COVID

SHOCKING report from Canada: 106 young people hospitalized due to heart inflammation after receiving mRNA jab

Posted by

0


With more than 54 million doses of the COVID shot administered in the country, approximately 68.6% of the Canadian population is considered “fully vaccinated,” although this could change depending on booster shot rollouts.

Now, less than a year into the controversial jab rollout and subsequent mandates, hundreds of people within the province of Ontario alone have developed a potentially dangerous and costly health condition after their Moderna or Pfizer injection.

Hundreds of Ontario residents diagnosed with heart inflammation following COVID injection, including more than 100 people under the age of 25

Public Health Ontario recently released a report titled, “Myocarditis and Pericarditis Following Vaccination with COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines in Ontario: December 13, 2020, to August 7, 2021.”

The details are as follows:

  • There have been a total of 204 reported cases of myocarditis, pericarditis, pleuropericarditis, or myopericarditis (all conditions are related to inflammation in and around the heart)
  • Of the total reported cases, all but 2 required an emergency room visit; 146 required hospitalization; and 3 required admissions to the ICU – fortunately, there are no reported fatalities
  • 106 of these cases involved people under the age of 25; 54 of these cases involved people aged 25 to 39
  • The majority of these cases occurred in males, mostly after the second dose of either mRNA jab

Currently, protests are erupting around Ontario after the provincial government announced it will be requiring COVID-19 vax passports for entrance into public places such as restaurants, gyms, and nightclubs, effective September 22.

Sadly, it’s not just Ontario residents who are experiencing this concerning adverse effect.  Nova Scotia recently reported that as of July 23, 2021, 22 of its residents have suffered heart inflammation following immunization with either the Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna shots.

In other pandemic news:  Lockdowns pushing millions of people into extreme poverty, says World Bank

No long-term safety data on the COVID shots (along with thousands of reported post-jab health effects, including deaths).  Possible speech and developmental impairments due to widespread, prolonged mask use in children.  Loneliness and social isolation.  Surging rates of childhood obesity.  These aren’t the only problems associated with the global pandemic response: economic hardships triggered by government actions are leading to skyrocketing rates of poverty, as well.

According to World Bank, about a quarter of the world’s population lives on less than $3.20 per day, and nearly half of the world’s population lives on less than $5.50 per day, as of September 2020.

However, thanks to the COVID-19 pandemic, the number of people experiencing extreme poverty – living on less than $1.90 per day – is increasing.  In a January 2021 article, World Bank warns: “The estimated increase in global poverty in 2020 is truly unprecedented.”

Current projections have estimated that the number of people pushed into extreme poverty – the so-called “COVID-19-induced new poor” – was between 119 and 124 million in 2020.

Along with conflict and climate change, World Bank cites “economic contraction” as a key driver of this sobering shift in global poverty.

“The deceleration in economic activity intensified by the pandemic,” World Bank explains in an October 2020 press release, “is likely to hit the poorest people especially hard, and this could lead to even lower shared prosperity indicators in coming years.”

The international financial institution also indicates an increasing number of people in urban communities are falling into extreme poverty, even though such levels of destitution have “traditionally affected people in rural areas.”

Official projections like this remind us that it could be a long, long time before we fully understand the long-reaching effects of these pandemic lockdowns, business closures, social isolation, and other COVID-19 mitigation measures.

Then again, not everyone is coming out of this by the skin of their teeth.  According to Forbes, American billionaires have increased their wealth by roughly $1.2 trillion during the pandemic.

Moderna patents reveal presence of wireless nanosensors in shots, claims naturopathic doctor

Posted by

0


Science fiction or terrifyingly true?  Some health professionals are now making the astounding claim that the COVID shot made by Moderna contains wireless nanosensors.

These nanosensors, it is argued, could be used as bioweapons of global control – or as part of a social credit score system, similar to what is currently being used in communist China.

Does the patent for Moderna COVID shots actually reveal that these jabs contain wireless nanotechnology?

In a December 3, 2021 interview on the Stew Peters Show, a Naturopathic Doctor named Dr. Ariyana Love claims she’s uncovered evidence from the Moderna patents which shows that the pharmaceutical company’s COVID jabs contain so-called “wireless nanosensors” that are partly made up of a compound known as graphene oxide.

Earlier this year, a Spanish doctor and University of Almeria biotechnology professor by the name of Dr. Pablo Campra reportedly tested samples of the mRNA COVID shots and claimed to have detected graphene oxide, which is proven to be toxic in humans and animals.  Of course, this claim has been labeled false by Reuters and other “fact-checking” websites.

But Dr. Love disagrees.  She says the nanosensors found in Moderna’s COVID shots are called “biochips,” and “they’re in more than one [Moderna COVID vaccine] patent, so yeah, they exist.”

She continues: “[The biochips] are made from graphene oxide, which also proves graphene oxide is listed in the patents … We have now proof that there’s graphene oxide, graphene hydroxide, and other graphene variants in these shots, and that [proof] comes from, so far, seven scientific research teams and scientists, including the University of Almeria.”

On her website, Dr. Love describes herself as the founder of Meta Nutrients, “an international foundation pioneering harmonized medicine,” as well as a second-generation Naturopathic Doctor, researcher, and writer.

You can hear her interview here and decide for yourself whether her claims sound plausible or not:

Moderna Patent Uncovers Horror: Nanocensor Contained in Bioweapon

Whether they’re actually in COVID shots or not, biochips are real – and currently being used by people throughout the world.

China’s infamous social credit database system offers a wary example of what could happen if such nanotechnology becomes widespread.

According to a May 2021 article published by Business Insider, Chinese technology (including facial recognition and other forms of surveillance) currently allows government officials to “punish” citizens – in the form of travel bans, slow internet access, and more – for everything from speeding to downloading too many video games.

Incredibly, plenty of people in other parts of the world are signing up for biotechnology willingly.  In Sweden, for example, thousands of people have had microchips inserted under the skin so they can swipe their hands against digital readers to gain entrance to homes, gyms, offices, and more.  These chips can even be used to quickly share personal information (e.g. the kind you’d find on social media accounts) with other people’s phones.

Could the increasing normalization of microchipped humans be paving the way for social credit systems in places other than China, including freer countries like Sweden and the United States?

