respiratory Archives - Amazing Health Advances

Prevalence of Nicotine Pouch Use Found to be Low Among U.S. Adults

The AHA! Team — Tue, 20 Aug 2024 04:45:40 +0000

Keck School of Medicine of USC via News-Medical – A new study found that the prevalence of nicotine pouch use was low in U.S. adults despite a 641% increase in sales of the products between 2019 and 2022. Researchers say the findings raise questions about who is using the millions of nicotine pouches sold in the U.S. and why. Nicotine pouches, a new commercial tobacco product, contain a crystalline powder with nicotine, flavorings (including fruit, mint or candy) and other additives. They do not cause respiratory harm and are perceived by some as an alternative to help adults who smoke tobacco quit. Nicotine pouches have recently gained attention over concerns that their flavors and trendy social media marketing campaigns are attracting youth users. However, limited data on usage among adults has been collected since the new products entered the market. Now, a study from the Keck School of Medicine of USC and the University of Nebraska Medical Center analyzed nicotine pouch use in a nationally representative sample of 39,557 U.S. adults. The study found that 2.9% of adults had ever used nicotine pouches, with 0.4% reporting current use. The majority of adults currently using pouches also currently smoke cigarettes. Additionally, 5.2% of those who attempted to quit smoking in the past year and had relapsed back to smoking reported using pouches to help with their cessation efforts. The study, funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), was just published in JAMA. “The low prevalence of nicotine pouch use in adults surprised us, given the rapid increase in sales. But it’s also possible that the sales are being diverted to adolescents, who were not represented in this survey.” – Adam Matthew Leventhal, PhD, study coauthor, professor in the department of population and public health sciences at the Keck School of Medicine and executive director of the USC Institute for Addiction Science Patterns of pouch use Data for the study were collected through the Current Population Survey (CPS) Tobacco Use Supplement in September 2022. The CPS is a monthly survey of U.S. adults that uses rigorous research methods to ensure its participants represent an accurate cross-section of the country’s population, making the results reliable enough to influence important policy decisions. The Tobacco Use Supplement includes straightforward questions about cigarette smoking, attempts to quit smoking and-;for the first time in September 2022-;the use of nicotine pouches. Of 39,558 survey respondents, 2.9% had ever used nicotine pouches, and 0.4% were currently using them. Adults who currently smoked (10.8%) or formerly smoked (6.7%) were more likely to report ever using nicotine pouches compared to people who had never smoked (1.1%). Current use of nicotine pouches was also higher among adults who currently smoked (1%) and formerly smoked (0.7%) compared to those who had never smoked (0.2%). Pouch use, both past and present, was lower in adults under 65, but higher in males and non-Hispanic whites. Among those who currently smoked who tried to quit in the past year, more reported trying to switch to e-cigarettes (21.6%) than nicotine pouches (5.2%) to help them quit. One question raised by the findings is whether adults who use nicotine pouches may be using them to “top off” nicotine in situations where they cannot smoke or use other tobacco products, Leventhal said, rather than as a way to quit smoking. Instead of reducing the health risks of cigarette smoking, that use pattern could actually make nicotine dependence more severe. Based on the study results, Leventhal estimates that of all U.S. adults who currently used nicotine pouches in 2022, about 35% had previously smoked cigarettes and 25% were currently smoking cigarettes. The remaining 40% of adult pouch consumers had never regularly smoked cigarettes and could be at risk for developing nicotine dependence. “In summary, we didn’t see a large population of adults using nicotine pouches, and fewer appear to be using them in a fashion that would potentially reduce their harm from smoking cigarettes,” Leventhal said. Regulating nicotine pouches New nicotine products typically go straight to market before the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reviews marketing applications and decides whether to authorize or ban each product. That decision involves weighing potential public health benefits, such as whether a product provides a safer alternative for adults who smoke, against risks, such as whether it may increase nicotine dependence among youth. Applications from major manufacturers of nicotine pouches are currently under review by the FDA. “Regulators can take our data and put it into that equation,” Leventhal said. “What our study suggests is that there’s not a large population of adults who smoke who are using these products to quit.” This study is part of the USC Tobacco Center of Regulatory Science, one of seven national centers supported by the NIH and FDA to collect evidence that can inform tobacco product regulation. In collaboration with the University of Michigan and other institutions, USC researchers are also conducting a parallel study to investigate adolescent use of nicotine pouches. They are looking at how pouch use relates to shifting teen usage patterns of other nicotine products, including e-cigarettes. About this research In addition to Leventhal, the study’s other author is Hongying Daisy Dai from the College of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha. This work was supported by the National Cancer Institute [U54CA180905] and the National Institute on Drug Abuse [R21DA058328]. Source: Keck School of Medicine of USC Journal reference: Dai, H. D., et al. (2024). Prevalence of Nicotine Pouch Use Among US Adults. JAMA. doi.org/10.1001/jama.2024.10686. To read the original article click here.

