3083 replies to this topic

[bladedmind]

Be cautious.

 

The use of Povidone Iodine nasal spray and mouthwash during the current COVID-19 pandemic may protect healthcare workers and reduce cross infection.

 

In late 2019 a novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2 causing Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) appeared in Wuhan China, and on 11th March 2020 the World Health Organisation declared it to have developed pandemic status. Povidone-iodine (PVP-I) has a better anti-viral activity than other antiseptics, and has already been proven to be an effective virucide in vitro against severe acute respiratory syndrome and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronaviruses (SARS-CoV and MERSCoV). Povidone iodine has been shown to be a safe therapy when inhaled nasally or gargled. We propose that a protocolised nasal inhalation and oropharyngeal wash of PVP-I should be used in the current COVID-19 pandemic to limit the spread of SARS-CoV-2 from patients to healthcare workers (and vice versa) and thus reduce the incidence of COVID-19. There should be regular use in patients with COVID-19 to limit upper respiratory SARS-CoV-2 contamination, but also use by healthcare workers prior to treating COVID 19 patients or performing procedures in and around the mouth/ nose during the pandemic, regardless of the COVID 19 status of the patient. Patients having such procedures should also be treated with PVP-I. The total iodine exposure proposed is within previously recorded safe limits in those without contraindications to its use. 

 

 

Can be found ready-made  (e.g., http://ph.betadine.c...e-and-mouthwash) or DIY if you know for sure what you are doing. 

Edited by bladedmind, 23 June 2020 - 06:28 PM.

[gamesguru]

interesting, iodine.. is it safe to give to people in the ICU for weeks at a time?

[bladedmind]

Review: Improving Therapeutics for COVID-19 with Glutathione-boosting Treatments that Improve Immune Responses and Reduce the Severity of Viral Infections

 

Glutathione-boosting treatments have been shown to enhance immune responses and reduce the severity of influenza, coronavirus, HIV and other viral infections.  Such viral infections markedly increase the production of Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS) and deplete cysteine and critical antioxidants, including reduced glutathione (GSH).  These viruses use depletion of GSH to create an oxidized environment needed for viral replication/assembly and evading the host immune system.  High levels of reduced glutathione in antigen presenting cells is critical for mounting an adaptive immune response to viral infections and for avoiding inflammatory cytokine responses.  SARS CoV-1 up-regulates TGF-β1, which increases ROS, depletes glutathione and lowers substrate and enzyme needed for glutathione synthesis….

 

This paper reviews a substantial body of evidence that Glutathione-boosting supplements including N-Acetyl Cysteine (NAC), Alpha Lipoic Acid (ALA) and Liposomal Reduced Glutathione have beneficial effects in combating viral disruption of redox status and immune responses in animal models and in humans.  Glutathione-boosting treatments improve immune responses, as well as reduce viral replication, inflammatory cytokines and/or severity of viral infections, including HIV and even Influenza in the elderly. The potential for glutathione-boosting supplements to reduce risks of severe COVID-19 induced cytokine storms and disease in susceptible populations is addressed.  Clinical trials are needed to determine if the severity of COVID-19 is reduced from onset of symptoms by: combined oral treatment with up to 2400 mg/day NAC and 1200 mg/day ALA; or with NAC, ALA and 2000 mg/day oral Liposomal Reduced Glutathione; versus a placebo control.

 

 

[bladedmind]

interesting, iodine.. is it safe to give to people in the ICU for weeks at a time?

 

Don't know, haven't checked the references.  I learned during quick internet browsing that it can stain teeth, which is why it is not routinely popular.   I presume that brief use and using as gargle rather than mouthwash would mitigate the problem. 

[DanCG]

 

And just to keep it on-topic, it is no surprise to me, as is evidenced by this long discussion thread, that essential nutrients are helpful in fighting COVID. In fact, it is a near crime that so many "health professionals" (not doctors) are steadfast against supplementation to help people get through a COVID infection. The people who suffer the most are those who have the worst diets, don't exercise, don't get any sun, etc... It is common sense to prescribe essential nutrients, exercise, etc... as a first defense against COVID.