If a person is found to be reading or sharing “fake news,” for example, could this type of nanotechnology prevent someone from being able to drive their car, access their bank account, or take public transportation?

It is truly speculation at this point.  However, this “Big Brother-esque” technology is certainly becoming more and more advanced.  It is only a matter of time to see how these innovations will play out in public and private life.

Behind the needle: Who are the puppeteers of childhood immunizations?

Posted by

0


In a world where shaming and punishing individuals for wanting the freedom to accept or decline medical interventions is becoming the unquestioned status quo, the state of California continues to carry the banner in Draconian, police-state-like efforts that aim to control the masses.

Even though childhood vax rates are still generally high in this country, more and more parents are saying “no” to the standard childhood immunization schedule set by the pharma-bought Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).  And the truth is, it’s been a long time coming – likely with no small thanks to the absolute mess that was the COVID-19 pandemic.  Unfortunately, that’s not stopping state politicians from trying to push the Big Pharma agenda of making every man, woman, and child in the United States a lifelong customer.

State-sponsored threats against medical freedom continue: California threatens to pull funding for hundreds of schools due to “low” vaccine rates, but critics question accuracy of state’s audit

The California Department of Health (CDPH) recently alerted nearly 600 schools in the state that their funding may be restricted because more than 10 percent of their students were not “fully vaccinated” for the previous academic year.  But the CDPH’s audit of these schools is misleading according to many critics, and at worst, is “driven by Big Pharma and political interests,” writes Children’s Health Defense.  For example:

Speaking to Children’s Health Defense, analyst and writer Karl Kanath notes that per the CDC schedule, several shots required for school entry can be administered later in childhood, e.g., between the ages of 4 and 6 (the age at which many kids enter kindergarten).  But this means that many kids in California could have been labeled “unvaxxed” by the CDPH’s audit even if their parents were simply choosing a delayed schedule, which is an increasingly popular option).

(Referring to California’s elimination of personal belief exemptions to childhood vaccines back in 2015, Kanath also warns of a grim picture for the future of medical freedom in America, saying that “eliminating school exemptions for children is a major step in making exemptions unavailable for adults.”)

Other critics argue that childhood vax statistics are being skewed simply to paint the picture that dropping immunization rates are a crisis-worthy public health issue.  But an April 2022 Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) from the CDC found the U.S. kindergarten vax rate for the 2020-21 school year was 94 percent – a mere one percentage point lower than the previous year.

Who decides how to raise your children: You or the CDC?

Here’s a radical idea:

Parents should have the right to choose whether their children receive all, some, or none of the vaccinations currently recommended by the CDC per the childhood immunization schedule – which is a schedule that seems to grow bigger and bigger as we speak.  But make no mistake: it’s not a choice if parents are made to feel coerced into opting in or punished for opting out.

It’s also not a choice when the CDC claims that choosing not to inject your child with dozens of jabs is across-the-board neglectful or dangerous.  Yes, some “vaccine-preventable” childhood illnesses can be serious and even deadly.  However, there are many nuances that the CDC and other pro-vax agencies fail to discuss when educating parents.  For instance:

  • What is the actual likelihood that these communicable diseases, if contracted, would cause severe symptoms?
  • What are the available treatment options for these communicable diseases?
  • Are there certain communities or demographics more at risk?
  • Are parents truly able to give informed consent to these vaccines when healthcare providers are not explaining the full range of risks, benefits, and alternatives?
  • Have the effects of all these shots given together been adequately studied?  (Spoiler alert: they haven’t)
  • What is the CDC doing to address the fact that fewer than one percent of adverse effects of vaccines are NOT reported, as acknowledged by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services?

We also can’t ignore the fact that the CDC is clearly bought and paid for by the very pharmaceutical companies making insane profits off these “required” vaccines.

Indeed, as recently as November 2019 (which, post-pandemic, seems like an eternity ago), a cohort of advocacy groups released a petition that called on the CDC to stop claiming it doesn’t have any financial support or financial conflict of interest from drug manufacturers.

Reporting on the petition, Ash Clinical News writes that the advocacy groups – including Public Citizen, Knowledge Ecology International, Liberty Coalition, Project on Government Oversight, and U.S. Right to Know – are “concerned about the pharmaceutical industry’s possible undue influence on medical research and practice.” And we can clearly see why:

“The CDC has accepted millions of dollars through the CDC Foundation,” writes Ash Clinical News.  “During fiscal years 2014 through 2018, the CDC Foundation received $79.6 million from companies like Pfizer, Biogen, and Merck.  Since it was created by Congress in 1995, the nonprofit organization has accepted $161 million from corporations.”

It all begs the question: how many of our country’s public policies are dictated by transparent, unbiased, and legitimate science – and how many are dictated by alarmist headlines, skewed statistics, and financial incentives?  And in the meantime, how many of our children are suffering avoidable consequences?

Long COVID: New Info on Who Is Most Likely to Get It

Posted by

0



 

The COVID-19 pandemic may no longer be a global public health emergency, but millions continue to struggle with the aftermath: Long COVID. New research and clinical anecdotes suggest that certain individuals are more likely to be afflicted by the condition, nearly 4 years after the virus emerged. 

People with a history of allergies, anxiety or depression, arthritis, and autoimmune diseases and women are among those who appear more vulnerable to developing long COVID, said doctors who specialize in treating the condition.

Many patients with long COVID struggle with debilitating fatigue, brain fog, and cognitive impairment. The condition is also characterized by a catalog of other symptoms that may be difficult to recognize as long COVID, experts said. That’s especially true when patients may not mention seemingly unrelated information, such as underlying health conditions that might make them more vulnerable. This makes screening for certain conditions and investigating every symptom especially important. 

The severity of a patient’s initial infection is not the only determining factor for developing long COVID, experts said.

“Don’t judge the person based on how sick they were initially,” said Mark Bayley, MD, medical director of the Toronto Rehabilitation Institute at University Health Network and a professor with the Temerty Faculty of Medicine at the University of Toronto. “You have to evaluate every symptom as best you can to make sure you’re not missing anything else.” 

Someone who only had a bad cough or felt really unwell for just a few days and recovered but started feeling rotten again later — “that’s the person that we are seeing for long COVID,” said Bayley. 

