6 ms·

Visceral fat shows strongest association with ICU need in patients with Covid-19

• fnord77 6y ago
  > An abnormal fat distribution, and in particular [Visceral Fat] expansion, is re-known to be associated with low grade inflammation and with the secretion of pro-inflammatory cytokines, such as interleukin 6 (IL-6) [[14]].
• goldforever 6y ago
  No, its no mask wearing...lol
• nradov 6y ago
  No surprise there. Visceral fat has has long been associated with a higher risk of respiratory diseases. But it's good to see this confirmed for COVID-19. https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20090306/belly-fat-bad-for-your-lungs https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20090306/belly-fat-bad-for-y...
  • pmiller2 6y ago
    Your point probably stands, but COVID is not a respiratory disease. It's a vascular disease: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7556303/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7556303/
    • TheSpiceIsLife 6y ago
      What does SARS stand for? The article you linked, first paragraph: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) leads to multi-system dysfunction with emerging evidence suggesting that SARS-CoV-2-mediated endothelial injury is an important effector of the virus. Potential therapies that address vascular system dysfunction and its sequelae may have an important role in treating SARS-CoV-2 infection and its long-lasting effects. You're saying it's not a respiratory disease? Are you sure?
      • pmiller2 6y ago
        Yes, I'm sure. Continue reading, please.
        • peytn 6y ago
          Worth mentioning that one of the authors happens to be on the board of a biotech developing a stroke product.
        • TheSpiceIsLife 6y ago
          Most people infected with the COVID-19 virus will experience mild to moderate respiratory illness and recover without requiring special treatment. But then again, if it's damaging the vascular system then it's also a kidney disease. 25% of each stroke volume out of the heart goes to the kidneys. Anything that damages the vascular system will strain the heart leading to higher blood pressure, which will damage the kidneys. Poor kidney clearance will increase the incidence of joint diseases like gout and arthritis. COVID-19 is a joint disease.
          • pmiller2 6y ago
            I'll be sure to notify the researchers to issue a correction. How may I credit you?
          • Zancarius 6y ago
            You know what structures also have ACE2 receptors that SARS-CoV-2 attacks? The endothelial cells. Guess how SARS-CoV-2 causes the formation of emboli that fundamentally result in blocking the lung vasculature? By attacking the endothelium.
      • Zancarius 6y ago
        It's largely called SARS-CoV-2 because, surprise, it's in the coronavirus family that causes SARS. Yes, it is a respiratory disease, but what we've learned in the last year is that the worst respiratory effects from this disease aren't from it infecting pneumocytes (that's how it spreads) but from the emboli that it creates which then block the vasculature of the lungs. I'd suggest this lecture by Dr. Seheult of MedCram which dates back to around the time we started discoverying the concerning underlying pathologies of the disease process: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PlUFibXtDxQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PlUFibXtDxQ This is also one of the possible explanations for the appearances of rash-like lesions in the extremities of younger populations who are otherwise asymptomatic: Capillary vasculature becoming blocked by the formation of emboli creating a redness in the skin is another feature of a disease that is primarily vascular in nature. Not to mention the increased risk of stroke. The correct answer is that it's "kind of both" but that the damaging effects from SARS-CoV-2 are less a consequence of destruction of lung cells, as was originally thought, and more a function of blocking the vasculature that carry away oxygen.
    • nradov 6y ago
      According to the CDC: "COVID-19 is a respiratory disease caused by SARS-CoV-2". So you can take your argument up with them. A disease can be more than one thing. https://www.cdc.gov/dotw/covid-19/index.html https://www.cdc.gov/dotw/covid-19/index.html
      • deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
      • pmiller2 6y ago
        I'll get right on that.
  • johnyzee 6y ago
    Your link is about 'belly fat', which is not visceral fat, but rather subcutaneous (under the surface of the skin, as opposed to internally around the organs). Intuitively, it would seem that visceral (internal) fat might affect lung function more, but as the article states, the mechanism of impairment is not clear.
    • brailsafe 6y ago
      Seems like it's both actually, the more pronounced of which is visceral which seems to make up most of a beer belly. https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/womens-health/in-depth/belly-fat/art-20045809 https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/womens-health/i...