 

Recently, a friend asked me for advice about supplements, both for general use and in particular for COVID. I went through a short list including the usual supplements discussed in this thread. Then she told me about the prescription medications she was taking. I had to tell her to wait until I did some research on interactions before doing anything new. It turns out that quercetin would likely alter the pharmacokinetics of two antidepressants she was taking, due to effects on cytochrome P450 and P-glycoprotein. The results could have been disastrous. No quercetin (or resveratrol) for her. I come away with a new appreciation for the problems physicians face. It is much easier for doctors to issue a blanket “no supplements” than to research each potential interaction and attempt to adjust doses.

 

People reading this forum are generally knowledgeable and cautious, but too many in the general public will not approach the use of supplements wisely. Still, I agree with your general sentiment that health professionals should be advising modest supplementation, more exercise, getting blood sugar under control, etc.

[pamojja]

People reading this forum are generally knowledgeable and cautious, but too many in the general public will not approach the use of supplements wisely.

 

I rather think the general public, including some members here, don't approach pharmaceuticals wisely. By taking a real long-term benefits/risks evaluation.

 

Without pharmaceuticals, almost all supplements become really harmless.

 

 UK_Relative_Risks_2D_2012_9_July_01.jpg   113.39KB   1 downloads

 

 EU_Bubbles_Graph_2012_9_July_01.jpg   154.15KB   1 downloads

 

[DanCG]

 

I rather think the general public, including some members here, don't approach pharmaceuticals wisely. By taking a real long-term benefits/risks evaluation.

 

Without pharmaceuticals, almost all supplements become really harmless.

I agree wholeheartedly. Unfortunately, our "health care" system is built around pharmaceuticals. Too few people are "without pharmaceuticals".

It's not just the general public, but the doctors who don't think about long-term risks/benefits.

[resveratrol_guy]

Long story, but I just wanted to mention that I drank 1 mL of Agri-Mectin (not approved for human use and definitely unsafe for chronic use) brand ivermectin dissolved in about 500 mL of water, twice, a week apart. This was relative to my 67 Kg body weight at the time. It seems to form a foam on the surface of the water which refuses to dissolve, so it wasn't straightforward to ensure that I got substantially all of it down my throat. It also wasn't easy to get out of the bottle; that required a (rather fat) 20-guage veterinary syringe. (I also had to eject a small blob of the rubber top which the syringe had bit off.) Apart from smelling a bit like a cat after a flea bath, it doesn't seem to have harmed me. I just wanted to share this in case someone out there thinks they have COVID19 and wants to intervene, but is afraid to try it. (Obviously my sample-of-one isn't particularly rigorous, but at least it's one. I believe there are others on YouTube. I saw one guy who drank it undiluted in a bit higher quantity, but it's impossible to verify.) Ideally, one would get IV ivermectin in the ICU, but these times demand brutal practicality due to the paucity of competent professional care. And yes, I did think I had the disease. That turned out not to be the case, but it does explain my absence of several weeks, during which this thread has added dozens of pages that I unfortunately don't have time to read, so my apologies if this is stale info.

 

I imagine that Agri-Mectin will be banned at some point, if it's not already. That would be fine if the FDA-approved equivalent were available in every ICU, to be administered under doctor supervision, but we don't live in that world, and it's until when or if we ever will.

Edited by resveratrol_guy, 26 June 2020 - 02:45 AM.

[Gal220]

But these times demand brutal practicality due to the paucity of competent professional care. And yes, I did think I had the disease. That turned out not to be the case, but it does explain my absence of several weeks, during which this thread has added dozens of pages that I unfortunately don't have time to read, so my apologies if this is stale info.

 

Has anyone changed what they are doing?

 

Prevention 

1.Sleep      2.exercise    3.diet(low sugar-bread/pasta)/ Vitamin regimen      4.quecetin/vitaminC empty stomach - preventative+cytokine storm inhibitor      5. natto - improve blood viscosity + clear potential blood clots      6.oxygen finger tester

 

If symptoms - Get Tested   

1.Salt water gargle      2.more Natto     3.more Vitamin C    4.add 10mg zinc to quercetin(500mg x2daily)     5.glutathione       6.curcumin      7.garlic      8. Potassium    9.Make sure hospital checks your insulin levels.

Edited by Gal220, 26 June 2020 - 03:10 AM.

