COVID 2019 Comorbidity with Diabetes

[urbanracer]

Out of the frying pan ?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-53218704

 

[HSSS]

Out of the frying pan ?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-53218704

Blimey, let me panic about one thing at a time please! Head in the sand til it does mutate as I personally can do nothing else about that threat.

 

[lindisfel]

I dont think we will need a new runway at Heathrow or HS2.
D.

 

[Bill_St]

An excellent summary of the latest state of play.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/landia/article/PIIS2213-8587(20)30238-2/fulltext

 

[Brunneria]

An excellent summary of the latest state of play.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/landia/article/PIIS2213-8587(20)30238-2/fulltext

Thank you.
Looks like, even with controlled blood glucose, I have been at much higher risk of getting a bad case of COVID-19 than I had thought - due to the obesity analysis they have given here, and the ongoing inflammation (arthritis and high C-reactive protein) and the family tradition of high ferritin levels.

Am even more pleased that I 'stringently' socially distanced, and continue to take much more care than many of those I see around me.

 

[Cobia]

Who would have thought a study into covid and keto would be done...
Found it on FB.

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04358835

 

[DCUKMod]

An excellent summary of the latest state of play.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/landia/article/PIIS2213-8587(20)30238-2/fulltext

Very interesting find, Bill.

I'm officially noted that my T2 is "Resolved". I am slender, without fatty liver and last C_RPHS was 0.3, I hope that puts me in a decent place, in terms of risk, but in what seems like a bit of a health lottery, who knows.

I'll be continuing with singing as I wash my hands etc.

Thanks for post it.

 

[Jamie H]

Thank you.
Looks like, even with controlled blood glucose, I have been at much higher risk of getting a bad case of COVID-19 than I had thought - due to the obesity analysis they have given here, and the ongoing inflammation (arthritis and high C-reactive protein) and the family tradition of high ferritin levels.

Am even more pleased that I 'stringently' socially distanced, and continue to take much more care than many of those I see around me.

"Second, people older than 65 years are more likely to have a longer duration of diabetes and a greater prevalence of diabetic complications. Third, diabetes and older age often correlate with comorbidities such as cardiovascular disease, hypertension, and obesity".

So what we've known all along.. You're at higher risk of you are older and have diabetic complications and have other Co morbidities.

The risk remains at 2 times if you are type 2 and 3.5 times if you are type 1.... However 2 and 3.5 times a small baseline risk (eg under 40 with good hba1c) is still a small overall risk.

Obviously the same is true the other way... 2 and 3.5 times a big baseline risk (eg 85 with heart disease) is still a big overall risk.

One size fits all for diabetics just isn't really applicable.

 

[Brunneria]

So what we've known all along.. You're at higher risk of you are older and have diabetic complications and have other Co morbidities.

Except that (I am very glad to say) further depth and nuance is now emerging.
The mention of different vascular risk (micro damage due to diabetes, macro damage due to heart disease) and the Ferritin mention are both very interesting to different members of my immediate and extended family, as well as myself.

Others may well find further snippets that are relevant to them personally, which have not, up til now been publicly discussed.
The c-reactive protein inflammation marker was mentioned early on, back when it was 'just' an epidemic. I hope that someone does further work to establish (like with blood glucose control) whether pre-existing high levels are significantly more likely to cause issues, rather than levels that 'just' hike high with the onset of COVID-19.

 

[Brunneria]

For those who are interested, some of the pages on the worldometer website are now doing 'projections' of case numbers and deaths, based on the easing of lockdown restrictions, and the wearing of masks.
Interesting stuff.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/

Just hit the 'projections' link and you can edit the graphs to show mask use or not, etc.

Some for the UK, but the facility is not (yet) available for countries like Brazil.

I found it interesting to see that by the 1st Nov, the non mask wearing UK projection shows a marked second wave developing.

Obviously, this is just info, not prophesy, and any projection is only as good as the accuracy of the data that is entered.

 

[bulkbiker]

any projection is only as good as the accuracy of the data that is entered.

Only as good as the model it is based on in reality. And we all know that models can be "problematic" to put it mildly.

 

[Brunneria]

Only as good as the model it is based on in reality. And we all know that models can be "problematic" to put it mildly.

i would be very interested to know where they are getting their projection data, but no time today to go rummaging...

The plus or minus mask projections for the United States (on the page to which I linked) show about 40,000 additional deaths if masks are not universally worn. It is going to be very interesting to see what actually happens, and how close those projections are. We won't have long to wait. The projection only goes up to the 1st November.

