[BostonCard]

Put together by the Cleveland clinic

https://riskcalc.org/COVID19Hospitalization/

I'll just paste the disclaimer:

No Medical Advice. ALTHOUGH SOME CONTENT MAY BE PROVIDED BY INDIVIDUALS IN THE MEDICAL PROFESSION, YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT PROVISION OF SUCH CONTENT DOES NOT CREATE A MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL-PATIENT RELATIONSHIP AND DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN OPINION, MEDICAL ADVICE, PROFESSIONAL DIAGNOSIS, SERVICE OR TREATMENT OF ANY CONDITION. Access to general information is provided for educational purposes only, through this site and links to other sites. Content is not recommended or endorsed by any doctor or healthcare provider. The information and Content provided are not substitutes for medical or professional care, and you should not use the information in place of a visit, call, consultation or the advice of your physician or other healthcare provider. You are liable or responsible for any advice, course of treatment, diagnosis or any other information, services or product obtained through this site.

For what it is worth, I ran the calculator with a 20-year old non-Hispanic Black male with no co-morbidities, a BMI of 27 (which is probably less predictive in an athlete, but would be the equivalent of a 6 foot, 200 lb linebacker), who had fever and shortness of breath and got a hospitalization prediction of 3.1%.  With just fever it is 1.2%, and currently asymptomatic but with a history of asthma it is 1.5%.  These are low probabilities in all, but on a team full of football players, if everyone got it, there is a decent chance one or two would be hospitalized.  

BC

[BostonCard]

Put together by the Cleveland clinic

https://riskcalc.org/COVID19Hospitalization/

I'll just paste the disclaimer:

No Medical Advice. ALTHOUGH SOME CONTENT MAY BE PROVIDED BY INDIVIDUALS IN THE MEDICAL PROFESSION, YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT PROVISION OF SUCH CONTENT DOES NOT CREATE A MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL-PATIENT RELATIONSHIP AND DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN OPINION, MEDICAL ADVICE, PROFESSIONAL DIAGNOSIS, SERVICE OR TREATMENT OF ANY CONDITION. Access to general information is provided for educational purposes only, through this site and links to other sites. Content is not recommended or endorsed by any doctor or healthcare provider. The information and Content provided are not substitutes for medical or professional care, and you should not use the information in place of a visit, call, consultation or the advice of your physician or other healthcare provider. You are liable or responsible for any advice, course of treatment, diagnosis or any other information, services or product obtained through this site.

For what it is worth, I ran the calculator with a 20-year old non-Hispanic Black male with no co-morbidities, a BMI of 27 (which is probably less predictive in an athlete, but would be the equivalent of a 6 foot, 200 lb linebacker), who had fever and shortness of breath and got a hospitalization prediction of 3.1%.  With just fever it is 1.2%, and currently asymptomatic but with a history of asthma it is 1.5%.  These are low probabilities in all, but on a team full of football players, if everyone got it, there is a decent chance one or two would be hospitalized.  

BC

[Genuine Realist]

Put together by the Cleveland clinic

https://riskcalc.org/COVID19Hospitalization/

I'll just paste the disclaimer:

No Medical Advice. ALTHOUGH SOME CONTENT MAY BE PROVIDED BY INDIVIDUALS IN THE MEDICAL PROFESSION, YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT PROVISION OF SUCH CONTENT DOES NOT CREATE A MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL-PATIENT RELATIONSHIP AND DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN OPINION, MEDICAL ADVICE, PROFESSIONAL DIAGNOSIS, SERVICE OR TREATMENT OF ANY CONDITION. Access to general information is provided for educational purposes only, through this site and links to other sites. Content is not recommended or endorsed by any doctor or healthcare provider. The information and Content provided are not substitutes for medical or professional care, and you should not use the information in place of a visit, call, consultation or the advice of your physician or other healthcare provider. You are liable or responsible for any advice, course of treatment, diagnosis or any other information, services or product obtained through this site.