[Hip]

Long story, but I just wanted to mention that I drank 1 mL of Agri-Mectin (not approved for human use and definitely unsafe for chronic use) brand ivermectin 

 

What makes you think that the quantity of ivermectin you consumed will be sufficient to have an any antiviral effect in vivo? Did you do a pharmacokinetic analysis? Because from my pharmacokinetic calculation, you would need about 150 grams of ivermectin to have a reasonable antiviral effect in the body. And at that dose level, it will probably be fatally toxic. So as far as its coronavirus antiviral effects are concerned, it looks like a nonstarter.

[geo12the]

My understanding is that the study showing Ivermectin works that got people excited has been withdrawn because it involved the Surgisphere charlatans, the same ones involved in the Lancet paper on hydroxychloroquine that was withdrawn. There are studies that show it inhibits viruses in-vitro.  

[lancebr]

My understanding is that the study showing Ivermectin works that got people excited has been withdrawn because it involved the Surgisphere charlatans, the same ones involved in the Lancet paper on hydroxychloroquine that was withdrawn. There are studies that show it inhibits viruses in-vitro.  

 

Is it this study you are talking about or was it a different study?

 

https://www.newsmax....6/09/id/971417/

 

Some doctors are thinking that if it does work it is not because of its supposed anti-viral

properties but because of some other mechanism that they haven't yet figured out that

seems to slow down the replication of the virus so the body can fight it off better.

 

 

It looks like the Eastern Virginia Medical School has it as part of their treatment protocol

if you are mildly symptomatic at home or on the floor. I have also read that some other

medical schools and some hospitals are using it as a treatment option.

 

 

Attached Files

•  protocol.jpg   179.75KB   0 downloads

Edited by lancebr, 26 June 2020 - 10:08 PM.

[smithx]

Latest is a bit different (still has ivermectin, no more hydroxychloroquine):

https://www.evms.edu...for_clinicians/

 

 

[Mind]

I agree wholeheartedly. Unfortunately, our "health care" system is built around pharmaceuticals. Too few people are "without pharmaceuticals".

It's not just the general public, but the doctors who don't think about long-term risks/benefits.

 

Great points you raise about pharmaceuticals and the sick-care industry! I often forget about how people trapped in the sick-care industry are taking handfuls of pharma drugs every day...and there are a lot of interactions/side effects, when combined with certain supplements.

[resveratrol_guy]

What makes you think that the quantity of ivermectin you consumed will be sufficient to have an any antiviral effect in vivo? Did you do a pharmacokinetic analysis? Because from my pharmacokinetic calculation, you would need about 150 grams of ivermectin to have a reasonable antiviral effect in the body. And at that dose level, it will probably be fatally toxic. So as far as its coronavirus antiviral effects are concerned, it looks like a nonstarter.

 

I drank 75% as much, pound for pound, as the IV dose intended for cattle. Granted, that's only for the purpose of preventing or treating parasites, not any sort of virus. Based on the experiments of pulmonologist Jean-Jacques Rajter, it seems plausible that my same dose, delivered IV (and maybe oral), has a material impact on disease course (but not as a monotherapy). Granted, I've missed a couple months of research. Has this been refuted?

Edited by resveratrol_guy, 27 June 2020 - 11:34 AM.

[resveratrol_guy]

Some doctors are thinking that if it does work it is not because of its supposed anti-viral

properties but because of some other mechanism that they haven't yet figured out that

seems to slow down the replication of the virus so the body can fight it off better.

 

That's an interesting theory because Rajter was using it in the ER with serious cases, while viral load supposedly peaks during the first week of symptoms -- generally before people end up there. So in principle, people are fighting themselves rather than the virus at that point. Therefore, thwarting viral reproduction would seem to be irrelevant for such patients. Indeed, remdesivir seems to work best when patients just start needing passive oxygen. However, we also need to account for the fact that less viral load in a serious patient might well cause more systemic havoc than more viral load in a mild patient. So it could still be down to load reduction via the well-known importin channels upon which ivermectin acts.

Edited by resveratrol_guy, 27 June 2020 - 11:46 AM.

[kurdishfella]

good thing its summer for most people and everyone is having more vitamin d levels which is crucial for immune system. A lot of people are deficient. Also your vitamin d levels can increase without the sun even hitting you, because it works also on a vibration level the light, this is how caves are able to spawn and grow flowers etc underneath were sun does not shine. My point is because a lot of people stay inside especially now it is good that the sun has come more frequent maybe it actually saved a lot of lives. 

Edited by kurdishfella, 27 June 2020 - 01:46 PM.

