ABSTRACT
There are, however, other mechanisms at play in long COVID, such as persistent (intracellular) viral infection, genetic alterations, maladaptive healing and tissue damage that cause organ dysfunction in various body systems and auto immune responses similar to rheumatoid arthritis, Lupus erythematosus and anticardiolipin and Sjogren syndrome12,15. Some of the simultaneous effects included absorption of building blocks for optimal health, stimulating self-healing internal processes, restoring weakened systems, and symptom relief in addition to specific anti-inflammatories. [...]we present a RCT demonstrating efficacy for a traditional Iranian medicine in the management of blood glucose in people with type 2 diabetes. When you look at the photos you can't help but recognise the incidental benefits in the use of the traditional herbal medicine -the connection to the earth, physical activity, exposure to UV light and earth microbiota, and the social benefits of working together - benefits that sit outside of the chemical composition of the herbal medicine.
ABSTRACT
Evidence from systematic reviews and small RCTs shows fairly-high safety profiles for some intravenous (IV) nutrients including vitamin C in people with cancer,2-4 or when critically ill in hospital,5 6 and when used to reduce fatigue, pain and depression in cancer,2 or long covid7, and for zinc in critically ill patients with SARS-CoV-2.8 However, the evidence of safety for IV administration of combinations of vitamins, minerals and nutrients is definitely scant. [...]in people with pancreatitis, using IV combinations of antioxidants (selenium, vitamin C and n-acetyl cysteine) in the acute phase was shown to increase the risk of end organ failure and death, compared to placebo infusions.9 Plus, increased risk of beta carotene in people who smoke has been repeatedly demonstrated with orally ingested supplements. [...]best wishes to you and yours for a peaceful and enjoyable holiday season.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the benefits and risks of zinc formulations compared with controls for prevention or treatment of acute viral respiratory tract infections (RTIs) in adults. METHOD: Seventeen English and Chinese databases were searched in April/May 2020 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs), and from April/May 2020 to August 2020 for SARS-CoV-2 RCTs. Cochrane rapid review methods were applied. Quality appraisals used the Risk of Bias 2.0 and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. RESULTS: Twenty-eight RCTs with 5446 participants were identified. None were specific to SARS-CoV-2. Compared with placebo, oral or intranasal zinc prevented 5 RTIs per 100 person-months (95% CI 1 to 8, numbers needed to treat (NNT)=20, moderate-certainty/quality). Sublingual zinc did not prevent clinical colds following human rhinovirus inoculations (relative risk, RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.21, moderate-certainty/quality). On average, symptoms resolved 2 days earlier with sublingual or intranasal zinc compared with placebo (95% CI 0.61 to 3.50, very low-certainty/quality) and 19 more adults per 100 were likely to remain symptomatic on day 7 without zinc (95% CI 2 to 38, NNT=5, low-certainty/quality). There were clinically significant reductions in day 3 symptom severity scores (mean difference, MD -1.20 points, 95% CI -0.66 to -1.74, low-certainty/quality), but not average daily symptom severity scores (standardised MD -0.15, 95% CI -0.43 to 0.13, low-certainty/quality). Non-serious adverse events (AEs) (eg, nausea, mouth/nasal irritation) were higher (RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.69, NNHarm=7, moderate-certainty/quality). Compared with active controls, there were no differences in illness duration or AEs (low-certainty/quality). No serious AEs were reported in the 25 RCTs that monitored them (low-certainty/quality). CONCLUSIONS: In adult populations unlikely to be zinc deficient, there was some evidence suggesting zinc might prevent RTIs symptoms and shorten duration. Non-serious AEs may limit tolerability for some. The comparative efficacy/effectiveness of different zinc formulations and doses were unclear. The GRADE-certainty/quality of the evidence was limited by a high risk of bias, small sample sizes and/or heterogeneity. Further research, including SARS-CoV-2 clinical trials is warranted. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020182044.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Tract Infections , Adult , Humans , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Respiratory Tract Infections/drug therapy , Respiratory Tract Infections/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Zinc/therapeutic useABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: This rapid review systematically evaluated the effects of honeybee products compared to controls for the prevention, duration, severity, and recovery of acute viral respiratory tract infections (RTIs), including SARS-CoV-2, in adults and children. METHODS: Cochrane rapid review methods were applied. Four English databases plus preprint servers and trial registries were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The evidence was appraised and synthesized using RoB 2.0 and GRADE. RESULTS: 27 results were derived from 9 RCTs that included 674 adults and 781 children. In hospitalized adults with SARS-CoV-2, propolis plus usual-care compared to usual-care alone reduced the risk of shock, respiratory failure and kidney injury and duration of hospital admission. Honey was less effective than Guaifenesin for reducing cough severity at 60-minutes in adults with non-specific acute viral RTIs. Compared to coffee, honey plus coffee, and honey alone reduced the severity of post-infectious cough in adults. Honey reduced the duration of cough in children compared to placebo and salbutamol; and the global impact of nocturnal cough after one night compared to usual-care alone and pharmaceutical cough medicines. CONCLUSION: More studies are needed to robustly assess honeybee's role in SARS-CoV-2 and non-specific viral respiratory infections. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO: CRD42020193847.
