Pfizer 91% effective in updated data, protective against South African variant

Re:Pfizer 91% effective in updated data, protective against ... by HWR_14 on Friday April 02, 2021 @12:54AM (#26669108)

Given that lung scans of people with long-COVID show scar tissue, I doubt it's entirely psychosomatic. Given that lung damage has appeared even in outwardly asymptomatic carriers, it seems likely that that damage shows up more in people who, knowing they are less likely to die, take more risks.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Pfizer 91% effective in updated data, protective against ... by refurb on Friday April 02, 2021 @01:46AM (#26669272)

That’s not the case in general. The CBC in Canada has run multiple article about long Covid and state again and again “doctors have said all the tests come back negative, nothing is wrong with them”.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Pfizer 91% effective in updated data, protective against ... by HWR_14 on Friday April 02, 2021 @01:57AM (#26669301)

I mean, you're looking at Canada. Look at the BBC and Oxford's xenon based scans that are in fact detecting the damage.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Pfizer 91% effective in updated data, protective against ... by refurb on Friday April 02, 2021 @06:50AM (#26670415)

That’s experimental and has been done on a pretty small group of patients. It would still need to validated before it can be used as a diagnostic.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Pfizer 91% effective in updated data, protective against ... by HWR_14 on Friday April 02, 2021 @04:57PM (#26675911)

A very valid point. There have been quite a few conflicting reports, especially on long term lung damage. It may be too early to make definitive statements. Certainly it seems likely enough that some long term consequences exist, enough that it worries me.

[ Parent | on HN ]