[Gal220]

but these times demand brutal practicality due to the paucity of competent professional care.

 

I do think too many people really trust doctors to be all knowing AND any doctor is basically equivalent to another.  I hope this Oxford article isnt an indicator that hospitals havent been addressing insulin levels in a virus largely dominated by diabetics , but it wouldnt shock me either.  If you want to further erode your confidence in at least some hospitals, check out this nurse tell all Mercola just POSTED

 

"Olszewski addresses a number of problems at Elmhurst, including the disproportionate mortality rate among people of color, the controversial rule surrounding Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) orders, lax personal protective equipment (PPE) standards, and the failure to segregate COVID-positive and COVID-negative patients"

 

"Olszewski's experience in a private hospital in her home state of Florida is in stark contrast to that of Elmhurst. In Florida, they would treat each patient as needed, rather than driving them toward ventilation as quickly as possible. "

 

"One of the treatment protocols used on COVID-19 patients in Florida was hydroxychloroquine and zinc. Not one patient died. When asked why she thinks hydroxychloroquine has been demonized in the media, she says, "Because it works and then people won't need vents." "

 

 

 

BUT if you do address your SUGAR and HIGH BLOOD PRESSURE(both will probably require diet/exercise changes) + the supplements above , I would be relying on my own immunity to kill the virus rather than take a pharmaceutical, especially with the high percentage of people who have no symptoms or a mild fever.

Edited by Gal220, 27 June 2020 - 04:52 PM.

[Ames]

tl;dr: Caprylic Acid may be worth having on-hand when possible initial symptoms arise.

 

I was traveling in Santa Clara in mid-March, about 1-1.5 weeks before the "lockdown" (loose term) started going into effect. This was after Santa Clara was listed as a ground zero of sorts (or one of them) in the US due to a cluster of first cases. My hosts had us in crowded restaurants. I later flew to the East Coast on a commercial flight, after traveling through both the Bay Area and Southern California.

 

In the following month, I began getting strange symptoms that began in the lung (felt like fluid / inflammation). These symptoms were strange to me because I didn't remember such symptoms ever having begun in the lung for any type of sickness. When I had had similar symptoms in the past, they had always begun in my head or throat and later moved into my lung when I was unfortunate.

 

Each time they came up, I would take Caprylic Acid and they would go away within 24 hours. The symptoms repeated over the next couple of months, but less and less frequently. Each time the Caprylic Acid knocked them out. The symptoms stopped repeating in May, at the latest. 

 

I can't say if Caprylic Acid would be effective beyond assisting with initial mild symptoms, or if I had COVID. But it did work how I stated. 

 

 

Edited by golgi1, 27 June 2020 - 06:00 PM.

[Hip]

I drank 75% as much, pound for pound, as the IV dose intended for cattle. Granted, that's only for the purpose of preventing or treating parasites, not any sort of virus. Based on the experiments of pulmonologist Jean-Jacques Rajter, it seems plausible that my same dose, delivered IV (and maybe oral), has a material impact on disease course (but not as a monotherapy). Granted, I've missed a couple months of research. Has this been refuted?

 

Ivermectin has only been tested in vitro as an antiviral for coronavirus. With these in vitro tests, they will determine the concentration of the substance which inhibits viral replication by 50% in a cell line in a petri dish. That concentration is known as the EC50 or IC50.

 

In order to have an antiviral effect in vivo, you have to attain at least the same concentration in the blood. To work out the concentration achieved in the blood when you take an substance orally, you use pharmacokinetic data and calculations. A lot of the time, it is not possible to achieve in the blood the same high concentration that were used in vitro, because of limiting factors such as oral bioavailability and plasma protein binding. 

 

And according to my pharmacokinetic calculations, the oral ivermectin dose required to achieve the EC50 is far, far too high. So ivermectin does not look like it will be clinically useful as a antiviral for coronavirus.

 

It is however possible that ivermectin might have some immune-boosting effects which might be useful.

Edited by Hip, 27 June 2020 - 07:49 PM.

[lancebr]

I have noticed that more news organization, including some MSM organizations, are covering stories

about the MMR vaccine possibly protecting from Covid and that some are recommending that the

people at the highest risk should think about getting the MMR for the time being until there is a 

specific vaccine for Covid.

