Smokescreen 15
The ultimate smokescreen - the winter crisis
Our work on hospital-acquired COVID-19, presented at the beginning of TTE, opened our eyes to the possibility that a significant number of COVID-19 cases were identified as positive five or more days after patient admission. Such that COVID-19 did not play a direct role in the initial hospital admission.
COVID 19 acquired in UK hospitals - what does it all mean?
Let’s recap what we found based on the data provided by the public health bodies.
We reasoned that the same may be true of other Respiratory Virus Hospital-Acquired Infections (RV HAI) caused by other agents.
As politicians, “experts”, and the media are always screaming about the F word, we assumed they meant RVs in general. This, of course, is our assumption: flip a coin for a reliable translation into microbiology speak. In fact, don’t bother to flip a coin, as the F word is used to deliberately confuse politics with microbiology. If you flip a coin, it will be heads you lose, tails I win.
We also showed that RV HAIs are important as, by their own nature, they hit the weakest and are often deadly and are associated with significantly higher mortality compared with community-acquired cases, often with several-fold greater risk.
Why Respiratory Virus Hospital-acquired Infections Matter
Hospital-acquired infections with respiratory viruses (RV HAIs) are a significant concern because they have serious clinical, public health, and economic consequences, particularly in healthcare settings where vulnerable populations are concentrated.
In our further explorations of the RV HAI topic, we came up with this paper, partly produced by the Scare Agency and partly by a big London hospital conglomerate:
This prospective observational study investigated hospital-acquired influenza among 298 inpatients exposed to 11 confirmed influenza cases in a large UK hospital network during the 2018–2019 influenza season.
Of the 298 inpatients, 23 (7.7%) developed symptomatic, laboratory-confirmed influenza, and In-hospital mortality was 22% in these secondary cases, compared with 4% in flu-negative contacts.
Exposure was defined as sharing a bay or room with a laboratory case at the time of testing (our emphasis):
The time element is a bit vaguish but this is a prospective study, so it’s real stuff - not made up. “Any time” is probably the best they could come up with in busy departments.
The message from this study is that the older and frailer you are, the more likely you are to catch influenza in an institution, end up in the ICU and/or die.
The bad bit is the study’s recommendation for isolation and antiviral prophylaxis, which lacks high-quality evidence to support it.
Other issues arising from this study include what the facilitating circumstances were and whether the authors tested for the presence of other pathogens. Regardless, we can be clear that RV HAIs are a key driver of morbidity and mortality within hospitals.
This post was written by two old geezers who continue their study of RV HAIs as they think it is a very important, understudied and undertested area. And if you are using AI: trust but verify.
Readings
Nosocomial acquisition of influenza is associated with significant morbidity and mortality: Results of a prospective observational study. J Infect Public Health. 2022 Oct;15(10):1118-1123. doi: 10.1016/j.jiph.2022.08.021.
Thanks for the comments folks. The bottom line which we have repeated constantly in many different series and many different posts is that we do not understand respiratory viral transmission. We have covered infection, activation, stress, miasmata, latency and a variety of other theories. All are partly explanatory none explain all the facts. Since the Covid pandemic, science has been highjacked by ideology which is why we have certainty instead of uncertainty, acceptance of dogma, instead of careful investigation.
Best wishes, Tom
When my mother was in a care home with mixed bag causes of demtia it was almost impossible to stop them from sending her to hospital. Sometimes it was a simple bump or mild chest infection. The care was excellent in the home and they were only covering themselves just in case we complained.We really need to improve medical care in the community/ care home etc.