Well, tell him he’s lucky to be getting over it at half term, and not missing much school. See what the response is…
[ I hope he shrugs it off fast and feels good soon - stay safe ]
—————
The Indy (admittedly no longer a source of great journalism) has a neat little round up of stories as regards pressures on the NHS…
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/covid-nhs-winter-crisis-hospitals-b1943694.html
Which stage are we at right now? Sunak’s coronavirus briefing was classic stage 2… but things could arguable be already moving to stage 3…
…we’ve already had stage 4 at least twice before during this pandemic, anyone betting on us not going through that again wouldn’t get good odds from me.
So the take up of biological materials by blood or lymph is determined by molecular weight. Antibodies are entirely absorbed by lymphatic route. Small peptides via vascular absorption. Vaccines (and these are large structures of encapsulated lipids will most likely be lymphatic. Hence the several days to see a good response.
This is based on studies in sheep, not humans but the translation is likely to be valid based on multiple different molecules.
Just popping in after lurking since day 1 of this thread (it’s been great and thanks for everyone’s input… Kept me sane). My turn to dip in as my whole family is currently in isolation (4 of us) after all testing positive.
Both my wife and I double jabbed (4 months ago each). Eldest gave it to us as a present from school (11 year old). My wife had it badly 2 months ago (confirmed pcr) and now again another confirmed pcr (did not think it was possible to get it twice so close together?)
The kids and I had it in August, by LFT and PCR confirmation, and we were told not to bother doing another PCR until 90 days as the residual antibodies are likely to cause a positive whether you really have it or not.
Ah yes theotherjohn very true... But weirdly my wife kept testing anyway with LFTs twice a week (school guidance for everyone) and the LFT went negative about 4 weeks after the first PCR.
Then most recently she did another LFT just after the result from the positive PCR and the line of doom showed a positive result! Very weird.
As you say though I am not going to do another test for at least 90 days! Hopefully with the double jab and covid last week I should be free of worry for a couple of weeks until the next mutant arrives 🙁
This all sucks doesn't it
I know nowt about myocarditis etc – but I have some basic understanding of anatomy.
And yet you seems to know more than most doctors and academics - well done...
Your link to Dr John Campbell has amongst its first comments a very good explanation of why he is talking balderdash
You probably didn't expand his comments then as he goes on to say:
"That said, I have never understood why present day training seems to advise against aspiration prior to intramuscular injection in both medical and nursing courses. Perhaps I am a bit of a dinosaur (graduated medical school in 1995), so I still do it the traditional way. I know full well that the likelihood of inadvertant IV injection with the short, fine needles (as used with Covid-19 and flu vaccination) is practically zero. However, it does no harm to aspirate, seems entirely logical and sensible; and is hardly a huge extra task in the process. I have seen enough freak events happen over my many years of work that I rather not take any chances. I also do not understand the seeming active resistance that some medical and nursing practitioners have when asked by patients to aspirate prior to IM injection. There's no need to be difficult for something so simple and if it affords the patient a measure of reassurance, surely we should just do so rather than be a**hats about it. "
and in particular :
"I have seen enough freak events happen over my many years of work that I rather not take any chances"
which equates to the very small chance the HK team suggest.
The first comment after his says
"Forty percent reported having aspirated blood at least once, whereas 6 RNs (4%) noted blood aspiration ≥13 times. Blood aspiration occurred most frequently in the dorsal gluteal (15%) and deltoid (12%)"
which comes from here :
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25784149/
The small risks have always been attributed to the vaccine rather than the delivery technique?
that's the point, perhaps the very small risks are actually associated with the delivery technique, which is what is being researched. There was another paper a while ago suggesting that the blood clots from the AZ vaccine were actually a side effect of the small chance of hitting a blood vessel.
Don’t bother your vaccination team with this research, let them do their jobs as they are trained to do it. Talk to your GP if you have concerns. As it happens, to me, it all looks like taking several unconnected truths to infer something that isn’t likely to be true at all. Something common with internet expertise. It may not be that, it might well amount to something, but don’t take that… “you have no idea what you are doing, go and look at these selected stories” approach into the vaccination centre or pharmacist, you’ll be wasting their precious time.
Can't see how linking to published medical reports is 'Internet expertise".
It sounds like it's worth evaluating. But I don't agree that this is the opinion of "most doctors and academics"
It's the opinion of some, for sure. What proportion......IDK
I just said that tj's knowledge seemed to be more than most doctors and academics, I wasn't implying that the conclusion of this research was held by them.
Seeing what happened to Kyle, as discussed in that video linked to earlier, it is certainly worth consideration.
