We don’t see a lot about COVID-19 within the mainstream media lately. Persons are bored with enthusiastic about it, and the parents who generate content material for the mainstream media are bored with writing about it. Greater than drained, I’d say. Fed up is extra prefer it. However a fast have a look at the information is attention-grabbing.
At current, the prevalence of COVID is diminishing. Through the week ending August 31, 2.3% of emergency division visits reported constructive COVID assessments. This was a giant drop from the ten.2% of ED visits that reported constructive COVID assessments the earlier week. There was a serious enhance in ED visits resulting from COVID simply previously few months, from the low positivity price of lower than 0.5% reported within the week ending Might ninth of this yr. For the reason that onset of the pandemic, there have been 139.8 million constructive COVID-19 emergency division visits.
General numbers of hospitalizations and deaths have additionally dropped considerably. Listed below are some COVID dying figures for comparability:
Week ending 09/14/2024 – 563 deaths resulting from COVID
Week ending 08/31/2024 – 663 deaths resulting from COVID
Week ending 05/18/2024 – 336 deaths resulting from COVID
Week ending 01/27/2024 – 2,131 deaths resulting from COVID
Week ending 01/17/2023 – 3,870 deaths resulting from COVID
Week ending 01/15/2022 – 19,078 deaths resulting from COVID
Week ending 01/19/2021 – 25,974 deaths resulting from COVID
In accordance with my calculator, the latest COVID dying price is about 2.5% of what it was on the pandemic’s peak. It’s not over, but it surely actually is approach, approach down.
Within the US, there have been 111,820,092 confirmed circumstances of COVID, and 1,219,489 confirmed deaths. Over 95% of the US inhabitants has identifiable COVID antibodies, which reduces the influence by way of hospitalizations and deaths. In comparison with COVID in its peak interval, what we’re taking a look at now’s undoubtedly minor. The illness has its ups and downs, however the general trajectory is obvious. Typically, COVID is diminishing as a severe risk.
The lengthy COVID story is considerably extra regarding. The CDC has taken its time in defining lengthy COVID. They’ve settled on three months because the time span that defines lengthy COVID – if signs persist three months or longer, the sickness qualifies as lengthy COVID. The prevalence of lengthy COVID in adults over the age of 18 declined very barely, from about 7.5% in June of 2022 to about 6% in the identical interval in 2023, and has not modified since 2023. These percentages will not be percentages of the overall inhabitants, however of the inhabitants that was recognized with COVID – in different phrases, since 2023 about 6% of individuals initially recognized with COVID went on to develop lengthy COVID. In accordance with the CDC, the individuals almost definitely to be affected by lengthy COVID are ladies, Hispanics, hospitalized people, individuals with underlying well being situations, and the unvaccinated. In adults reporting earlier episodes of COVID, the prevalence of lengthy COVID is far larger. It reached 18.9% again in 2022 and has not modified a lot since that point.
Simply a few months in the past, we had been reluctantly pressured to cross on the data that Paxlovid doesn’t do a lot to alleviate the signs of lengthy COVID.
The parade of variants continues. As of August 31, there have been 26 variants in circulation within the US. The variant presently inflicting probably the most infections is designated as KP.3.1.1, which is related to 42.2% of COVID circumstances that come to the eye of the healthcare system and are topic to blood assessments. That is actually a small fraction of all of the COVID circumstances for the reason that starting of the pandemic, however that proportion is probably going an correct reflection of the present prevalence of that variant within the general inhabitants. All of those present variants are within the Omicron class.
Talking as Doc Gumshoe, I’m reluctant to stake a agency place on the present COVID outlook. Sure, hospitalizations and deaths are approach down, however every new variant appears to be extremely infective. Vaccines and former infections enhance mobile immunity and are efficient safety towards severe sickness, however will not be that protecting towards preliminary an infection. My spouse and I put on masks solely once we assume we have to. On the motion pictures or the theater we put on masks, additionally at any healthcare amenities we go to. Will this be the way in which it’s for the remainder of the twenty first century? We actually hope not, but it surely’s laborious to know.
Some however not all antidepressants could end in weight achieve
This was based mostly on a research that analyzed information from greater than 183,000 individuals between the ages of 20 and 80, with a median age of 48 years. Most topics had been obese or overweight firstly of the research. The vast majority of the themes had been ladies. The researchers analyzed individuals’ digital well being information and physique mass index. They gauged weight achieve or loss at common intervals of six, twelve, and twenty-four months, after individuals began taking antidepressants. (Petimar J. Remedy-induced Weight Change Throughout Frequent Antidepressant Remedies. Ann Intern Med 2024 Aug; 177(8);993-10030
In reference to this research Dr. Roy Perlis, affiliate chief of psychiatric analysis at Massachusetts Basic Hospital, identified that it is very important perceive that weight achieve is a key motive that folks would possibly cease taking antidepressants, even when the antidepressants are working properly, and likewise that some individuals could also be reluctant to begin taking antidepressants even when they really feel depressed or anxious, as a result of they’re conscious that weight achieve is a possible aspect impact and they’re extra involved about weight achieve than about their emotions of despair or nervousness.