The post Prevalence of Nicotine Pouch Use Found to be Low Among U.S. Adults appeared first on Amazing Health Advances.

Discover 5 Powerful Herbs to Support Respiratory Function

AHA Publisher — Wed, 27 Apr 2022 07:00:57 +0000

Stephanie Vick via NaturalHealth365 – We all want healthy lungs. Unfortunately, chemtrails, secondhand smoke, poor quality food, and aerosol contaminants (to name a few) create a greater risk of respiratory diseases. To make matters worse, many of the medications doctors prescribe for these respiratory problems have a number of unwanted side effects, including insomnia, nausea, and irritability. The good news is that nature offers much safer (and effective) alternatives. Herbs, in particular, play a huge role in maintaining healthy lungs. Used correctly, they can provide great relief and support respiratory function. 5 Great Herbs to Improve Your Breathing Naturally Osha root is indigenous to North America in the area of the Rocky Mountains and is long revered by Native people for its healing properties. The root of the osha plant appears to possess lung-strengthening capabilities. Osha root contains camphor and other beneficial oils, which clear away mucous, improve blood flow to the lungs and increase your ability to take a deeper breath. Lomatium is another traditional Native American medicinal herb. It has antibacterial and antiviral properties and has been used with great success by many suffering from allergies and other ailments affecting lung function. By the way, the Naturopathic Handbook of Herbal Formulas: A Practical and Concise Herb User’s Guide supports the use of lomatium for these purposes. For generations, pleurisy root has been used for respiratory complaints by supporting the immune system. While we do not have many clinical studies on this plant, it has a long history of anecdotal evidence demonstrating its effectiveness. Pleurisy root’s expectorant abilities are quite remarkable. It has an outstanding ability to clear mucous from the chest and lungs, which makes it easier to heal from a variety of respiratory ailments. It also has anti-inflammatory properties that help in these circumstances. Licorice root is somewhat of a wonder herb in Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) when it comes to treating respiratory diseases and promoting healthy lungs. With a long track record of success in TCM – dating back thousands of years – it also has expectorant and anti-inflammatory properties. Licorice root soothes bronchial spasms and eases sore throats. It even has the noted ability to block the formation of lung cancer cells. In addition, it has anti-bacterial and anti-viral properties. Mullein is native to Europe and Asia but has been successfully grown in America since the time of European colonization. It was considered an important healing herb back then, and, according to the University of Michigan, studies support that tradition today. Thanks to its unique chemical compounds, mullein supports healthy pulmonary function. It is also an excellent expectorant and soothes the mucous membranes when irritated. Its healing properties are known to be very powerful. If you are looking for natural ways to support your respiratory function, try one or more of these excellent herbal supplements. While you should never quit taking your medication without the advice of a trusted medical professional, you may find these herbs help you feel a lot better and without adverse side effects. Learn to trust the wisdom of plant intelligence and enjoy the various health-promoting benefits of medicinal herbs. Sources for this article include: NIH.gov Newstarget.com NaturalPedia.com To read the original article click here.

The post Discover 5 Powerful Herbs to Support Respiratory Function appeared first on Amazing Health Advances.

