Cardiac Damage Even in Mild Cases

[ClimbDad]

Two studies of COVID-19 sufferers show serious damage to the heart, even in mild and asymptomatic cases. 78% of people had damage in one study, which specifically excluded anyone who’d previously been diagnosed with a heart condition. 2/3rds of people in the study were never hospitalised with COVID19, and were classed as mild or asymptomatic cases who’d recovered at home.

“These were relatively young, healthy patients who fell ill in the spring, Valentina Puntmann, who led the MRI study, pointed out in an interview. Many of them had just returned from ski vacations. None of them thought they had anything wrong with their hearts.”

Dirk Westermann, a cardiologist at the University Heart and Vascular Centre in Hamburg, said in an interview. “We don’t know the long-term consequences of the changes in gene expression yet. I know from other diseases that it’s obviously not good to have that increased level of inflammation.”

Taken together, the two studies, published Monday in JAMA Cardiology, suggest that in many patients, Covid-19 could presage heart failure, a chronic, progressive condition in which the heart’s ability to pump blood throughout the body declines. It is too soon to say if the damage in patients recovering from Covid-19 is transient or permanent, but cardiologists are worried.“

78%, not 1%, not even 7%. 78% with heart problems. These complications are not rare. I don’t understand why so many people on MN are willing to gamble their long-term health and the health of friends and family.

If schools are to open with normal class sizes in September, students and teachers must wear masks. The long-term human and economic cost of this virus is only just starting to become clear. We need to do everything possible to minimise transmission.

www.statnews.com/2020/07/27/covid19-concerns-about-lasting-heart-damage/

Is the OP hoping to halving use posters to try and persuade Boris/Gavin/schools that masks should be used?

You seem to be confusing him with the DM. Their agenda is transparently motivated by self-interest and they're not interested in factual accuracy. This OP is posting credible science (by the current standards when everything is rushed) and engaging with a range of opinions. What you do on the back of that discussion is up to you. He doesn't mind a bit of free speech and he's not breaking talk guidelines. Not sure why it's all such a problem for you. People post about scary things all the time. Life is scary. Hide the thread.

Totally agree @Sunshinegirl82.

What I’m not clear on is why...

Thanks for posting this OP I'm not quite sure why you are getting such a hard time on here, personally I'm always interested to read new information and research. Yes it's worrying, but it's a pandemic and personally I would rather be well informed so I can make decisions accordingly.

There has been so much focus on deaths, which is understandable, but we shouldn't ignore the non-fatal health impacts of this disease.

Although if they can SD in schools due to smaller class sizes, which was the original plan for school return in Scotland, why do they also need masks? They are for situations where people can’t maintain 2m distance.

No, the OP has a specific agenda relating to schools and masks. That is clear.

The OP must feel that by bringing this to the wider attention of mumsnet something will happen. What is that?

If it was simply looking to draw attention to the various studies there would not be a specific reference to schools and masks in every one of the numerous threads that have been started.

If s/he wants mumsnet gets to get behind a campaign to get the government to enforce masks in school then say that.

The studies referenced in these posts are in the public domain already so that cannot be the motivation for the threads.

Lots of threads on this site are of the 'have you heard...' type. People do that. For a range of reasons.

However there is certainly an element in the media and on MN that tries to shut down discussions that don't fit a narrative. They can influence the way people think and read about what they do see in the media. This element may give climbdad the impression that he needs to rebalance things by sharing knowledge that goes against the grain, just in case people are using MN as a news site. Again, it happens all the time. You wouldn't care if you weren't complicit.

Facts and free speech all the way.

Things like this being posted and people wonder why anxiety is through the roof 🤦🏼‍♀️

The OP has repeatedly made it clear that they do not consider that schools should return at full capacity in September and that children and staff in schools should wear masks. The posts seem designed to prove to mumsnet that these actions are appropriate and necessary.

So what? Isn't MN a forum for the discussion of ideas?. By the way, this is exactly what's happen in Victoria..

Mumsnet are not in charge of school return policy

So what? See above.

If reading studies on covid makes you ill with anxiety then stop reading them, but don't criticise other people who want to share and read this stuff.

Personally I fully intend to send my children back to school in spite of the risk, however I do worry about the impact on staff particularly if they are older or vulnerable. I would support any solutions that reduce the risk to staff while still enabling us to send children to school. I'm not sure masks would work, but stricter rules on bubbles, more social distancing and reduced or altered school hours are all things I would support.

Things like this being posted and people wonder why anxiety is through the roof

1. It's research and always worth looking at.
2. MN is a discussion forum, not a gun to the head. No-one has to read it.
3. You can report it if you think it's some way detrimental. Good luck with that.

@echt

Things like this being posted and people wonder why anxiety is through the roof

1. It's research and always worth looking at.
2. MN is a discussion forum, not a gun to the head. No-one has to read it.
3. You can report it if you think it's some way detrimental. Good luck with that.

