#6 albedo

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,801 posts
  • 607
  • Location:Europe
  • NO

Posted 27 July 2020 - 07:26 AM

@DorianGrey, thanks I recollected well you wrote about this and I think you also have experience in medical setting due to your job :-)


  • like x 2
  • dislike x 1
  • Disagree x 1

#7 albedo

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,801 posts
  • 607
  • Location:Europe
  • NO

Posted 27 July 2020 - 08:10 AM

"...Widespread misinformation on social media includes the false claim that influenza vaccination increases the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Scientists, health care providers, and public health leaders must counter these claims with clear, evidence-based information on the importance of influenza vaccination during the COVID-19 pandemic..."

 

"...The optimal timing of influenza vaccination in patients with confirmed COVID-19 is uncertain. There are no clinical studies on the effects of influenza vaccination in patients with COVID-19, but it may be prudent to delay vaccine administration until after the acute illness has resolved..."

 

"...Will there be a perfect storm of COVID-19 and influenza during the 2020–2021 season? We do not yet know, but we must start preparing in the coming months..."

 

https://science.scie...t/368/6496/1163

 

 


  • Agree x 1

#8 albedo

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,801 posts
  • 607
  • Location:Europe
  • NO

Posted 27 July 2020 - 08:27 AM

"...This paper discusses these issues and estimates ideal minimum influenza vaccination coverage based on an estimated influenza Basic Reproduction Number (R0) of 0.9–2.1 so as to obtain herd immunity or approach it. There is a strong argument for attempting near universal population coverage with the annual influenza vaccine leading up to next winter..."

 

"...Bacterial superinfection is one of the deadliest complications of influenza. The upcoming flu season will be a challenge not only not to miss sequential or mixed infections with influenza and SARS-CoV-2, but also to decide on treatment including which patients will benefit from antibiotics. Vaccination against influenza and pneumococcal disease will be important to mitigate these infections..."

 

"...In balance, it is clear that the universal uptake of the influenza vaccine would be ideal this winter, especially in the at-risk groups. An almost universal uptake may engender herd immunity and thus protect those in who the vaccine is ineffective. Furthermore, a decrease in hospital visits and admissions will alleviate hospitals and allow services to better cope with COVID-19 complications as lockdowns are inevitably relaxed..."

 

https://www.scienced...303455?via=ihub



#9 albedo

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,801 posts
  • 607
  • Location:Europe
  • NO

Posted 27 July 2020 - 09:13 AM

A paper from Pawelec, met in several occasions in aging conferences focusing on the elder and immunity:

 

"...These are significant non-scientific hurdles that need to be overcome when considering recent advances in influenza vaccines (https://www.wired.co...ine-big-pharma/). Nonetheless, a recent analysis suggests that despite the drawbacks of current seasonal influenza vaccines, there is a huge public health and public financial benefit to the use of influenza vaccines so that further improvements would make a big impact67. As vaccines produced in cells rather than eggs become more generally available, some analyses are concluding that in addition to other potential advantages (see above), they may also be more cost-effective68...."

 

"...As with other areas of medicine, a “one-size-fits-all” approach to influenza vaccination will never be optimal for every individual. In particular, the state of health and pre-exposures of the vaccinee will be highly influential in determining the success of the vaccine. In an ideal situation, prior to vaccination, the immunological history of the person would be assessed from a small blood sample. This would determine the state of humoral and cellular immunity as it pertained to influenza reactivity and the composition and nature of the vaccine modified accordingly..."

 

https://f1000researc...ticles/9-305/v1

 



#10 Dorian Grey

  • Guest
  • 1,733 posts
  • 699
  • Location:kalifornia

Posted 27 July 2020 - 03:16 PM

My girlfriend's aunt was admitted to hospital last Summer with a pulmonary infection.  They asked her on admission if she'd had the flu shot that year.  Nurse came around with the vaccine within hours, saying  it was standard procedure, this despite the fact it was the middle of Summer, and the flu season was long over.  They never even asked if she wanted it; she just got it. 

 

She died a few days later.  Not saying the flu shot had anything to do with that, but I was impressed they were pushing unnecessary vaccines on a patient already critically ill.  

 

Read the phase 3 clinical trial for Moderna's coronavirus vaccine are scheduled to be followed for possible delayed adverse events for 2 years, though they may be starting mass vaccination on the fly after just a few months of observation.  It will be interesting to see how much arm-twisting will be going on, or if we will be allowed any choice if there are several vaccines available.  COVID vaccine is one shot I'm actually interested in getting, but the new mRNA format spooks me a bit.  I'm thinking I'd rather get an old school attenuated/inactivated virus jab until the newfangled mRNA vaccines complete their 2 year observation period.  


Edited by Dorian Grey, 27 July 2020 - 03:20 PM.

  • Good Point x 2
  • Informative x 1

#11 lancebr

  • Guest
  • 425 posts
  • 177
  • Location:USA

Posted 27 July 2020 - 04:06 PM

Inactivated trivalent influenza vaccine is associated with lower mortality among Covid-19 patients in Brazil

 

https://www.news-med...-mortality.aspx

 

Controlling for health facility of treatment, comorbidities as well as an extensive range of socio-demographic factors, we show

that patients who received a recent influenza vaccine experienced on average 8% lower odds of needing intensive

care treatment (95% CIs [0.86, 0.99]), 18% lower odds of requiring invasive respiratory support (0.74, 0.88) and

17% lower odds of death (0.75, 0.89).