• vsviridov 6y ago
  Enjoy those daily donuts from Krispy Kreme
• milofeynman 6y ago
  > Published:July 23, 2020 In terms of covid papers, this was published an eternity ago
• 2421n 6y ago
  Open up intellectual property around the vaccines and focus on getting everyone healthy... I'm not against further interventions like shutdowns, mask mandates, etc., but I can't take anyone seriously if they don't first advocate for these two basic life-saving measures. IP law may literally kill millions in the developing world in the coming years. The reason you see the pharma companies lobbying for Covax is that the pressure is already mounting and they know what the more effective, less profitable alternative is.
  • centimeter 6y ago
    Why would they have dumped billions into developing these vaccines in the first place if they expected to just lose the IP rights right away anyway? You might be able to save a small number of extra people this time by screwing over the vax manufacturers, but a lot more people will die next time when no one is willing to put up the R&D money.
    • 2421n 6y ago
      Many of the vaccines were developed with public funding and for those that were not, then an amount that would cover R&D and incentivize future production could easily be reached so as to save millions of lives...
• mrslave 6y ago
  But how do I lose it quickly?
  • nradov 6y ago
    You can't lose it quickly, at least not in a sustainable way. But you can lose it slowly just like other types of fat. Exercise more, eat less, and in particular reduce your sugar intake. There is some evidence that stress also causes accumulation of visceral fat so if you can find a way to relax that might help.
    • dvt 6y ago
      I always think that this idea of "losing fat quickly" is kind of interesting. If you think about it, one year of your life is, on average, barely over a percent of your entire lifespan. If you lifted weights or ran ~5 days a week for a year and ate appropriately, most people would probably end up looking like models. And that's just one year. To me, that's pretty darn quick. Basically, anything else of value takes like way longer: playing an instrument, getting good at a sport, getting an education. If you really think about it, the time investment is actually pretty minimal.
      • blodkorv 6y ago
        its more complicated than that depending on your life. You will never look like a model by just lifting weights and running. You need a propper diet plan and a life that supports it. Going on dinner with your friend? that will be a no for a year. Having a bussiness lunch meeting with clients or bosses? Thats a no for a year. Skipping a week or more of lifing because of unexpected life reasons? Thats a no for a year. Guarantee a majority of your sleep to be of good quality for a whole year? Very few can do that. Being on a caloric deficit and maintaining a high protein intake every day for a whole year? That is really hard and requires you to have no unplanned events for a whole year. Getting in a situation where you have no real good options for your diet plan, you need to make sure never to get there for a year. If your goal is "just" to loose weight its a bit easier but still a lot of hard work with no compromises for a year, and if you want to look like a model then you need hard work and good genetics to support that. The time investment depends a whole lot on external factors and its never minimal.
• tinus_hn 6y ago
  So we lock down gyms, close sports facilities and chastise people for going outside.
  • deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  • thefz 6y ago
    Can't agree with you more because I fall in the demographic affected by sport restriction, but the easiest way to lose body fat quickly is simply to not eat. Exercise/diet have a 30/70% contribution to one's weight loss. Our body is so damn efficient at burning fuel that it is simply faster not to introduce it, so exercise as a fat loss tool alone is not gonna cut it. It is however encouraged for the myriad other reasons it is good to us.
• idanman 6y ago
  Only 150 people with 35 intubated. There are several factors that could explain (at least part of) their results and one is age. They do mention that age denotes a statistically significant difference between intubation and no intubation under Table 1. It is not easy to tell but depends on how you read this it could be that they had some data and they went fishing. You can always find correlations by fishing through the data and looking for when does the p-value become low enough [0] but its not a valid way to do data analysis. It is also data from one hospital and one region. I don't think you can draw too many conclusion from this one study. It is published in a journal with impact factor of 6.36 and a metabolic journal. If this was a significant finding I would think they would publish in a higher impact factor journal. So overall it calls for some skepticism. [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_dredging https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_dredging
• netmonk 6y ago
  COVID19 is fatshaming from Mother Nature.