ABSTRACT
[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.imr.2020.100484.].
ABSTRACT
[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.imr.2020.100457.].
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The global COVID-19 pandemic has prompted an urgent search for interventions to prevent and treat SARS-CoV-2. Higher risk of infection and adverse outcomes coincide with populations with chronic diseases and elderly who are at risk of zinc deficiency. Through several mechanisms zinc may prevent, reduce severity and duration of symptoms. METHOD: An a priori protocol was registered with PROSPERO on 27th April 2020 (CRD42020182044). Eight databases (one Chinese) and four clinical trial registries (one Chinese) were searched for randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials (RCTs), evaluating single or adjunct zinc against placebo or active controls, for prevention and/or treatment of SARS-CoV-2, other coronaviruses or related infections. RR constraints included not searching bibliographies or contacting authors, single reviewers with calibration and second reviewer checking, meta-analyses and quality appraisal of critical and study primary outcomes only and reporting results as they became available. RESULTS: 118 publications of 1,627 records met the inclusion criteria (35 Chinese and 83 English publications), 32 for prevention, 78 for treatment and 8 for both. Four RCTs specific to SARS-CoV-2 are ongoing; two are investigating zinc for prevention and two for treatment. As of 7 July 2020, no results were available. A wide range of zinc forms, including nasal spray/gel, lozenges, liquid, tablets and intramuscular were investigated. CONCLUSION: Currently, indirect evidence suggests zinc may potentially reduce the risk, duration and severity of SARS-CoV-2 infections, particularly for populations at risk of zinc deficiency including people with chronic disease co-morbidities and older adults. Direct evidence to determine if zinc is effective for either prevention or treatment of SARS-CoV-2 is pending. In the interim, assessing zinc status of people with chronic diseases and older adults, as part of a SARS-CoV-2 clinical work-up, is reasonable as both groups have a higher risk of zinc deficiency/insufficiency and poorer outcomes from SARS-CoV-2.
ABSTRACT
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to an explosion of rapid reviews geared towards providing time sensitive answers for clinical and policy decision-makers. Rapid reviews (RRs) strike a balance between rigour and rapidity to minimise bias and optimise transparency within specified constraints. Methods: This review article appraised the methods and reporting standards of a convenience sample of RR protocols and RRs of COVID-19 clinical management questions, published in the first six-months of 2020. Inclusion criteria were all RR protocols evaluating traditional, complementary, and integrative medicine (TCIM) registered on PROSPERO, and all RRs indexed on PubMed or published on the Oxford COVID-19 Evidence Service. A purpose-specific 9-item reporting checklist reflecting recommended minimum requirements for RRs was applied. Findings were synthesised and narrated in the context of methodological considerations for conducting and reporting RRs of TCIM. Results: Included studies were five RR protocols of TCIM and 16 RRs, of which five considered TCIM. Wide variations in RR methods were proposed or applied, as were the reporting standards. All five RRs that evaluated TCIM had the lowest reporting standards that limited reproducibility and transparency. Despite accepted recommendations, most RRs did not publish a protocol. Conclusions: We propose that specific research disciplines, such as TCIM, have a uniqueness that may lead to unacceptable outputs if minimum methodological standards are not applied. The recommended minimum requirements will optimise the credibility of rapid reviews of TCIM and limit the risk of prematurely disregarding a potentially effective intervention.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The global COVID-19 pandemic has prompted an urgent search for effective interventions. SARS-CoV-2 mortality/morbidity risk increases with age and for those chronic disease co-morbidities, both of which are associated with lower zinc status, as is the risk of infection. METHODS: Rapid review methods will be applied to a systematic review of zinc for the prevention or treatment of SARS-CoV-2 and viral respiratory tract infections in humans. Included are published studies reporting randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials that compare zinc intervention to placebo and/or other comparator interventions. English and Chinese language databases will be searched for primary studies of viral respiratory tract infections and clinical trial registries for SARS-CoV-2 infections. Due to concerns about indirectness, studies evaluating non-SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus infections will be rated down by one level, and non-specific or confirmed non-coronavirus viral infections will be rated down by two levels. Review constraints include (1) using Google translate when screening articles published in languages other than English or Chinese and limited translation (2) following calibration, only one reviewer will screen articles, extract data, appraise quality and conduct the analysis, (3) prioritising data extraction and meta-analyses of SARS-CoV-2 studies and critical outcomes of other viral infections, followed by high risk groups and (4) reporting important preliminary findings prior to peer review if necessary. DISCUSSION: The application of these rapid review methods and broadening the inclusion criteria to include other coronavirus-related viral respiratory tract infections aims to enable a timely evidence appraisal of priority research questions and dissemination of results. STUDY REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020182044.