 

Usually in the past I never got flu shots for most years, but I got one the past three years because of an elderly family member

living with me and my family and the doctors recommended it for their safety since they would be around me and family members

who might be more prone to catching the flu. 

 

I made sure to get a flu shot that was preservative free (ie no thimerosal, no mercury and no aluminum) and it had no formaldehyde,

no gelatin, no antibiotics, no latex in the ingredients.

 

Me and my family got the MMR vaccine last month since there is some belief that a live vaccine like the MMR, Polio, or BCG

can provide some protection against Covid.

 

https://asm.org/Pres...he-Worst-Sympto

 

The lady at CVS said they have seen an increase in adults getting the MMR vaccine which she said was odd since it is

mainly children that usually get it.


Edited by lancebr, 27 July 2020 - 04:54 PM.

  • Informative x 1

#12 albedo

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,801 posts
  • 607
  • Location:Europe
  • NO

Posted 28 July 2020 - 02:14 PM

A limitation of the study though is "...Study limitations include the assumption of a causal relationship between influenza vaccination and respiratory viruses. Perhaps there were other factors influencing rates of respiratory illnesses..."

 

Also, importantly, see the author's letter to the Editor:

 

 

"...Coronavirus results in this study represented the four endemic, regularly circulating strains of coronavirus (229E, NL63, OC43, and HKU1) during the 2017–2018 influenza season, not novel coronavirus (COVID-19). The four circulating strains of coronavirus have existed in the general population for years, first identified in the mid-1960s. At the time of the study, and even at the time of initial electronic publication, COVID-19 was not yet in existence.

Established levels of immunity in the general population for the four circulating strains of coronavirus at the time of the study when compared to lack of immunity for the novel COVID-19 strain make any sort of correlation between vaccination and COVID-19 invalid..."

 

https://www.scienced...264410X20304862

 



#13 Dorian Grey

  • Guest
  • 1,733 posts
  • 699
  • Location:kalifornia

Posted 28 July 2020 - 03:38 PM

Also, importantly, see the author's letter to the Editor:

 

 

"...Coronavirus results in this study represented the four endemic, regularly circulating strains of coronavirus (229E, NL63, OC43, and HKU1) during the 2017–2018 influenza season, not novel coronavirus (COVID-19). The four circulating strains of coronavirus have existed in the general population for years, first identified in the mid-1960s. At the time of the study, and even at the time of initial electronic publication, COVID-19 was not yet in existence.

Established levels of immunity in the general population for the four circulating strains of coronavirus at the time of the study when compared to lack of immunity for the novel COVID-19 strain make any sort of correlation between vaccination and COVID-19 invalid..."

 

https://www.scienced...264410X20304862

 

Absence of proof is not proof of absence!  This is a signal, and a powerful one in my humble opinion.  


  • Agree x 1

#14 hype_wagon

  • Guest
  • 11 posts
  • 19
  • Location:US

Posted 29 July 2020 - 02:12 AM

A seemingly unrelated study which suggests we may have antibodies to some of the surface (non-spike) proteins due to previous exposure to similar coronaviruses (which typically only cause a mild cold).

Immune T Cells May Offer Lasting Protection Against COVID-19

Posted on July 28th, 2020 by Dr. Francis Collins

Much of the study on the immune response to SARS-CoV-2, the novel coronavirus that causes COVID-19, has focused on the production of antibodies. But, in fact, immune cells known as memory T cells also play an important role in the ability of our immune systems to protect us against many viral infections, including—it now appears—COVID-19.

An intriguing new study of these memory T cells suggests they might protect some people newly infected with SARS-CoV-2 by remembering past encounters with other human coronaviruses. This might potentially explain why some people seem to fend off the virus and may be less susceptible to becoming severely ill with COVID-19.

The findings, reported in the journal Nature, come from the lab of Antonio Bertoletti at the Duke-NUS Medical School in Singapore [1]. Bertoletti is an expert in viral infections, particularly hepatitis B. But, like so many researchers around the world, his team has shifted their focus recently to help fight the COVID-19 pandemic.

Bertoletti’s team recognized that many factors could help to explain how a single virus can cause respiratory, circulatory, and other symptoms that vary widely in their nature and severity—as we’ve witnessed in this pandemic. One of those potential factors is prior immunity to other, closely related viruses.

SARS-CoV-2 belongs to a large family of coronaviruses, six of which were previously known to infect humans. Four of them are responsible for the common cold. The other two are more dangerous: SARS-CoV-1, the virus responsible for the outbreak of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), which ended in 2004; and MERS-CoV, the virus that causes Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), first identified in Saudi Arabia in 2012.

All six previously known coronaviruses spark production of both antibodies and memory T cells. In addition, studies of immunity to SARS-CoV-1 have shown that T cells stick around for many years longer than acquired antibodies. So, Bertoletti’s team set out to gain a better understanding of T cell immunity against the novel coronavirus.

The researchers gathered blood samples from 36 people who’d recently recovered from mild to severe COVID-19. They focused their attention on T cells (including CD4 helper and CD8 cytotoxic, both of which can function as memory T cells). They identified T cells that respond to the SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid, which is a structural protein inside the virus. They also detected T cell responses to two non-structural proteins that SARS-CoV-2 needs to make additional copies of its genome and spread. The team found that all those recently recovered from COVID-19 produced T cells that recognize multiple parts of SARS-CoV-2.