Serious Health Risks Linked to Processed Meats

AHA Publisher — Wed, 09 Dec 2020 08:00:22 +0000

Edit Lang via NaturalHealth365 – Despite the overwhelming amount of evidence linking processed meat with an increased risk of cancer and mortality, Americans seem to have trouble kicking the habit. Lunchmeat, sausage, hot dogs, ham and bacon, are the most popular types of processed meat Americans have enjoyed for decades. However – new research, including a total of 120,852 participants – confirms the alarming relationship between processed meat consumption and increased cardiovascular, respiratory, and overall mortality. Researchers found that substituting processed meat with other protein sources lowered mortality risks. A Deadly Love Affair Without Concern Over Processed Meat Risks It is hard to imagine a baseball game or a picnic without hot dogs or some other meat. Kids and adults alike have a long-standing emotional attachment to these foods. Processed meats have been a fundamental part of the all-American food culture. Eating processed meat, however, does come with serious risks to our health. Colorectal cancer, diabetes, obesity are only some of the associated negative health effects. Let’s face it; Americans eat more than enough processed meat to cause major health risks. According to a Harvard research study, increasing processed red meat intake by just half a serving a day can raise the risk of mortality over the next eight years by 13 percent. WHO Classifies Processed Meats as Group 1 Carcinogens, Same as Smoking A review study examining 800 epidemiological studies worldwide concluded that eating hot dogs and other processed meats every day increases the risk of colorectal cancer. Study authors also found that the risk increased with the amount of processed meat consumed. As a result of these findings, in 2015, the World Health Organization classified processed meats as a Group 1 carcinogen. Without a doubt, a Group 1 classification warrants the need to inform the public about the health risks associated with their decades-long eating habits. Yet, most people are still unaware that processed meats pose a danger to their health. Everyone should know that these foods are now listed alongside other cancer-causing activities such as smoking and asbestos exposure in the Group 1 category. WARNING: Nitrites Are the Probable Cause of Harm Caused by Lunch Meats While scientists are still unclear about what makes processed meat so cancer-causing, many have pointed at heme compounds, nitrosamine, and the formation of free radicals. Meats containing nitrites and nitrates seem to be the most troubling. Most commercial lunch meats contain nitrites. The meat industry uses sodium nitrite as a preservative and colorant to give the meat an appetizing pink or red shade. The problem with sodium nitrite is that it can form nitrosamines, molecules that cause cancer under certain conditions. Nitrosamines are highly cancer-causing compounds that increase your risk of stomach, pancreatic, and colon cancers. Cancer, however, is not the only risk scientists associated with nitrites. Studies found that nitrate-cured meats could negatively impact mental health and cause mania, especially in people who already have bipolar disorder. Reduce Your Cancer Risk by Avoiding Processed Meats While eliminating your cancer risk is not possible, you can reduce it by avoiding processed meats. The American Institute of Cancer Research recommends eating as little processed meat as possible. Remember, there is no safe amount of processed meat, so it is best to avoid it altogether. If processed meat products have been part of your diet for a long time, you may find it hard to completely cut them out. Consider these tips to reduce the amount you eat. Read labels carefully, and look for words such as nitrite or nitrate. Do not purchase meats that have been chemically treated with these compounds Be mindful that even uncured meats can contain nitrates If you find it hard to remove processed meats from your diet, at least reduce portion sizes and the number of times you eat them per week Center your diet around whole, plant-based foods, and experiment with meatless days. Sources for this article: NaturalHealthResearch.org, Jandonline.org, NaturalHealth365.com, BMJ.com To read the original article click here. For more articles from NaturalHealth365 click here.

The post Serious Health Risks Linked to Processed Meats appeared first on Amazing Health Advances.