For what it is worth, I ran the calculator with a 20-year old non-Hispanic Black male with no co-morbidities, a BMI of 27 (which is probably less predictive in an athlete, but would be the equivalent of a 6 foot, 200 lb linebacker), who had fever and shortness of breath and got a hospitalization prediction of 3.1%.  With just fever it is 1.2%, and currently asymptomatic but with a history of asthma it is 1.5%.  These are low probabilities in all, but on a team full of football players, if everyone got it, there is a decent chance one or two would be hospitalized.  

BC

Well, I'm 74 last Saturday, BC. I'm going to be hospitalized for SOMETHING sooner or later. It might be the virus or it might be something worse.

I do believe - seriously - that a lot of Americans assume they're going to live forever, and in perfect health. (Obviously, say that out loud and it's ridiculous - but we have become awfully good lately at not saying unpleasant things out loud, or even thinking them.) It's a RIGHT, Gawd damn it - right there in the Constitution.

[Genuine Realist]

Put together by the Cleveland clinic

https://riskcalc.org/COVID19Hospitalization/

I'll just paste the disclaimer:

No Medical Advice. ALTHOUGH SOME CONTENT MAY BE PROVIDED BY INDIVIDUALS IN THE MEDICAL PROFESSION, YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT PROVISION OF SUCH CONTENT DOES NOT CREATE A MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL-PATIENT RELATIONSHIP AND DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN OPINION, MEDICAL ADVICE, PROFESSIONAL DIAGNOSIS, SERVICE OR TREATMENT OF ANY CONDITION. Access to general information is provided for educational purposes only, through this site and links to other sites. Content is not recommended or endorsed by any doctor or healthcare provider. The information and Content provided are not substitutes for medical or professional care, and you should not use the information in place of a visit, call, consultation or the advice of your physician or other healthcare provider. You are liable or responsible for any advice, course of treatment, diagnosis or any other information, services or product obtained through this site.

For what it is worth, I ran the calculator with a 20-year old non-Hispanic Black male with no co-morbidities, a BMI of 27 (which is probably less predictive in an athlete, but would be the equivalent of a 6 foot, 200 lb linebacker), who had fever and shortness of breath and got a hospitalization prediction of 3.1%.  With just fever it is 1.2%, and currently asymptomatic but with a history of asthma it is 1.5%.  These are low probabilities in all, but on a team full of football players, if everyone got it, there is a decent chance one or two would be hospitalized.  

BC

Well, I'm 74 last Saturday, BC. I'm going to be hospitalized for SOMETHING sooner or later. It might be the virus or it might be something worse.

I do believe - seriously - that a lot of Americans assume they're going to live forever, and in perfect health. (Obviously, say that out loud and it's ridiculous - but we have become awfully good lately at not saying unpleasant things out loud, or even thinking them.) It's a RIGHT, Gawd damn it - right there in the Constitution.

[teejers1]

Put together by the Cleveland clinic

https://riskcalc.org/COVID19Hospitalization/

I'll just paste the disclaimer:

No Medical Advice. ALTHOUGH SOME CONTENT MAY BE PROVIDED BY INDIVIDUALS IN THE MEDICAL PROFESSION, YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT PROVISION OF SUCH CONTENT DOES NOT CREATE A MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL-PATIENT RELATIONSHIP AND DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN OPINION, MEDICAL ADVICE, PROFESSIONAL DIAGNOSIS, SERVICE OR TREATMENT OF ANY CONDITION. Access to general information is provided for educational purposes only, through this site and links to other sites. Content is not recommended or endorsed by any doctor or healthcare provider. The information and Content provided are not substitutes for medical or professional care, and you should not use the information in place of a visit, call, consultation or the advice of your physician or other healthcare provider. You are liable or responsible for any advice, course of treatment, diagnosis or any other information, services or product obtained through this site.

For what it is worth, I ran the calculator with a 20-year old non-Hispanic Black male with no co-morbidities, a BMI of 27 (which is probably less predictive in an athlete, but would be the equivalent of a 6 foot, 200 lb linebacker), who had fever and shortness of breath and got a hospitalization prediction of 3.1%.  With just fever it is 1.2%, and currently asymptomatic but with a history of asthma it is 1.5%.  These are low probabilities in all, but on a team full of football players, if everyone got it, there is a decent chance one or two would be hospitalized.  

