Highest Rated Comments

Girl_on_a_bicycle39 karma

A pneumococcal vaccine would offer protection against secondary bacterial infection. Streptococcus pneumoniae is the most common cause of secondary bacterial pneumonia in viral illness, and the pneumococcal vaccine definitely offers protection. That's why infants receive a pneumococcal vaccination, and elderly people as well.

The streptococcus pneumonia is such a common secondary infection, that there was a lot of debate in during the Spanish flu as to whether it was the primary pathogen (it was not, but it commonly contributed to death)

Girl_on_a_bicycle23 karma

Book recommendation: The Body Keeps the Score.

It covers the topics of mindfulness and PTSD well, and I would say its a must read for anyone working with PTSD patients.

Girl_on_a_bicycle10 karma

In the US kids now get the PCV13 Vaccine sometime before the age of 2, which protects against Streptococcus pneumonia. It protects against 13 strains of the bacteria. In addition to preventing secondary pneumonia caused by this bacteria, it protects against meningitis, ear infections, and sinus infections caused by the same bug.

Adults with poorly functioning immune systems, lung disease, or who are older than 65 should be vaccinated with the PPSV23 vaccine.

So the most vulnerable people are somewhat protected against this potential complication. Should more people be vaccinated if coronavirus hits hard? Damn it, Jim, I'm an intern, not an epidemiologist!

Here's the data showing the effects of vaccination over the last 20 years: https://www.cdc.gov/pneumococcal/surveillance.html

Girl_on_a_bicycle9 karma

And presumably, you don't smoke or have diabetes or chronic lung disease or anything compromising your immune system. And your spleen is working well. Otherwise, you would indeed be at risk for contacting streptococcus pneumonia and would benefit from vaccination despite the fact that you haven't turned 65 yet.

Girl_on_a_bicycle7 karma

From the perspective as a medical doctor, I found Jon Kabit Zim's book (very MBSR) interesting from a scientific sort of perspective (highlighting the links between mindfulness and physiology) but ultimately I wouldn't recommend it to anyone looking into meditation. (I read the sciencey parts, but couldn't get through the parts actually about medication) I think when you strip meditation away from any kind of spiritual context...I can't explain, it's like missing the forest for the trees, like meditation becomes more of an exercise in self-indulgence than a discipline.

Meanwhile, I have like six books by Thich Nhat Hahn, that I actually read.