Australian Scientists Develop a Nasal Spray That Could Stop SARS-CoV-2 Infection

AHA Publisher — Thu, 01 Oct 2020 07:00:21 +0000

Angela Betsaida B. Laguipo, BSN via News-Medical Net – As the coronavirus disease (COVID-19), caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), continues to wreak havoc globally, scientists race to develop an effective medicine or vaccine to fight the infection. With more than 33.5 million people infected since the pandemic started in December 2019, finding a treatment for those infected is crucial to stemming its spread. Now, a biotech company in Australia, Ena Respiratory, said that a nasal spray it is developing might help boost the human immune system to fight flu and common colds, significantly reduced the growth of the coronavirus in a recent study in animals. The potential nasal spray may not only help treat COVID-19 but also prevent it. The Nasal Spray The novel product, called INNA-051, is being developed by Ena Respiratory, and laboratory experiments have shown that it reduced viral replication by as much as 96 percent in the animal study. Spearheaded by Public Health England’s (PHE) Deputy Director, Professor Miles Carroll, the new study described the potential treatment and has been published in the open-source preprint server bioRxiv*. Used as a nasal spray, it aims to boost the natural immune system of the body to fight common colds and flu. It works by triggering the innate immune system, which is the body’s first line of defense against infection from a pathogen. When the drug has enhanced the immune system, it also prevented the infection and replication of SARS-CoV-2 in the laboratory. The Study Respiratory tract diseases, including those that cause flu, common colds, and the coronavirus infection, represent major ongoing global health threats. These viruses have caused outbreaks to pandemics, endangering the lives of those who are at higher risk, such as children, older adults, and those who are immunocompromised. The SARS-CoV-2 infection is actively spreading worldwide, and it spreads quickly from one person to another through close contact and respiratory droplets. One of the biggest threats of the current pandemic is that several people infected with the virus are asymptomatic, which means that they do not know that they carry the virus. As a result, they are called silent spreaders. The research team from the National Infection Service, Public Health England (PHE) wanted to develop the nasal spray to prevent the replication of the virus in the nasal area, the most common point of entry of the virus. To test the nasal spray, the team obtained nasal wash and throat swab samples four days before the viral challenge. Upon analyzing the viral RNA in nasal wash samples, the team confirmed infection in all treatment groups, with lower viral RNA levels seen in the INNA-051 treatment. The team has found that prophylactic intra-nasal administration of INNA-051 in the SARS-CoV-2 ferret infection model has reduced levels of viral RNA in the nose and throat. “The results of our study support clinical development of a therapy based on prophylactic TLR2/6 innate immune activation in the URT to reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmission and provide protection against COVID-19,” the team wrote in the paper. Further, the research team added that the prophylactic approach is important to people at a high risk of community transmission or development of the severe disease from COVID-19, such as older adults, people with comorbidities, and those who are immunocompromised. “We’ve been amazed by just how effective our treatment has been. By boosting the natural immune response of the ferrets with our treatment, we’ve seen a rapid eradication of the virus,” Christophe Demaison, the Ena Respiratory Managing Director, said. “If humans respond similarly, the benefits of treatment are two-fold. Individuals exposed to the virus would most likely rapidly eliminate it, with the treatment ensuring that the disease does not progress beyond mild symptoms. This is particularly relevant to vulnerable members of the community. In addition, the rapidity of this response means that the infected individuals are unlikely to pass it on, meaning a swift halt to community transmission,” he added. *Important Notice bioRxiv publishes preliminary scientific reports that are not peer-reviewed and, therefore, should not be regarded as conclusive, guide clinical practice/health-related behavior, or treated as established information. This article has been modified. To read the original article click here.

The post Australian Scientists Develop a Nasal Spray That Could Stop SARS-CoV-2 Infection appeared first on Amazing Health Advances.

What’s the World’s Favorite Fizzy Drinks Maker Doing Fighting Covid?

AHA Publisher — Thu, 10 Sep 2020 07:00:57 +0000

Abigail Klein Leichman via Israel21c – Back in March, Hadassah University Medical Center intensive care physician Dr. Akiva Nachshon saw that some European countries lacked enough ventilators for seriously ill Covid-19 patients. Proper breathing support for mild and moderate patients could prevent Israel from facing a similar situation, he reasoned. However, the slow-oxygen nasal inhalation therapy devices that do the job best are in short supply because they cost about $15,000 (excluding consumables). Nachshon’s biomedical engineer friend Shlomo Friedman suggested enlisting the help of Israeli carbonated drink machine maker SodaStream. “They understand thermodynamics, gases and physics, and they have the necessary R&D infrastructure,” Friedman told Nachshon. That’s what led to Stream02, an inexpensive alternative recently tested successfully at Hadassah’s Ein Kerem campus in Jerusalem. The inventors hope it will soon be approved for all Covid patients. Nachshon explained that oxygen makes up 21 percent of the air we breathe. “Stream02 can give up to 100%. You can get 100% oxygen through regular nasal prongs, but the flow is extremely high and Covid-19 patients can’t tolerate it.” The challenge was to make an affordable device that matches the efficiency of the expensive slow-oxygen system. “The thermodynamics are complicated, but the concept is pretty simple,” he says. A Cold Call Nachshon didn’t have any contacts at SodaStream, which was acquired by PepsiCo two years ago for $3.2 billion. He called the main number, explained his idea, and within an hour got a call from Avi Cohen, SodaStream’s head of research and development. After listening to Nachshon’s proposal, Cohen invited the physician to his nearby Jerusalem home to flesh out details that very day. “He said, ‘Bring whatever you think will help me understand what you want.’ We were all in lockdown at the time, but I sat with him on his porch and placed everything on the table,” recalls Nachshon. “Avi had already made a sketch. After our meeting, he spoke with SodaStream’s CEO, Eyal Shohat, and got the okay to work on it immediately.” Nachshon went to SodaStream’s Kfar Saba headquarters a few times “and their team came to our lab at Hadassah to better understand the needs.” The doctor feared that the invention would get stuck in governmental red tape. But the Ministry of Health quickly approved a safety and feasibility study once the prototype machines were ready in July. The study was delayed a bit only because Nachshon became very busy in Hadassah’s two Covid ICU units during the second wave of the outbreak. The StreamO2 prototype was tested not on Covid patients but on 22 postsurgical patients who could be strictly monitored. “People tolerated it very well, although some said it was too much for them,” Nachshon tells ISRAEL21c. “I’m sending my report to the Ministry of Health to get approval to use it as a device for Covid patients at Hadassah.” If all continues going well, Nachshon looks forward to getting approval for StreamO2 to be produced and distributed to other hospitals treating mild to moderate coronavirus cases. “The nasal breathing therapy machine developed by the joint team of doctors from Hadassah and SodaStream engineers can be a perfect lifesaving solution,” said Cohen. “The advantage is the ability to replicate it in bulk for patients suffering from respiratory distress in Israel and around the world.” Nachshon says StreamO2 works exactly the same as the $15,000 nasal inhalation therapy device, and “we have plans in the future to make it smarter than the present system.” To read the original article click here. For more articles from Israel21c click here.

