Dammit!

[Oh_hunnihunni]

I brought conjunctivitis home with me yesterday. One look in the mirror confirms it isn't just tired eyes... So no contact lenses till it goes away, which makes life dangerous, but hey, what's life without risk, eh?

I have dosed with yoghurt liquor and it is calming the itch, but I wondered if anyone else has some home remedies worth trying - being a super myope, life without clear sight is not to be recommended.

[Outsider]

Do you know who you might have got it from - it's very contagious?
I hope it's not opthalmic shingles - I'm still recovering from shingles after 8 weeks (but only affected my body and not the eyes fortunately).

[harm_less]

Do you know who you might have got it from - it's very contagious?
I hope it's not opthalmic shingles - I'm still recovering from shingles after 8 weeks (but only affected my body and not the eyes fortunately).

You do realise that shingles is one of the most common Adverse events of special interest in regard to the COVID vaccine. If the onset of shingles followed your vaccination was it reported?

[Outsider]

Do you know who you might have got it from - it's very contagious?
I hope it's not opthalmic shingles - I'm still recovering from shingles after 8 weeks (but only affected my body and not the eyes fortunately).

You do realise that shingles is one of the most common Adverse events of special interest in regard to the COVID vaccine. If the onset of shingles followed your vaccination was it reported?

Yes, I have read that and the GP knows but it's not been reported, I don't think. I've also suffered breathlessness since the second jab and asked them if this should be reported and they said No.
I was vaccinated against Shingles three and a half years ago.

[Oh_hunnihunni]

Me too, and no, it's definitely pink eye. And yes, very catchy, which is how I brought it home, probably off the shopping trolley handle. And I am staying home to keep it here!! Should've bought more wine...

[Magoo]

i get breathless walking to the mailbox.
i put it down to lack of breath.

[harm_less]

You do realise that shingles is one of the most common Adverse events of special interest in regard to the COVID vaccine. If the onset of shingles followed your vaccination was it reported?

Yes, I have read that and the GP knows but it's not been reported, I don't think. I've also suffered breathlessness since the second jab and asked them if this should be reported and they said No.
I was vaccinated against Shingles three and a half years ago.

If your GP refuses to report a vaccine reaction go over his head: https://report.vaccine.covid19.govt.nz/s/

[Praktica]

A trained professional has made the judgement that either it isn't a vaccine reaction, or that it is not serious enough to report. This is why self reported reactions are useless - unless the person with the symptoms is medically trained.

[Oh_hunnihunni]

Relevant meme of farcebook this morning around how we expect years of study towards degrees, certification, and registration and then we ignore the expertise of teachers and medical staff...

[harm_less]

A trained professional has made the judgement that either it isn't a vaccine reaction, or that it is not serious enough to report. This is why self reported reactions are useless - unless the person with the symptoms is medically trained.

Why then does the COVID vaccine website input field have a "Member of the public" option? This is about collection of public health data and by allowing the general public to report suspected adverse reactions the MoH are casting as wide a net as possible to gather this data. Note also that the Medsafe adverse reactions data includes the following:

"An AEFI is an untoward medical event which follows immunisation and does not necessarily have a causal relationship with the administration of the vaccine. The adverse event may be an unfavourable or unintended sign, abnormal laboratory finding, symptom or disease."

By allowing patients who know their own health anomalies better than all too frequent dismissive health 'professionals', especially as GPs are being brow beaten into following the 'accentuate the positive' narrative in regard to vaccine implementation. Keep in mind also that the COVID vaccines have been released with limited historical research data and the feedback from those having them administered are a valuable part of the ongoing research being undertaken in the development of these vaccines.

[Praktica]

A trained professional has made the judgement that either it isn't a vaccine reaction, or that it is not serious enough to report. This is why self reported reactions are useless - unless the person with the symptoms is medically trained.

Why then does the COVID vaccine website input field have a "Member of the public" option? This is about collection of public health data and by allowing the general public to report suspected adverse reactions the MoH are casting as wide a net as possible to gather this data. Note also that the Medsafe adverse reactions data includes the following:

"An AEFI is an untoward medical event which follows immunisation and does not necessarily have a causal relationship with the administration of the vaccine. The adverse event may be an unfavourable or unintended sign, abnormal laboratory finding, symptom or disease."

By allowing patients who know their own health anomalies better than all too frequent dismissive health 'professionals', especially as GPs are being brow beaten into following the 'accentuate the positive' narrative in regard to vaccine implementation. Keep in mind also that the COVID vaccines have been released with limited historical research data and the feedback from those having them administered are a valuable part of the ongoing research being undertaken in the development of these vaccines.