Next, they looked at blood samples from 23 people who’d survived SARS. Their studies showed that those individuals still had lasting memory T cells today, 17 years after the outbreak. Those memory T cells, acquired in response to SARS-CoV-1, also recognized parts of SARS-CoV-2.

Finally, Bertoletti’s team looked for such T cells in blood samples from 37 healthy individuals with no history of either COVID-19 or SARS. To their surprise, more than half had T cells that recognize one or more of the SARS-CoV-2 proteins under study here. It’s still not clear if this acquired immunity stems from previous infection with coronaviruses that cause the common cold or perhaps from exposure to other as-yet unknown coronaviruses.

What’s clear from this study is our past experiences with coronavirus infections may have something important to tell us about COVID-19. Bertoletti’s team and others are pursuing this intriguing lead to see where it will lead—not only in explaining our varied responses to the virus, but also in designing new treatments and optimized vaccines.

Reference:

[1] SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell immunity in cases of COVID-19 and SARS, and uninfected controls . Le Bert N, Tan AT, Kunasegaran K, et al. Nature. 2020 July 15. [published online ahead of print]

 

This study show that wrong types of immune responses are engaged in severe cases of Covid-19 and how some of are associated with mortality. The bottom line is that this virus wreaks havoc on our immune system and needs to be avoided as much as possible.

Longitudinal analyses reveal immunological misfiring in severe COVID-19

Nature (2020)
Abstract

Recent studies have provided insights into the pathogenesis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)1–4. Yet, longitudinal immunological correlates of disease outcome remain unclear. Here, we serially analysed immune responses in 113 COVID-19 patients with moderate (non-ICU) and severe (ICU) disease. Immune profiling revealed an overall increase in innate cell lineages with a concomitant reduction in T cell number. We identify an association between early, elevated cytokines and worse disease outcomes. Following an early increase in cytokines, COVID-19 patients with moderate disease displayed a progressive reduction in type-1 (antiviral) and type-3 (antifungal) responses. In contrast, patients with severe disease maintained these elevated responses throughout the course of disease. Moreover, severe disease was accompanied by an increase in multiple type 2 (anti-helminths) effectors including, IL-5, IL-13, IgE and eosinophils. Unsupervised clustering analysis identified 4 immune signatures, representing (A) growth factors, (B) type-2/3 cytokines, © mixed type-1/2/3 cytokines, and (D) chemokines that correlated with three distinct disease trajectories of patients. The immune profile of patients who recovered with moderate disease was enriched in tissue reparative growth factor signature (A), while the profile for those with worsened disease trajectory had elevated levels of all four signatures. Thus, we identified development of a maladapted immune response profile associated with severe COVID-19 outcome and early immune signatures that correlate with divergent disease trajectories.

 

More info on the surface proteins,

Coronavirus envelope protein: current knowledge
    Dewald Schoeman & Burtram C. Fielding
    Published: 27 May 2019

Virology Journal volume 16, Article number: 69 (2019)
    281k Accesses, 151 Citations, 443 Altmetric
Abstract
Background

Coronaviruses (CoVs) primarily cause enzootic infections in birds and mammals but, in the last few decades, have shown to be capable of infecting humans as well. The outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in 2003 and, more recently, Middle-East respiratory syndrome (MERS) has demonstrated the lethality of CoVs when they cross the species barrier and infect humans. A renewed interest in coronaviral research has led to the discovery of several novel human CoVs and since then much progress has been made in understanding the CoV life cycle. The CoV envelope (E) protein is a small, integral membrane protein involved in several aspects of the virus’ life cycle, such as assembly, budding, envelope formation, and pathogenesis. Recent studies have expanded on its structural motifs and topology, its functions as an ion-channelling viroporin, and its interactions with both other CoV proteins and host cell proteins.
Main body

This review aims to establish the current knowledge on CoV E by highlighting the recent progress that has been made and comparing it to previous knowledge. It also compares E to other viral proteins of a similar nature to speculate the relevance of these new findings. Good progress has been made but much still remains unknown and this review has identified some gaps in the current knowledge and made suggestions for consideration in future research.
Conclusions

The most progress has been made on SARS-CoV E, highlighting specific structural requirements for its functions in the CoV life cycle as well as mechanisms behind its pathogenesis. Data shows that E is involved in critical aspects of the viral life cycle and that CoVs lacking E make promising vaccine candidates. The high mortality rate of certain CoVs, along with their ease of transmission, underpins the need for more research into CoV molecular biology which can aid in the production of effective anti-coronaviral agents for both human CoVs and enzootic CoVs.


Edited by hype_wagon, 29 July 2020 - 02:22 AM.

  • WellResearched x 4
  • Informative x 1

#15 hype_wagon

  • Guest
  • 11 posts
  • 19
  • Location:US

Posted 29 July 2020 - 09:29 AM

Studies on the innate immune system and influenza.  Trained immunity (by repeated exposure to environmental pathogens) may increase risks of atherosclerosis and autoimmune disease.

 

It's interesting because there are some unusual things going on, i.e. adaptations of the innate immune T cells, but it is even the more interestingly associated with inflammation and death.  See 2nd study for examples on how immunity and exposure to lots of viruses like the flu may have a harmful effect on the human over its life.  That would suggest a middle ground between rugged individualism, and obsessive hand washing or living in a bubble.