The research particularly in contrast one antidepressant, sertraline (Zoloft, now marketed by Viatris, previously marketed by Upjohn and Pfizer) with a number of different antidepressants – escitalopram (Lexapro, from Forest), paroxetine (Paxil, from GlaxoSmithKline), duloxetin (Cymbalta, from Eli Lilly). citalopram (Celexa, additionally from Forest). fluoxetine (Prozac, additionally from Eli Lilly), venlaxafine (Effexor, from Pfizer), and bupropion (Wellbutrin, a drug with conflicting information regarding totally different generic variations, and whose manufacture and distribution includes many alternative corporations).
The largest weight beneficial properties had been related to escitalopram and paroxetine. Every of those was linked with a 1.4 pound weight achieve at 6 months. For escitalopam, the load achieve rose to three.6 kilos at 24 months, and for paroxetine it reached 2.9 kilos at 24 months. Sertraline was related to a small weight achieve, simply 0.5 kilos, on the 6 month mark, however the weight achieve elevated to three.2 kilos on the 24 month marker. Citalopram, fluoxetine, and venlaxafine had been a lot in the identical vary as sertraline. The one drug that was related to any weight reduction in any respect was bupropion, simply 0.25 kilos at 6 months. However that pattern switched instructions at 24 months, when bupropion was related to a median weight achieve of 1.2 kilos.
The research’s creator factors out that weight achieve and weight reduction might be related to despair itself. Some people can truly shed some pounds on account of despair, which might make individuals lose their urge for food. Maybe when individuals begin taking an antidepressant, their urge for food improves, they usually regain the load that they had misplaced.
The research was observational, that means it can’t show that antidepressants trigger weight modifications, solely that they had been linked with them. It wasn’t a randomized, managed trial and the individuals taking antidepressants weren’t in comparison with a management group not taking the medicines.
Additional limitations of the research had been identified by the authors. One was that solely about one third of the themes had been taking their prescribed antidepressant remedy simply six months after the research began, which makes it tough (if not inconceivable) to hyperlink later weight modifications with a selected drug. And, in fact, the research was not randomized, so the authors couldn’t inform if the variations within the weight outcomes had been due principally to the variations between the medicines or different variations between the research topics.
I’m in accord with the underlying precept of the research, specifically that the topic of weight achieve related to antidepressants is unquestionably vital. Extra weight and weight problems is a big well being concern within the US and across the globe, and likewise, for a lot of individuals, weight management borders on an obsession. And large numbers of individuals take antidepressants. The CDC reported that in 2025 to 2018, 13.2% of American adults used antidepressants – about twice as many ladies (17.7%) as males (8.4%). And ladies are reportedly extra involved about weight achieve than males. Thus, the topic that this research was addressing is of concern to a fantastic many people.
However by way of outcomes that involved people would possibly act on, the research got here up moderately brief. The research seems to have been designed in such a approach as to give you a bonus for sertraline, however no such benefit emerged. The one antidepressant that demonstrated any weight reduction was bupropion, after which solely on the six-month interval.
It’s laborious to say if there was any general conclusion rising from the research. I grant the authors’ good intentions. It could clearly be worthwhile to puzzle out which – if any – of the obtainable antidepressants had no adversarial results in any respect by way of weight achieve. The research didn’t accomplish this, and it appears seemingly that assembly that specific goal is unrealistic. The most effective I can say is, “Good strive!”
Ought to all individuals aged 70 or older take statins?
Regardless of acknowledged skepticism on whether or not statins do extra good than hurt, the consensus is that individuals over 40 who’ve any of a number of cardiovascular danger elements can cut back their danger of main adversarial cardiovascular occasions by taking statins. About 47 million people within the US take a each day statin tablet. It has been advised that excess of these 47 million individuals are actually at main coronary heart assault danger. In accordance with the CDC, 86 million People have elevated ldl cholesterol, and about 121 million have coronary heart illness. In accordance with cardiovascular practitioners, these people would all profit from statin remedy.
However now it’s being advised that each one people 70 years outdated or older would profit from statins, no matter whether or not they had any particular cardiovascular danger elements.