 

https://asm.org/Pres...he-Worst-Sympto

 

I thought the protection from the MMR towards Covid was mainly coming from the antibodies, but

based upon the the following information it seems that it comes from different ways:

 

"In Dr. Noverr’s laboratory, in collaboration with Dr. Fidel, vaccination with a live attenuated fungal

strain-induced trained innate protection against lethal polymicrobial sepsis. The protection was

mediated by long-lived myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs) previously reported inhibiting

septic inflammation and mortality in several experimental models. The researchers say that an MMR

vaccine should be able to induce MDSCs that can inhibit or reduce the severe lung inflammation/sepsis

associated with COVID-19. Mortality in COVID-19 cases is strongly associated with progressive lung

inflammation and eventual sepsis."

Edited by lancebr, 27 June 2020 - 10:34 PM.

[albedo]

What do you think about hesperidin? "SARS-CoV-2 or COVID-19 is representing the major global burden that implicated more than 4.7 million infected cases and 310 thousand deaths worldwide in less than 6 months. The prevalence of this pandemic disease is expected to rise every day. The challenge is to control its rapid spread meanwhile looking for a specific treatment to improve patient outcomes. Hesperidin is a classical herbal medicine used worldwide for a long time with an excellent safety profile. Hesperidin is a well-known herbal medication used as an antioxidant and anti-inflammatory agent. Available shreds of evidence support the promising use of hesperidin in prophylaxis and treatment of COVID 19. Herein, we discuss the possible prophylactic and treatment mechanisms of hesperidin based on previous and recent findings. Hesperidin can block coronavirus from entering host cells through ACE2 receptors which can prevent the infection. Anti-viral activity of hesperidin might constitute a treatment option for COVID-19 through improving host cellular immunity against infection and its good anti-inflammatory activity may help in controlling cytokine storm. Hesperidin mixture with diosmin co-administrated with heparin protect against venous thromboembolism which may prevent disease progression. Based on that, hesperidin might be used as a meaningful prophylactic agent and a promising adjuvant treatment option against SARS-CoV-2 infection." https://www.scienced...30698772031358X

[DanCG]

What do you think about hesperidin? "SARS-CoV-2 or COVID-19 is representing the major global burden that implicated more than 4.7 million infected cases and 310 thousand deaths worldwide in less than 6 months. The prevalence of this pandemic disease is expected to rise every day. The challenge is to control its rapid spread meanwhile looking for a specific treatment to improve patient outcomes. Hesperidin is a classical herbal medicine used worldwide for a long time with an excellent safety profile. Hesperidin is a well-known herbal medication used as an antioxidant and anti-inflammatory agent. Available shreds of evidence support the promising use of hesperidin in prophylaxis and treatment of COVID 19. Herein, we discuss the possible prophylactic and treatment mechanisms of hesperidin based on previous and recent findings. Hesperidin can block coronavirus from entering host cells through ACE2 receptors which can prevent the infection. Anti-viral activity of hesperidin might constitute a treatment option for COVID-19 through improving host cellular immunity against infection and its good anti-inflammatory activity may help in controlling cytokine storm. Hesperidin mixture with diosmin co-administrated with heparin protect against venous thromboembolism which may prevent disease progression. Based on that, hesperidin might be used as a meaningful prophylactic agent and a promising adjuvant treatment option against SARS-CoV-2 infection." https://www.scienced...30698772031358X

Nice find. Much earlier in this forum, there was discussion of a virtual binding study that identified hesperidin as potentially blocking the interaction of spike protein and ACE2 receptor. When this abstract said “Hesperidin can block coronavirus from entering host cells through ACE2 receptors which can prevent the infection” I was hoping that someone had followed up by doing some actual binding experiments. But no, this paper relies on the same modeling paper that was discussed earlier. So it remains an interesting but untested hypothesis.

If I were at high risk for exposure to COVID, I would add hesperidin to my stack. Why not? It is cheap, safe, and as this paper points out, it has a lot of potential benefits.

[lancebr]

Here is an observational study comparing two different protocols:

 

https://www.trialsit...t-under-6-days/

 

 

The study patients were divided into two groups:

 

(A) (n=60): Ivermectin 200 µgm/kg single dose and Doxycycline 100 mg BID for 10 days.

 

(B) (n=56): Hydroxychloroquine 400mg first day then 200mg BID for 9 days plus Azithromycin 500mg daily for 5 days.