BC

How many college football athletes have you read about being hospitalized?  There is the one well known lineman from Indiana(?).  Not sure I recall reading about any others - and I know I've read about more than 100 positive tests (hell, Clemson has, what . . . 85 all by their lonesome?).  And somehow I think hospitalizations would be reported on . . . and positive tests (though rarely have I seen reporting on both).

Based on what I've read, those %s seem high.  Perhaps significantly so.  Perhaps that is because you are assuming symptomatic positive tests?

[teejers1]

Put together by the Cleveland clinic

https://riskcalc.org/COVID19Hospitalization/

I'll just paste the disclaimer:

No Medical Advice. ALTHOUGH SOME CONTENT MAY BE PROVIDED BY INDIVIDUALS IN THE MEDICAL PROFESSION, YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT PROVISION OF SUCH CONTENT DOES NOT CREATE A MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL-PATIENT RELATIONSHIP AND DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN OPINION, MEDICAL ADVICE, PROFESSIONAL DIAGNOSIS, SERVICE OR TREATMENT OF ANY CONDITION. Access to general information is provided for educational purposes only, through this site and links to other sites. Content is not recommended or endorsed by any doctor or healthcare provider. The information and Content provided are not substitutes for medical or professional care, and you should not use the information in place of a visit, call, consultation or the advice of your physician or other healthcare provider. You are liable or responsible for any advice, course of treatment, diagnosis or any other information, services or product obtained through this site.

For what it is worth, I ran the calculator with a 20-year old non-Hispanic Black male with no co-morbidities, a BMI of 27 (which is probably less predictive in an athlete, but would be the equivalent of a 6 foot, 200 lb linebacker), who had fever and shortness of breath and got a hospitalization prediction of 3.1%.  With just fever it is 1.2%, and currently asymptomatic but with a history of asthma it is 1.5%.  These are low probabilities in all, but on a team full of football players, if everyone got it, there is a decent chance one or two would be hospitalized.  

BC

How many college football athletes have you read about being hospitalized?  There is the one well known lineman from Indiana(?).  Not sure I recall reading about any others - and I know I've read about more than 100 positive tests (hell, Clemson has, what . . . 85 all by their lonesome?).  And somehow I think hospitalizations would be reported on . . . and positive tests (though rarely have I seen reporting on both).

Based on what I've read, those %s seem high.  Perhaps significantly so.  Perhaps that is because you are assuming symptomatic positive tests?

[oldalum]

Well, I'm 74 last Saturday,

Happy Birthday!!

[oldalum]

Well, I'm 74 last Saturday,

Happy Birthday!!

[BostonCard]

Put together by the Cleveland clinic

https://riskcalc.org/COVID19Hospitalization/

I'll just paste the disclaimer:

No Medical Advice. ALTHOUGH SOME CONTENT MAY BE PROVIDED BY INDIVIDUALS IN THE MEDICAL PROFESSION, YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT PROVISION OF SUCH CONTENT DOES NOT CREATE A MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL-PATIENT RELATIONSHIP AND DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN OPINION, MEDICAL ADVICE, PROFESSIONAL DIAGNOSIS, SERVICE OR TREATMENT OF ANY CONDITION. Access to general information is provided for educational purposes only, through this site and links to other sites. Content is not recommended or endorsed by any doctor or healthcare provider. The information and Content provided are not substitutes for medical or professional care, and you should not use the information in place of a visit, call, consultation or the advice of your physician or other healthcare provider. You are liable or responsible for any advice, course of treatment, diagnosis or any other information, services or product obtained through this site.

For what it is worth, I ran the calculator with a 20-year old non-Hispanic Black male with no co-morbidities, a BMI of 27 (which is probably less predictive in an athlete, but would be the equivalent of a 6 foot, 200 lb linebacker), who had fever and shortness of breath and got a hospitalization prediction of 3.1%.  With just fever it is 1.2%, and currently asymptomatic but with a history of asthma it is 1.5%.  These are low probabilities in all, but on a team full of football players, if everyone got it, there is a decent chance one or two would be hospitalized.  