How many people know enough about medicine, or even their own health, to know when something is an anomaly? I would guess that no action is taken on any self report, until professionals have evaluated it. How often does that happen?

[Oh_hunnihunni]

Any survey that relies on voluntary contributions has a very unstable basis that simply cannot be relied upon.

It is one of the inherent weaknesses in democracy.

[harm_less]

Why then does the COVID vaccine website input field have a "Member of the public" option? This is about collection of public health data and by allowing the general public to report suspected adverse reactions the MoH are casting as wide a net as possible to gather this data. Note also that the Medsafe adverse reactions data includes the following:

"An AEFI is an untoward medical event which follows immunisation and does not necessarily have a causal relationship with the administration of the vaccine. The adverse event may be an unfavourable or unintended sign, abnormal laboratory finding, symptom or disease."

By allowing patients who know their own health anomalies better than all too frequent dismissive health 'professionals', especially as GPs are being brow beaten into following the 'accentuate the positive' narrative in regard to vaccine implementation. Keep in mind also that the COVID vaccines have been released with limited historical research data and the feedback from those having them administered are a valuable part of the ongoing research being undertaken in the development of these vaccines.

How many people know enough about medicine, or even their own health, to know when something is an anomaly? I would guess that no action is taken on any self report, until professionals have evaluated it. How often does that happen?

Got to filter out all those pesky hypochondriacs eh? What about the patient who has CFS/ME, ongoing gut disbiosis causing food intolerances, lymphatic discomfort, recurring low level infections, all of which a 15 minute, pay at the counter GP visit will likely dismiss as psychosomatic or "come back if it gets worse".

Recent health issues have taught me not to put blind faith in health professionals. They are all too inclined to diagnose based on blood tests, pharmaceutical solutions and cherry picking the information they can glean from you while both you and them are painfully aware of the meter running.

Jesse Mulligan (on Radio NZ) recently recounted his reluctant doctor's visit for a collection of vague symptoms. Diagnosis: Shingles (subsequent to a COVID vaccination). Doctor's action: won't be related to the vaccination so won't report it. That attitude from our health professionals is all too common and good reason to override their actions if you see fit.

---

Any survey that relies on voluntary contributions has a very unstable basis that simply cannot be relied upon.

It is one of the inherent weaknesses in democracy.

Doctors can't necessarily be relied on either so where does that put us?

And that weakness in democracy is what stops us being in a dictatorship.

[Praktica]

How many people know enough about medicine, or even their own health, to know when something is an anomaly? I would guess that no action is taken on any self report, until professionals have evaluated it. How often does that happen?

Got to filter out all those pesky hypochondriacs eh? What about the patient who has CFS/ME, ongoing gut disbiosis causing food intolerances, lymphatic discomfort, recurring low level infections, all of which a 15 minute, pay at the counter GP visit will likely dismiss as psychosomatic or "come back if it gets worse".

Recent health issues have taught me not to put blind faith in health professionals. They are all too inclined to diagnose based on blood tests, pharmaceutical solutions and cherry picking the information they can glean from you while both you and them are painfully aware of the meter running.

Jesse Mulligan (on Radio NZ) recently recounted his reluctant doctor's visit for a collection of vague symptoms. Diagnosis: Shingles (subsequent to a COVID vaccination). Doctor's action: won't be related to the vaccination so won't report it. That attitude from our health professionals is all too common and good reason to override their actions if you see fit.

---

Any survey that relies on voluntary contributions has a very unstable basis that simply cannot be relied upon.

It is one of the inherent weaknesses in democracy.

Doctors can't necessarily be relied on either so where does that put us?

And that weakness in democracy is what stops us being in a dictatorship.

How does this patient *know* they have these things? Getting diagnoses from support groups on line, or from "unorthodox practitioners"  doesn't mean they have any of them.

[Oh_hunnihunni]

How many people know enough about medicine, or even their own health, to know when something is an anomaly? I would guess that no action is taken on any self report, until professionals have evaluated it. How often does that happen?

Got to filter out all those pesky hypochondriacs eh? What about the patient who has CFS/ME, ongoing gut disbiosis causing food intolerances, lymphatic discomfort, recurring low level infections, all of which a 15 minute, pay at the counter GP visit will likely dismiss as psychosomatic or "come back if it gets worse".

