Thread on long Covid and health risks.

Recovery from Covid is understood by most to be when acute phase symptoms, including fever, cough, fatigue, headaches, go away.

Are there hidden risks beyond the acute phase? Are some of them even fatal? Could some be prevented?
1/n

There is ample evidence that the body does not come back to pre-Covid equilibrium for some people, partly due to permanent damage to cells in different organs (as varied as pancreas, brain, lungs) for some and/or heightened inflammatory state in the body.

2/n
In light of this, it is important to recognize that there is need for caution even later. The impact of some of these long-covid conditions can be non-fatal but chronic. More worrying is the potential risk of death even months later.
3/n
I had heard of anecdotes first-hand from multiple friends of people passing away due to heart attacks, strokes, and pulmonary embolism. My interest in researching this in more detail was because it is affecting so many of us in India at the moment.
4/n
After a lot of perusing through medical papers through databases, I came across this study published in Nature.

High-dimensional characterization of post-acute sequalae of COVID-19
https://t.co/9C1EjHBUID
PDF can be downloaded here

5/n
First, what is a sequela?
A typical sequela is a chronic complication of an acute condition - in other words, a long-term effect of a temporary disease or injury - which follow immediately from the condition.
6/n
Unlike other studies which had much lower number of patients (observations) this was the largest that I have seen to date - around 73,000 patients in the US Veterans database who got Covid.
7/n
A few parameters at the outset was a mean age of ~61, 88% males. They were tracked over a 6 month period and they checked on whether they developed any post-covid conditions, what drugs they needed to take, and what their pathology lab test results came like for key tests.

8/n
Do pre-existing health conditions affect severity seen in acute Covid? We anecdotally know that to be true and there is research on this too, that suggests so.
9/n
See the red box in the second-last tweet. The patients who had severe Covid (with ICU and without it) already had higher interaction with the Veteran healthcare system in the preceding year - being in long-term care already or more visits as outpatients.

10/n
This study is about post-Covid issues. Hence, the results should be seen in this light that if you already have a health issue you will most probably have more severe Covid and in turn, those with more severe Covid have higher risk of complications later on post-covid
11/n
There will still be cases of people who were relatively healthy to begin with but got Covid / had to go to hospital / ICU. I could not see separate data in this paper for this.
12/n
A fair question would be whether they have different risk as compared to already unhealthy people. Although, it is probably better to take greater care in any case because some of the outcomes as listed out are possibly fatal even.
13/n
Going on to the main study results.
Hazard ratio definition from wiki -> For example, in a drug study, the treated population may die at twice the rate per unit time of the control population. The hazard ratio would be 2, indicating higher hazard of death from the treatment.
14/n
In the figure below you will see hazard ratio comparison of covid +ve cases, hospital without ICU, and ICU cases.
15/n
Please see thromboembolism (blood clots leading to blockage as an example). Someone who went to hospital due to Covid (in that cohort with mean age 60 years) had a 10x risk compared to the general population. Someone who had an ICU stay had a 30x chance of an event.

16/n
Or see heart failure. Someone who went to hospital due to Covid (in that cohort with mean age 60 years) had a ~4x risk compared to the general population. Someone who had an ICU stay had a ~7x chance of a heart failure event.

17/n
There was additional data on excess burden. Basically, for every 1k people who got Covid, as compared to the general population, how many more people satisfied a condition as given in the tables (got a medical condition, had to take a medicine, had test levels as mentioned)
18/n
Key takeaway - There are continuing risks for aggravations / chronic conditions in anybody who has had Covid and even more so for anyone who has been to a hospital without ICU and high risks for those who went to an ICU, in older age groups.

19/n
Key takeaway - Data for younger people is not there in this study. Risks will be lesser for younger people in a non-linear way per my reading but some risks surely will be there nevertheless.

