CORONAVIRUS

[Peter Cobbold]

No booster call from our GP. And with 1 in 25 infected at present. no way will we join a queue.

Peter

[mike ellis]

Our clinics were always by appointment and worked very well.  Received my invitation for a booster today, unfortunately also today I have just tested positive for Covid so it will have to wait for 28 days.  Despite having taken high doses of Vit D for a good five years.

Mike

[john.r.davies]

Oh, bad luck!

[Lebro]

Sorry to hear you have caught it Mike, I had it recently, but not much more than a cold, all clear now.  I'm sure vit D helped.

Bob

[john.r.davies]

I think I've said before that in the Vax clinic we ask the clients if they have had Covid, because they should not have a booster until a month afterwards, else the  booster will be a wasted dose.     Many, many people report that they have had it since their initial vaccinations, but universally, and as Bob says, it has been no more than a bad cold.     Ain't vaccines wonderful?!

But, in the last week, the number of people that need admission to hospital has increased 20% since the previous week!

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/?msclkid=bc07fd1dac1f11ec952b15b0a3368a64

Covid is NOT over, however gung-ho the Government is about it.   Omicron is VERY infectious, will not be the last variant of the virus and we have no idea how dangerous that will be.

You can look up the current situation in your own area on the above Gov.uk website.  Just enter you postcode to get the sane data. locally.

I am required to wear a mask in the Clinic and I always do when out of my house and indoors somewhere.    I'd encourage you to so too, to protect others more than yourself.

Stay safe!

John

[Peter Cobbold]

19 hours ago, mike ellis said:

Our clinics were always by appointment and worked very well.  Received my invitation for a booster today, unfortunately also today I have just tested positive for Covid so it will have to wait for 28 days.  Despite having taken high doses of Vit D for a good five years.

Mike

Mike,

D3 doesn't prevent a detectable test, especially PCR. But it does prevent a severe infection. Israel data show a ca 14-fold reduction in risk of severe covid for  pts admitted with >100 nmol/L vs < 50 nmol/L   https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35113901/    A good level of D3 may well hahve helped many infecteds avoid hospital in the first place, adn they would not have been assessed in this study. So 14-fold is conceovably an under-estimate.

Peter

 

[john.r.davies]

You all may be interested in this.   An online video presentation is a new way to publish your research findings, but this is from Queen Mary Hospital and was done through COVIDENCE online data gathering, so the method is appropriate.   Some, as were the investigators, may be disappointed but they summarised the results in this slide:

You can see the presentation in its entirety (15 mins) at 

I'm sorry too, that such an easy and safe measure isn't effective,

John

[Peter Cobbold]

Here is the paper:  https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.03.22.22271707v1

There are several flaws in this experiment:

scoring infections started on the same day as supplements were started. But it is  very well known that serum 25(OH)D takes 2 to 3 months to  reach its new level. This will have reduced the difference in D3 status between control and intervention groups

sunlight exposure will have started to raise 25(OH)D in all groups in the second ahlf of the trial. This too is well known and proeprly conducted D3 trials are run from Oct-March, this ran from Dec to May, again  reducing the difference in D3 status between interevnetion and control groups

The authors did not measure control group initial 25(OH). In the supplementary material they admit:

"" Imputed baseline 25(OH)D values for participants randomized to the no offer arm of the trial were then compared to measured baseline 25(OH)D values for participants randomized to either intervention arm (Figure S1, Supplementary Material): the distribution of imputed 25(OH)D concentrations in the ‘no offer’ arm at baseline (range 61.2 nmol/L, s.d. 8.2 nmol/L) was constrained compared to that of measured 25(OH)D concentrations in the lower-offer arm (range 169.3 nmol/L, s.d. 17.8 nmol/L) and the higher-offer arm (range 111.7 nmol/L, s.d. 16.2). This finding called the validity of the imputation into question, which precluded conduct of sub-group analyses by baseline 25(OH)D concentration.""

It was an  experiment spoiled by lack of resource for measuring 25(OH)D, despite several donations. "Imputing serum 25(OH)D" is guessing.

Peter

[john.r.davies]

No study can be perfect.    The investigators discussed the seasonal variation, see at 14 minutes in.   They removed anyone who took supplements and Lo! the difference disappears!

But consider those results.      "Secondary Outcome", the numbers that developed a real SARS-Covid infection. (6 minutes in)    The calculated "P" for those numbers was 0.5.

To apply statistics, it is assumed that the two factors being tested are not connected.    If  P is 1, then it is certain that they are nothing to do with each other.   To be sure that they are connected, then P must be 0.05 or less, near to zero.    This is called a 'significant' result, one that is 95% or bette, than pure chance.