It is absolutely fine to share things on MN, that is what it is here for. However, it has got to point that many know who the OP will be before even opening the thread. Just today the OP has shared a school outbreak, told us our kids are at risk and now this heart thread. All pushing the mask thing.

I don’t think you have to be a super sleuth to work out the OP’s agenda is to get people (parents & teachers, the kinds of people who congregate on parenting forums) to agree that it might be sensible to wear masks in schools, the only public environment where there are currently no credible plans for social distancing or masks to protect those inside said settings for at least six hours a day. With a virus that is mainly airborne.
It doesn’t seem particularly sinister agenda to me. What am I missing?

It is absolutely fine to share things on MN, that is what it is here for. However, it has got to point that many know who the OP will be before even opening the thread

Forewarned is forearmed. So need to open it.

Just today the OP has shared a school outbreak, told us our kids are at risk and now this heart thread. All pushing the mask thing

So what? Argue with the poster or hide it. God knows MN keep it simple enough.

It doesn’t seem particularly sinister agenda to me. What am I missing?

Quite.

And again !!!! Seriously we all read these articles

How do you remove all risk long term?

Where is the vaccine?

100% avoidance of covid for 100% of the population is no compatible with western life. Unless your happy to stay safe at home while others risk there life producing your food.

You do know that everyone dies OP? You cant cheat death. Your dieing a little bit every day. Death comes to everyone. Try to find peace with mortality

@Alex50

Yes and I know quite a few people who have had it who had mild symptoms, recovered with no on going health issues.

Me too 15 at work 2 at home all fine had it in March

@echt

That's what people are doing, arguing with the poster.

@SirBale

God knows why I’ve chosen to read this. Tested positive 3 months ago, through not fault of my own, I was being bloody careful and following the bloody rules as best I could! At no point did I think myself super human and it wouldn’t affect me. Now scaring myself silly again that I’m going to drop dead any moment with a heart attack! Luckily for me I took part in a covid study mapping all of the major organs and neither my heart or lungs show any sign of damage - maybe I’m in the lucky 20%. I know it’s my own choice to click on an open threads but I constant stream of finding only articles that point out the negatives doesn’t help anyone - I’m not sure what I could have done differently to have avoided the illness.

Just ignore him he is like the media posting the negative never the positive my sister is in icu (truth) and there are no patients on ventilators for weeks and they use different treatments now

Having looked at what the OP has posted, he has proposed that we continue to minimise risk.

That's it.

Me too 15 at work 2 at home all fine had it in March

Anecdata is meaningless in this context, unless you're taking part in a study.

Try to find peace with mortality

Nice try at the continued attacks on the OP's mental health which got some posts deleted.

Reading about research like this is unsettling and sometimes frightening, but personally I'd rather know about it than not. I appreciate posts on here that draw attention to important developments.

I think if I found reading this sort of thing unbearably frightening I would avoid the topic completely. I don't think expecting other people to sanitise their discussions about coronavirus in order not to mention things like this is reasonable. Nor is expecting people not to be interested but rather just to 'accept mortality' instead.

I also don't think an agenda to push for schools to be safer in September is sinister. I think people going into the autumn uninformed about the full potential consequences of this virus is dangerous.

Deciding whether or not to send a child back to school in September, or whether or not to go on holiday, or whether or not to push one's boss for better covid precautions - all those types of decisions are affected by how much we think we should care about avoiding catching the virus. And how much we think we should care about avoiding catching the virus is affected by what we know about its effects.

Research like this can make us feel less sure about what we're doing, and push us into uncomfortable places where we're temporarily not sure what the right thing to do is any more, or where we're less confident that things we have no choice about are safe than we were before. Shooting the messenger is pointless and unhelpful though.

Gosh, what a lot of shooting the messenger on this thread! I have seen plenty of posts on MN where people are told they have mental health issues for being concerned about Covid when they are relatively young and healthy, with people quoting low death rates as if that were the only thing that matters. I can totally understand why the OP feels the need to redress the balance.

Interesting paper but it is easy to take away a headline figure without actually be sure of what it is found. What jumped out at me was the lack of information regarding the number of healthy and risk matched controls who had abnormal CMR findings or a detectable trop. So 78% compared to what? Yes there were statistically significant differences in their LVF but a mild reduction and it appears even some of the healthy controls had reductions but what does that translate to in real life is actually hard to get from this paper.
I couldn’t find the age ranges of the participants. We have a median age but it wasn’t clear how much of a range there was, is age a factor in this?
Finally, although there were a number of asymptomatic patients in their study, it was very small and they even highlighted in their limitations that their findings were not applicable asymptomatic patients.

I take it OP doesn’t want schools to open then.......