5 ms·

This is the thing that's frustrated me from the beginning. So many people assume that it's like the flu, that you get sick and maybe you die but otherwise you g

by dhosek 6y ago

This is the thing that's frustrated me from the beginning. So many people assume that it's like the flu, that you get sick and maybe you die but otherwise you go back to normal and there's been abundant evidence that this simply isn't the case. And I'm just some schmuck who reads a lot. We're going to see a lot of people with long-term impacts on their health from this on top of all the dead and we still have people claiming it's no big deal.

ketamine__ 6y ago
Most of the population wants to take risks with their health for activities that they find enjoyable. Heart disease and other chronic conditions are the direct result of that. It's not surprising that people are rebelling against lockdowns based on the current culture in western countries.
- colanderman 6y ago
  Heart disease isn't transmissible.
  - just-juan-post 6y ago
    If your aim is public safety then I suggest you start lobbying to outlaw alcohol.
  - yokaze 6y ago
    Myocarditis can be directly the result of transmissible diseases, even the common cold. That is, if you shrug off the cold and think your tougher than that, a myocarditis can a complication of it. Wonder how many sportspeople continued to train while having initial symptoms... https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/myocarditis/symptoms-causes/syc-20352539 https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/myocarditis/s...
    - creaghpatr 6y ago
      Most athletes undergo a physical at the beginning of their respective seasons, which probably includes testing for irregular heart conditions. That's how these cases get discovered.
  - bch 6y ago
    > Heart disease isn't transmissible If it comes via COVID-19 (apparently), in a way it is, no?
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - d_tr 6y ago
      I think the point of the comment was about the difference between risking only your health (bad diet -> heart disease) vs risking the health of others as well (coronavirus 'rebels').
      - ketamine__ 6y ago
        Which is ironic because people with conditions like heart disease almost overwhelmed the healthcare system during the pandemic... "Approximately 90% of hospitalized patients identified through COVID-NET had one or more underlying conditions, the most common being obesity, hypertension, chronic lung disease, diabetes mellitus, and cardiovascular disease." https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6915e3.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6915e3.htm
        outworlder 6y ago
        Not that ironic if you consider that you may have 'cardiovascular' diseases that you have no idea about and that are not caused by lifestyle.
        ketamine__ 6y ago
        Post a source and we can debate it. Until then these are the facts.
  - ketamine__ 6y ago
    It certainly can be but not in the way you are suggesting. Every child's diet is set by their parents. Children can develop plaque in their arteries too. And when they become independent they will likely continue the diet that was started in childhood. However, this is a straw man. I commented on risk not transmissibility.
- dr-detroit 6y ago
  If by most you mean those who stand most to benefit
- hkai 6y ago
  Username checks out.
rootusrootus 6y ago
How prevalent are long-term complications like myocarditis with the seasonal flu?
- SketchySeaBeast 6y ago
  Apparently 10%? I found an article discussing the very same thing about H1N1. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.110.938506 https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.110...
  - slg 6y ago
    This is a problem with a lot of science reporting. Things get filtered through so many reports that it is tough to know what they mean anymore. The 10% number in your report references another report which references this report [1]. Here is part of the abstract: >The incidence of viral myocarditis was studied prospectively at the Central Military Hospital 1 in Finland in connection with an A1 virus influenza epidemic in Jan. 1978. Of 104 conscripts taken consecutively to hospital because of a sudden respiratory infection, 41 had serologically confirmed influenza A, 37 were serologically negative, while in 26 it was not possible to carry out complete virological analyses. Six of the serologically confirmed influenza patients had acute myocarditis on the basis of serial electrocardiographic ST segment and/or T wave changes, unresponsive to beta-blockade. The incidence of the influenza A myocarditis was thus 9% of the 67 verified and suspected cases of influenza taken together. So 6 people of the 67 people who went to a single Finnish Hospital in 1978 with influenza had myocarditis. Through a game of telephone that becomes "myocardial involvement in seasonal influenza infection has been reported in up to 10% of cases" which clearly isn't the conclusion of the original study. The original sample is tiny and it is already measuring from a population of people who were sick enough to go to the hospital. 30-35% would be a hugely alarming number, especially among 18-23 year old Division 1 athletes. It would be difficult to find a healthier population of people. [1] - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7368969/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7368969/
    - timr 6y ago
      While what you say is true, you should be sure to apply the same standard of evidence to the claims made here. As the currently top comment is pointing out, the "30-35%" is based on, essentially, rumor. They haven't given MRIs to every Division I athlete. Some unknown number of people had MRIs, and 30% of those had myocarditis. Was this a representative sample? We have no way of knowing. But here's a scary article, regardless.
mfer 6y ago
I suspect some of this is news coverage and metrics. People tend to chase after what is measured. Most of the metrics are rates of people who get it and rates death. This is further broken down by region and demographic. So, we talk a lot about these things. The other issues surrounding it are either not being measured or the measurements are not public. So, we are not talking about them or chasing after things that impact them.
smileysteve 6y ago
> So many people assume that it's like the flu I conclude that few people have had the full blown flu recently; or any disease that has fevers > 100 degrees. Chock it up to the vaccine, significant herd immunity, etc. Last significant fever I had was an inconsistent barely 100 degrees (walking pneumonia 8 years ago), and if I could wear a mask around others and work from home to prevent those cough or chills for a handful of nights there'd be no question about it.

