I would not normally pass along medical articles from The New York Post, but at the end of this one is the list of "top ten" co-morbidities (along with age) of the deaths in New York. Also, it's good to see a headline that Diet has a huge influence on immunity to Covid and there is something everyone can do about it.

America’s junk food diet makes us even more vulnerable to coronavirus

https://nypost.com/2020/04/18/ameri...to-coronavirus/

There are so many unknowns about this virus, and so many test results that don't sound logical. 73% of prisoners in Ohio Test positive but have no symptoms? 60% of positive tests on the TR aircraft carrier had no symptoms. Are we even testing for the right virus? Is this something like a herpes simplex cold sore virus we carry in us but a new mutation triggered it...but only in certain people? All types of tests seem too weird at this point to put much faith in them.

All valid points. I'm beginning to realize that much of the blame, finger pointing, and other shaming going on is just subterfuge that does not help the objective of finding more about this virus. Now, I'm wondering whether recommended isolation resulting in lock downs is really effective in mitigating this virus, as having underlying conditions would likely be similarly fatal in the case of a highly contagious flu or other virus. What we do know is that obesity is a symptom of an underlying health issue that typically rides along with other symptoms like HBP, CVD, sleep apnea (existing breathing issues), blood sugar issues, and others that put anyone at risk with any virus or illness that manifests itself in the lungs and taxes oxygen transfer to the blood.

If the test results referenced are accurate, then we've got to be more creative in dealing with this virus and may need to consider allowing people to contract the virus to get over it. While I realize that the isolation and lock down recommendations were primarily to prevent overwhelming hospitals and health facilities, that's not happening right now, but the catch 22 is that someone will argue that the very reason hospitals are not overwhelmed is due to isolating. With this information, I'm no longer sure about this argument.

My hunch is that reopening the country will go well if those that have been identified as the most vulnerable remain well isolated from it. This virus spreads very easily, so I don't think there is any practical way to isolate these people forever. The most important thing is to keep the spikes down so that our healthcare system can still cope.

Regarding
I agree with Rob. The article does make good points, for the most part, in pinpointing poor diet as a huge risk factor. However, nothing much was said about what to do about it. If what comes out of this is nothing but increased blame and pressure on obese people to eat "healthy" and lose weight by the same old failed methods what will we gain? I still don't think that the mainstream understands what the real source of the problem is. I'm sure that eating 'healthy' will still involve plenty of healthy whole grains, fruits and vegetables (including starchy ones). I think that we are making some headway in the right directions, but I don't think we will get there until the guidelines actually promote a diet well suited to the metabolically challenged. Let's hope that one positive result of this pandemic is a desire to truly understand what's happening to the virus infected metabolically ill without the bias of the past.

Well lucky us, if you want to hear her advice on how to be "healthy" her book Advertised within this article, comes out tomorrow.

Most of the co-morbidities are caused by insulin resistance. Tests for insulin resistance are seldom done.

Dr Aseem Malhotra linking it to poor diet today on the BBC

I don't think she has diabetes and her BG is always within range but her blood sugar crashes hard if she doesn't eat, then she eats junk all the time. I might guess she's in the prediabetic range, maybe a 6.5-7. I believe her fasting BG that her doctor thinks is "fine" is around 105.

The lack of correlation with weight may be due to the fact that COVID-19 hits the frail (underweight) as well as the obese hardest. Skinny doesn't mean healthy.

I only get (allergenic) asthma symptoms when I eat hearthealthywholegrains or walk through cigarette smoke. I never had asthma until I went vegan (~1990 at 36 for a stint), and I never have attacks when I avoid all grains and smokers. I like to be able to breathe.

Interesting read Janet, Thanks for sharing.

One thought tho, that last section labeled "Deadly Factors" would have been much more useful if, along with the percentage of those who died who exhibited a particular factor, information had also been given about the number of New Yorkers who, in general, have the particular factor.

For example, the article says that 20% of the people who died from Coronavirus in New York State had hyperlipidemia.

But, when I googled "hyperlipidemia in New York State" the first thing that google returned was a pdf from Health.NY.gov that says that in 2015, 80% of New York adults surveyed reported that they'd had their cholesterol levels checked within the previous five years and that 36.6% of those reported that they were told they had high cholesterol levels.