The post What’s the World’s Favorite Fizzy Drinks Maker Doing Fighting Covid? appeared first on Amazing Health Advances.

COVID Doc Says Hydroxychloroquine ‘Highly Effective’ and Fears Are Overblown – Now FDA Chief Admits It Might Help

AHA Publisher — Sat, 01 Aug 2020 07:00:10 +0000

Lori Johnson via CBN News – A Tennessee physician has a message for COVID-19 patients: Use hydroxychloroquine “if you can find a doctor with guts enough to prescribe it.” Meanwhile, the US Food and Drug Commissioner Stephen Hahn said some studies “suggest a benefit” to using the drug on COVID-19, despite the fact that the government agency issued guidance stating the use of the drug should be avoided unless it’s being studied in a clinical trial or for hospital use. In a radio interview, Hahn reiterated the fact that doctors are free to prescribe the drug “off label,” and that the FDA “does not regulate the practice of medicine.” Dr. Tom Rogers is one of those physicians who prescribe hydroxychloroquine to his COVID-19 patients. He told CBN News he personally has found the drug to be a “highly effective” way to treat the virus, provided the drug is prescribed in the early stages of the disease and is combined with the antibiotic azithromycin and a zinc supplement. “It’s a very controversial, kind of ‘Trump drug’,” he told CBN News. “There were initially a bunch of studies that said it worked, and then the powers that be came out with some other studies that said it didn’t work. But there are many, many studies and many doctors who I’ve talked to personally, on the front lines that use it all the time and it works.” He continued, “You have to use it very early,” he said. “The studies that said it didn’t work, those were hospitalized patients that were very sick.” He said possible negative consequences of taking hydroxychloroquine are over-blown. “They’re claiming it causes cardiac arrhythmia, which is rare,” he says. “I’ve never seen that. I’ve talked to rheumatologists who’ve used it for decades, they’ve never seen it.” Dr. Rogers says he prefers to prescribe the hydroxychloroquine cocktail to patients with symptoms such as fever, aches, loss of taste or smell, and believes it can prevent a patient from going to the hospital. In addition to hydroxychloroquine combined with azithromycin and zinc, Dr. Rogers said there are other ways patients in the early stages of COVID-19 can avoid landing in the hospital. Those include the inhaled steroid Budesonide combined with azithromycin and zinc. Budesonide is a common asthma drug he prescribes to patients who test positive for COVID-19 and have mild respiratory symptoms such as “cough, wheezing or shortness of breath that’s not acute yet.” Still, neither hydroxychloroquine nor budesonide is recommended by the FDA to treat COVID-19 because their effectiveness has not been proven in randomized, controlled studies, which is the standard requirement for FDA approval. To read the original article click here. For more articles from CBN News click here.

The post COVID Doc Says Hydroxychloroquine ‘Highly Effective’ and Fears Are Overblown – Now FDA Chief Admits It Might Help appeared first on Amazing Health Advances.