20/n
My purpose for sharing this data, like an earlier thread I shared was that doctors that you go to may or may not have read this. Covid is new for the world as much as the medical community.
21/n
It is in YOUR interest to share data like this with your doctor and ask for the best advice based for yourself or people you know to prevent whatever can be prevented.
22/n
For example, per this earlier thread I shared that a good question to ask your doc would be whether it is useful to do a D-dimer test after a month or even 2 months and what does the doc have to say about thinners if the level is high?
https://t.co/puY0RaUDi5
23/n
If you find this useful, do a good deed and share it with others. I have heard of enough preventable cases related to blood clotting for example.

Watch out for yourself and take care. Prevention is better than cure was never so apt.

24/n

More from All

कुंडली में 12 भाव होते हैं। कैसे ज्योतिष द्वारा रोग के आंकलन करते समय कुंडली के विभिन्न भावों से गणना करते हैं आज इस पर चर्चा करेंगे।
कुण्डली को कालपुरुष की संज्ञा देकर इसमें शरीर के अंगों को स्थापित कर उनसे रोग, रोगेश, रोग को बढ़ाने घटाने वाले ग्रह


रोग की स्थिति में उत्प्रेरक का कार्य करने वाले ग्रह, आयुर्वेदिक/ऐलोपैथी/होमियोपैथी में से कौन कारगर होगा इसका आँकलन, रक्त विकार, रक्त और आपरेशन की स्थिति, कौन सा आंतरिक या बाहरी अंग प्रभावित होगा इत्यादि गणना करने में कुंडली का प्रयोग किया जाता है।


मेडिकल ज्योतिष में आज के समय में Dr. K. S. Charak का नाम निर्विवाद रूप से प्रथम स्थान रखता है। उनकी लिखी कई पुस्तकें आज इस क्षेत्र में नए ज्योतिषों का मार्गदर्शन कर रही हैं।
प्रथम भाव -
इस भाव से हम व्यक्ति की रोगप्रतिरोधक क्षमता, सिर, मष्तिस्क का विचार करते हैं।


द्वितीय भाव-
दाहिना नेत्र, मुख, वाणी, नाक, गर्दन व गले के ऊपरी भाग का विचार होता है।
तृतीय भाव-
अस्थि, गला,कान, हाथ, कंधे व छाती के आंतरिक अंगों का शुरुआती भाग इत्यादि।

चतुर्थ भाव- छाती व इसके आंतरिक अंग, जातक की मानसिक स्थिति/प्रकृति, स्तन आदि की गणना की जाती है


पंचम भाव-
जातक की बुद्धि व उसकी तीव्रता,पीठ, पसलियां,पेट, हृदय की स्थिति आंकलन में प्रयोग होता है।

षष्ठ भाव-
रोग भाव कहा जाता है। कुंडली मे इसके तत्कालिक भाव स्वामी, कालपुरुष कुंडली के स्वामी, दृष्टि संबंध, रोगेश की स्थिति, रोगेश के नक्षत्र औऱ रोगेश व भाव की डिग्री इत्यादि।
The best morning routine?

Starts the night before.

9 evening habits that make all the difference:

1. Write down tomorrow's 3:3:3 plan

• 3 hours on your most important project
• 3 shorter tasks
• 3 maintenance activities

Defining a "productive day" is crucial.

Or else you'll never be at peace (even with excellent output).

Learn more


2. End the workday with a shutdown ritual

Create a short shutdown ritual (hat-tip to Cal Newport). Close your laptop, plug in the charger, spend 2 minutes tidying your desk. Then say, "shutdown."

Separating your life and work is key.

3. Journal 1 beautiful life moment

Delicious tacos, presentation you crushed, a moment of inner peace. Write it down.

Gratitude programs a mindset of abundance.

4. Lay out clothes

Get exercise clothes ready for tomorrow. Upon waking up, jump rope for 2 mins. It will activate your mind + body.

You May Also Like

This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".


The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.


Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)


There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.


At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?