Search Results for covid-19

Insufficient evidence to claim COVID-19 vaccines cause menstrual irregularities in vaccinated women; vaccinated people aren’t making unvaccinated people ill

Millions of women in the U.S. received at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose. No significant safety concerns related to fertility or pregnancy have emerged in clinical trials or safety monitoring of COVID-19 vaccination campaigns. For the moment, there isn’t sufficient evidence to establish a causal relationship between the COVID-19 vaccines and menstrual irregularities that women observed after vaccination. More studies are needed to shed light on this subject.

Flawed speculative study incorrectly claims that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines cause neurodegenerative diseases

The mRNA COVID-19 vaccines authorized for emergency use in the U.S. demonstrated safety and efficacy in thousands of people during clinical trials. Ongoing safety monitoring in millions of vaccinated people further shows that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines are safe and don’t alter human DNA. They are also not associated with neurodegenerative diseases or serious adverse effects other than rare cases of allergic reactions in people with a previous history of allergies.

COVID-19 vaccines don’t cause herpes infections; a possible association with the reactivation of herpes zoster in patients with rheumatic diseases remains unconfirmed

Herpes zoster (shingles) is a viral infection caused by the varicella-zoster virus that also causes chickenpox. This virus doesn’t cause other types of herpes, such as genital herpes. Only people who had chickenpox in the past can develop shingles, which result from a reactivation of pre-existing virus in the body. One study reported six cases of shingles in patients with rheumatic diseases after receiving the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, suggesting that the vaccine might trigger viral reactivation in these patients. However, the study wasn’t designed to establish a causal association between shingles and the vaccine because it didn’t include a group of unvaccinated rheumatic patients.

Current data from clinical trials offer no reliable evidence that ivermectin is effective against COVID-19; better-quality clinical trials are needed to resolve this question

The effectiveness of the antiparasitic drug ivermectin as a COVID-19 treatment and preventative was evaluated in multiple clinical trials. However, many of these trials had limitations such as a small study population, poorly defined study outcomes, and the use of multiple drug combinations. These factors make it difficult for researchers to be certain about ivermectin’s effect. As such, researchers have called for better-quality clinical trials in order to address this question. Given the lack of reliable evidence that ivermectin is effective and the risk of side effects from the drug, several health authorities don’t recommend its use for treating or preventing COVID-19 at this time.

Using face masks reduces the transmission of COVID-19 and doesn’t lead to oxygen deficiency or carbon dioxide buildup in the blood

Although viruses such as SARS-CoV-2 are much smaller in size than the pores in a face mask, these viruses are carried by droplets or aerosols that can be effectively trapped by face masks, reducing aerosol emission. Face masks can’t prevent the passage of gases, so they cannot significantly reduce the amount of oxygen in the blood, nor increase the amount of carbon dioxide.

DARPA developed a hydrogel sensor which monitors blood for infections at early stages, not a microchip for COVID-19 identification or location tracker

In collaboration with the private biotech company Profusa, researchers at DARPA developed a hydrogel sensor to detect infection. The hydrogel biosensor technology was developed with the aim of serving as an early identification system for infectious disease outbreaks, such as during pandemics and biological attacks. It is sensitive enough to identify signs of illness a few days before symptoms appear, but it cannot identify the cause of the infectious disease. The sensor can only measure markers of biochemical changes and immune response in the blood.

Oral contraceptives have a bigger risk factor for blood clot formation than the AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccines

COVID-19 vaccines from AstraZeneca and Johson & Johnson have been shown to be effective against COVID-19 and safe in the vast majority of cases. As of April 2021, there was only one case of blood clotting disorder per 100,000 to 1,000,000 vaccinations. This is one hundred to one thousand times less than the number of blood clotting disorders associated with the use of oral contraceptives within a year. However, it is important to note that oral contraceptives and the AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson vaccines are associated with different types of blood clotting disorders and thus cannot be directly compared.

The World Health Organization doesn’t recommend ivermectin as a COVID-19 treatment; the drug’s safety and effectiveness remains uncertain in COVID-19 patients

Repurposing existing drugs is a helpful strategy that can accelerate the approval of new treatments against a disease. However, simply because a drug works against one disease isn’t evidence that it will work for another. Therefore, even existing drugs used for one disease still need to demonstrate that they are safe and effective in the context of another disease. While some studies suggest that ivermectin might have a beneficial effect in COVID-19 patients, they don’t provide sufficient evidence to recommend ivermectin as a COVID-19 treatment due to potential biases and small sample sizes.

COVID-19 vaccines were developed in record time due to scientists’ good understanding of similar coronaviruses and unprecedented investments from companies and governments

COVID-19 vaccines were developed in record time. This is due to previous research on coronaviruses, unprecedented investment, and the prevalence of the disease. Vaccines aim to prime the immune system to respond quickly to the disease in the future. Several vaccines have been developed in this way, saving millions of lives. However, this is not always straightforward to achieve depending on how the immune system responds and the variety of antigens it would need to recognize.

Scientific evidence supports the use of face masks to reduce COVID-19 spread, mainly by preventing infectious liquid particles from reaching uninfected people

Evidence indicates that contact with infectious liquid particles is the main mode of COVID-19 transmission. Masks act as a simple physical barrier to reduce the dissemination of these liquid particles generated by people when they cough, sneeze, or speak. Several published studies showed that face masks reduce the spread of viral infectious diseases like COVID-19. Wearing masks outdoors is also important if spending prolonged periods of time in close contact with other people.