by dhosek 6y ago

ketamine__ 6y ago

Most of the population wants to take risks with their health for activities that they find enjoyable. Heart disease and other chronic conditions are the direct result of that. It's not surprising that people are rebelling against lockdowns based on the current culture in western countries.

colanderman 6y ago
Heart disease isn't transmissible.
- just-juan-post 6y ago
  If your aim is public safety then I suggest you start lobbying to outlaw alcohol.
- yokaze 6y ago
  Myocarditis can be directly the result of transmissible diseases, even the common cold. That is, if you shrug off the cold and think your tougher than that, a myocarditis can a complication of it. Wonder how many sportspeople continued to train while having initial symptoms... https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/myocarditis/symptoms-causes/syc-20352539 https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/myocarditis/s...
  - creaghpatr 6y ago
    Most athletes undergo a physical at the beginning of their respective seasons, which probably includes testing for irregular heart conditions. That's how these cases get discovered.
- bch 6y ago
  > Heart disease isn't transmissible If it comes via COVID-19 (apparently), in a way it is, no?
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - d_tr 6y ago
    I think the point of the comment was about the difference between risking only your health (bad diet -> heart disease) vs risking the health of others as well (coronavirus 'rebels').
    - ketamine__ 6y ago
      Which is ironic because people with conditions like heart disease almost overwhelmed the healthcare system during the pandemic... "Approximately 90% of hospitalized patients identified through COVID-NET had one or more underlying conditions, the most common being obesity, hypertension, chronic lung disease, diabetes mellitus, and cardiovascular disease." https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6915e3.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6915e3.htm
      - outworlder 6y ago
        Not that ironic if you consider that you may have 'cardiovascular' diseases that you have no idea about and that are not caused by lifestyle.
        ketamine__ 6y ago
        Post a source and we can debate it. Until then these are the facts.
- ketamine__ 6y ago
  It certainly can be but not in the way you are suggesting. Every child's diet is set by their parents. Children can develop plaque in their arteries too. And when they become independent they will likely continue the diet that was started in childhood. However, this is a straw man. I commented on risk not transmissibility.
dr-detroit 6y ago
If by most you mean those who stand most to benefit
hkai 6y ago
Username checks out.

rootusrootus 6y ago

How prevalent are long-term complications like myocarditis with the seasonal flu?

SketchySeaBeast 6y ago
Apparently 10%? I found an article discussing the very same thing about H1N1. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.110.938506 https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.110...
- slg 6y ago
  This is a problem with a lot of science reporting. Things get filtered through so many reports that it is tough to know what they mean anymore. The 10% number in your report references another report which references this report [1]. Here is part of the abstract: >The incidence of viral myocarditis was studied prospectively at the Central Military Hospital 1 in Finland in connection with an A1 virus influenza epidemic in Jan. 1978. Of 104 conscripts taken consecutively to hospital because of a sudden respiratory infection, 41 had serologically confirmed influenza A, 37 were serologically negative, while in 26 it was not possible to carry out complete virological analyses. Six of the serologically confirmed influenza patients had acute myocarditis on the basis of serial electrocardiographic ST segment and/or T wave changes, unresponsive to beta-blockade. The incidence of the influenza A myocarditis was thus 9% of the 67 verified and suspected cases of influenza taken together. So 6 people of the 67 people who went to a single Finnish Hospital in 1978 with influenza had myocarditis. Through a game of telephone that becomes "myocardial involvement in seasonal influenza infection has been reported in up to 10% of cases" which clearly isn't the conclusion of the original study. The original sample is tiny and it is already measuring from a population of people who were sick enough to go to the hospital. 30-35% would be a hugely alarming number, especially among 18-23 year old Division 1 athletes. It would be difficult to find a healthier population of people. [1] - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7368969/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7368969/
  - timr 6y ago
    While what you say is true, you should be sure to apply the same standard of evidence to the claims made here. As the currently top comment is pointing out, the "30-35%" is based on, essentially, rumor. They haven't given MRIs to every Division I athlete. Some unknown number of people had MRIs, and 30% of those had myocarditis. Was this a representative sample? We have no way of knowing. But here's a scary article, regardless.

mfer 6y ago

I suspect some of this is news coverage and metrics. People tend to chase after what is measured. Most of the metrics are rates of people who get it and rates death. This is further broken down by region and demographic. So, we talk a lot about these things. The other issues surrounding it are either not being measured or the measurements are not public. So, we are not talking about them or chasing after things that impact them.

smileysteve 6y ago

> So many people assume that it's like the flu I conclude that few people have had the full blown flu recently; or any disease that has fevers > 100 degrees. Chock it up to the vaccine, significant herd immunity, etc. Last significant fever I had was an inconsistent barely 100 degrees (walking pneumonia 8 years ago), and if I could wear a mask around others and work from home to prevent those cough or chills for a handful of nights there'd be no question about it.