While patients who become severely sick and require hospitalization have a higher risk of developing long COVID, this group size is small compared with the much larger number of people infected overall. As a result, despite the lower risk, those who only become mild to moderately sick make up the vast majority of patients in long COVID clinics. 

A small Northwestern Medicine study found that 41% of patients with long COVID never tested positive for COVID-19 but were found to have antibodies that indicated exposure to the virus. 

Doctors treating patients with long COVID should consider several risk factors, specialists said. They include:

  • A history of asthma, eczema, or allergies
  • Signs of autonomic nervous system dysfunction
  • Preexisting immune system issues
  • Chronic infections
  • Diabetes
  • Being slightly overweight
  • A preexisting history of anxiety or depression
  • Joint hypermobility (being “double-jointed” with pain and other symptoms)

Screening for Allergies

Alba Azola, MD, assistant professor of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation at Johns Hopkins Medicine, said a history of asthma, allergies, and eczema and an onset of new food allergies may be an important factor in long COVID that doctors should consider when evaluating at-risk patients.

It is important to identify this subgroup of patients because they respond to antihistamines and mast cell stabilizers, which not only relieve their allergy symptoms but may also help improve overall fatigue and their tolerance for basic activities like standing, Azola said.

A recently published systemic review of prospective cohort studies on long COVID also found that patients with preexisting allergic conditions like asthma or rhinitis may be linked to a higher risk of developing long COVID. The authors cautioned, however, that the evidence for the link is uncertain and more rigorous research is needed.

“It stands to reason that if your immune system tends to be a bit hyperactive that triggering it with a virus will make it worse,” said Bayley.

Signs of Dysautonomia, Joint Hypermobility

Patients should also be screened for signs and symptoms of dysautonomia, or autonomic nervous system disorder, such as postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS) or another type of autonomic dysfunction, doctors said.

“There’s a whole list because the autonomic nervous system involves every part of your body, every system,” Azola said.

Issues with standing, vision, digestion, urination, and bowel movement, for example, appear to be multisystemic problems but may all be linked to autonomic dysfunction, she explained.

Patients who have POTS usually experience a worsening of symptoms after COVID infection, Azola said, adding that some patients may have even assumed their pre-COVID symptoms of POTS were normal. 

She also screens for joint hypermobility or hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, which affects connective tissue. Research has long shown a relationship between autonomic dysfunction, mast cell activation syndrome (repeated severe allergy symptoms that affect multiple systems), and the presence of hypermobility, Azola said. She added that gentle physical therapy can be helpful for patients with hypermobility issues.

Previous studies before and during the pandemic have also found that a substantial subset of patients with myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome, which shares many similarities with long COVID, also have connective tissue/hypermobility disorders.

Depression, Anxiety, and Female Patients

People with a preexisting history of anxiety or depression also appear to be at a higher risk for long COVID, Bayley said, noting that patients with these conditions appear more vulnerable to brain fog and other difficulties brought on by COVID infection. Earlier research found biochemical evidence of brain inflammation that correlates with symptoms of anxiety in patients with long COVID.

“We know that depression is related to neurotransmitters like adrenaline and serotonin,” Bayley said. “The chronic inflammation that’s associated with COVID — this will make people feel more depressed because they’re not getting the neurotransmitters in their brain releasing at the right times.”

It may also put patients at a risk for anxiety due to fears of post-exertional malaise (PEM), where symptoms worsen after even very minor physical or mental exertion and can last days or weeks.

“You can see how that leads to a bit of a vicious cycle,” said Bayley, explaining that the cycle of fear and avoidance makes patients less active and deconditioned. But he added that learning to manage their activity can actually help mitigate PEM due to the anti-inflammatory effects of exercise, its positive impact on mood, and benefits to the immune and cardiovascular systems. 

Meanwhile, a number of epidemiologic studies have found a higher prevalence of long COVID among women. Perimenopausal and menopausal women in particular appeared more prone, and at least one study reported that women under 50 years were five times more likely to develop post-COVID symptoms than men.

A recent small UK study that focused on COVID-19 hospitalizations found that women who had lower levels of inflammatory biomarkers at admission were more likely to experience certain long-term symptoms like muscle ache, low mood and anxiety, adding to earlier research linking female patients, long COVID, and neuropsychiatric symptoms. 

History of Immune Dysfunction, Diabetes, Elevated Body Mass Index (BMI)

Immune dysfunction, a history of recurrent infections, or chronic sinus infections are also common among patients under Azola and her team’s care. Those who have arthritis or other autoimmune diseases such as lupus also appear more vulnerable, Bayley said, along with patients who have diabetes or a little overweight.

Recent research out of the University of Queensland found that being overweight can negatively affect the body’s immune response to the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Blood samples collected 13 months after infection, for example, found that individuals with a higher BMI had lower antibody activity and a reduced percentage of relevant B cells that help build antibodies to fight the virus. Being overweight did not affect the antibody response to the COVID-19 vaccines, however, giving further support for vaccination over infection-induced immunity as an important protective factor, researchers said.

Narrowing the Information Gap

The latest Centers for Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Household Pulse Survey estimates that 14% of all American adults have had long COVID at some point, with > 5% of the entire adult population currently experiencing long COVID. With millions of Americans affected, experts and advocates highlight the importance of bridging the knowledge gap with primary care doctors. 

Long COVID specialists said understanding these connections helps guide treatment plans and manage symptoms, such as finding the right medications, improving tolerance, optimizing sleep, applying cognitive strategies for brain fog, dietary changes, respiratory exercises to help with shortness of breath, and finding the fine line between what causes PEM and what doesn’t. 

“Whenever you see a disease like this one, you always have to ask yourself, is there an alternative way of looking at this that might explain what we’re seeing?” said Bayley. “It remains to be said that all bets are still open and that we need to continue to be very broad thinking about this.”

CDC committee recommends new pentavalent meningococcal vaccine

Posted by

0


Key takeaways:

  • A newly approved pentavalent meningococcal vaccine covers serogroups A, B, C, W and Y.
  • A CDC advisory committee recommended administering it when both MenACWY and MenB are indicated at the same visit.

A CDC advisory committee voted 10-4 on Wednesday to recommend administering a newly approved pentavalent meningococcal vaccine when vaccination with both a MenACWY and MenB vaccine are indicated at the same visit.