BC

How many college football athletes have you read about being hospitalized?  There is the one well known lineman from Indiana(?).  Not sure I recall reading about any others - and I know I've read about more than 100 positive tests (hell, Clemson has, what . . . 85 all by their lonesome?).  And somehow I think hospitalizations would be reported on . . . and positive tests (though rarely have I seen reporting on both).

Based on what I've read, those %s seem high.  Perhaps significantly so.  Perhaps that is because you are assuming symptomatic positive tests?

Remember, all models are wrong, some models are useful.  Models tend to break down towards the extremes, and I suspect it is probably most well-calibrated for a middle age weekend warrior with a couple of symptoms, high blood pressure, and a bit too much of a belly. There is no box to tick that says "I am a collegiate athlete", which presumably would decrease the probability of requiring hospitalization.  Moreover, I put in a BMI of 27 (again, 6 foot 200 lb), though a 6 foot, 200 lb linebacker with 8% body fat is different than your 6 foot, 200 lb average american with 25% body fat.  So yes, it probably overestimates the probabilities a bit for football players specifically.

BC

[BostonCard]

Put together by the Cleveland clinic

https://riskcalc.org/COVID19Hospitalization/

I'll just paste the disclaimer:

No Medical Advice. ALTHOUGH SOME CONTENT MAY BE PROVIDED BY INDIVIDUALS IN THE MEDICAL PROFESSION, YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT PROVISION OF SUCH CONTENT DOES NOT CREATE A MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL-PATIENT RELATIONSHIP AND DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN OPINION, MEDICAL ADVICE, PROFESSIONAL DIAGNOSIS, SERVICE OR TREATMENT OF ANY CONDITION. Access to general information is provided for educational purposes only, through this site and links to other sites. Content is not recommended or endorsed by any doctor or healthcare provider. The information and Content provided are not substitutes for medical or professional care, and you should not use the information in place of a visit, call, consultation or the advice of your physician or other healthcare provider. You are liable or responsible for any advice, course of treatment, diagnosis or any other information, services or product obtained through this site.

For what it is worth, I ran the calculator with a 20-year old non-Hispanic Black male with no co-morbidities, a BMI of 27 (which is probably less predictive in an athlete, but would be the equivalent of a 6 foot, 200 lb linebacker), who had fever and shortness of breath and got a hospitalization prediction of 3.1%.  With just fever it is 1.2%, and currently asymptomatic but with a history of asthma it is 1.5%.  These are low probabilities in all, but on a team full of football players, if everyone got it, there is a decent chance one or two would be hospitalized.  

BC

How many college football athletes have you read about being hospitalized?  There is the one well known lineman from Indiana(?).  Not sure I recall reading about any others - and I know I've read about more than 100 positive tests (hell, Clemson has, what . . . 85 all by their lonesome?).  And somehow I think hospitalizations would be reported on . . . and positive tests (though rarely have I seen reporting on both).

Based on what I've read, those %s seem high.  Perhaps significantly so.  Perhaps that is because you are assuming symptomatic positive tests?

Remember, all models are wrong, some models are useful.  Models tend to break down towards the extremes, and I suspect it is probably most well-calibrated for a middle age weekend warrior with a couple of symptoms, high blood pressure, and a bit too much of a belly. There is no box to tick that says "I am a collegiate athlete", which presumably would decrease the probability of requiring hospitalization.  Moreover, I put in a BMI of 27 (again, 6 foot 200 lb), though a 6 foot, 200 lb linebacker with 8% body fat is different than your 6 foot, 200 lb average american with 25% body fat.  So yes, it probably overestimates the probabilities a bit for football players specifically.

BC

[OutsiderFan]

It is continuously bewildering to see so many people missing the important points with this pandemic and the number of them being missed:

- It’s not just about how many die; it’s about how many get sick and have long term health complications.
- Spread must be mitigated or non-Covid care stops; Hospitals lose revenue without elective procedures.
- Masks & distancing needed to keep economy going at some level to avoid the above.
- School closure isn’t just about whether kids get sick or not, it’s also that they become spread vectors.
- High percentage of recovered infected have myocarditis; requires 3-6 months no competitive sports.
- If we don’t knock down spread in unison, the pandemic will last longer.