PLoS Pathog. 2015 Dec 28;11(12):e1005338. doi: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1005338. eCollection 2015 Dec.
Type I Interferon Induced Epigenetic Regulation of Macrophages Suppresses Innate and Adaptive Immunity in Acute Respiratory Viral Infection

Free PMC article
Abstract

Influenza A virus (IAV) is an airborne pathogen that causes significant morbidity and mortality each year. Macrophages (Mϕ) are the first immune population to encounter IAV virions in the lungs and are required to control infection. In the present study, we explored the mechanism by which cytokine signaling regulates the phenotype and function of Mϕ via epigenetic modification of chromatin. We have found that type I interferon (IFN-I) potently upregulates the lysine methyltransferase Setdb2 in murine and human Mϕ, and in turn Setdb2 regulates Mϕ-mediated immunity in response to IAV. The induction of Setdb2 by IFN-I was significantly impaired upon inhibition of the JAK-STAT signaling cascade, and chromatin immunoprecipitation revealed that both STAT1 and interferon regulatory factor 7 bind upstream of the transcription start site to induce expression. The generation of Setdb2LacZ reporter mice revealed that IAV infection results in systemic upregulation of Setdb2 in myeloid cells. In the lungs, alveolar Mϕ expressed the highest level of Setdb2, with greater than 70% lacZ positive on day 4 post-infection. Silencing Setdb2 activity in Mϕ in vivo enhanced survival in lethal IAV infection. Enhanced host protection correlated with an amplified antiviral response and less obstruction to the airways. By tri-methylating H3K9, Setdb2 silenced the transcription of Mx1 and Isg15, antiviral effectors that inhibit IAV replication. Accordingly, a reduced viral load in knockout mice on day 8 post-infection was linked to elevated Isg15 and Mx1 transcript in the lungs. In addition, Setdb2 suppressed the expression of a large number of other genes with proinflammatory or immunomodulatory function. This included Ccl2, a chemokine that signals through CCR2 to regulate monocyte recruitment to infectious sites. Consistently, knockout mice produced more CCL2 upon IAV infection and this correlated with a 2-fold increase in the number of inflammatory monocytes and alveolar Mϕ in the lungs. Finally, Setdb2 expression by Mϕ suppressed IL-2, IL-10, and IFN-γ production by CD4+ T cells in vitro, as well as proliferation in IAV-infected lungs. Collectively, these findings identify Setdb2 as a novel regulator of the immune system in acute respiratory viral infection.

 

 

There are also examples of deleterious systemic consequences of trained immunity. In general, trained immunity is an adaptive response resulting in the long-lasting capacity to respond more strongly to stimuli (36). While this type of high-alert immune state has beneficial effects during host defense, it could also trigger enhanced tissue damage during chronic inflammatory conditions in which trained immunity is induced by endogenous ligands of innate receptors. For example, there is strong epidemiological evidence for an increased susceptibility of atherosclerosis in patients with autoimmunity or chronic inflammatory conditions such as rheumatoid arthritis (103). It is tempting to speculate that the maladaptive state of innate immune cells triggered by the underlying chronic inflammatory condition would change the local immune responsiveness of immune cells in atherosclerotic lesions and that this could contribute to the increased disease risk (104). It is also possible that Western-type diets, which are known to trigger systemic inflammatory responses, can precipitate maladaptive trained immune responses. A strong argument for this hypothesis is the recent demonstration of trained immunity induced by oxidized LDL in human monocytes via epigenetic reprogramming (105).

 


  • WellResearched x 3
  • Well Written x 1
  • Informative x 1

#16 hype_wagon

  • Guest
  • 11 posts
  • 19
  • Location:US

Posted 29 July 2020 - 11:20 PM

Potentially a case of co-morbid correlation than cross-vaccine protection.  A finding recently reported that many COVID deaths cross-test positive for H1N1 before, or at, the time of autopsy.

High prevalence of SARS‐CoV‐2 and influenza A virus (H1N1) co‐infection in dead patients in Northeastern Iran
First published: 28 July 2020

 

This article has been accepted for publication and undergone full peer review but has not been through the copyediting, typesetting, pagination and proofreading process, which may lead to differences between this version and the Version of Record. Please cite this article as doi: 10.1002/jmv.26364

Abstract

In the last months of 2019, an outbreak of fatal respiratory disease started in Wuhan, China, and quickly spread to other parts of the world. It named COVID‐19, and to date, thousands of cases of infection and death reported worldwide. The disease is associated with a wide range of symptoms that make it difficult to diagnose it accurately. The previous SARS pandemic in 2003, researchers found that the patients with fever, cough, or sore throat had a 5% influenza virus‐positive rate. This finding sparked in our minds that the wide range of symptoms and also relatively high prevalence of death in our patients may be due to the co‐infection with other viruses. Thus, we evaluate the co‐infection of SARS‐CoV‐2 with other respiratory viruses in dead patients in North Khorasan. We evaluated the presence of influenza A/B virus, Human metapneumovirus, bocavirus, adenovirus, respiratory syncytial virus, and parainfluenza viruses in 105 SARS‐CoV‐2 positive dead patients, using PCR and RT‐PCR tests. We found co‐infection with influenza virus in 22.3%, respiratory syncytial virus, and bocavirus in 9.7%, parainfluenza viruses in 3.9%, Human metapneumovirus in 2.9% and finally adenovirus in 1.9% of SARS‐CoV‐2 positive dead cases.

The highlights of our findings are a high prevalence of co‐infection with influenza A virus and the monopoly of co‐infection with Human metapneumovirus in children.