Genetic Mutations Predispose Individuals to Severe COVID-19

AHA Publisher — Mon, 27 Jul 2020 07:00:16 +0000

Rabound University Medical Center via EurekAlert – Current observations suggest that the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 causes severe symptoms mainly in elderly patients with chronic disease. However when two pairs of previously healthy young brothers from two families required mechanical ventilation at the intensive care unit in rapid succession, doctors and researchers at Radboud University Medical Center were inclined to consider that genetic factors had a key role in compromising their immune system. Their research identified the gene TLR7 as an essential player in the immune response against SARS-CoV-2. A finding with potentially major consequences for understanding and possibly treatment of COVID-19. During the wave of COVID-19 patients that flooded Dutch hospitals in the first half of 2020, two young brothers became seriously ill with the SARS-CoV-2 virus and had to be mechanically ventilated in the ICU. One of them died from the consequences of the infection, the other recovered. The severe course of disease in otherwise healthy young brothers was a relatively rare occurrence, especially because the virus mainly affects the elderly. This observation triggered the curiosity of an attentive physician from the MUMC+ department of clinical genetics. She contacted her colleagues in Nijmegen who then investigated why these two young brothers were so severely affected. Genetic Factors “In such a case, you immediately wonder whether genetic factors could play a role,” says geneticist Alexander Hoischen. “Getting sick from an infection is always an interplay between – in this case – the virus and the human immune system. It may be a mere coincidence that two brothers from the same family become so severely ill. But it is also possible that an inborn error of the immune system has played an important role. We investigated this possibility, together with our multidisciplinary team at Radboudumc.” One X-Chromosome All genes (collectively called the exome) of both brothers were sequenced, after which the investigators combed through the data searching for a possible shared cause. Cas van der Made, PhD student and resident at the department of Internal Medicine: “We mainly looked at genes that play a role in the immune system. We know that several of these genes are located on the X-chromosome, and with two brother pairs affected X-chromosomal genes were most suspicious. Women carry two X-chromosomes, while men possess a Y-chromosome apart from the X. Therefore, men have only one copy of the X-chromosomal genes. In case men have a defect in such a gene, there is no second gene that can take over that role, as in women.” Gene Identification That search quickly revealed mutations in the gene encoding for the Toll-like receptor 7, TLR7 for short. There are multiple TLR-genes, which belong to a family of receptors with an important role in the recognition of pathogens (such as bacteria and viruses) and the activation of the immune system. Hoischen: “A few letters were missing in the genetic code of the TLR7 gene. As a result, the code cannot be read properly and hardly any TLR7 protein is produced. TLR7 function has so far never been associated with an inborn error of immunity. But unexpectedly we now have an indication that TLR7 is essential for protection from this coronavirus. So it seems that the virus can replicate undisturbed because the immune system does not get a message that the virus has invaded. Because TLR7, which must identify the intruder and subsequently activate the defense, is hardly present. That could be the reason for the severity of the disease in these brothers.” Additional Confirmation Then, quite unexpectedly, the doctors and researchers at Radboudumc come across another pair of brothers who have fallen seriously ill with COVID-19. Again, they are both under 35 years of age. Both of them were also in the ICU for mechanical ventilation. “Then the question of the role of genetics became even more obvious.” says Hoischen. “We also investigated the genetic code of these two brothers, again via the ‘rapid-clinical exome’ method. This time we saw no deletion, no loss of letters, but a single spelling mistake of one DNA-letter of the TRL7 gene. The effect on the gene is the same, however, because these brothers also do not make sufficient functional TLR7 protein. Suddenly we had four young people with a defect in the same gene, all of whom had fallen seriously ill from the SARS-CoV-2 virus.” Essential Role in the Defense Van der Made and colleagues have investigated the consequences of improper functioning of the TLR7 receptor. “Once activated, TLR7 triggers the production of so-called interferons, signaling proteins that are essential in the defense against virus infections,” says van der Made. “This immune response is perhaps all the more important in the fight against the SARS-CoV-2 virus, because we know from the literature that the virus has tricks to reduce the production of interferons by immune cells. When we mimic an infection with the coronavirus, we see that immune cells of the patients without properly functioning TLR7 hardly respond, and that minimal amounts of interferons are produced. These tests make it clear that the virus appears to have free rein in people without properly functioning TLR7 because it [the virus] is not recognized by the immune system.” Consequences “Due to the serious illness of four brothers in two families, so serious that it cost one of the young men his life, we have discovered this condition,” says Hoischen. “It seems to be a very specific abnormality, an immunodeficiency, which is mainly related to this coronavirus. None of the four men have previously suffered from immune-related diseases. It is the first time that we can connect a clinical phenomenon so strongly with TLR7.” “This discovery not only provides us with more insight into the fundamental workings of the immune system, but it may also have important consequences for the treatment of severely ill COVID-19 patients,” says Frank van de Veerdonk, immunologist and infectiologist. “The substance interferon can be given as a therapy. It is currently being investigated whether administering interferon in COVID-19 can indeed help.” To read the original article click here.

The post Genetic Mutations Predispose Individuals to Severe COVID-19 appeared first on Amazing Health Advances.