The FDA approved Pfizer’s Penbraya on Friday as the only vaccine covering the five most common serogroups causing meningococcal disease in people aged 10 to 25 years.

Child being vaccinated 5 (Adobe Stock)
A CDC advisory committee voted to recommend a pentavalent meningococcal conjugate vaccine. Image: Adobe Stock

The new vaccine comprises the company’s serogroup B shot and its vaccine covering groups A, C, W-135, and Y serogroups, reducing the number of doses needed for individuals to be fully vaccinated against the disease to two shots given 6 months apart.

Four of the 14 members of the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices voted “no” on the recommendation, with two expressing similar reasons for their vote.

“My vote ‘no’ was because I wanted to vote for a little bit of a broader recommendation,” Katherine A. Poehling, MD, MPH, director of pediatric population health at the Wake Forest University School of Medicine, said. “I respect [the votes] of my colleagues and believe there are going to be many more conversations to come about meningococcal vaccines.”

The second “no” vote, Veronica V. McNally, JD, president and CEO of the Franny Strong Foundation, said she was also hoping for a broader recommendation.

The panel did unanimously agree to add the vaccine, and an mpox vaccine, to the Vaccines for Children program, a federal program that provides recommended vaccines at no cost to children whose families are uninsured or cannot afford them.

CDC Director Mandy K. Cohen, MD, MPH, will now choose whether to endorse the committee’s recommendations.

COVID-19 Now Causing These Symptoms, New Data Sho

Posted by

0


A recent survey shows what symptoms people can expect from the virus.

COVID-19 Now Causing These Symptoms, New Data Show
A healthcare professional as seen in a file photo. (Megan Jelinger/AFP via Getty Images)

While health officials have said that COVID-19 symptoms have been relatively consistent over the years, a recent survey has revealed the most common symptoms of the viral infection—as the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has said the newest variant JN.1 has seen an uptick in recent days.

The CDC, in an update earlier this month, said that it’s not clear if symptoms associated with the JN.1 variant are markedly different than previous ones.

“In general, symptoms of COVID-19 tend to be similar across variants,” the agency said. “The types of symptoms and how severe they are usually depend more on a person’s immunity and overall health rather than which variant causes the infection.”

New Symptoms?

Recent survey data collected by health officials in the United Kingdom, where multiple COVID-19 strains are spreading, trouble sleeping and insomnia appear to have become more common symptoms among cases. In comparison, a survey released more than a year earlier for Scotland shows no mention of trouble sleeping or insomnia as symptoms.

The data show that approximately 10.8 percent of surveyed UK residents reported having issues trying to sleep. The same dataset shows that 10.5 percent of survey respondents cited worry or anxiety as a COVID-19 symptom.

Notably, a once-telltale sign of a COVID-19 infection was a loss of taste or smell. However, that symptom was only reported by about 2 percent of respondents in the survey. The Scottish survey from last year showed that about 11 percent of respondents reported a loss of taste or smell.

Meanwhile, only 2.4 percent reported getting a fever associated with COVID-19, according to the survey

The most common COVID-19 symptom was a runny nose at 31.1 percent, while cough was No. 2 on the list at 22.9 percent, the data show. About 20 percent of respondents reported a headache, nearly 20 percent reported weakness or tiredness, 15.8 percent reported muscle pain, and 13.2 percent reported a sore throat.

The UK survey did not make mention of the JN.1 variant. And how those symptoms are different also depends on whether those people specifically tested positive for COVID-19 or other infections such as influenza and RSV.

“Cough, sore throat, sneezing, fatigue and headache were all among the most commonly reported symptoms for each of the three infections, suggesting that discriminating between SARS-CoV-2, influenza and RSV based on symptoms alone may prove challenging,” UK officials wrote in a preprint. Those symptoms are in line with other surveys from prior COVID-19 variants throughout the pandemic.

A CDC study that was released in May as a preprint found that common symptoms among those who contracted the earlier BA.5 variant appeared to be notably different. About 77 percent reported a cough, 48 percent reported a fever, 22 percent reported shortness of breath, and 20 percent reported a change of taste or smell.

JN.1 Rising

On Dec. 22, the CDC said in an update that JN.1 is continuing “to cause an increasing share of infections and is now the most widely circulating variant in the United States,” adding that it’s now about 39 percent to 50 percent of all COVID-19 variants. JN.1 amounted to approximately 15 percent to 29 percent two weeks ago, it noted.

“JN. 1’s continued growth suggests that the variant is either more transmissible or better at evading our immune systems than other circulating variants. It is too early to know whether or to what extent JN.1 will cause an increase in infections or hospitalizations,” the CDC said, adding, “We’re also seeing an increasing share of infections caused by JN.1 in travelers, wastewater, and most regions around the globe.”

This electron microscope image made available by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shows the spherical particles from the first U.S. case of COVID-19. (The Canadian Press/AP-Hannah A. Bullock, Azaibi Tamin/CDC via AP)
This electron microscope image made available by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shows the spherical particles from the first U.S. case of COVID-19. (The Canadian Press/AP-Hannah A. Bullock, Azaibi Tamin/CDC via AP)

Several days before the update, the U.N.’s World Health Organization (WHO) listed the COVID-19 sub-variant JN.1 as a “variant of interest,” but it noted there is little evidence to suggest that it poses a more severe health risk than other recent variants.

The variant “may cause an increase in SARS-CoV-2 cases amid a surge of infections of other viral and bacterial infections, especially in countries entering the winter season,” referring to the virus that causes COVID-19, according to WHO.

“As we observe the rise of the JN.1 variant, it’s important to note that while it may be spreading more widely, there is currently no significant evidence suggesting it is more severe or that it poses a substantial public health risk,” Dr. John Brownstein, the chief innovation officer at Boston Children’s Hospital, told ABC News last week.

It comes as several hospitals in Massachusetts, New York, California, Illinois, Delaware, Washington, and elsewhere have opted to re-implement mask mandates. While some of the hospitals only require masking for staff, some of the facilities will require face coverings for patients and visitors as well.

Shining a light on COVID-19

Posted by

0


Research activities in the areas of X-ray imaging and ultraviolet sterilization illustrate how photonics is helping to combat the threat of COVID-19.