I'm not a statistician BUT, even if we assume that the 20% of New Yorkers who had NOT had their cholesterol checked within 5 years also DID NOT have hyperlipidemia, then 29.28% (0.8 x 36.6) of the New Yorkers surveyed had hyperlipidemia. And that's making the assumption that every single person with hyperlipidemia had been tested. More likely, those who've never had their cholesterol checked probably have a fairly similar levels of high cholesterol as those who have been tested. (There'll be some who've never been tested simply because they appear healthier so their doctors won't have checked. But there'll be others who've never been tested because they're too poor to go see a doctor so therefore more likely to have various health issues. I'm better the two groups come close to canceling out so that the real prevalence of hyperlipidemia is very close to the reported 36.6%)

So, assuming that the survey participants were selected reasonably randomly, then we ought to be able to assume that at least 29%, (and more likely, closer to 36.6%) of New Yorkers have hyperlipidemia.

Seems to me like that should also mean that somewhere between 29% to 36.6% of the New Yorkers who died of COVID-19 should have had hyperlipidemia, even if hyperlipidemia had NOTHING to do with whether one dies of the disease or not.

But, only 20% did! So, is hyperlipidemia PROTECTIVE rather than a risk factor for dying of the disease???

That was my thought too, especially considering that (at least as I understand it) cholesterol is required to build and repair all cells in the body. So if the job of cholesterol is to repair, then logic says to me that lung damage from covid is more likely to be repaired and result in recovery for someone who has what is currently considered to be high cholesterol. It would be interesting to find out what percentage of those who recovered vs those who died were on statins to prevent their bodies from producing "too much" cholesterol.


This also leads back to the stats for hypertension and diabetes, because those were the most common co-morbidities... and not at all uncommon among those who are eating the recommended low fat high carb diet.



Coincidence? Hmm...

FYI: A clinic in a small town a few miles north of where I work started offering a drive-through Covid-19 antibody test. The test was covered by my insurance so I decided to have it done today. My results were negative for the antibody. Thus says this 'results back in 5 minutes' test.

But to be honest, even before I got my results I sort of felt like this might be more of a racket than a service. As they pricked my finger and took a few drops of blood they informed me that the test was FDA approved and that it had a 70% accuracy rate. 70% accuracy??? Really? OK. So how confident should I be in the results either way. Not very.

The test results were provided by what I supposed to be a medical doctor -- on a 10" tablet hanging from what looked like an IV rack placed outside my window like a drive-in speaker. I heard the spiel given to the car ahead of me - much about repeating all the 'stay safe' sanitizing & social distancing rules that we all know. My spiel was verbatim. In fact, I almost thought that I was watching a video. Then suddenly he asked if I had any questions. It was a real person! I asked about the 70% accuracy and told him about the two people from my office that tested positive for the antibody and that most of our office was sick at the same time as this person who tested positive. I told him that I suspected that I had experienced covid-19 and that's why I wanted this test. His response came across as a little defensive about what they were doing and the value in spite of a FDA approved 70% accuracy rate. In the end he did suggest that with my circumstances I might want to consider having a more reliable test done. Wow. It really is more like a racket than a service, IMO. There were no cars in the front of the clinic. I don't know if they were closed or not. But they sure were busy out back processing that long line of cars.

Perhaps I did have corona-virus a month or two ago. Maybe I didn't. I'm not confident that this test shed much light on my situation. 4 more people from my office are scheduled to have their antibody tests tomorrow at the same clinic. These people were among those in the office that were sick for weeks back in February. If all come back negative I will feel a little more confident in my negative results. What if we get mixed results in that group? Could they be false positives? Who knows?

Interesting story, and it reinforces my concerns as well. Yesterday, I called ARCpoint Labs that is supposedly offering the antibody testing in my area, and I got a recording stating that by Wednesday of this week, people will be able to make an appointment on their website to schedule the test. The test costs $225. At that instance, I decided I didn't want to bother, as I had no confidence that the testing was accurate and wasn't about to spend the money. Later that day, my son called and informed me that there were many antibody testing options popping up in various areas throughout the country, but the federal government was warning people that there are only a few testing options that are accurate. Enough said.

I think you are on the right track. Yesterday I wstched a presentation on youtube where a doctor vindicated cholesterol as protective at higher levels. Sorry I didnt keep the link handy to include here.

My doctor feels the need to point out my cholesterol is too high at 105....never a mention of other lipid levels, sigh. Dr Atkins showed a study where too low a cholesterol level was deadly......I ignore my doctor.

For cholesterol being protective...might have been the interview with Dr Paul Mason at The Fat Emperor.

https://thefatemperor.com/ep68-dr-p...s-crucial-info/

From the funny transcription:



Think Dr Mason also had more on cholesterol in his YouTube on Covid, but no transcription with that one ( which might be a good thing )
https://youtu.be/4lJPjsuftmQ

Yes, Dr. Mason's youtube site is a good source for his most current information:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3...5sYM5Ybw/videos