The last point is why the NCAA allowing each conference to make its own decisions about playing sports, and each campus being allowed to decide to have students on campus or not, no matter it’s virus outbreak situation, is as dumb and reckless as the Federal Government punting on any national management of the pandemic and leaving it to individual states to figure out on their own.

If some conferences have students on campus and play sports while others are shuttered without sports, we are creating conditions to make the pandemic last longer than it would if we all acted together, on the same standards at the same time. How can university leaders not understand this? How can they say playing sports is the most important thing before we get the pandemic under control?

The name of our country is UNITED States, yet we act as individuals without unity or sacrifice for others. Can it be any wonder why we are failing so spectacularly to get a pandemic under control that requires everyone being united and acting is unison to stop it? Texas has a 35% positive test rate over last week according to Johns Hopkins and four Big 12 members, but it’s cool to play sports with less than pro mitigation. California has a 9% positive average over last week and it’s shut everything down.

Stopping the virus spread has to be the number one goal if we are ever going to stop it. The pro sports leagues have demonstrated what needs to be done to stop spread - massive testing, isolation, and strict protocols - yet we don’t have the ability to apply those lessons to greater society and instead conclude that if the pros can play so can the colleges, blithely missing the fact they are in a bubble and/or doing mass testing and strictly managing behavior, even failing to realize how the fact they are paid factors in.

And how foolish to think “football provides structure, and is safer for players than the general student body,” and your conclusion be let’s continue with football and not freak out about the 10, 20, 30, and in some cases, 40 thousand of those regular students not being given the safe environments of the football program.

What in living hell is wrong with our society?

[OutsiderFan]

It is continuously bewildering to see so many people missing the important points with this pandemic and the number of them being missed:

- It’s not just about how many die; it’s about how many get sick and have long term health complications.
- Spread must be mitigated or non-Covid care stops; Hospitals lose revenue without elective procedures.
- Masks & distancing needed to keep economy going at some level to avoid the above.
- School closure isn’t just about whether kids get sick or not, it’s also that they become spread vectors.
- High percentage of recovered infected have myocarditis; requires 3-6 months no competitive sports.
- If we don’t knock down spread in unison, the pandemic will last longer.

The last point is why the NCAA allowing each conference to make its own decisions about playing sports, and each campus being allowed to decide to have students on campus or not, no matter it’s virus outbreak situation, is as dumb and reckless as the Federal Government punting on any national management of the pandemic and leaving it to individual states to figure out on their own.

If some conferences have students on campus and play sports while others are shuttered without sports, we are creating conditions to make the pandemic last longer than it would if we all acted together, on the same standards at the same time. How can university leaders not understand this? How can they say playing sports is the most important thing before we get the pandemic under control?

The name of our country is UNITED States, yet we act as individuals without unity or sacrifice for others. Can it be any wonder why we are failing so spectacularly to get a pandemic under control that requires everyone being united and acting is unison to stop it? Texas has a 35% positive test rate over last week according to Johns Hopkins and four Big 12 members, but it’s cool to play sports with less than pro mitigation. California has a 9% positive average over last week and it’s shut everything down.

Stopping the virus spread has to be the number one goal if we are ever going to stop it. The pro sports leagues have demonstrated what needs to be done to stop spread - massive testing, isolation, and strict protocols - yet we don’t have the ability to apply those lessons to greater society and instead conclude that if the pros can play so can the colleges, blithely missing the fact they are in a bubble and/or doing mass testing and strictly managing behavior, even failing to realize how the fact they are paid factors in.

And how foolish to think “football provides structure, and is safer for players than the general student body,” and your conclusion be let’s continue with football and not freak out about the 10, 20, 30, and in some cases, 40 thousand of those regular students not being given the safe environments of the football program.

What in living hell is wrong with our society?

[M T]

Well, I'm 74 last Saturday, BC. I'm going to be hospitalized for SOMETHING sooner or later. It might be the virus or it might be something worse.

That made me reflect upon the relative seriousness of a first case of COVID-19 versus other ailments.  Since our ages are close, I thought I'd try to get some estimates.

Just being in the 65-74yo age group in SCC back in January, one's chances of not yet dying by COVID-19 are 99.971%.