As the COVID-19 pandemic caused by the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus sweeps around the globe causing widespread misery and disruption, photonics researchers are considering how they can help. At the virtual IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI 2020; http://2020.biomedicalimaging.org/) in early April, a special online session entitled ‘COVID-19, deep learning and biomedical imaging’ brought together a panel of six imaging experts from the US, Israel, the Netherlands and Denmark to discuss opportunities. The debate centred on how artificial intelligence (AI) could perhaps help by performing automated analysis and classification of chest X-rays and computer tomography (CT) scans from the lungs of patients with COVID-19, making it possible to identify the presence of the disease and assess its severity.

Credit: Brain light / Alamy Stock Photo

The idea and hope is that well-trained algorithms applied to lung images may provide an automated clinical means of diagnosis of COVID-19 that has a high degree of confidence and does not require any reagents, disposable consumables or lengthy processing times unlike swab polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests. It is now known that the pneumonia associated with COVID-19 tends to present several typical signatures in lung images — in particular, so-called reverse halos, crazy-paving and ground glass features. Using AI to identify COVID-19 thus seems to be a realistic proposition.

“Chest radiographs cost under US$1 but their interpretation is difficult,” Eliot Siegel, chief of radiology at the University of Maryland School of Medicine in the US told attendees. “Can we use AI to distinguish COVID-19 from other respiratory diseases? Can we quantify the disease? Can we distinguish between acute and mild versions and track its trajectory?”

Bram van Ginneken from the diagnostic image analysis group at Radboud University in the Netherlands described efforts in the country to collect and analyse CT images of patients with COVID-19, yielding a standardized classification and diagnosis scheme called CORADS that has a score of one to six, with four and above indicating a high level of suspicion of COVID-19 infection (https://radiologyassistant.nl/chest/covid-19-corads-classification).

“There’s an enormous shortage of PCR swab tests, you have to wait for results and if the infection has moved from the nose and throat to the lungs it may not be detected by swab tests,” said van Ginneken. “Eight radiologists in seven Dutch hospitals have been assessing COVID-19 cases and we’ve found that the CORADS clinical diagnosis and the PCR test agree well.”

Furthermore, researchers say that AI may also be able to judge the severity of the disease, providing a quantitative score or metric that ranks the patient’s condition and prognosis, opening the way for new forms of triage and screening at hospitals.

Hayit Greenspan from Tel-Aviv University described efforts to develop a ‘Corona-Score’ that provides a quantitative metric for patients with COVID-19 by determining the volume of opacities in their lungs by applying algorithms to a three-dimensional fusion of image slices. “The Corona-Score represents the extent of the disease and strongly correlates to the severity of the disease,” explained Greenspan.

In a similar vein, in the US, Raul San Jose Estepar from Harvard University described the team’s development of an app called Covictory (details at https://acil-bwh.github.io/slowdown-covid19/). The idea is that a smartphone is used to take a photo of a portable chest X-ray image and the app uses AI algorithms to determine if the image likely represents normal healthy condition or mild or moderate/severe COVID-19, providing percentages for each situation. The thinking is that such a system may be a useful additional screening tool.

Moving away from the discussion at ISBI, scientists and tech firms are exploring the opportunities for ultraviolet (UV) sterilization as a convenient means for eradicating coronavirus from pieces of personal protective equipment (PPE) and contaminated surfaces. It’s well established that short-wavelength UV-C light (200–280 nm region) is highly effective at killing bacteria and viruses by damaging their genetic material (DNA or RNA) if the dose of the light is sufficient, thus providing an environmentally friendly, chemical-free means for sterilization.

With this in mind, Andrea Armani’s group from the University of Southern California has developed a simple UV-C chamber for sterilizing face visors. The system consists of 18-gallon plastic bins that are internally coated with highly reflective chrome paint and equipped with 15-W high-intensity UV-C bulbs. Armani says that a chamber costs just US$50, can hold 3 face shields at once, and it takes 6 minutes to perform a sterilization cycle. By working with a local firm in Los Angeles, 50 systems have been manufactured and donated to local hospitals in the region. So far, the team has focused on sterilization of face shields as this is straightforward and works well, and Armani says that other pieces of equipment such as N95 masks, “could be tricky” due to their more complex composition. Interestingly, the Danish firm UVD Robots has taken things a stage further and has equipped autonomous robots with UV light sources in order to perform automated sterilization of spaces. It takes about 10–20 minutes for its disinfection robot to treat a room, according to the firm.

It is likely that the valuable contributions from vaccine hunters, epidemiologists and virologists will be best remembered for how science ultimately triumphed over COVID-19, but it’s possible that photonics may play a small role along the way.

Nanotechnology-based disinfectants and sensors for SARS-CoV-2

Posted by

0


Nanotechnology-based antimicrobial and antiviral formulations can prevent SARS-CoV-2 viral dissemination, and highly sensitive biosensors and detection platforms may contribute to the detection and diagnosis of COVID-19.

One thing we have learned so far amid the current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is the degree to which we are limited in our fight against respiratory viral diseases. Up to now SARS-CoV-2 has spread to over 215 countries, with more than 15,000,000 people infected, and over 615,000 deaths to date (Johns Hopkins University Coronavirus Resource Center, 21 July 2020). Our most important line of defence is our own immune system, however people who are immunocompromized, or people with at least one underlying co-morbidity (that is, cardiovascular diseases/hypertension and diabetes, and other chronic underlying conditions), are highly vulnerable and their sole line of defence is sanitizers, face masks, immune system boosters and drugs that are clinically approved1. Scientists around the world have made promising strides towards developing approaches to prevent COVID-192. However, there are still challenges for the development of therapeutics or vaccines, such as regulatory issues, large-scale production and deployment to the public3. It will take months before we can have a global answer to this pandemic. Furthermore, we must be prepared for potential outbreak of a second and even a third wave of the virus, which calls for alternative options to reinforce our arsenal against not only COVID-19 but also other viral diseases that can potentially become pandemics. The silver lining amidst this crisis is the state of our technological advances mainly in the field of nanotechnology. So far, a significant body of work has covered the development of nano-based vaccines or anti-viral agents to block SARS-CoV-2, all of which are currently far from public implementation due to lengthy and strict regulatory affairs4.