In the UK (according to the Worldometer projections) the potential lives saved are around 4,000, up until the 1st November, when the winter wave is considered a possibility.

My own personal view is that I would rather err on the side of caution, especially if one of those 4,000 could be me, or one of my friends or relatives. I simply cannot fathom why anyone would push against masks if even one life could saved. I would still err on the side of caution if we were talking about 4,000 complete strangers - cos I am altruistic like that. It astonishes me that people are willing to risk other people's lives for the sake of putting a piece of cloth over their own mouths, no matter how 'projected' and 'modelled' the figures might be.

ed. For clarity.

 

[bulkbiker]

The plus or minus mask projections for the United States (on the page to which I linked) show about 40,000 additional deaths if masks are not universally worn. It is going to be very interesting to see what actually happens, and how close those projections are. We won't have long to wait. The projection only goes up to the 1st November.

In the UK (according to the Worldometer projections) the potential lives saved are around 4,000, up until the 1st November, when the winter wave is considered a possibility.

.

But they fail to explain the methodology that they are using to make those "predictions" anywhere on the site (or at least I can't find it).

They have gone from reporting data (even though possibly flawed which they admit to) to making things up which surprises and disappoints me.

 

[lucylocket61]

For those who are interested, some of the pages on the worldometer website are now doing 'projections' of case numbers and deaths, based on the easing of lockdown restrictions, and the wearing of masks.
Interesting stuff.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/

View attachment 42856
Just hit the 'projections' link and you can edit the graphs to show mask use or not, etc.

Some for the UK, but the facility is not (yet) available for countries like Brazil.

I found it interesting to see that by the 1st Nov, the non mask wearing UK projection shows a marked second wave developing.

Obviously, this is just info, not prophesy, and any projection is only as good as the accuracy of the data that is entered.

I don't have the projection options on either my laptop or mobile.

 

[Brunneria]

I don't have the projection options on either my laptop or mobile.

Thats a pity.
I have them on my laptop, tablet and phone - using variously chrome and safari.

But they fail to explain the methodology that they are using to make those "predictions" anywhere on the site (or at least I can't find it).

They have gone from reporting data (even though possibly flawed which they admit to) to making things up which surprises and disappoints me.

That is why I said I would be interested to find out what sources they were using for their projections.
Although I do not automatically assign nefarious motives to people who produce projections that do not align with my hoped for outcome.

 

[bulkbiker]

Although I do not automatically assign nefarious motives

Me neither (not automatically anyway) but it would be nice if they either showed the source or outlined their methodology don't you think?

 

[Brunneria]

Me neither (not automatically anyway) but it would be nice if they either showed the source or outlined their methodology don't you think?

I sent them a query on their Contact Us page this morning, asking them to publish their sources for the projections.
I don't have a clue how long the projection links have been there - I only spotted them this morning - so maybe they are still setting it all up. Or maybe it has been there for weeks and I hadn't noticed. Hope it was the former. They are pretty good at acknowledging the sources and limitations of their other data.

I suspect that their capacity to create those graphs depends heavily on the format and available data published by each country - and we all know that there are significant limitations on those.

 

[Brunneria]

Yes, the pages are under construction now, with more info appearing as time passes.
Going to be very interesting picking my way through it.
http://www.healthdata.org/covid/updates

 

[bulkbiker]

Yes, the pages are under construction now, with more info appearing as time passes.
Going to be very interesting picking my way through it.
http://www.healthdata.org/covid/updates

Hmmm

Those sticky little fingers get everywhere.

 

[Jamie H]

Except that (I am very glad to say) further depth and nuance is now emerging.
The mention of different vascular risk (micro damage due to diabetes, macro damage due to heart disease) and the Ferritin mention are both very interesting to different members of my immediate and extended family, as well as myself.

Others may well find further snippets that are relevant to them personally, which have not, up til now been publicly discussed.
The c-reactive protein inflammation marker was mentioned early on, back when it was 'just' an epidemic. I hope that someone does further work to establish (like with blood glucose control) whether pre-existing high levels are significantly more likely to cause issues, rather than levels that 'just' hike high with the onset of COVID-19.

My aplogies I did think I had edited this when I saw you mention particular nuances that were quite relevant to you and would naturally make you anxious. My aplogies it didn't edit correctly and if I came across as insensitive. Even my general point about age isn't meant to be flippant.. I have elderly parents that I worry a lot about and the impact it would have on them if they got it. Nevermind my own associated risk even as a younger well controlled diabetic!