In Santa Clara County, 537 cases are 70-79yo, of which 44 have died.  So, simply going from the fact that being hospitalized would likely mean you were a confirmed case, your survival probability (ignoring that you were hospitalized, your gender, race, comorbidities, etc) would be 92%.

To date, the COVID-related hospitalization rate for 65-74yo is 150.1 per 100K in California (281.3 per 100K in the US).
In SCC, there are about 138,000 65-74yo.   That would lead to an estimate of about 207 hospitalized to date.
(SCC doesn't publish age demographics of COVID hospitalizations, so I have to estimate.)
There were 36 60-69yo  and  44 70-79yo (and 51 80-89yo) that died in SCC.  I'll estimate 40 65-74yo died.
If we presume that the 40 that died all were hospitalized first, that leads to a survival probability of 81%.
(For 75-85yo, it is 203.8 per 100K in Calif.; 75,122  people; ~153 cases, ~47 died; survival prob. 69%. ) 

In 2006, heart-attack survival rate (65+yo, 1 month after hospitalization) was about 90%.
All cancers 5-year survival rate is 70%
Stroke survival rates:  1 month 72%, 1 year 59%, 5 year 40%  (all cause mortality, not just direct stroke effects)

[M T]

Well, I'm 74 last Saturday, BC. I'm going to be hospitalized for SOMETHING sooner or later. It might be the virus or it might be something worse.

That made me reflect upon the relative seriousness of a first case of COVID-19 versus other ailments.  Since our ages are close, I thought I'd try to get some estimates.

Just being in the 65-74yo age group in SCC back in January, one's chances of not yet dying by COVID-19 are 99.971%.

In Santa Clara County, 537 cases are 70-79yo, of which 44 have died.  So, simply going from the fact that being hospitalized would likely mean you were a confirmed case, your survival probability (ignoring that you were hospitalized, your gender, race, comorbidities, etc) would be 92%.

To date, the COVID-related hospitalization rate for 65-74yo is 150.1 per 100K in California (281.3 per 100K in the US).
In SCC, there are about 138,000 65-74yo.   That would lead to an estimate of about 207 hospitalized to date.
(SCC doesn't publish age demographics of COVID hospitalizations, so I have to estimate.)
There were 36 60-69yo  and  44 70-79yo (and 51 80-89yo) that died in SCC.  I'll estimate 40 65-74yo died.
If we presume that the 40 that died all were hospitalized first, that leads to a survival probability of 81%.
(For 75-85yo, it is 203.8 per 100K in Calif.; 75,122  people; ~153 cases, ~47 died; survival prob. 69%. ) 

In 2006, heart-attack survival rate (65+yo, 1 month after hospitalization) was about 90%.
All cancers 5-year survival rate is 70%
Stroke survival rates:  1 month 72%, 1 year 59%, 5 year 40%  (all cause mortality, not just direct stroke effects)

[dabigv13]

Interestingly, playing with some of the parameters, smoking currently or in the past seems to improve your odds of avoiding hospitalization. Not sure how much I believe that. Makes me question the model.

[dabigv13]

Interestingly, playing with some of the parameters, smoking currently or in the past seems to improve your odds of avoiding hospitalization. Not sure how much I believe that. Makes me question the model.

[BostonCard]

Interestingly, playing with some of the parameters, smoking currently or in the past seems to improve your odds of avoiding hospitalization. Not sure how much I believe that. Makes me question the model.

I have seen some reports (out of France, of course) that smoking was associated with lower odds of hospitalization.  Seems counterintuitive to me, the pulmonologist, and this meta analysis by the WHO suggests an association between smoking and disease severity:

https://www.who.int/news-room/commentari...d-covid-19

At the time of this review, the available evidence suggests that smoking is associated with increased severity of disease and death in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Although likely related to severity, there is no evidence to quantify the risk to smokers of hospitalization with COVID-19 or of infection by SARS-CoV-2 was found in the peer-reviewed literature. Population-based studies are needed to address these questions.

BC

[BostonCard]

Interestingly, playing with some of the parameters, smoking currently or in the past seems to improve your odds of avoiding hospitalization. Not sure how much I believe that. Makes me question the model.

