Posting some miscellaneous coronavirus news today.
It's been frequently noted that covid-19 is far more likely to be fatal for the elderly or those with serious pre-existing conditions. This has led to some debate about whether these fatalities should be chalked up to the coronavirus, or whether they should be attributed to something else.
Here's a study that attempts to count the number of years of life lost, based on the life expectancy of the victims, adjusted for their pre-existing conditions. The conclusion is that the average years of life lost per fatality is about 12 years, based on data from Italy.
https://wellcomeopenresearch.org/articles/5-75
COVID-19 – exploring the implications of long-term condition type and extent of multimorbidity on years of life lost: a modelling study
Based on this sort of analysis, we could also look at years of life lost to "deaths of despair". According to various analysis quoted in
an article at Childrens' Health Defense, each 1% increase in unemployment sustained over a period of 5 years, results in approximately 58,000 additional deaths. Unemployment is associated with an increase in all-cause mortality of 63%, including increases in suicides, cardiovascular events, homicides, and alcohol related deaths. With unemployment expected to reach 32% or 47 million newly unemployed soon, the "deaths of despair" will be on the increase. With many of these fatalities among much younger people, the average years life lost per fatality will be much greater. Not to dismiss the deaths of the ill and elderly, but the deaths of these younger people deserve to be weighted more heavily. A teenage suicide could cost 70 years of life lost.
On another topic: it's well known that prior to covid-19, there were at least four distinct varieties of the family of coronaviruses circulating in the human population. Those coronaviruses generally produced mild to moderate cold or flu symptoms. It was rarely even worth the trouble to diagnose whether a particular case of cold or flu was caused by a rhinovirus, influenza virus or coronavirus.
So now there's some evidence of cross-immunity against covid-19 caused by exposure to other human coronaviruses. This might be part of the reason why outbreaks of the novel coronavirus almost always spare a significant percentage of the group that was heavily exposed.
https://www.genengnews.com/news/good-news-for-covid-19-vaccine-immune-system-shows-robust-response-to-sars-cov-2/
The teams also looked at the T-cell response in blood samples that had been collected between 2015 and 2018, before SARS-CoV-2 started circulating. They detected SARS-CoV-2-reactive CD4+ T cells in ~50% of unexposed individuals. But everybody has almost certainly seen at least three of the four common cold coronaviruses, which could explain the observed crossreactivity.
Any potential for crossreactive immunity from other coronaviruses has been predicted by epidemiologists to have significant implications for the pandemic going forward. Crossreactive T cells are also relevant for vaccine development, as cross-reactive immunity could influence responsiveness to candidate vaccines.
Whether this immunity is relevant in influencing clinical outcomes is unknown, tweeted Crotty, but it is tempting to speculate that the crossreactive CD4+ T cells may be of value in protective immunity, based on SARS and flu data.
“Given the severity of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, any degree of cross-reactive coronavirus immunity could have a very substantial impact on the overall course of the pandemic and is a key detail to consider for epidemiologists as they try to scope out how severely COVID-19 will affect communities in the coming months,” said Crotty. It may explain why some people or geographical locations are hit harder by COVID-19.
Last up, and I'm posting here instead of the MMS thread because this seems to be actual clinical evidence. Dr. Kalcker reports that Chlorine Dioxide has cured approx. 100 patients in Ecuador:
https://lbry.tv/@Kalcker:7/100-Recovered-Aememi-1:7