The behaviours of the virus do not depend on the current ‘zone’ of public health restrictions. And, to be perfectly candid, neither should ours. (2/14)
THIS IS A CATCHY & ATTENTION-GRABBING TITLE
Today, the Province will likely announce what zone of the reopening framework we'll shift into as of Tuesday. Whatever is announced, though, doesn't change what we need to do. Why?
Kindly read these 14 tweets & we'll tell you. (1/14)
The behaviours of the virus do not depend on the current ‘zone’ of public health restrictions. And, to be perfectly candid, neither should ours. (2/14)
Nurses, doctors, paramedics & healthcare workers have experienced things much differently than most of us. (3/14)
Business owners & hospitality workers have been on a rollercoaster of openings & closures.
Students, parents, teachers & school staff have had to adapt to going from online (4/14)
And this virus has disproportionately affected some groups more than others.
But there's the thing: while our experiences of this pandemic haven't been shared, we do have a shared goal.
And we can reach it together. (5/14)
Want to help ensure that once our local businesses reopen, they stay open? We can wear masks & physically distance. (6/14)
Helping those who are isolated or have been disproportionately affected? We must get our vaccines when our time comes. (7/14)
Between now and then, we'll be following our COVID-19 Vaccination Plan: https://t.co/WoFmxjyXHW. (8/14)
No one is perfect. In fact, other than the song Tiny Dancer, perfection doesn't exist.
Yes, some of us haven't been 100% #COVIDwise every day. (9/14)
Our actions matter. We know the lack of instant gratification is hard. (10/14)
It's about knowing our actions now will pay dividends later.
And with the new variants, we don't have a choice but to be as vigilant as we can, every day. (11/14)
If you ♥️ or RT this, do it because you're committing. Make it a sign. Your way of saying to your followers that you're on board.
And you won't be alone. (12/14)
More from Health
This is a limited point about availability of efficacy data for vaccines under development in the context of the approval for CovidShield and Covaxin in India.
There have been many so-called experts on the idiotbox opining about apparent availability of P III data which 1/n
2/n apparently the SEC had access to based on which it "supposedly" approved Covaxin. Another argument that is prevalent is other regulators (US FDA and MHRA) also approved vaccines based on P II data alone. Let me give you a few facts so that you can make your own decision.
3/n The protocols for both mRNA vaccines are publicly available. You can check. Both protocols *define* when the interim analysis will be done. This is not subjective. They clearly define how many infections need to be documented before the Data Safety Monitoring Board meets.
4/n Find the protocols for the bridging study for CovidShield and Covaxin and look for a similar milestone.
Here is one set of efficacy data post the interim analysis of a mRNA vaccine.
Source: https://t.co/BAPnP3PxEb
5/n This data was analyzed post the interim analysis where the blind was broken by the DSMB. Now ask yourself this question:
How does the SEC, or the sponsor of these studies, or the experts who are offering their opinion liberally on the idiotbox know what the efficacy is
There have been many so-called experts on the idiotbox opining about apparent availability of P III data which 1/n
2/n apparently the SEC had access to based on which it "supposedly" approved Covaxin. Another argument that is prevalent is other regulators (US FDA and MHRA) also approved vaccines based on P II data alone. Let me give you a few facts so that you can make your own decision.
3/n The protocols for both mRNA vaccines are publicly available. You can check. Both protocols *define* when the interim analysis will be done. This is not subjective. They clearly define how many infections need to be documented before the Data Safety Monitoring Board meets.
4/n Find the protocols for the bridging study for CovidShield and Covaxin and look for a similar milestone.
Here is one set of efficacy data post the interim analysis of a mRNA vaccine.
Source: https://t.co/BAPnP3PxEb
5/n This data was analyzed post the interim analysis where the blind was broken by the DSMB. Now ask yourself this question:
How does the SEC, or the sponsor of these studies, or the experts who are offering their opinion liberally on the idiotbox know what the efficacy is
1/15
Why can cefepime cause neurological toxicity?
And why is renal failure the main risk factor for this complication?
The answer requires us to learn about cefepime's structure and why it unexpectedly binds to a certain CNS receptor.
#MedTwitter #Tweetorial
2/
Let's establish a few facts about cefepime:
🔺4th generation cephalosporin antibiotic
🔺Excretion = exclusively in the urine (mostly as unchanged drug)
🔺Readily crosses the blood-brain barrier (so it easily accesses the brain)
https://t.co/rjYG1BfGPR
3/
The first report of cefepime neurotoxicity was in 1999.