Consequently, we propose that nanotechnology could have a closer impact on the current pandemic when implemented in two defined areas: (1) Viral disinfectants, by developing highly effective nano-based antimicrobial and antiviral formulations that are not only suitable for disinfecting air and surfaces, but are also effective in reinforcing personal protective equipment such as facial respirators. (2) Viral detection, by developing highly sensitive and accurate nano-based sensors that allow early diagnosis of COVID-19.

Viral disinfectants

Considering various transmission routes of coronavirus (that is, via cough or respiratory droplets, or biofluids)5, one approach to fight against the virus is through preventing its dissemination by means of disinfecting air, skin or surrounding surfaces (Fig. 1).

figure 1
Fig. 1: Nanotechnology-based viral disinfectants work against SARS-CoV-2 by preventing viral dissemination on air, surfaces and protective equipment.

To this end, chemical disinfectants (such as chlorines, peroxides, quaternary amines and alcohols) effective against a wide variety of pathogens have been used for disinfection and sterilization of personal protective equipment and surfaces6. Despite promising results from chemical disinfectants, they are often associated with drawbacks such as high concentration requirements for 100% viral inhibition, limited effectiveness over time, and possible risks to public health and environment7,8. Consequently, metallic nanoparticles (for example, silver, copper, titanium dioxide nanoparticles) have been proposed as alternatives due to their inherent broad range antiviral activities, persistence and ability to be effective at much lower dosage9,10. For instance, preliminary evaluations showed that silver nanocluster/silica composite coating on facial masks had viricidal effects against SARS-CoV-211. In another example, NanoTechSurface, Italy, developed a durable and self-sterilizing formula comprised of titanium dioxide and silver ions for disinfecting surfaces12. In a similar manner, FN Nano Inc., USA, developed a photocatalytic coating (light mediated) based on titanium dioxide nanoparticles, which can decompose organic compounds including viruses on the surface upon exposure to light, damaging the viral membrane12. Nanomaterials can also be incorporated into respiratory face masks to further increase their inhibitory effect13. Scientists from Queensland University of Technology, Australia, have developed a breathable and disposable filter cartridge from cellulose nanofibers, which were capable of filtering particles smaller than 100 nanometres14. Alternatively, owing to high surface-area-to-volume ratio and their unique chemical and physical properties, other nanomaterials (for example, graphene) can be used to adsorb and eliminate SARS-CoV-215. For instance, LIGC Applications Ltd., USA, have made a reusable mask made of microporous conductive graphene foam that allows the trapping of microorganisms and the conduction of electrical charge to destroy them16.

These nanomaterials present an enormous potential as disinfectants against coronavirus, mainly due to unique attributes of nanomaterials including intrinsic anti-viral properties such as reactive oxygen species (ROS) generation and photo-dynamic and photo-thermal capabilities. Also, adverse effects of metallic nanomaterials on human health and the environment can be prevented by using biodegradable nanomaterials (that is, polymeric, lipid-based).

Viral detection

Diagnostics is a critical weapon in the fight against this pandemic, as it is pivotal to isolate infected individuals as early as possible, preventing dissemination17. Several nanotechnology-based approaches for SARS-CoV-2 tagging and detection are being developed (Fig. 2).

figure 2
Fig. 2: Nanotechnology-based sensors for SARS-CoV-2 detection, involved in the development of platforms for viral tagging and nano-diagnostic assays.

Generally, testing kits operate based on detection of antibodies (by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, or enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA)) or RNA (by polymerase chain reaction, or PCR) associated with the virus (from nasopharyngeal swabs taken from individuals’ noses and throats). This relies on their surface interactions with a complementary detection ligand or strand in the kit18. However, these testing kits are generally associated with problems such as false-negative results, long response times and poor analytical sensitivity19. To this end, due to their extremely large surface-to-volume ratios, nanosized materials can instigate highly efficient surface interactions between the sensor and the analyte, allowing faster and more reliable detection of the virus20. Accordingly, a group of researchers have developed a colloidal gold-based test kit that enables easy conjugation of gold nanoparticles to IgM/IgG antibodies in human serum, plasma and whole blood samples21. However, the targeted IgM/IgG antibodies in this kit were not specific to COVID-19, and as a result in some cases produced false results associated with patients who were suffering from irrelevant infections. Consequently, researchers from the University of Maryland, USA, developed a colorimetric assay based on gold nanoparticles capped with suitably designed thiol-modified DNA antisense oligonucleotides specific for N-gene (nucleocapsid phosphoprotein) of SARS-CoV-2, which were used for diagnosing positive COVID-19 cases within 10 min from the isolated RNA samples22. Such testing kits could potentially produce promising results, however their performance would still be affected by quantity of the viral load. To address this shortcoming, researchers from ETH, Switzerland, have recently reported a unique dual-functional plasmonic biosensor combining the plasmonic photothermal effect and localized surface plasmon resonance (LSPR) sensing transduction to provide an alternative and promising solution for clinical COVID-19 diagnosis23. The two-dimensional gold nano-islands functionalized with complementary DNA receptors provide highly sensitive detection of the selected sequences from SARS-CoV-2 through nucleic acid hybridization. For better sensing performance, thermoplasmonic heat is generated on the same gold nano-islands chip when illuminated at their plasmonic resonance frequency. Remarkably, this dual-functional LSPR biosensor exhibited high selectivity towards the SARS-CoV-2 sequences with a detection limit as low as 0.22 pM. In other work, to achieve rapid and accurate detection of SARS-CoV-2 in clinical samples, researchers from the Korea Basic Science Institute developed an ultra-sensitive field-effect transistor (FET)-based biosensing device24. The sensor was produced by coating graphene sheets of the FET with a specific antibody against SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. The FET device could detect the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein at concentrations of 1.31×10–5 pM in phosphate-buffered saline and 1.31×10–3 pM in clinical transport medium. Remarkably, the device exhibited no measurable cross-reactivity with Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) antigen, indicating the extraordinary capability of this sensor to distinguish the SARS-CoV-2 antigen protein from those of MERS-CoV.