Here it is again :
Also his video update :
Oh dear
"I just said that tj’s knowledge seemed to be more than most doctors and academics"
Nope - I even qualified that I know nothing really about myocarditis
I know basic anatomy and thus understand why the covid vaccine delivered as mine was cannot inadvertently enter the bloodstream directly
I have given thousands of IM injections going back to the days of big long wide needles and as was common practice used to aspirate. I have never aspirated blood. NOt once.
Youtube videos are not data or evidence
You are making conclusions not supported by the evidence
yes we used to aspirate all IM injections. Then as the equipment improved and the evidence base became clear and we moved to "evidence based practice" this requirement was dropped. some folk will still do it from habit.
But aspiration of small volume IM injections delivered via a short fine needle is not done, not needed and the evidence backs this up. YO simply cannot reach a big enough blood vessel to either aspirate blood or inadvertently deliver it IV - thats why the needle is so short.
I was going to drop this as its buggering up a very good informative thread but I find it hard not to reply when on the end of sarcastic posts like that
Please drop it. If you want to believe your "internet research" trumps decades of real research then do so. don't keep buggering up this thread
Look TJ can be opinionated and wrong on lots of things, this isn't one of them, respect the man's professional expertise and shut up. Plus as other have said the vaccinators will follow their standard procedures regardless of how good your internet research is, that's how the NHS works, they don't make it up as they go for very good reasons, they are not the government (who clearly make it up based on the mornings papars).
So we are saying that TJ has more in-depth professional expertise than the team that wrote that paper at the University of Hong Kong?
OK.
No were saying tj's real world experience and training tops you doing your own research on the internet and drawing your own conclusions.
bullshotcrummond
Free MemberSo we are saying that TJ has more in-depth professional expertise than the team that wrote that paper at the University of Hong Kong?
We're saying that TJ has a career of experience which involved using best practice evolved by the entire medical profession over years, the same best practice which is being used for the vaccine delivery. This is not "do it TJ's way because TJ says so", this is "TJ has been trained in this and he's sharing", he's not relying on his own expertise.
Ah - you're a "new" visitor to STW. If you'd been around a bit longer you might have been more aware of TJs professional expertise.
Still at least it didn't take you long to pick up on referring to tjagain as TJ.
Thanks for the vote of confidence chaps
The NHS does not always get stuff right and is sometimes slow to react to changing paradigms but these days its all " evidence based practice" and while I have not read all the research I trust those who provide the policies and procedures to base this on the evidence and then minions like me follow this. This is one place where the practice changed in response to the evidence.
No were saying tj’s real world experience and training tops you doing your own research on the internet and drawing your own conclusions.
I haven't done my own research on the Internet - it is a published paper from a team of researchers from the University of Hong Kong - all I am guessing a lot more qualified than TJ (bsed on him moaning about his level of earnings and pension from the NHS...)
The video discussion is also from someone I am guessing is also a lot more qualified and experienced with the NHS than TJ as he used to train nurses.
Best practise used to include aspirating - now it doesn't as the NHS think the risk/reward profile doesn't justify it.
Clearly some well-qualified people think that this might be a suspect conclusion for the case of the mRNA vaccines, otherwise they would not have researched it.
As the video interview was with a very prominent mountain biker who has been severely affected by what Dr John Campbell thinks has the hall-marks of a misapplied injection (based on his many years of experience in the NHS...) my original question was whether anyone else thought that it might be worth asking for aspiration as it only takes an extra 10 seconds and that hassle might be worth the possible risk of not being 'crippled' for 9 months or so and unable to cycle, and then hoping that you are not left with any permanent damage to the heart.
If you want your injection to be done in a different way, talk to your GP, they will look after you. Don't walk into a vaccination centre or pharmacists and ask the staff there to ignore the guidance and training they have received. You won't just waste "10 seconds" in doing so, it'll take longer than that for them to patiently listen to you explaining what you think they've been doing wrong. You'll more likely see exasperation than aspiration.
This bullshitcrummond chappie is sounding more and more like a previous banned poster on here.
*Long explanation of the mechanics of injection deleted*
Its been explained to you why you do not aspirate, its been explained to you why its a really bad idea to ask the vaccinators to do it
Please dude - take this off this thread and stop stinking up what is a truely informative thread
Evidence base
The procedure for IM injection has been discussed widely in the literature but there are concerns that nurses are still performing outdated and ritualistic practice relating to site selection, aspirating back on the syringe (Greenway, 2014) and skin cleansing.