This was based mostly on an observational research by which researchers analyzed information from the UK Biobank and Whitehall II research in additional than 20,000 adults 70 years and older with or with out earlier heart problems. This information was then utilized in a heart problems simulation mannequin to estimate their coronary heart illness danger, survival price, quality-adjusted life years, and healthcare prices with and with out lifetime customary or larger depth statin remedy. (Mihaylova B, et al. Coronary heart 2024;0:1–10. doi:10.1136/heartjnl-2024-324052)
On evaluation, the researchers discovered that individuals who continued with customary statin therapy for his or her lifetime elevated their quality-adjusted life years by 0.24 – 0.70 years and people on higher-intensity statin remedy raised their quality-adjusted life years by one other 0.04 – 0.13 years.
The research’s lead creator, Borislava Mihaylova, DPhil, College of Oxford, mentioned “The consequences of statin remedy reported right here throughout individuals 70 years of age and older are, as anticipated, a bit smaller however sizeable. These outcomes full the image of seemingly substantial well being advantages with statin remedy throughout the continuum of age and danger ranges within the inhabitants.”
A query inescapably arises: are these small will increase in life expectancy definitely worth the elevated dangers that accompany statin therapy? It seems to me that the utmost profit, on common, is a bit lower than one “quality-adjusted” yr of elevated life. Some people will get greater than that and a few will get much less.
However we now have to think about the trade-off. The listing of attainable statin unintended effects is lengthy and regarding, viz: headache, nausea, dizziness, gastrointestinal bloating, diarrhea, constipation, muscle or joint ache, confusion, reminiscence loss, kidney harm, liver harm, muscle breakdown (rhabdomyolysis), elevated blood sugar and kind 2 diabetes.
Of those, rhabdomyolysis might be the one of many best concern. This situation impacts about 26,000 individuals within the US. It’s usually unusual, and unusual amongst individuals taking statins – about 1.5 in 100,000 statin customers develop rhabdomyolysis. This may account for fewer than a thousand of the rhabdomyolysis circumstances within the US. Typically, rhabdomyolysis is a results of overexertion or trauma and leads to a breakdown of muscle fiber. The poisonous elements of the muscle fiber can enter the circulation and trigger kidney harm.
By itself, the chance of rhabdomyolysis shouldn’t be sufficient to dissuade an individual from statin remedy if the center illness dangers had been vital, specifically, elevated ldl cholesterol. Nonetheless, in an individual with no particular cardiovascular dangers, the advantages of statin remedy look doubtful. Talking for myself, I’m not the least disposed to begin statin remedy within the doubtful hope of gaining a small fraction of an extra yr of life.
In case you didn’t discover, the research inhabitants included each individuals with and with out recognized cardiovascular danger elements. Within the US, as I identified above, the variety of individuals with elevated ldl cholesterol is nearly double the quantity presently taking statins. If the UK proportion is comparable, it’s attainable (and even seemingly) that the statins conferred that profit solely to the research individuals who truly had cardiovascular danger elements, and to not the themes with none danger elements. Why wouldn’t it be in any other case? Why would statins, which decrease cardiovascular danger by lowering ldl cholesterol transport, convey any profit to people whose levels of cholesterol had been regular? In any case, as we now have a number of instances identified in previous discussions, ldl cholesterol at regular ranges is a vital physiologic issue. If ranges are within the regular vary, why would there be any profit in bringing these ranges decrease?
My skepticism extends not solely to the outcomes of the research, however to the motives of the research within the first place. Had been the authors on the lookout for a motive to prescribe statin remedy to an ever-increasing fraction of the inhabitants? The funding for the analysis got here from the UK Nationwide Institute of Care and Well being Analysis, so it wasn’t a pharmaceutical firm trying to enhance gross sales of its statin.
I must repeat what I mentioned firstly of this dialogue, that statin remedy supplies very vital advantages to individuals with coronary heart illness dangers. The research underneath dialogue was meant to find out whether or not statin remedy offered related advantages to people who didn’t have these coronary heart illness dangers. In my view, this research didn’t accomplish that goal.
A notable AI accomplishment
AI can do many issues, together with issues associated to healthcare. AI can give you compounds that, based mostly on their configuration, have the potential to be employed as useful medication. Whether or not AI can confirm the efficacy of those potential compounds, in truly having useful results when utilized in people, must be decided on a case-by-case foundation. There are estimated to be about 20 million natural compounds, any of which may be priceless as medication. If AI may at the very least determine the possibles out of this large group, it might be a serious step in the suitable course
The NY Instances lately reported what I’d decide to be a notable, and extremely promising, AI accomplishment. A person with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), which was often called Lou Gehrig’s illness, had completely misplaced his capacity to make use of his voice. He couldn’t make a single sound, a lot much less utter a phrase or participate in a dialog.