I have seen some reports (out of France, of course) that smoking was associated with lower odds of hospitalization.  Seems counterintuitive to me, the pulmonologist, and this meta analysis by the WHO suggests an association between smoking and disease severity:

https://www.who.int/news-room/commentari...d-covid-19

At the time of this review, the available evidence suggests that smoking is associated with increased severity of disease and death in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Although likely related to severity, there is no evidence to quantify the risk to smokers of hospitalization with COVID-19 or of infection by SARS-CoV-2 was found in the peer-reviewed literature. Population-based studies are needed to address these questions.

BC

[lex24]

Loading...

[lex24]

Loading...

[dabigv13]

Interestingly, playing with some of the parameters, smoking currently or in the past seems to improve your odds of avoiding hospitalization. Not sure how much I believe that. Makes me question the model.

I have seen some reports (out of France, of course) that smoking was associated with lower odds of hospitalization.  Seems counterintuitive to me, the pulmonologist, and this meta analysis by the WHO suggests an association between smoking and disease severity:

https://www.who.int/news-room/commentari...d-covid-19

At the time of this review, the available evidence suggests that smoking is associated with increased severity of disease and death in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Although likely related to severity, there is no evidence to quantify the risk to smokers of hospitalization with COVID-19 or of infection by SARS-CoV-2 was found in the peer-reviewed literature. Population-based studies are needed to address these questions.

BC

Was worried I might need to start recommending my patients take up smoking. Not sure I have any pamphlets printed up for that in my office.

[dabigv13]

Interestingly, playing with some of the parameters, smoking currently or in the past seems to improve your odds of avoiding hospitalization. Not sure how much I believe that. Makes me question the model.

I have seen some reports (out of France, of course) that smoking was associated with lower odds of hospitalization.  Seems counterintuitive to me, the pulmonologist, and this meta analysis by the WHO suggests an association between smoking and disease severity:

https://www.who.int/news-room/commentari...d-covid-19

At the time of this review, the available evidence suggests that smoking is associated with increased severity of disease and death in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Although likely related to severity, there is no evidence to quantify the risk to smokers of hospitalization with COVID-19 or of infection by SARS-CoV-2 was found in the peer-reviewed literature. Population-based studies are needed to address these questions.

BC

Was worried I might need to start recommending my patients take up smoking. Not sure I have any pamphlets printed up for that in my office.

[fullmetal]

I heard an opinion that smoking acclimates one's lungs to inflammatory responses...and that the inflammatory response to covid would be therefore better tolerated by smokers.  Ha.

[fullmetal]

I heard an opinion that smoking acclimates one's lungs to inflammatory responses...and that the inflammatory response to covid would be therefore better tolerated by smokers.  Ha.

[Mick]

I heard an opinion that smoking acclimates one's lungs to inflammatory responses...and that the inflammatory response to covid would be therefore better tolerated by smokers.  Ha.

[Mick]

I heard an opinion that smoking acclimates one's lungs to inflammatory responses...and that the inflammatory response to covid would be therefore better tolerated by smokers.  Ha.

[M T]

A few months back, when I was looking closely at the early reports, former smokers had less serious illness (IIRC) in some of the data.   An odd result.

I then kept seeing some warnings that smoking made things worse, but I never chased down their data to see what was behind the warnings.

Here's a recent study at Stanford indicating teens that vape have a higher chance of getting the disease.  From what I can tell by a quick scan of it, the same results might have been true if they'd studied teens that hold hands at church and take communion.  Or maybe if they'd studied any subset of youths that socialize in the same manner as vapers.

The fact that smoke enters their lungs didn't seem to factor into the evaluation, based on what the article reports.  (It may be critical, or it may not.)  I don't see (from the article anyway) that they were asked about the severity of their COVID.  Conceivably, they had more cases of COVID than non-vapers, but the severity wasn't compared.

Another article about this study reported "The researchers note, however, that vaping involves the repeated touching of hands to the mouth and face, which is associated with the spread of COVID-19."   Continuing down that line, smokers may be more likely than non-smokers to get the infection initially in their mouth or nostrils rather than in their lungs, which might impact the course of the disease (that's just a hypothesis of mine which has no data supporting or refuting it that I'm aware of).