Aspiration
It is common practice to draw back on a syringe after the needle is inserted to check whether it is in a blood vessel. While it is important to aspirate if the DG muscle site is used – because of proximity to the gluteal artery – it is not required for other IM injection sites (PHE, 2013; Malkin, 2008).
Proper, refernced evidenced based practice
this might help you understand and might lead you to realising your confusion The whole article is informative
From
One suspects our time has not been entirely wasted.
Bandits at six o'clock...
So now they're saying the practise itself is unsafe?
It's almost like they're running out of things to scare you with.
If you say that injecting into a blood vessel can’t happen or that the consequences of it are negligable then you are attributing the myocarditis/pericarditis to the vaccine, which therefore gives ammunition to the anti-vaxxers.
That was the bit that threw me - I'm not aware that anyone, anti-vaxxers included, has been suggesting that the very small risk of side effects was due to the method of injection.
It wouldn't be a study in the same way, but....
If NHS practise changed a number of years ago so we have a pre- and post- aspiration as normal era
and lack of aspiration is the cause of the myocarditis (OK, injection into veins instead of muscle is but YKWIM)
- how much has myocarditis increased in the last 10 years since injection practise changed, given all the IM injections that must have been given in that time?
See the Torygraph are reporting according to government modelling "cases will 'plummet' in November".
^^^
well we'll run out of unvaccinated schoolkids sooner or later....
– how much has myocarditis increased in the last 10 years since injection practise changed, given all the IM injections that must have been given in that time?
It depends on what you are injecting I would suppose.
The mice study linked to showed that the mRNA vaccine has a strong link to myopcarditis if injected into the blood vessels.
The consequences of injecting other vaccines might well be different, and probably because those consequences were lower then any side effect from misapplication wouldn't be noticed so much.
like a previous banned poster
says the previously banned poster...
The mice study linked to showed that the mRNA vaccine has a strong link to myopcarditis if injected into the blood vessels.
Its been explained to you why this vaccine cannot get into major blood vessels when injected as per best practice, its been explained to you where your confusion may well be coming from, I have given you the best practice outlined with properly referenced and peer reviewed evidence
I have asked you to stop stinking up this informative thread with your confused and ill conceived theories
Please - just stop.
says the previously banned poster…
So, you're not new here. Thanks for being clear. You've raised your point with your new username, people can read it and take it onboard if they want to (I'd suggest dismissing it, but that's for others to decide for themselves), now take it up with your GP if you're concerned about your own jabs, and stop going on.
Deleted - don't feed the troll
OK
You are not the person I thought you were. I'll try once again
The HK research - appears valid of itself - if you IV inject the vaccine into mice it is linked to myocarditis. The problem tho this is irrelevant to the delivery of vaccines in humans in the UK as it cannot be injected IV if given into the deltoid using the supplied equipment. so its completely irrelevant. It may be that the vaccine has a rare side effect of myocarditis. That would remain the same whether you aspirate the syringe or not as aspirating it is irrelevant as it achieves nothing.
Campbell - I did not watch the whole video but as soon as he produced the green needle it was clear it was a case of garbage in garbage out. The vaccine is not delivered by that type of needle. Thus its irrelevant, If he is recommending aspiration then it shows his lack of understanding - was he really recommending aspiration of IM injections into the deltoid or are you confusing procedures for the gluteal muscles where aspiration is still recommended?
some basic facts
The vaccine cannot be delivered IV if put into the deltoid using the supplied equipment
The non aspiration of IM injections into the deltoid is established best practice following decades of research
If you ask the vaccinators to aspirate they will and have to refuse as they MUST follow policy which states not to do this. If they did attempt to aspirate ( virtually impossible with that fine needle even if deliberately put into a major vein like the anticubital ( the one in your elbow)) they would be liable for disciplinary action as gross professional misconduct
Your issue is thinking irrelevant stuff is relevant
with that i will no longer attempt to answer you - you are not listening.
I haven’t done my own research on the Internet
This is a good place to start (Page 41 onwards).
Cominarty EMA EPAR review for the submission package. I was interested in the highest doses administered chronically (Rat 100 ug, which is about 900x the human dose). No evidence of cardiac toxicity despite what will be very high production levels of SP. Monkeys also showed little toxicity of note.
I'll just leave this here...
The most common causes of acute myocarditis and the possible consequence of dilated cardiomyopathy are virus infections.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21641134/
It's not the lipid nanoparticles, nor the mRNA that leads to circulating spike protein. So I am at a loss as to the issue with an IV injection - other than the liver clearing these things relatively quickly before they can be taken up by antigen presenting cells. And of course there are multiple recombinant spike protein vaccines being trialled so further safety data will be available in tens of thousands (Sanofi, Novovax).