Recent health issues have taught me not to put blind faith in health professionals. They are all too inclined to diagnose based on blood tests, pharmaceutical solutions and cherry picking the information they can glean from you while both you and them are painfully aware of the meter running.

Jesse Mulligan (on Radio NZ) recently recounted his reluctant doctor's visit for a collection of vague symptoms. Diagnosis: Shingles (subsequent to a COVID vaccination). Doctor's action: won't be related to the vaccination so won't report it. That attitude from our health professionals is all too common and good reason to override their actions if you see fit.

---

Any survey that relies on voluntary contributions has a very unstable basis that simply cannot be relied upon.

It is one of the inherent weaknesses in democracy.

Doctors can't necessarily be relied on either so where does that put us?

And that weakness in democracy is what stops us being in a dictatorship.

Does it actually stop us ending up in a dictatorship, or is our dictatorship just a more benign one than most?

[harm_less]

Got to filter out all those pesky hypochondriacs eh? What about the patient who has CFS/ME, ongoing gut disbiosis causing food intolerances, lymphatic discomfort, recurring low level infections, all of which a 15 minute, pay at the counter GP visit will likely dismiss as psychosomatic or "come back if it gets worse".

Recent health issues have taught me not to put blind faith in health professionals. They are all too inclined to diagnose based on blood tests, pharmaceutical solutions and cherry picking the information they can glean from you while both you and them are painfully aware of the meter running.

Jesse Mulligan (on Radio NZ) recently recounted his reluctant doctor's visit for a collection of vague symptoms. Diagnosis: Shingles (subsequent to a COVID vaccination). Doctor's action: won't be related to the vaccination so won't report it. That attitude from our health professionals is all too common and good reason to override their actions if you see fit.

---

Doctors can't necessarily be relied on either so where does that put us?

And that weakness in democracy is what stops us being in a dictatorship.

How does this patient *know* they have these things? Getting diagnoses from support groups on line, or from "unorthodox practitioners"  doesn't mean they have any of them.

In a word, 'symptoms'. If your health professional is too blinkered to recognise them or take them seriously then it is your responsibility to gain further help or treatment in regards to them.

[Oh_hunnihunni]

Or accept that you may be imagining them, or misattributing them to the cause...

[harm_less]

Or accept that you may be imagining them, or misattributing them to the cause...

So is that what my friend should have done after receiving two negative diagnoses from a maxillofacial specialist 3 years back. I went to his funeral just after Xmas following his suffering over 3 years of various unsuccessful treatments for advanced mouth cancer.

Unquestioning faith in medical professionals can be hazardous for your health. If you suspect you aren't being diagnosed correctly do whatever you need to in order to receive what you believe is effective treatment rather than be shafted by the health sector.

[Praktica]

Or accept that you may be imagining them, or misattributing them to the cause...

So is that what my friend should have done after receiving two negative diagnoses from a maxillofacial specialist 3 years back. I went to his funeral just after Xmas following his suffering over 3 years of various unsuccessful treatments for advanced mouth cancer.

Unquestioning faith in medical professionals can be hazardous for your health. If you suspect you aren't being diagnosed correctly do whatever you need to in order to receive what you believe is effective treatment rather than be shafted by the health sector.

I don't see that those without a medical education have any choice but to trust their doctor - but that doesn't prevent you from getting a second opinion. What grounds does any unqualified person have to judge whether a treatment is effective or not?

[harm_less]

So is that what my friend should have done after receiving two negative diagnoses from a maxillofacial specialist 3 years back. I went to his funeral just after Xmas following his suffering over 3 years of various unsuccessful treatments for advanced mouth cancer.

Unquestioning faith in medical professionals can be hazardous for your health. If you suspect you aren't being diagnosed correctly do whatever you need to in order to receive what you believe is effective treatment rather than be shafted by the health sector.

I don't see that those without a medical education have any choice but to trust their doctor - but that doesn't prevent you from getting a second opinion. What grounds does any unqualified person have to judge whether a treatment is effective or not?

In the case I cited the specialist is the only one of that type available in our province, as is the case for a number of other medical specialists if there even is one of the variety you require available locally. In such cases a second opinion requires travelling out of province for many NZers usually at significant cost and inconvenience so is it any wonder many are so inclined to move outside of the conventional health sector.

A patient is well placed to know whether their treatment is effective or not; your health complaint is either improving or it's not. You're very much demonstrating that you've never suffered any health issue that isn't just a 'cut and dried' treat and cure situation.