Skin Rash May Be a Symptom of COVID-19

AHA Publisher — Tue, 14 Jul 2020 07:00:30 +0000

Sally Robertson, B.Sc. via News-Medical Net – Researchers at King’s College London and Zoe Global Ltd have conducted a study suggesting that skin rashes could be valuable predictors of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In a large community-based study, 8.8% of people who had tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) also reported having a skin rash. Among people who had not tested positive, but did report at least one classic symptom of COVID-19 symptom based on NHS guidelines, 8.2% also reported skin rashes. According to NHS guidelines, the three most common signs of COVID-19 are fever, persistent cough, and a reduced sense of smell (anosmia). Skin-related symptoms are not included, even though these can be easily spotted by patients, say Mario Falchi and team. The researchers say their findings strongly support including skin rashes, adding that although skin rashes are far less common than fever, they are much more specific and last longer. “Recognizing rashes is important in identifying new and earlier COVID-19 cases,” says the team. A pre-print version of the paper is available on the server medRxiv*, while the article undergoes peer review. The Link with Skin Manifestations Has Been Slow to Emerge It has become apparent during the COVID-19 pandemic that while the disease is primarily a respiratory illness, it also targets multiple organs, including the skin. Some studies have previously reported urticaria, chicken pox-like body rashes, and chilblains on the toes or fingers (acral rashes), possibly due to minor thrombotic events or damaged endothelium in small vessels of the digits. However, the link between COVID-19 and skin manifestations has been slower to emerge than it has for organs such as the heart, intestine, and brain. “COVID-19 rashes may present in many forms and at different stages of the disease. The heterogeneous presentations, the time delay, as well as the focus on severely ill patients during the early phases of the pandemic, led to the skin being overlooked as an important target organ for COVID-19,” say Falchi and colleagues. Now the researchers have used data available for 336,847 UK users of the COVID Symptom Study app to investigate the diagnostic value of skin rashes for infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The team also used data available for 11,546 people who participated in an independent survey on COVID-19-related skin symptoms. Skin Rashes Increased the Odds of SARS-CoV-2 Positivity More Than Fever Of 27,157 app users who provided swab test results, 2,021 (7.4%) were positive for SARS-CoV-2, and 25,136 (92.6%) were negative. Of the swab-positive individuals, 178 (8.8%) reported skin rashes (138 body rashes; 62 acral and 22 both body and acral), compared with 1357 (5.4%) of swab-negative individuals. Association analysis showed that the presence of body or acral rashes increased the likelihood of being swab positive for SARS-CoV-2 by 67%. This compares with fever increasing the odds of SARS-CoV-2 positivity by 47%, and fever is commonly used to screen for COVID, points out the team. Skin Rashes Were Also Predictive in Untested, But Symptomatic Users Among the 334,690 app users who did not provide a swab test result, 17,371 reported one of the three main symptoms (fever, persistent cough, and anosmia), which according to NHS guidelines, would require isolation and SARS-CoV-2 testing. Of those reporting one of the three typical symptoms, 8.2% also reported a skin rash, compared with 6% of untested users who did not report any of the three symptoms. Association analysis revealed that among untested users who reported one of the three main symptoms, the likelihood of having a body rash was 46% greater compared with those who did not report one of the symptoms. The increased likelihood of acral rash among those reporting a symptom was not statistically significant. The Findings Support the Inclusion of Skin Rashes as a Suspected Symptom To capture more information about the type, duration, and timing of rashes, the team analyzed data available for people 11,546 with a rash who participated in an independent survey on COVID-19-related skin symptoms. Among 694 responders who were positive for SARS-CoV-2 by swab or antibody test and provided information on COVID-19-related symptoms, the rash appeared before any other symptom in 17% of cases and in 21% of cases, the rash was the only symptom. “Twenty-one percent of the SARS-CoV-2 positive surveyees presented with skin symptoms alone and would have been missed if using the NHS classic symptoms alone,” write Falchi and colleagues. The researchers say the findings strongly support the inclusion of skin rashes as a suspected COVID-19 symptom. “Although, it is less prevalent than fever, it is more specific of COVID-19 and last longer,” they add. “An increased awareness from the public and healthcare professionals regarding COVID-19 skin changes will allow more efficient identification of new and earlier clusters of the disease,” concludes the team. *Important Notice medRxiv publishes preliminary scientific reports that are not peer-reviewed and, therefore, should not be regarded as conclusive, guide clinical practice/health-related behavior, or treated as established information. To read the original article click here.

The post Skin Rash May Be a Symptom of COVID-19 appeared first on Amazing Health Advances.

Does Blood Plasma from COVID-19 Survivors Help Patients Infected with Novel Coronavirus?