Another approach that can be used for SARS-CoV-2 and that was successfully used with MERS-CoV, Mycobacterium tuberculosis and human papillomavirus consists of a paper-based colorimetric sensor for DNA detection based on pyrrolidinyl peptide nucleic acid (acpcPNA)-induced silver nanoparticle aggregation25. Briefly, in the absence of complementary DNA, silver nanoparticles aggregate due their electrostatic interactions with the acpcPNA probe. However, in the presence of target DNA, a DNA–acpcPNA duplex starts to form which leads to dispersion of the silver nanoparticles as a result of electrostatic repulsion, giving rise to a detectable colour change25. The use of aptamers and molecular beacons instead of PNA can also represent a potential alternative.

Other avenue where nanomaterials can contribute to detection of SARS-CoV-2 is the extraction and purification of targeted molecules from biological fluids (blood and nasal/throat samples). Thus, nanomaterials with magnetic properties can be decorated with specific receptors of the virus, leading to attachment of virus molecules to the nanoparticles that will allow their magnetic extraction using an external magnetic field.

In this way nanomaterial-based detection can facilitate faster and more accurate detection of the virus even at early stages of the infection, in large due to versatility of surface modification of nanoparticles.

Outlook

This overview of newly developed nanotechnology-based disinfectants and sensors for SARS-CoV-2 lays out a blueprint for development of more effective sensors and disinfectants that can be implemented for the purpose of detection, and prevention of this and another coronavirus. More advances in nano-based disinfectants are needed to meet the challenges on the front lines of patient care. On the other side, with COVID-19 rapidly spreading and with new foci of infection around the corner, efficient detection is pivotal, and the rule is to diagnose more quickly, easily and broadly. Time is of essence when dealing with pandemics and the two emphasized aspects of nanotechnology are more likely to soon become available to the public, as they are not associated with some of the stricter regulations commonly associated with vaccines. It is essential to shorten patient-specific and community-wide response times to determine who is infected or not and nanotechnology products like the ones described here will also reduce the impact on healthcare workers by providing faster and easy-to-use platforms that do not require special equipment or highly trained personnel. And this is how nanotechnology is taking root against SARS-CoV-2, by promoting exactly the type of wide-ranging, integrated approaches that are essential to control this pandemic outbreak at local, national, and international levels.

Nanoscale nights of COVID-19

Posted by

0


As the spread of SARS-CoV-2 has triggered worldwide closures of research labs and facilities, Kostas Kostarelos shares his views on what may be going wrong in the fight against COVID-19 and how the nanoscience community could and should contribute.

The beauty of viral nanoparticles

During several years of teaching nanomedicine, I have illustrated the uniqueness of viral nanoparticles to many generations of students: “Remember, viruses are the most beautiful, smart and capable nanoparticles!” I have always enthusiastically highlighted their structurally beautiful nanoscale features, and their biological trickery in transferring their genetic contents into target cells and hijacking them to express proteins. Viruses are evolutionary works of art and in the fields of gene therapy, vaccinology and immunotherapy (to name just a few), scientists are engineering and using viruses for the smart delivery of molecules and genetic information. However, I must admit that during the past few late nights, while working in my makeshift home office, I cannot help but feel strangely guilty for my past opinions and lecture notes. As I gradually get more gloomy looking at the daily updated counts of ‘confirmed cases’, ‘deaths’ and ‘recovered cases’, guilt starts taking over. How can such beautiful nanoparticles create so much human loss, havoc and devastation? How can such nanoscale beauty so rapidly metamorphose into a wild beast?

The human factor

We knew this was coming. Experts and international committees have long been analysing and developing scenarios and plans to be able to respond to a potential intentional or unintended virus outbreak. There were also warnings that owing to our excessively industrialized agricultural and animal farming activities, climate change, highly congested urban areas and international aviation, which has created a ‘smaller’ and more accessible world, the risk for the spread of a contagious virus or an antibiotic-resistant bacterial strain was almost certain to happen. Not only were we told, but we had been given warning signs throughout the past 20 years, including avian influenza virus (Hong Kong, 1997), severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) coronavirus (China, 2002), swine influenza virus (Mexico, 2009) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) coronavirus (Saudi Arabia, 2012). These magnificent nanostructures that combine structural complexity with biological efficiency (Fig. 1), have all been originally transmitted from different animal species to humans; importantly, they are highly contagious with human-to-human transmission, which has sadly caused many deaths. Unfortunately, we collectively failed to understand that the risk was clear, imminent and significant. We failed to guarantee that the plans and directives, developed by experts, can be rapidly and effectively implemented in case of an outbreak. Indeed, each efficient viral infection is met by a multiplicity of human inefficiencies. We were out-beaten by nature’s nanostructures.

figure 1
Fig. 1: Electron micrographs of virus structures.

The scientific facts

The acute need is to get the scientific facts right, as fast and accurately as possible. We need to take advantage of the technology and automation in our laboratories as well as powerful modelling approaches to reveal scientific facts about COVID-19. What have we already learnt? SARS-CoV-2 is very similar to previously studied coronaviruses. It binds to angiotensin I converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) cell receptors and is highly transmittable among humans, even at the latent stages of infection. We know that SARS-CoV-2 infects the upper respiratory system and, in particular, the lung epithelium, with a severe downstream effect or direct impact on the myocardium. Infections of older (male more than female) individuals, and of patients with chronic underlying (diagnosed or not) conditions are the most vulnerable. Lastly, we know that 80% of infected individuals are asymptomatic or suffer from mild symptoms, 15% need hospitalization and 5% develop a serious illness and may need critical care. We also know though, that valid epidemiological data should be taken with great caution as different countries and health systems have very different approaches to testing and reporting.

However, there is also a lot we do not know. We do not know whether SARS-CoV-2 is able to mutate into different serotypes and how rapidly. We do not know whether cell internalization and viral transduction of SARS-CoV-2 is dependent on temperature, multiple rounds of infections and/or generations of virus progeny. We do not know whether the antibodies and titres produced in infected individuals are able to confer effective immunity against subsequent exposures to SARS-CoV-2 and for how long such immunity may last. Finally, we need to agree on strict parameters for the clinical reporting of COVID-19 infections and outcomes, which all national health agencies should adhere to. This is the only way to determine valid transmission, fatality and protective immunity rates. Only if we generate accurate scientific knowledge (even if inconclusive), can we assess the validity of public health interventions that are currently in place in many countries around the world, and potentially reduce the demand for such dramatic societal sacrifices.