#17 lancebr

  • Guest
  • 425 posts
  • 177
  • Location:USA

Posted 30 July 2020 - 12:50 AM

Mayo Clinic Exploratory analysis of immunization records highlights decreased SARS-CoV-2 rates in individuals with recent non-COVID-19 vaccinations

 

https://www.medrxiv....7.27.20161976v2

 

"In this exploratory study, we analyze immunization records from 137,037 individuals who received SARS-CoV-2 PCR tests.

We find that polio, Hemophilus influenzae type-B (HIB), measles-mumps-rubella (MMR), varicella, pneumococcal conjugate (PCV13),

geriatric flu, and hepatitis A / hepatitis B (HepA-HepB) vaccines administered in the past 1, 2, and 5 years are associated with decreased

SARS-CoV-2 infection rates, even after adjusting for geographic SARS-CoV-2 incidence and testing rates, demographics, comorbidities,

and number of other vaccinations. Furthermore, age, race/ethnicity, and blood group stratified analyses reveal significantly lower

SARS-CoV-2 rate among black individuals who have taken the PCV13 vaccine, with relative risk of 0.45 at the 5 year time

horizon (n: 653, 95% CI: (0.32, 0.64), p-value: 6.9e-05)."


Edited by lancebr, 30 July 2020 - 12:50 AM.

  • Informative x 1

#18 gamesguru

  • Guest
  • 3,278 posts
  • 397
  • Location:coffeelake.intel.int

Posted 30 July 2020 - 01:52 AM

In the "Plandemic" video Dr Judy Mikovits PhD pointed out a brand new influenza vaccine, cultured in canine cells rather than eggs was broadly introduced in Italy in 2019, months before the country was decimated by COVID.  This new vaccine was also introduced in the UK, but from what I understand was not as widely adopted.  Still the COVID catastrophies in Italy & UK are legendary.

 

She's really established herself as one to be treated with the maximum of skepticism.  The whole Plandemic movie is extremist and sensational and to be taken with a grain of salt IMO.  There are plenty of seemingly intuitive correlations out there, yet we must not have an exaggerated tendency for believing them prematurely.

Judy Anne Mikovits is a former American research scientist who is known for her discredited medical claims, such as that murine endogenous retroviruses are linked to chronic fatigue syndrome. She has been described as an anti-vaccination activist and a promoter of conspiracy theories, and has been accused of scientific misconduct.Wikipedia

 

Let's dive into her claims with the help of some fact checkers[1].

“The AMA was saying, ya know, doctors will lose their license if they use hydroxychloroquine.”  - Dr. Judy Mikovits (16:49)

This is false. 

The American Medical Association never threatened to revoke licenses and even if they had, the AMA can’t do that.

An AMA staff member confirmed to VERIFY that they have no control over medical licenses. The AMA is a voluntary membership organization, rather than a regulatory authority with the power to grant or revoke medical licenses. Medical licensure is a state-run process

The AMA did share guidelines for states regarding COVID-19 prescriptions, including hydroxychloroquine. None of these documents threaten licenses and their language varies state to state.

 

“Wearing the mask literally activates your own virus. You're getting sick from your own reactivated coronavirus expressions and if it happens to be SARS-CoV-2 then you've got a big problem.”  - Dr. Judy Mikovits (20:28)

This is false. Wearing a mask is not causing the virus to “activate.”

In another interview, Mikovits explained her belief that the virus doesn’t spread from person to person -- but instead gets injected with vaccines.

“It’s plausible, it’s probable that it’s been in every flu vaccine since ‘13 to ‘15 because that’s when this work was being illegally done,” she said in the video.

She believes SARS-CoV-2 has been dormant in our bodies for years and that masks are causing it to “activate,” and cause COVID-19.

There is no evidence to support this claim. There are reasons it’s false -- like COVID-19 testing.

 

Millions of people worldwide are getting COVID-19 tests. If this was a dormant virus in our bodies, the tests would still show it. There would be no negative results from anyone who’s ever had a flu shot.

And the idea that masks activated the virus doesn’t add up either. The CDC and WHO initially didn’t advise people to wear masks. And for weeks, the virus was still spreading worldwide.

 

“[Italy] got an untested, new form of an influenza vaccine that had four different strains of influenza including the highly pathogenic H1N1. That vaccine was grown in a cell line. A dog cell line. Dogs have lots of coronaviruses and that's why they're not testing there.” - Dr. Judy Mikovits (15:53)

It is true that in September 2019 a cell-based flu vaccine was made available in Italy for the first time, and it’s also true that it contains four flu vaccines including H1N1.

However, it’s not untested. The vaccine, which was released in Europe for the first time for the 2019-2020 flu season, was tested in the United States in the 2017-2018 flu season. It was determined to be more effective than traditional egg-based vaccines in that study.

 

And it’s not abnormal for the H1N1 strain to be included in the flu vaccine. In a 2017 article, the University of Minnesota’s Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy reported the WHO had updated the annual H1N1 strain used in the vaccine.

 

There’s no evidence that it came from dogs specifically, either. The CDC’s information page on cell-based vaccines doesn’t mention dogs, and neither do other pages.

Finally, it wasn’t required that everyone in Italy use this specific vaccine. It was just one of several options they had for flu vaccinations.

 

“The game is to prevent the therapies until everyone is infected and push the vaccine, knowing that the flu vaccines increase the odds by 36% of getting COVID-19.” - Dr. Judy Mikovits (18:18)
 

This is false. The flu vaccine does not increase the chances of getting COVID-19 by 36%.

Mikovits’ claim misrepresents the findings of a study into whether the flu vaccine could increase the chances of getting other viruses.