A patient w/ renal failure received high doses of cefepime and then developed encephalopathy, tremors, myoclonic jerks, and tonic-clonic seizures.
✅All symptoms resolved after hemodialysis.
https://t.co/u7JLVitQpp
4/
Cefepime neurotoxicity is surprisingly common, occurring in up to 15% of treated critically ill patients (w/ symptoms varying from encephalopathy to seizures).
💡The main risk factors = renal failure and lack of dose adjustment for renal function.
https://t.co/nxbnzSq8AR
5/
What about cefepime induces neurotoxicity?
One clue is that it's not the only antibiotic that causes neurotoxicity, particularly seizures.
This actually is a class effect w/ other beta-lactam antibiotics (including penicillins and carbapenems).
https://t.co/Lf4BhON9IY
Why can cefepime cause neurological toxicity?
And why is renal failure the main risk factor for this complication?
The answer requires us to learn about cefepime's structure and why it unexpectedly binds to a certain CNS receptor.
#MedTwitter #Tweetorial
2/
Let's establish a few facts about cefepime:
🔺4th generation cephalosporin antibiotic
🔺Excretion = exclusively in the urine (mostly as unchanged drug)
🔺Readily crosses the blood-brain barrier (so it easily accesses the brain)
https://t.co/rjYG1BfGPR
3/
The first report of cefepime neurotoxicity was in 1999.
A patient w/ renal failure received high doses of cefepime and then developed encephalopathy, tremors, myoclonic jerks, and tonic-clonic seizures.
✅All symptoms resolved after hemodialysis.
https://t.co/u7JLVitQpp
4/
Cefepime neurotoxicity is surprisingly common, occurring in up to 15% of treated critically ill patients (w/ symptoms varying from encephalopathy to seizures).
💡The main risk factors = renal failure and lack of dose adjustment for renal function.
https://t.co/nxbnzSq8AR
5/
What about cefepime induces neurotoxicity?
One clue is that it's not the only antibiotic that causes neurotoxicity, particularly seizures.
This actually is a class effect w/ other beta-lactam antibiotics (including penicillins and carbapenems).
https://t.co/Lf4BhON9IY
You May Also Like
1/“What would need to be true for you to….X”
Why is this the most powerful question you can ask when attempting to reach an agreement with another human being or organization?
A thread, co-written by @deanmbrody:
2/ First, “X” could be lots of things. Examples: What would need to be true for you to
- “Feel it's in our best interest for me to be CMO"
- “Feel that we’re in a good place as a company”
- “Feel that we’re on the same page”
- “Feel that we both got what we wanted from this deal
3/ Normally, we aren’t that direct. Example from startup/VC land:
Founders leave VC meetings thinking that every VC will invest, but they rarely do.
Worse over, the founders don’t know what they need to do in order to be fundable.
4/ So why should you ask the magic Q?
To get clarity.
You want to know where you stand, and what it takes to get what you want in a way that also gets them what they want.
It also holds them (mentally) accountable once the thing they need becomes true.
5/ Staying in the context of soliciting investors, the question is “what would need to be true for you to want to invest (or partner with us on this journey, etc)?”
Multiple responses to this question are likely to deliver a positive result.
Why is this the most powerful question you can ask when attempting to reach an agreement with another human being or organization?
A thread, co-written by @deanmbrody:
Next level tactic when closing a sale, candidate, or investment:
— Erik Torenberg (@eriktorenberg) February 27, 2018
Ask: \u201cWhat needs to be true for you to be all in?\u201d
You'll usually get an explicit answer that you might not get otherwise. It also holds them accountable once the thing they need becomes true.
2/ First, “X” could be lots of things. Examples: What would need to be true for you to
- “Feel it's in our best interest for me to be CMO"
- “Feel that we’re in a good place as a company”
- “Feel that we’re on the same page”
- “Feel that we both got what we wanted from this deal
3/ Normally, we aren’t that direct. Example from startup/VC land:
Founders leave VC meetings thinking that every VC will invest, but they rarely do.
Worse over, the founders don’t know what they need to do in order to be fundable.
4/ So why should you ask the magic Q?
To get clarity.
You want to know where you stand, and what it takes to get what you want in a way that also gets them what they want.
It also holds them (mentally) accountable once the thing they need becomes true.
5/ Staying in the context of soliciting investors, the question is “what would need to be true for you to want to invest (or partner with us on this journey, etc)?”
Multiple responses to this question are likely to deliver a positive result.