AHA Publisher — Sat, 11 Jul 2020 07:00:30 +0000

University of California San Diego Health via Newswise – A new clinical trial at UC San Diego Health will investigate whether an old therapy might effectively treat a modern-day scourge. There is only one approved, specific treatment for COVID-19, the illness caused by the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, albeit with modest efficacy. Numerous experimental or repurposed drugs are under investigation, including the arthritis drug tocilizumab. And one treatment that is more than a century old. Researchers at University of California San Diego School of Medicine and UC San Diego Health have launched a clinical trial to assess the safety and efficacy of convalescent plasma (CP) to prevent COVID-19 after a known exposure to the virus. CP therapy involves infusing patients with antibodies extracted from the blood of donors who have successfully recovered from COVID-19, with the hope that the resulting boost to their immune systems will shorten the length and reduce the severity of the disease. The UC San Diego trial is part of a larger, national effort approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. The goal is to create a network of hospitals and blood banks collecting, isolating, processing and testing whether plasma from COVID-19 survivors has therapeutic, preventive value. The national trial is being coordinated by Johns Hopkins University and sponsored by the National Insitute of Health through the Department of Defense. “With convalescent plasma therapy, we want to act prophylactically, using a product with known high-titers (concentrations) of neutralizing antibodies,” said Edward Cachay, MD, an infectious disease specialist at UC San Diego Health and professor of medicine at UC San Diego School of Medicine. “We want to learn how we can prevent sickness, how we can prevent COVID patients from needed mechanical ventilation, and how we can prevent them from dying from the disease.” Before the emergence of antibiotics, CP was used to prevent and treat a host of bacterial and viral infections, including diphtheria, scarlet fever and pertussis. It was used during the 1918 influenza pandemic with reported good effect. In general, CP treatment has proven safe, but its effectiveness has varied with disease and among individuals. Studies of CP therapies for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2009 H1N1 influenza showed measurable reductions of mortality (compared to placebo or no therapy), but efforts to treat Ebola virus infections during the 2014-16 outbreak in West Africa were inconclusive. Chinese researchers treating COVID-19 patients have reported some success using CP, albeit not in randomized, controlled studies — the gold standard in clinical research. On April 13, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued research guidelines for assessing CP as a potential COVID-19 treatment and the American Red Cross is currently seeking blood plasma donors who have fully recovered from novel coronavirus infections. Plasma is the liquid portion of blood that carries blood components throughout the body, such as red and white blood cells, platelets, salts and enzymes. It also contains proteins and antibodies produced by the body’s immune system to fend off invasive pathogens, such as SARS-CoV-2. To qualify as a plasma donor for COVID-19 patients, donors must be at least 17 years old and weigh 110 pounds; be in good health; and have a prior, verified diagnosis of COVID-19 but are now symptom-free and fully recovered. The UC San Diego Health clinical trial will recruit a total of 487 qualifying participants for the study. Criteria to qualify for participation include a high-risk factor, such as age or an underlying condition, like cardiovascular disease, diabetes, existing pulmonary impairment or employment as a health care worker; known exposure to SARS-CoV-2; and a negative PCR diagnostic test to show no current infection. Testing will be conducted inside tents set up across from the emergency department at Jacobs Medical Center and the Altman Clinical and Translational Research Institute (ACTRI) on the La Jolla health campus. The UC Health Blood Bank is coordinating efforts with the San Diego Blood Bank. The ACTRI is providing personnel, infrastructure support and other resources for the CP trial and for other COVID-19-related clinical trials at UC San Diego. In addition, the ACTRI has created a COVID-19 Biobank to provide materials for research projects to diagnose or treat the disease. In cases of infection by the novel coronavirus, it appears the human immune system begins producing antibodies to the disease five to 10 days after the initial infection. The antibodies bind to the targeted coronavirus, stopping it from latching onto new cells and beginning the production of more viral particles. Over the course of two or so weeks, the body clears out the virus, but antibodies to it (or the blueprints for making them) remain. The depth and length of subsequent immunity have not been determined. Cachay said he thinks CP will likely be most effective in persons with early exposure to the novel coronavirus, before symptoms appear, but it will require a clinical trial to substantiate that thinking. “If we don’t do this, if we just gather anecdotal evidence that isn’t conclusive, then we won’t be any better off when the next wave hits.” To read the original article click here.

The post Does Blood Plasma from COVID-19 Survivors Help Patients Infected with Novel Coronavirus? appeared first on Amazing Health Advances.