The study was done by the Department of Defense in 2017 -- before COVID-19 broke out.

Soldiers who’d received the flu vaccine were studied to see if they had a higher chance of infection from other viruses.

The study concluded that there was “little to no evidence supporting the association of virus interference and influenza vaccination.”

It also adds that “those receiving the influenza vaccine were more likely to have no pathogen detected and reduced risk of influenza when compared to unvaccinated individuals.”

So the study never looked for COVID-19, and concluded that there was no evidence the influenza virus increased the odds of getting other viruses.

 

BOTTOM LINE:

This documentary peddles numerous COVID-19 rumors using false information with little evidence.

The group behind it has a clear bias in which they distrust the validity of the virus and health organizations from the outset.

And it portrays Dr. Mikovits as someone who published “blockbuster” research before the “minions of big pharma” came after her. This version of her story does not match the facts.


  • Well Written x 1
  • like x 1
  • Agree x 1

#19 Dorian Grey

  • Guest
  • 1,733 posts
  • 699
  • Location:kalifornia

Posted 30 July 2020 - 03:12 AM

Plandemic is an easy target, but as with many sensational videos, there are often kernels of truth.  

 

Did the Italians NOT actually get a brand new, next generation flu shot cultured in kidney cells of dogs in 2019, just months before their COVID catastrophe?   From what I could find on this, they did!  

 

When the FDA cautioned on outpatient HCQ, I asked my doc if he would consider prescribing HCQ if I got sick, & he said he was bound by the formulary of his group, which followed FDA guidelines; so NO he could not offer me HCQ for COVID TFN.  Technically, he may not have lost his license, but the end result was the same.  NO HCQ for YOU!  

 

Regarding the flu shot predisposing coronavirus infection.  Technically this was not COVID specific, as the study was done before COVID even existed.  Still absence of COVID specific proof is not specific proof of absence regarding COVID.  It is however an ominous signal, & NO, I won't be getting the flu jab this fall.  

 

As to quashing outpatient therapeutics in hopes of getting better vaccine compliance.  The evidence for this is pretty strong in my humble opinion.  The HCQ SNAFU would be laughable if this were a science fiction movie.  Overdosing critically ill patients, long past the point of being helped by a viral replication inhibitor with a med known to cause cardiac issues if not prescribed correctly was sheer madness.  I can't believe they thought they could sabotage trials like this and get away with it, & many looking closely are calling foul.  Time will tell if that charade will stand the test of time.  

 

I'll leave the minor quibbles be.  The four major points aren't all that far fetched.  


  • Good Point x 2
  • Dangerous, Irresponsible x 1

#20 gamesguru

  • Guest
  • 3,278 posts
  • 397
  • Location:coffeelake.intel.int

Posted 30 July 2020 - 03:23 AM

Plandemic is an easy target, but as with many sensational videos, there are often kernels of truth.  

 

Did the Italians NOT actually get a brand new, next generation flu shot cultured in kidney cells of dogs in 2019, just months before their COVID catastrophe?   From what I could find on this, they did!

 

The vaccine wasn't new, it had been used extensively in the US two years prior.  And why should this have anything to do with the novel coronavirus at all?

 

Just looking at the correlation between margarine consumption and divorce rates in Maine, one would assume a striking causative role.  But this is mere fanciful speculation, a chance correlation, and a credulity to believe what is likely false.
 

When the FDA cautioned on outpatient HCQ, I asked my doc if he would consider prescribing HCQ if I got sick, & he said he was bound by the formulary of his group, which followed FDA guidelines; so NO he could not offer me HCQ for COVID TFN.  Technically, he may not have lost his license, but the end result was the same.  NO HCQ for YOU! 

Regarding the flu shot predisposing coronavirus infection.  Technically this was not COVID specific, as the study was done before COVID even existed.  Still absence of COVID specific proof is not specific proof of absence regarding COVID.  It is however an ominous signal, & NO, I won't be getting the flu jab this fall. 


As to quashing outpatient therapeutics in hopes of getting better vaccine compliance.  The evidence for this is pretty strong in my humble opinion.  The HCQ SNAFU would be laughable if this were a science fiction movie.  Overdosing critically ill patients, long past the point of being helped by a viral replication inhibitor with a med known to cause cardiac issues if not prescribed correctly was sheer madness.  I can't believe they thought they could sabotage trials like this and get away with it, & many looking closely are calling foul.  Time will tell if that charade will stand the test of time. 

I'll leave the minor quibbles be.  The four major points aren't all that far fetched.

 

Yes but you had neither symptoms of COVID nor a positive mRNA RT-PCR test.  The HCQ is in short supply for people who need it due to demand crisis; the decision to deny you of it was likely in these economic and ethical considerations, it was not made in jest or under the oppression of some black-suited Moderna or Oxford reps.

 

Yes, it's true that absence of evidence is not absence of evidence.  But we really don't want to go down that road.  Otherwise we could all just suspect each other of being sexually attracted to donkeys.  After all, there's no proof we each aren't. But like HCQ and non-lethal complications, it's a dangerous assumption to make.

 

It seems criticisms were made of the high dose and low dose studies, but no happy medium was suggested.  As far as I can tell, there really isn't a happy medium because the two were so close already.