Physicians on the College of California, Davis, had been capable of assemble a three-dimensional printed mannequin of his mind and use it as a method to decide the place to implant electrodes that linked the affected person’s mind with a pc. Then they sank 4 electrode arrays into his mind’s outer layer. Every array had 64 spikes and regarded like a tiny mattress of nails. Every spike detected impulses from the neurons that fired when the affected person tried to kind a phrase by shifting his tongue, lips, or jaw. The pc was capable of translate these makes an attempt into sounds.
Quickly after implantation, the system – implants plus the pc, termed a neuroprosthesis – was capable of acknowledge a 50 phrase vocabulary with 99.6% accuracy. Right here’s how the article within the New England Journal of Drugs summarized the outcomes of the therapy:
“Twenty-five days after surgical procedure, on the primary day of system use and following half-hour of assortment of cortical recordings and processing whereas the participant tried to talk, the neuroprosthesis achieved 99.6% accuracy with a 50-word vocabulary. On the second day, after 1.4 extra hours of system coaching, the neuroprosthesis achieved 90.2% accuracy utilizing a 125,000-word vocabulary. With additional coaching information, the neuroprosthesis sustained 97.5% accuracy for self-paced conversations for over 248 cumulative hours over 8.4 months after surgical implantation.
“In a person with ALS and extreme dysarthria, an intracortical speech neuroprosthesis reached a stage of efficiency appropriate to revive naturalistic communication after transient coaching.” (N Engl J Med. 2024 Aug 15; 391(7): 609–618. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2314132)
I’m conscious that a lot of individuals view AI as a severe and looming risk to human existence. If machines can do all that, why do we’d like people? The instance above is a transparent indication of why we do want people. It was people who found out that AI would possibly represent a solution to that affected person’s extremely regarding drawback. AI can course of the mind scans and give you the place precisely to implant the electrodes, however a human has to instruct it to take action. And it’s a complete lot extra sensible and handy to have a human being truly implant the electrodes. We’re not antiquated and ineffective – not but, anyway!
Everyone knows that hypertension – hypertension, as it’s recognized to the healthcare world and a lot of the remainder of the world as properly – is a transparent and regarding well being danger. After we go to any medical practitioner, nearly all the time the primary issues the nurse does is verify our top, weight, and blood strain. It feels routine and nearly trivial. In case your blood strain is a bit excessive on that preliminary studying, likelihood is the nurse, or the doctor, will verify it once more. It’s vital to do the blood strain measurement accurately.
Right here’s what the Harvard Well being Letter says about taking your personal blood strain.
“Whether or not you might be on the physician’s workplace or checking your personal blood strain, it’s vital to take sure steps to get correct readings.
Don’t drink a caffeinated beverage or smoke in the course of the half-hour earlier than the take a look at. Sit quietly for 5 minutes earlier than the take a look at begins.
Through the measurement, sit in a chair together with your ft on the ground and your arm supported so your elbow is at about coronary heart stage.
The inflatable a part of the cuff ought to utterly cowl at the very least 80% of your higher arm, and the cuff ought to be positioned on naked pores and skin, not over a shirt.
Don’t discuss in the course of the measurement.
Have your blood strain measured twice, with a short break in between. If the readings are totally different by 5 factors or extra, have it carried out a 3rd time.
It’s a good suggestion to have your blood strain measured in each arms at the very least as soon as, for the reason that studying in a single arm could also be larger (often the suitable, since there’s extra direct blood circulate from the center on that aspect). The upper quantity ought to be used to make therapy selections.”
Why did Harvard Well being assume it was a good suggestion to publish these directions? My guess is, as a result of many extra individuals are actually doing their very own blood strain readings. There was a time when an individual would have his/her blood strain checked solely within the context of a healthcare go to of some form. However these days, easy house blood strain measuring gadgets are extensively (and inexpensively) obtainable. Errors in utilizing these gadgets, in addition to attainable defects within the gadgets themselves, may simply result in misguided readings, and misguided readings – whether or not on the excessive or low aspect – may have dangerous penalties. Maybe the Harvard Well being directions will make an actual distinction in lowering the frequency of mistaken blood strain readings, and, additionally maybe, result in improved well being outcomes.
* * * * * * *
The following time I put fingers to the keyboard (in my capability as Doc Gumshoe, anyway) I’m going to try urinary tract infections. These are the commonest infections within the US, and they’re much greater than a nuisance.
As I’ve mentioned many instances, I welcome your feedback – preserve them coming! Additionally, please let me know of any areas within the healthcare orbit that I ought to scrutinize.
Be properly, and thanks once more! Finest, Michael Jorrin (aka Doc Gumshoe)
[ed note: Michael Jorrin, who I dubbed “Doc Gumshoe” many years ago, is a longtime medical writer (not a doctor) and shares his commentary with Gumshoe readers once or twice a month. He does not generally write about the investment prospects of topics he covers, but has agreed to our trading restrictions. Past Doc Gumshoe columns are available here.]
