Psychiatrists and psychologists have higher incidence of mental illness in themselves!

Image
Psychiatrists and psychologists treat mental issues of their patients. But what about their own mental illnesses?  Psychiatrists and psychologists are more ill mentally  Doctors   are in great stress during their training as well as career period. The workload, busy and fast life schedules, and higher expectations and competitiveness and the nature of the job itself leads to a sense of exhaustion, both physical and mental. There is a heavy burnout. Moreover, time for socialization is almost nil.  Hence, doctors are in grave risk of suffering from mental health illnesses. And in this, psychiatrists and psychologists have a higher risk and incidence of mental health issues.  It is a sad truth that psychiatrists and psychologists are more ill mentally than general public or other doctors. This has been known but not accepted and recognised sufficiently.  Also, read: Narcissist mothers are non-loving and jealous of their daughters  Studies have revealed that psychiatrists and psychologists

Update: The current data and status of Astrazeneca Covid vaccine

 Astazeneca covid vaccine is in some trouble. Neither the people nor government are happy about it. And the regulators are looking out for some more data from the company. What is the current scenario on it? 

Astrazeneca-covid vaccine and the status 

There are doubts about the covid vaccine developed and manufactured by Astrazeneca company. A US health agency said in public that the said company used outdated data in the results of its large scale covid vaccine trials. 

Earlier, the company has released some interim data that revealed that its vaccine is better in the US trials. 

The company said:

"The numbers published yesterday were based on a pre-specified interim analysis with a data cut-off of 17 February.


"We have reviewed the preliminary assessment of the primary analysis and the results were consistent with the interim analysis. We are now completing the validation of the statistical analysis.


"We will immediately engage with the independent data safety monitoring board (DSMB) to share our primary analysis with the most up to date efficacy data. We intend to issue results of the primary analysis within 48 hours."

Anthony Fauci and his comments on the vaccine 

The main expert on covid in the USA government, Dr Anthony Fauci said:

"This (is) likely a very good vaccine."

He added:

"But the data and safety monitoring board got concerned that the data in AstraZeneca's public statement "were somewhat outdated and might in fact be misleading a bit,"

Emer Cooke is head of the European Medicines Unit. He said:

"The trials point to greater efficacy than what we actually observed in the previous trials that we examined,"

"The company has promised to provide us with (data) and we will adjust our assessment if there is any new information that needs to be taken into account."

Read here on medical and ethical issues of immunity passports 

Ian Jones, Professor of virology at Reading said:

"The NIAID (National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases) statement is not clear on the actual data that is causing the disquiet."

"I think it is generally accepted that the early trial data, while positive, did suffer from a communication issue which failed to get across a single clear message.


"But any concerns that date from that time would have surely been surpassed by the data now available from actual usage, which shows an excellent safety profile and the prevention of severe disease.

Astrazeneca vaccine for coronavirus (Source: BBC) 


"That is, in effect, a much bigger trial and it is that data that should be up front for consideration by bodies who have yet to approve its use."

More expert opinions 

Stephen Evans said:

"One explanation might well be that this trial is currently being conducted when there is a large amount of a new variant about more recently, and, as might be expected, the efficacy against that variant might be less, so more recent data shows reduced efficacy. Of course the other vaccines may also show such reduced efficacy and we don’t know by how much.

"It does not leave me concerned particularly unless they had found a safety issue that was being hidden, which does not appear to be the case."

German Professor Peter Kremsner said:

"This is indeed an extraordinary act. The negative reports about this vaccine do not stop, although my assessment is that it is well tolerated and safe, but clearly less effective than the two mRNA vaccines."


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Morton's toe: Everything you need to know about your longer second toe

There can be no universal forgiveness! It never exists!

Voluntary childlessness is on the rise in the world! What are the reasons for it?