  • Good Point x 1
  • dislike x 1
  • like x 1

#21 Dorian Grey

  • Guest
  • 1,733 posts
  • 699
  • Location:kalifornia

Posted 30 July 2020 - 03:54 AM

First cell-based quadrivalent influenza vaccine approved for use in Europe (Jan 2019)

 

https://www.seqirus....roved-in-europe

 

Are you quite sure this had been in use in the US for a year or so before this?  

 

HCQ in short supply?  Trump bought 70 million doses back in March or April.  Where the heck did they all go?  

 

True, I was not sick when I asked my doc about the availability of HCQ should I become ill.  He said: Not No Way, Not No How!  

 

As to the high dose / low dose studies, there is only one certainty.  2-2.4 grams in 24 hours would be very unwise, & this is exactly what Recovery/Solidarity used.  If they could have resisted the temptation to overdose their critically ill patients, the trials most likely wouldn't have been halted.  Not that this would have changed the outcome.  Antivirals that work by inhibiting replication must be given before viral load has peaked.  It ain't rocket science.  We've understood this from the Tamiflu model for many years.  


  • Good Point x 2
  • Off-Topic x 1

#22 albedo

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,801 posts
  • 607
  • Location:Europe
  • NO

Posted 30 July 2020 - 11:09 AM

Please remain focused on the flu vaccination and Covid-19, HCQ has rightly its place in the other threads.


  • Good Point x 1

#23 gamesguru

  • Guest
  • 3,278 posts
  • 397
  • Location:coffeelake.intel.int

Posted 30 July 2020 - 11:11 AM

First cell-based quadrivalent influenza vaccine approved for use in Europe (Jan 2019)

 

https://www.seqirus....roved-in-europe

 

Are you quite sure this had been in use in the US for a year or so before this? 

 

Quite.  It had been used by an estimated 1 to 10 million at least that year, probably significantly more than Italy used in 2019.  The idea that masks somehow bring the virus out of latency also lacks evidence.  It is very harmful information which led to censorship by YouTube.

Seqirus Begins Shipping 2017-2018 Influenza Vaccines to the U.S. Market

 

Seqirus is now shipping its portfolio of over 50 million doses of influenza vaccines to the U.S. market in preparation for the upcoming 2017-2018 influenza season.
20 Jul 2017

 

  • Seqirus is now shipping its portfolio of over 50 million doses of influenza vaccines to the U.S. market in preparation for the upcoming 2017-2018 influenza season.
  • Seqirus utilizes both egg and cell-based technologies to offer the broadest portfolio of influenza vaccines in the US, including both trivalent and quadrivalent formulations
  • The Seqirus portfolio includes FLUAD®, the only adjuvanted seasonal influenza vaccine specifically developed for people 65 years and older; and FLUCELVAX QUADRIVALENT®, the first cell-based seasonal influenza vaccine licensed in the U.S.
  • According to the U.S. Centers for Diseases Control and Prevention (CDC), the best way to help prevent influenza is by getting vaccinated each year1

 

 

HCQ in short supply?  Trump bought 70 million doses back in March or April.  Where the heck did they all go? 

True, I was not sick when I asked my doc about the availability of HCQ should I become ill.  He said: Not No Way, Not No How!

 

Seventy million doses is hardly enough to wet the palate for one morning of a screaming, paranoid mass of 300 million.  When people who are outside the risk groups (by age and health considerations) and have no symptoms ask for a medicine in short supply, it is only fair of doctors to reject the suggestion as absurd.

 

The doc's tone when he says "not no way, not no how" seems more jovial than serious. Even if so, he would not be making the decision, it would likely be the hospital where you were admitted. And due to the global shortage of HCQ and lack of evidence in its favor, this would be unlikely as well.  The bottom line is we don't go out prescribing prophylactic regimens of a scarce (and probably not that effective) medicine that lupus and RA patients need to otherwise healthy and asymptomatic people. If every doctor did that, it would just be chaos.  Lupus patients could die.

 

HCQ is just not that profitable, and though some Indian firms recently stepped up production it will likely be a drop in the bucket getting swallowed up by their domestic economy.  The efforts to curtail its use in the COVID-19 pandemic will likely be necessary to ensure a steady supply to those who need it more.

 

Also worth noting is the HCQ and retinopathy criteria were recently revised and made more stringent,

Three iterations of the American Academy of Ophthalmology HCQ dosing and HCQR screening guidelines have been published without including prescribing physicians on the writing committees. This may contribute prescribing physicians' low adherence to the guidelines. As ancillary tests have improved, asymptomatic HCQR is being detected earlier, leading to a higher reported prevalence of HCQR and a drop in the ceiling for safe dosing. These trends put stricter constraints on prescribers and their patients, who may have had well-controlled autoimmune disease on HCQ doses previously considered below the high-risk threshold for HCQR. Indeed, stopping HCQ at the earliest sign of HCQR should be reconsidered; for cases of early HCQR, dose reduction and more intensive monitoring for retinopathy may strike a more appropriate balance between HCQ risk and benefits.

 

As to the high dose / low dose studies, there is only one certainty.  2-2.4 grams in 24 hours would be very unwise, & this is exactly what Recovery/Solidarity used.  If they could have resisted the temptation to overdose their critically ill patients, the trials most likely wouldn't have been halted.  Not that this would have changed the outcome.  Antivirals that work by inhibiting replication must be given before viral load has peaked.  It ain't rocket science.  We've understood this from the Tamiflu model for many years.

 

It's harder to know to take preventative medicine before the virus has replicated to the point of presenting symptoms.

