FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to Virus

Flu vaccine and CV interference study

Jump to newest
 

By *nlyIfItsWorthIt OP   Man
over a year ago

Newcastle

[Removed by poster at 30/03/20 10:58:51]

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nlyIfItsWorthIt OP   Man
over a year ago

Newcastle

I've come across a study by the US dept of defense where they showed a direct link between the having the seasonal flu jab and an increased susceptibility to the coronavirus.

It showed that the flu jab does indeed protect again seasonal flu but at the risk of increased CV infection.

With both being potentially deadly I wonder if the government and healthcare system will ignore this published report or investigate the possibility that this may explain why the elderly and groups with underlying health conditions seem to me the groups who are experiencing the majority of infections, as they receive the flu jab as standard.

(Link to study available on request)

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *luffy_blanketsMan
over a year ago

Macclesfield

Can you post the link please.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nlyIfItsWorthIt OP   Man
over a year ago

Newcastle


"Can you post the link please. "

I don't know if you're allowed to on here but I'll try..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nlyIfItsWorthIt OP   Man
over a year ago

Newcastle

Quote from the conclusion

"Vaccine derived virus interference was significantly associated with coronavirus.."

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nlyIfItsWorthIt OP   Man
over a year ago

Newcastle

Link...

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31607599

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *luffy_blanketsMan
over a year ago

Macclesfield

[Removed by poster at 30/03/20 11:13:19]

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *luffy_blanketsMan
over a year ago

Macclesfield

Ok thanks

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *uited staffs guyMan
over a year ago

staffordshire

The conclusion of that study is that there was no difference - odds ratios around 1

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nlyIfItsWorthIt OP   Man
over a year ago

Newcastle


"The conclusion of that study is that there was no difference - odds ratios around 1"

Quote please

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nlyIfItsWorthIt OP   Man
over a year ago

Newcastle


"The conclusion of that study is that there was no difference - odds ratios around 1"

To quote in full

"CONCLUSIONS:

Receipt of influenza vaccination was not associated with virus interference among our population. Examining virus interference by specific respiratory viruses showed mixed results. Vaccine derived virus interference was significantly associated with coronavirus and human metapneumovirus; however, significant protection with vaccination was associated not only with most influenza viruses, but also parainfluenza, RSV, and non-influenza virus coinfections."

Over to you.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *uited staffs guyMan
over a year ago

staffordshire

Results: We compared vaccination status of 2880 people with non-influenza respiratory viruses to 3240 people with pan-negative results. Comparing vaccinated to non-vaccinated patients, the adjusted odds ratio for non-flu viruses was 0.97 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.86, 1.09; p = 0.60). Additionally, the vaccination status of 3349 cases of influenza were compared to three different control groups: all controls (N = 6120), non-influenza positive controls (N = 2880), and pan-negative controls (N = 3240). The adjusted ORs for the comparisons among the three control groups did not vary much (range: 0.46-0.51).

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

This "pandemic" lockdown will be over in two or three weeks. They are already planting seeds of information in the unreliable media that the virus is slowing in the UK.

This virus will disappear as quickly as it arrived lol.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nlyIfItsWorthIt OP   Man
over a year ago

Newcastle


"Results: We compared vaccination status of 2880 people with non-influenza respiratory viruses to 3240 people with pan-negative results. Comparing vaccinated to non-vaccinated patients, the adjusted odds ratio for non-flu viruses was 0.97 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.86, 1.09; p = 0.60). Additionally, the vaccination status of 3349 cases of influenza were compared to three different control groups: all controls (N = 6120), non-influenza positive controls (N = 2880), and pan-negative controls (N = 3240). The adjusted ORs for the comparisons among the three control groups did not vary much (range: 0.46-0.51)."

Now, try to specifically look at the link to coronavirus

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *uited staffs guyMan
over a year ago

staffordshire


"Results: We compared vaccination status of 2880 people with non-influenza respiratory viruses to 3240 people with pan-negative results. Comparing vaccinated to non-vaccinated patients, the adjusted odds ratio for non-flu viruses was 0.97 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.86, 1.09; p = 0.60). Additionally, the vaccination status of 3349 cases of influenza were compared to three different control groups: all controls (N = 6120), non-influenza positive controls (N = 2880), and pan-negative controls (N = 3240). The adjusted ORs for the comparisons among the three control groups did not vary much (range: 0.46-0.51).

Now, try to specifically look at the link to coronavirus "

You mean the subgroup analysis in the discussion part? Which played no part in the peer reviewed results part

Yeah right

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

Op, did they look at all seasonal flu vaccines as my understanding is that each year virologists and such like create a new vaccine..?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"This "pandemic" lockdown will be over in two or three weeks. They are already planting seeds of information in the unreliable media that the virus is slowing in the UK.

This virus will disappear as quickly as it arrived lol. "

Yes, that's because we have isolated. Risk it comes back if things start too quickly.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"This "pandemic" lockdown will be over in two or three weeks. They are already planting seeds of information in the unreliable media that the virus is slowing in the UK.

This virus will disappear as quickly as it arrived lol. "

Normality as we know it won't be until July at the earliest in my opinion.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *asIsaCouple
over a year ago

harrow

My daughter is working on the frontline and is possibly going to transfer to the Nightengale next week. Her information from senior NHS staff is the plan is that there will be a 6 month lockdown with restrictions being lifted during that time and then reinstated as the virus begins to spread again. Social distancing will be in place for 12 months after the second wave expected July /Aug. This thing is going nowhere - there is no exit starategy. Only a vaccine/herd immunity which is a long way away at best. If anyone thinks this will be 'over' in a few months is quite frankly deluded . Would love to hear how it's gonna just end in June/July as people seem to be suggesting!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Think we all know there isn't and can't be an "exit strategy" until vaccination available or 60%+ have been infected so herd immunity kicks in.

Doesnt stop Kier Starmer starting to stir shit/score political points by demanding government state what exit strategy is....knob!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *moothman2000Man
over a year ago

Leicestershire

Might be an umpopular comment, but I don't quite see how we can have an 'exit strategy' from a transient situation.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iamondCougarWoman
over a year ago

Norfuck! / Lincolnshire


"My daughter is working on the frontline and is possibly going to transfer to the Nightengale next week. Her information from senior NHS staff is the plan is that there will be a 6 month lockdown with restrictions being lifted during that time and then reinstated as the virus begins to spread again. Social distancing will be in place for 12 months after the second wave expected July /Aug. This thing is going nowhere - there is no exit starategy. Only a vaccine/herd immunity which is a long way away at best. If anyone thinks this will be 'over' in a few months is quite frankly deluded . Would love to hear how it's gonna just end in June/July as people seem to be suggesting! "

Yay! Someone else who sees the light. This virus is everywhere and is going nowhere until it can be stopped in it’s tracks .... vaccine! - at least 12 months away better get used to social distancing folks

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By *rFunBoyMan
over a year ago

Longridge

Reading between the lines, they are still allowing for 'Herd Immunity' but at a pace that the NHS can cope with those that need hospital admission due to bad reactions in order to ensure ICU beds and equipment.

The 'let it run' suggestion initially has caused a system shock and needs time to be processed prior to allowing the next batch through - by relaxation.

This will be the inferrence to overwhelming, NHS will end up treating nearly all of the severly poorly victims but at a steady and managable rate in order to avoid "hard choices".

Otherwise, we'll locked down until a vaccine is available...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top