 

 

The Results:

 

Group A, the Ivermectin group, experienced a 100% recovery rate, with a mean symptomatic recovery duration

of 5.93 days and negative PCR was on 8.93 days.

 

Group B results Hydroxychloroquine was 96.36%, 6.99 days and 9.33 days respectively. 

 

 

Group A experienced mild degree of adverse effects; lethargy in 14 (23.3%), nausea in 11 (18.3%) and occasional

vertigo in 7 (11.66%) of patients.

 

Group B experienced some degree of adverse effects; 13 (23.21%) mild type of blurring of vision and headache;

22 (39.2%) increased lethargy and dizziness, 10 (17.85%) occasional palpitation, and 9 (16.07%) experienced

nausea and vomiting.

Edited by lancebr, 29 June 2020 - 05:16 PM.

[Daniel Cooper]

Here is an observational study comparing two different protocols:

 

https://www.trialsit...t-under-6-days/

 

 

The study patients were divided into two groups:

 

(A) (n=60): Ivermectin 200 µgm/kg single dose and Doxycycline 100 mg BID for 10 days.

 

(B) (n=56): Hydroxychloroquine 400mg first day then 200mg BID for 9 days plus Azithromycin 500mg daily for 5 days.

 

 

The Results:

 

Group A, the Ivermectin group, experienced a 100% recovery rate, with a mean symptomatic recovery duration

of 5.93 days and negative PCR was on 8.93 days.

 

Group B results Hydroxychloroquine was 96.36%, 6.99 days and 9.33 days respectively. 

 

 

Group A experienced mild degree of adverse effects; lethargy in 14 (23.3%), nausea in 11 (18.3%) and occasional

vertigo in 7 (11.66%) of patients.

 

Group B experienced some degree of adverse effects; 13 (23.21%) mild type of blurring of vision and headache;

22 (39.2%) increased lethargy and dizziness, 10 (17.85%) occasional palpitation, and 9 (16.07%) experienced

nausea and vomiting.

 

It's a shame they didn't do a control group.  It would be nice to know the expected recovery rate of a patient population similar to what they used.

 

 

[DanCG]

It's a shame they didn't do a control group.  It would be nice to know the expected recovery rate of a patient population similar to what they used.

Agreed. But then, according to some people, the HCQ group is the control because it supposedly doesn't do anything.

[Gal220]

It's a shame they didn't do a control group.  It would be nice to know the expected recovery rate of a patient population similar to what they used.

 

Its hard to believe this is the only treatment they recieved, did they do nothing for them if high blood pressure, low potassium, clots, high sugar?

[Gal220]

If I were at high risk for exposure to COVID, I would add hesperidin to my stack. Why not? It is cheap, safe, and as this paper points out, it has a lot of potential benefits.

 

I agree, it is getting a little more run here lately.  One of the best resources I found on CoVid was the THE AMERICAN NUTRITIONAL ASSOCIATION - last updated 5/26

 

"Hesperidin may bind to Spike protein to interfere with the re-folding of Spike and inhibits the viral infection process. Oranges, grapefruit, lemon, and tangerines contain hesperidin, and it is also available in supplement form."

 

 

They also talk about oil of oregano, quercetin, the potassium loss issue, A, D, zinc, selenium, melatonin, sugar control etc

 

 

For those wishing to get hesperidin from natural sources, this recent VIDEO discusses dosing from that perspective.  I would just supplement.

 

Supposedly we should have some quercetin results here shortly

[DanCG]

Here is much more on hesperidin, This has many links to studies of various effects of hesperidin. There would be many reasons to take hesperidin even if SARS-COV-2 did not exist. The in silico studies are getting a lot of attention. Maybe somebody will do an experiment in the real world.

 

[lancebr]

Inactivated trivalent influenza vaccine is associated with lower mortality among Covid-19 patients in Brazil

 

https://www.medrxiv....1#disqus_thread

 

Controlling for health facility of treatment, comorbidities as well as an extensive range of socio-demographic

factors, we show that patients who received a recent influenza vaccine experienced on average

8% lower odds of needing intensive care treatment (95% CIs [0.86, 0.99]), 18% lower odds of requiring

invasive respiratory support (0.74, 0.88) and 17% lower odds of death (0.75, 0.89).

Edited by lancebr, 01 July 2020 - 02:22 PM.