 

HCQ has too many side effects, and it is too much of a preventative.  By the time of symptoms, anything that stops viral replication is useless. We likely need a specific modulator of the genes and T cells involved immune response and subsequent inflammation.  The nebulized Quercetin in the other thread seems interesting, because quercetin has a long history with allergies and auto-immune diseases as a safe Mast Cell stabilizer.


  • Well Written x 1
  • Off-Topic x 1
  • like x 1

#24 albedo

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,801 posts
  • 607
  • Location:Europe
  • NO

Posted 30 July 2020 - 11:17 AM

Informative post by Lancebr...(post deleted as I overlooked a duplication), my aplogizes


Edited by albedo, 30 July 2020 - 11:31 AM.


#25 Florin

  • Guest
  • 731 posts
  • 35
  • Location:Cannot be left blank

Posted 30 July 2020 - 06:56 PM

Cell-based vaccines were first approved in 2009 in Europe and in 2012 in the United States.

 

https://en.wikipedia...-based_vaccines


  • WellResearched x 1

#26 Dorian Grey

  • Guest
  • 1,733 posts
  • 699
  • Location:kalifornia

Posted 30 July 2020 - 07:56 PM

Point taken Florin/enoji; however at the hospital I worked at egg based flu shots were all that were offered and were mandatory if you didn't want to wear a mask full time.  

 

The only exception to this was if you had a documented egg allergy issued by a licensed doctor.  

 

It would be interesting to see just how widespread the canine cell cultured flu shot was issued by country.  Plandemic seemed to imply Italy in particular embraced the new format shot.  I looked into this after I first saw Plandemic, & found the new jab was used in Italy and also approved for use in the UK, though the egg based shot was still much more prevalent in UK.  Didn't save the links.  

 

I reckon this issue will come to the front burner as flu shot season arrives.  Hopefully someone with better detective skills than I will dig up some enlightening data for us.  


  • Dangerous, Irresponsible x 1
  • Good Point x 1

#27 albedo

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,801 posts
  • 607
  • Location:Europe
  • NO

Posted 05 August 2020 - 08:59 AM

If the speculations put forward in this nice article, reporting on the very intriguing results by Sette & Crotty on pre-existing immunity, turn out to be correct, would it imply flu vaccination might actually help to protect us also against SARS-Cov-2? Fascinating ....

 

"...And that brings us to another question raised by Sette and Crotty's paper: because the common circulating coronaviruses (CCC) appear in different places, at different times, could some countries, cities or localities be disproportionately affected (or spared) because the population had less exposure to those CCCs, thus creating less opportunity to develop cross-reactivity? "If the pre-existing T-cell immunity is related to CCC exposure, it will become important to better understand the patterns of CCC exposure in space and time. It is well established that the four main CCCs are cyclical in their prevalence, following multiyear cycles, which can differ across geographical locations. This leads to the speculative hypothesis that differences in CCC geo-distribution might correlate with burden of COVID-19 disease severity," Sette and Crotty wrote. So, ultimately can it be said that some people have at least partial natural protection from SARS-CoV-2, the novel coronavirus, if they have T-cell cross-reactivity?..."
 
 
"...However, there is also the possibility that pre-existing immunity might actually be detrimental, through mechanisms such as ‘original antigenic sin’ (the propensity to elicit potentially inferior immune responses owing to pre-existing immune memory to a related pathogen), or through antibody-mediated disease enhancement..."
 
"...There is substantial data from the influenza literature indicating that pre-existing cross-reactive T cell immunity can be beneficial..."
 
"...In conclusion, it is now established that SARS-CoV-2 pre-existing immune reactivity exists to some degree in the general population. It is hypothesized, but not yet proven, that this might be due to immunity to CCCs. This might have implications for COVID-19 disease severity, herd immunity and vaccine development, which still await to be addressed with actual data...."
 
Sette, A., Crotty, S. Pre-existing immunity to SARS-CoV-2: the knowns and unknowns. Nat Rev Immunol 20, 457–458 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1...1577-020-0389-z

  • Informative x 1
  • WellResearched x 1

#28 lancebr

  • Guest
  • 425 posts
  • 177
  • Location:USA

Posted 08 September 2020 - 06:38 AM

.

 

So has anyone definitely decided if they believe the flu vaccine is a good thing to get this season or a bad thing?


Edited by lancebr, 08 September 2020 - 07:18 AM.


#29 albedo

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,801 posts
  • 607
  • Location:Europe
  • NO

Posted 08 September 2020 - 07:29 AM

I for one do not have yet a take generally on this and for the population (epidemiology) but weighting my own personal situation and risks I will ask for the shot as soon as available and leave for the moment the Cov-2 vaccine when I will have a better understanding of the situation.



#30 Dorian Grey

  • Guest
  • 1,733 posts
  • 699
  • Location:kalifornia

Posted 08 September 2020 - 03:02 PM

.

 

So has anyone definitely decided if they believe the flu vaccine is a good thing to get this season or a bad thing?

 

Mercola has a big write-up on this today: 

 

https://articles.mer...oronavirus.aspx

 

I'm retired, so I can isolate well.  Will not be getting the flu jab, or the COVID shot any time soon!  

 

"We don’t even know what the ramifications of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine might be yet, although, historically, all coronavirus vaccines have resulted in more devastating disease and increased risk of death, as reviewed in my interview with Robert F. Kennedy Jr."

 

https://articles.mer...oronavirus.aspx

 

Scary stuff!  


Edited by Dorian Grey, 08 September 2020 - 03:09 PM.






Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: coronavirus

2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users