The Medical Thread: Vaccine Search / Staying Healthy / Treatments Etc

rfisher

Let the skating begin
Messages
64,404
I'm surprised that this isnt like one of the first drugs upon admission. Almost any lung/breathing issue get steroids as soon as major distress is evident.
I guess I assumed steroids, albuterol treatments were some of the first things ordered
They would be in the ED. A breathing treatment to open airways is the first thing respiratory care will do. Use of steroids is also common with inflammatory issues in pneumonia, particularly if it's not a bacterial pneumonia. One of the many complications with a viral or aspiration pneumonia is that it can become bacterial as well since fluid and consolidation in the lungs provides the perfect breeding ground for bacteria. Then you have to fight multiple battles. Been there, done that too many times.
 
Last edited:

Theatregirl1122

Needs a nap
Messages
23,009
I'm surprised that this isnt like one of the first drugs upon admission. Almost any lung/breathing issue get steroids as soon as major distress is evident.
I guess I assumed steroids, albuterol treatments were some of the first things ordered

I can pull an article on it later (running errands), but I believe retrospective studies found that, with both SARS and MERS, patients treated with steroids ultimately faired less well in the long term than those without?

Anyways, I don’t remember the exact specifics, but steroids were originally avoided with BB, at least in some places, because of results from SARS and MERS.

ETA: Apparently I missed the part of the thread where someone addressed this. Oops!
 

once_upon

Voter
Messages
16,730
Yes. I've been fortunate enough to avoid ED when my asthma flares up because I have a physician who will prescribe steroids as soon as I present in the office. I have had a nebulizer for 12 years or so and use it along with steroids.

Depending how long it has been going on, she will prescribe an antibiotic typically amoxicillin or zithromax.
 

Theatregirl1122

Needs a nap
Messages
23,009
White House Walks Back Promise of January Vaccines

A month after President Trump announced Operation Warp Speed, administration officials are offering no guarantees that the project will meet its goal of producing 300 million doses of a *********-19 vaccine by January.

“There are no sure things in science,” said a senior Trump administration official, who asked not to be named, in a conference call with reporters Tuesday. “We cannot promise a 100 percent chance of success. What we can tell Americans is that we’ve taken every possible step to maximize the probability of success.”


I am shocked, shocked.

I’m kind of shocked they would walk this back since he can’t be proven wrong until after the election.
 

MacMadame

Staying at home
Messages
37,818
I think they've been saying this since the announcement. And even as part of the announcement?
 

Sylvia

Wishing I could go back to the Lake Placid JGP
Messages
62,876
From the British Heart Foundation:
Professor Marc Dweck, British Heart Foundation Senior Lecturer and Consultant Cardiologist at the University of Edinburgh, said:
“*********-19 is a complex, multisystem disease which can have profound effects on many parts of the body, including the heart. Many doctors have been hesitant to order echocardiograms for patients with *********-19 because it’s an added procedure which involves close contact with patients. Our work shows that these scans are important – they improved the treatment for a third of patients who received them.”

ABC News - The heart: Before, during and after *********-19
*********-19 can not only exacerbate existing heart problems, but cause new ones.
 

MsZem

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,191
Moderna joins Pfizer in reporting promising results from their trials so far:

The Oxford-AstraZeneca initiative may have some good news for us soon, too:

One can only hope!!!
 

ballettmaus

Well-Known Member
Messages
15,327
If they all have promising results, will they all put out their own vaccine or will they join forces at one point to perfect the vaccine and put out the best one possible?
 

MsZem

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,191
If they all have promising results, will they all put out their own vaccine or will they join forces at one point to perfect the vaccine and put out the best one possible?
They use different approaches and mechanisms (see the NYT vaccine tracker). I don't know that they can be integrated into a single vaccine, but people may get better effects if they have more than one vaccine? I know that was done with polio back in the day.

The scientifically inclined among us can probably explain all this ;)
 

aka_gerbil

Rooting for the Underdogs
Messages
2,184
They use different approaches and mechanisms (see the NYT vaccine tracker). I don't know that they can be integrated into a single vaccine, but people may get better effects if they have more than one vaccine? I know that was done with polio back in the day.