This is what I have issue with – the blind assertion that these theories are ill conceived even though several highly qualified academics at the Uni of HK and a very experienced nurse practitioner/tutor are of a similar view.
You're at liberty to start a thread about this topic if you wish to elicit further discussion.
I’m amazed people will give youtube so much credence, if thats where you start to analyse quite complex advanced scientific principles then you have effectively failed in your personal due diligence.
doesn’t matter if those voicing their opinion have letters after their name think it an appropriate place for that kind of discourse, it’s not the right platform (thats peer reviewed publishing)
i’ll look at youtube for guidance on how to fit tubeless tyres and tips on getting them inflated, i’m hardly likely to find the right information if i wanted to improve a graphene/rubber polymer adhesion at the molecular level and integrate that into a cost effective manufacturing system whilst guarantee secure binding to a kevlar lining at optimal thickness and be able to vary that from .1 to .8mm with the flow control systems i have in place.
I thought of using the ‘Again’ suffix but choose one that is closer to my real name, which doesn’t have Turner in it…
Your new username is just one spelling mistake away from being perfect at describing what you post. When we're in the middle of a vaccine rollout slump and heading into what will be a very difficult winter the last thing we need is a poster turning up with a new username and posting unsubstantiated claims. This thread has been a massive help to a lot of people over the whole pandemic, please don't destroy it just as we may well need to rely on it again.
Personally I don’t see what the problem was with the original question. Seemed a bit unfair how everyone immediately piled on.
The question is OK but clearly because he does not understand. I patiently ( for me 🙂 ) explained the misunderstanding. gave proper evidence etc and he still kept on.
Personally I don’t see what the problem was with the original question. Seemed a bit unfair how everyone immediately piled on.
I don't think anyone had a problem with the question. And that was one of the most polite pile ons we've here in years.
It's just that when an expert in the field - and TJ is an expert when it comes to injecting patients - explains why the theory and the videos are based on several flawed ideas, it's a bit daft to keep coming back with nothing more than "yeah but"
BIG TLDR here ... I'm meant to be out of quarantine tomorrow but I took a lateral flow test today and it is still positive.
I didn't have any symptoms except a slight headache for a few hours a week ago (and realistically an elevated temperature reaching 37.5 so a degree above my more usual 36.5 but they don't count that and its back down in the 36's now) but I really don't want to go out and infect anyone or the whole thing seems rather pointless.
I had the call with the track and trace earlier who based on no symptoms from their list say I'm OK to go out tomorrow.
After this I acquired a lateral flow test... and took this to confirm just for my own reference really. This was positive.
I'm not in any hurry other than MH and getting a bit of cabin fever ...
Is it normal to test +ve on the lateral flow at this point? Is this why they don't ask people to test or am I being prudent waiting until it comes clear?
My understanding is that you don't take tests for 90 days after Covid precisely because of this.
pcr yes but does lateral flow test antibodies? or virus? i thought virus
neilneville... according to the NHS ...
You should do a rapid test twice a week (every 3 to 4 days) to check if you have the virus. If people test positive and self-isolate, it helps stop the virus spreading.
Weirdly this is the only lateral flow test that came back properly positive... the first one was barely showing if you squinted a bit but I took the PCR anyway...
MoreCash
My understanding is that you don’t take tests for 90 days after Covid precisely because of this.
Ah, wondered why that was.
BIG TLDR here … I’m meant to be out of quarantine tomorrow but I took a lateral flow test today and it is still positive.
Yep, same in our family. Advice is to do your 10 days isolation, if symptoms have gone you're good to go.
I also thought the LFT is calibrated to indicate if you are infectious with the virus, so could be used to check if OK to stop isolation, but the advice is you can't do either LFT or PCR test for 90 days.
I also thought the LFT is calibrated to indicate if you are infectious with the virus, so could be used to check if OK to stop isolation, but the advice is you can’t do either LFT or PCR test for 90 days.
In the case of my son, I did an LFT a few times while he was ill, the first 2 were positive, though the line was very faint on 2nd as he was getting better. The third on day 9 of his isolation was negative and I assume he is no longer infectious. Based on that I assume an LFT doesn’t stay positive weeks after an infection in the same way a PCR does, do I’d probably avoid mixing if you are still positive on LFT
My kid was returning negative LFTs after 2 weeks of their first positive one (and a positive PCR), and hasn't returned a positive once since, despite testing several times a week for school and clubs. Anecdotes aren't data... but they haven't triggered a false positive LFT since kicking the infection.