The best example of pure chance is to flip a coin, heads or tails?   Do that a number of times, calculate the P and you will get 0.5.

Peter, there is a long, long way from pure chance to a significant result.

John

 

Edited April 21, 2022 by john.r.davies

[Peter Cobbold]

John,  Indeed no expt is perfect. But we need to explain why Martineau found no effect when the Israel study found a 14-fold reduction in  C19 severity, with much smaller numbers: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35113901/  

The explanation may be that Martineau used a Yes/No score of infections with no information on severity. Indeed D3 actions on innate immunity is to slow virus expansion and reduce viral load and hence severity, its not an absolute shield. It is possible that Martineau and Israel may both be right. But to me reduction severity is the result that matters most.

It is the totality of information that we need to embrace, and recognise that all RCTs are experiments, and they can be screwed up , like any expt.

Peter

[john.r.davies]

Or, the smaller Israeli numbers! (Of people in the studies)

The smaller the difference between the control and experimental groups, the more in those groups is required to show a significant result.   Or, the greater is the potential error, and the Standard Deviation!

John

[Peter Cobbold]

47 minutes ago, john.r.davies said:

Or, the smaller Israeli numbers! (Of people in the studies)

The smaller the difference between the control and experimental groups, the more in those groups is required to show a significant result.   Or, the greater is the potential error, and the Standard Deviation!

John

The 14-fold difference was found for pts sufficiently sick with C19 to require hospital admission. The study does not tell us how few with good D3 status never needed hospitalisation. That number could be huge. That 14-fold ratio is likely a big underestimate of ability of D3 to reduce severity.

Every study has its limitations and  statistics cannot be used to sort out the correct interpretation. A statistically valid result does not necessarily mean the interpretation is correct. I can  throw a dice and get mostly 6s and a statistically significant outcome, but I need to knwo it was loaded to interpret the expt correctly. Any expt has to be interpreted in the context of the field as a whole. D3 is especially tricky to prove anything with  a single expt as it influences the expression of hundreds of genes.Its like trying to test hundreds of drugs in combination. That is why the Israeli result is so important: 14-fold is huge difference.

Peter

 

[PaulAnderson]

An interesting editorial from the BMJ and the HSJ at this Link

Paul

[Peter Cobbold]

14 hours ago, PaulAnderson said:

An interesting editorial from the BMJ and the HSJ at this Link

Paul

With 1 in 17 infected locally, we are still shielding, minimising meetings to immediate family and essentials only. Local hospital was in administration until recently, so for us it's  "better safe than sorry".

This winter doesn't bear contemplating. Likely new variants and a population that mostly seems to think the pandemic is all over.

Even the D3 campaign group has gone quiet, from  several emails daily to one a week.

Peter

[john.r.davies]

Thank you, Paul!    I no longer et either of those journals, so had not seem the Editorial.

Well worth reading, even if you are a staunch Tory, for the arguments on Government complacency.

John

[acaie]

2 hours ago, john.r.davies said:

Thank you, Paul!    I no longer et either of those journals, so had not seem the Editorial.

Well worth reading, even if you are a staunch Tory, for the arguments on Government complacency.

John

A Private Eye subscription is money well spent if you want to find out where stuff is going on. Inevitably because the government do so much more than the opposition they get more of the flack so Tory readers may feel they are getting an unfair share. Nevertheless a subscription is highly recommended.

[Peter Cobbold]

5 hours ago, john.r.davies said:

Thank you, Paul!    I no longer et either of those journals, so had not seem the Editorial.

Well worth reading, even if you are a staunch Tory, for the arguments on Government complacency.

John

Unfortunately for the NHS, the government was pushing at an open door with the public who  wanted to see an end to restrictions on lifestyle and business. We get the political decisions we want, not need.

[Peter Cobbold]

Belgian RCT shows D3 upon hospitalisation reduces impact of C-19:

https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/14/15/3048

25,000 IU daily is not excessively above the max rate of D3 supplied by sunlight on skin (10-20,000 IU daily).

Peter

 

[john.r.davies]

At last, an RCT to inform us!    But, this is a tiny trial with less than 25 in each group.   It should be repeated, please, with more patients, but falling numbers of infections may make that difficult to achieve.

John

[Peter Cobbold]

20 hours ago, john.r.davies said:

At last, an RCT to inform us!    But, this is a tiny trial with less than 25 in each group.   It should be repeated, please, with more patients, but falling numbers of infections may make that difficult to achieve.

John

The result is convincing even with small numbers. And as the basic science of D3 actions in immunity is long-established a bigger trial would not be expected to uncover a different  outcome. It also agrees with the Spanish trial with calcifidiol a year ago.

The falling number of infections at present is another indication of the importance of D3 - the sunny weather will have raised mean population 25(OH)D. 

Peter