Where have all the (nano)scientists gone?

In order to generate the urgently needed scientific knowledge, we need to get our technically capable, bright, young scientists back in the labs. I cannot help but wonder, why most governments in Europe (and more recently also in the USA) ordered the closures of world-class research laboratories and their support systems, during a generational crisis of biological and biomedical emergency. Many trained biological or biomedical scientists have been sent home, their laboratories closed down and their reagents left to expire. Of course, scientists would have to avoid working in confined spaces, should wear protective gear and would have to be regularly monitored for infection — but we need our laboratories back. Our energies and efforts should be focused on how to contribute to the fight against COVID-19. We — the biomedical scientific community — have the responsibility to support our clinical and healthcare colleagues, who work on the frontline of the pandemic, with our technical and intellectual capabilities in generating relevant and much needed scientific knowledge. We need to maximize synergies free from any political, linguistic, financial, geographical or scientific discipline obstacles. It is shameful that highly trained scientists are considered ‘non-essential’, while our nurses and clinical colleagues are daily exposed to the virus in their efforts to treat a constantly increasing number of patients.

The cancer analogy

Many heated conversations are currently taking place as to the best way to manage the COVID-19 menace. As I have tried to follow the different opinions, I cannot stop thinking of an analogy to cancer nanotechnology, that is, the three key principles in managing an individual cancer patient: early detection, monitoring and targeting. These principles, if exercised simultaneously, could also be illuminating as a way forward in the management of the COVID-19 pandemic. Early detection has improved the prognosis of many cancer patients. Similarly, early detection of individuals and groups, who are infected with COVID-19, could substantially accelerate the ability to manage and treat patients, but also infection hotspots. All chronic conditions, such as cancer, are further managed by regular monitoring. Therefore, monitoring should be undertaken not only for patients already infected with COVID-19, to track progression and responses, but also for healthy essential workers to ensure that they remain healthy and to reduce the risk of further spreading. Finally, nanomaterials (as well as other biologicals, such as monoclonal antibodies) are often used for targeting therapeutic agents specifically to cancer cells to minimize damage of healthy tissue. The same principle of targeting should be applied in the management of COVID-19 to be able to effectively isolate and treat infected patients. But also to establish a ‘protective targeting’ strategy to shield the vulnerable segment of the population (by isolating them or by social distancing, but with provision of emotional and practical support), and protect ‘essential’ workers (by making sure that protective gear and monitoring is provided). Only if all three principles are applied, the rest of society can and should return to normal function to support the activities in managing the pandemic. In this way, I want to finish by paraphrasing an undergraduate cancer management textbook: The COVID-19 pandemic will become a chronic disease, and as for any other chronic medical condition, COVID-19 stricken societies have families, jobs, businesses and other commitments. Therefore, our aim is to cure COVID-19 if possible; however, if not curable, we need to control the symptoms to improve the quality of patients’ lives by assuring society’s function to be able to support its ill and vulnerable.

Honey & “Magic Seeds” Slashes COVID Death Rate by ~75%: Landmark Trial

Posted by

0


A new study found a daily dose of healing honey and “magical” Nigella sativa seeds slashed COVID recovery time, hospital stays, and mortality rates by 4-fold versus placebo or ~75%.

Since the WHO declared COVID-19 a global pandemic in March 2020, the world has urgently needed safe, effective, accessible treatments beyond vaccines to combat the ongoing crisis.1 But most antiviral drug candidates have proven disappointing so far, with limited efficacies, concerning side effects, and prohibitive costs that restrict global access.2 

Due to this problem, researchers have increasingly probed traditional herbal remedies as safe, economical solutions against morbidity and mortality attributed to viral infections like COVID-19. Now, exciting new clinical findings from Pakistan suggest that age-old healing honey combined with the aspiring “magical seeds” of Nigella sativa — known traditionally as the “remedy for everything but death” — dramatically beat placebo at saving COVID lives.3  

In this rigorous double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, 313 COVID-positive adults with moderate or severe disease were provided either a daily mix of natural honey and Nigella sativa or an inactive placebo for 13 days along with standard care.4 The tested black cumin seeds contain thymoquinone, which has performed well on influenza patients in past studies.5 And honey boasts proven broad-spectrum antimicrobial action against respiratory viruses.6

The doses used in the study were:

  • Honey: 1 gm per kg body weight per day (e.g. a 150 lb person would consume 4.25 grams a day, or about 2/3rd a teaspoon worth of honey a day)
  • Nigella sativa seeds: 80 mg per kg body weight per day (e.g. a 150 lb person would consume 340 milligrams a day)

Compared to placebo, this sweet bee nectar and tiny “magic seed” combo revealed the following key clinical results: 

  • Alleviation of COVID-19 symptoms occurred around 50% faster with honey + Nigella sativa versus placebo (4 days vs 7 days for moderate cases; 6 days vs 13 days for severe cases)
  • Viral clearance was around 4 days faster with honey + Nigella sativa versus placebo based on PCR tests becoming negative
  • In moderate cases, 64% resumed normal activities at day 6 with honey + Nigella sativa versus only 11% with placebo
  • In severe cases, 50% were discharged from the hospital at day 6 with honey + Nigella sativa versus only 3% with placebo
  • Mortality rate was 4 times lower with honey + Nigella sativa versus placebo in severe cases (4% vs 19%)
  • No adverse effects were observed with the honey + Nigella sativa combination

This landmark study demonstrates that while rushed mRNA jabs flounder with tremendous pitfalls, nature’s ancient gifts bring safer, cheaper and more effective relief to those suffering.

Even if a safe and effective vaccine existed for COVID-19, for logistcal and financial reasons they would likely still remain out of reach for much of the developing world. In light of this, honey and and Nigella sativa could save thousands more vulnerable lives if research like this was more widely known, competing as it does with pharmaceutical interests.7 

Global health authorities should fast-track further gold-standard investigations into these traditional, cost-effective adjuvants against what has been largely billed as humanity’s greatest modern threat.8

When it comes to the supposed aim of international health authorities at defeating COVID-19, honey and “magic seeds” show ancient food-based healing traditions may still remain indispensable in preserving the health and well-being of our species, now, and long into the future.