It seems that vaping is a behavior, like choir singing, that leads to a higher incidence of COVID-19.  If so, both should be advised against or prohibited similarly for that reason.   Separately, the damage to the lungs that may be caused by tobacco and other smoke should suggest controls to limit the practice.

(I do not condone vaping or smoking.  I wanted to point out what seems to be studied here, and what apparently wasn't.)

[M T]

A few months back, when I was looking closely at the early reports, former smokers had less serious illness (IIRC) in some of the data.   An odd result.

I then kept seeing some warnings that smoking made things worse, but I never chased down their data to see what was behind the warnings.

Here's a recent study at Stanford indicating teens that vape have a higher chance of getting the disease.  From what I can tell by a quick scan of it, the same results might have been true if they'd studied teens that hold hands at church and take communion.  Or maybe if they'd studied any subset of youths that socialize in the same manner as vapers.

The fact that smoke enters their lungs didn't seem to factor into the evaluation, based on what the article reports.  (It may be critical, or it may not.)  I don't see (from the article anyway) that they were asked about the severity of their COVID.  Conceivably, they had more cases of COVID than non-vapers, but the severity wasn't compared.

Another article about this study reported "The researchers note, however, that vaping involves the repeated touching of hands to the mouth and face, which is associated with the spread of COVID-19."   Continuing down that line, smokers may be more likely than non-smokers to get the infection initially in their mouth or nostrils rather than in their lungs, which might impact the course of the disease (that's just a hypothesis of mine which has no data supporting or refuting it that I'm aware of).

It seems that vaping is a behavior, like choir singing, that leads to a higher incidence of COVID-19.  If so, both should be advised against or prohibited similarly for that reason.   Separately, the damage to the lungs that may be caused by tobacco and other smoke should suggest controls to limit the practice.

(I do not condone vaping or smoking.  I wanted to point out what seems to be studied here, and what apparently wasn't.)

[DocSavage87]

What's the current thinking behind ACE2 expression and allergen exposure in asthma/allergy patients?  I thought early studies showed under-representation of those groups compared to broadly classifying "asthma" as a risk.  (Certain categories of asthma are indeed a risk, right?)

Could smoking decrease ACE2 expression?  A quick search pops up some hits:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5955030/
But it seems like other studies go the opposite direction.

[DocSavage87]

What's the current thinking behind ACE2 expression and allergen exposure in asthma/allergy patients?  I thought early studies showed under-representation of those groups compared to broadly classifying "asthma" as a risk.  (Certain categories of asthma are indeed a risk, right?)

Could smoking decrease ACE2 expression?  A quick search pops up some hits:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5955030/
But it seems like other studies go the opposite direction.

[tcufrog]

I ran the calculator for my age, 65, BMI of 20, and fever, which resulted in a predicted hospitalization of 7.9%.  But oddly, if I changed my BMI to 21, the percentage dropped .7% to 7.2%.  Why would a slight weight variance make about a 10% difference in the probability?

[tcufrog]

I ran the calculator for my age, 65, BMI of 20, and fever, which resulted in a predicted hospitalization of 7.9%.  But oddly, if I changed my BMI to 21, the percentage dropped .7% to 7.2%.  Why would a slight weight variance make about a 10% difference in the probability?

[DocSavage87]

I ran the calculator for my age, 65, BMI of 20, and fever, which resulted in a predicted hospitalization of 7.9%.  But oddly, if I changed my BMI to 21, the percentage dropped .7% to 7.2%.  Why would a slight weight variance make about a 10% difference in the probability?

I noticed that too.  Could be confounding of that variable with cachexia / diseases of wasting that act to increase severity of the disease like cancer?

[DocSavage87]

I ran the calculator for my age, 65, BMI of 20, and fever, which resulted in a predicted hospitalization of 7.9%.  But oddly, if I changed my BMI to 21, the percentage dropped .7% to 7.2%.  Why would a slight weight variance make about a 10% difference in the probability?

I noticed that too.  Could be confounding of that variable with cachexia / diseases of wasting that act to increase severity of the disease like cancer?