The scientifically inclined among us can probably explain all this ;)

Given that they are utilizing different technologies, I'm going to say they are not going to be very different formulations that can't be combined. If all of them do work out, it will give people some choices initially, which would probably help get more people vaccinated more quickly.

This is not quite the answer to the question--I'm going to have to ask someone about that--but I know some people think vaccines based on whole organisms give better protection. If you use just one antigen, your immune system makes antibodies to that one antigen. If you use a whole organism, your immune system makes antibodies to multiple proteins, etc. If you have antibodies to more parts of a microorganism, then you have more options to recognize it.
 

KCC

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,023
When a vaccine comes out, would a fully vaccinated person still be able to spread the ***** along to someone else? I assume they can do so through touching infected surfaces and then touching something used by others. Could they also inhale the ***** and then spread it back out through talking/sneezing/etc.? I guess my question is whether the vaccine just eliminates symptoms or if it completely wipes out the ***** the moment it is inhaled, to the point that the vaccinated person could not spread it around. (Sorry if this is wordy.) Reason -- a friend has one kidney and is super sensitive to many vaccinations, to the point that she just doesn't get some of them. If I'm vaccinated and fly out to meet her, can I still be a spreader?
 

aka_gerbil

Rooting for the Underdogs
Messages
2,184
When a vaccine comes out, would a fully vaccinated person still be able to spread the ***** along to someone else? I assume they can do so through touching infected surfaces and then touching something used by others. Could they also inhale the ***** and then spread it back out through talking/sneezing/etc.? I guess my question is whether the vaccine just eliminates symptoms or if it completely wipes out the ***** the moment it is inhaled, to the point that the vaccinated person could not spread it around. (Sorry if this is wordy.) Reason -- a friend has one kidney and is super sensitive to many vaccinations, to the point that she just doesn't get some of them. If I'm vaccinated and fly out to meet her, can I still be a spreader?

Yes, you would be able to see your friend.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KCC

once_upon

Voter
Messages
16,730

Miezekatze

Well-Known Member
Messages
15,279
Could they also inhale the ***** and then spread it back out through talking/sneezing/etc.? I guess my question is whether the vaccine just eliminates symptoms or if it completely wipes out the ***** the moment it is inhaled, to the point that the vaccinated person could not spread it around.

I read an article last week (sorry it was German) that there are vaccines that work like that (so that vaccinated people can NOT infect others) and unfortunately also vaccines where the vaccinated person does not get sick himself, but can still infect others (I think the difference depends on at what point in time/place in the body the vaccine manages to stop inactivate/stop the *****).

So since neither form of vaccine exists yet, I guess the answer will be "it depends".

I guess the most safe way to visit a highly at risk friend would be to always wear a very good medical mask (maybe plus additionally a face shield) and wash hands very thoroughly before a visit.
 

aka_gerbil

Rooting for the Underdogs
Messages
2,184
This is a good article in The Atlantic on the reality that a vaccine won’t mean an instant end of the ***** and return to normal.


 

MacMadame

Staying at home
Messages
37,818
Here's another article to depress you:


I am not surprised to read this. I have been kind of surprised by the news about new vaccines. It doesn't seem possible, given how science works, that reality is as rosy as it's been painted.

Has journalism always been this lazy and the Woodward and Bernsteins been the exceptions?
 

aka_gerbil

Rooting for the Underdogs
Messages
2,184
Past attempts at nucleic acid vaccines have typically been beset with very unpleasant side effects. It’s one of the reasons my boss has been very skeptical of the Moderna vaccine from the very start.
 

MacMadame

Staying at home
Messages
37,818
Past attempts at nucleic acid vaccines have typically been beset with very unpleasant side effects. It’s one of the reasons my boss has been very skeptical of the Moderna vaccine from the very start.
I know this sounds perverse but it makes me feel so much better to hear that.

This is because, in the normal course of events, you'd expect some of the vaccines to work better than others but if you read the news it's all rosy. Which isn't realistic and therefore made me wonder what exactly was going on. I was afraid there was some big "gotcha" lurking in the shadows that would come out and bite us at the last second. So it's nice to know that there isn't one, it's just inaccurate reporting.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top
Do Not Sell My Personal Information