THREADETTE: DS had his annual exam at his "normal" doctor whom I adore. This Dr. is trustworty in every sense of word. He's in his mid-60s & when anyone asks for ped. recommendations, whether nextdoor or church groups, etc. everyone says this doctor. When DS was 2 months 1/
2/ or gosh, maybe just 1 month, during normal check-up Dr. heard issue w/ his heart. Mind you, 2 weeks prior we had just gotten DS's cystic fibrosis diagnosis. Dr. told us DS needed to see a cardo, said he wasn't hip on local one & called in favor from specialist at UofM Mott's
3/ who then saw DS on his lunch hour later in the week. Dr. knew we were already overwhelmed with CF diagnosis. Dr. ALWAYS gives amazing insights on things that I've asked his CF team and frankly have more faith in DR. SO, that's the backdrop for what I'm going to say.
4/ This Dr. is no COVID chicken little, but I wanted his take on heart side effects given DS's issues and also b/c CF Center all just would say "CDC recomends blah blah blah' and I knew Dr Amazing wouldn't just spit out "experts" talking points. He began by noting it's
5/ a risk benefit assessment for parents, but obviously for DS the risk is much higher. He added that the heart issue is very rare and nearly always treatable. He told me what to watch for and what to do. (See if you can replicate by pushing on heart, which indiates concern.)
6/ Call us, don't go to ER. Now, final point for those who are COVID vaccine hesitant (not those who are vaccine opposed, as I know you have your reasons), but for those who are open, but hesitant, he said something I hadn't considered for why folks should get vaccinated.
7/ Longer COVID circulates more time it has to mutate. Right now vaccines work on COVID & variants, but that might not be the case if it continues to circulate, which (this is my add't) means more time to become more deadly to kids/young people w/ no comorbities & w/ no vaccine.
8/8 So something to consider if you are not firmly opposed to getting vaccinate or having your older kids vaccinated.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Margot Cleveland

Margot Cleveland Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @ProfMJCleveland

1 Jul
THREAD on Brnovich Voting Rights Act case. Today’s opinion was a huge victory for voting integrity. While initially I was disappointed that the court did not set forth a clear standard the court’s analysis was just as important 1/
2/ The guideposts the court laid out make clear most of the left’s complaints about time place and manner regulation of voting are bunk
3/ Properly applied it is unlikely any prevalent voting integrity restrictions would be illegal under section 2 under the supreme court to guideposts
Read 5 tweets
25 Jun
The DOJ's complaint against Georgia is surreal.... Image
2/ Image
3/ Image
Read 8 tweets
25 Jun
Re-reading BLM complaint against Trump, Barr, et. al., following IG report on Lafayette Square clearing was amusing--more humorous was reading transcript from oral argument. Rule 11 will now make for some interesting choices. @FDRLST 1/ thefederalist.com/2021/06/25/aft…
2/ And after studying transcript (link included), D.C. police did not admit during oral argument to tearing gasing protestors. That came later.
Read 4 tweets
24 Jun
DS starts @VertexPharma Trikafta today so I'm doing an experiment. DS has pretty severe aquagentic wrinkling. Here are his hands without water.
2/ After 1 minute in water.
3/ After 5 inutes in water:
Read 5 tweets
1 Jun
BREAKING: Official spokesperson from D.C. MPD confirmed in writing that MPD officers deployed tear gas on June 1, 2021. In court proceedings, MPD's brief accepted as true the Plaintiffs' allegation. 1/ thefederalist.com/2021/06/01/bow…
2/ Had the MPD succeeded on its Motion to Dismiss, it never would have been forced to reveal whether it used tear gas. Last week, @NathanBacaTV reported that MPD's attorney admitted in oral argument that MPD had used tear gas, but given stage of procedure,
3/ And fact that MPD did not admit that in its brief OR previously, that seemed unlikely.
Read 6 tweets
1 Jun
Another point re @NathanBacaTV article: wusa9.com/article/news/i… The distinction b/w clearing Lafayette Park and other areas is blurred. And from his article D.C. officials still haven't said whether tear gas used outside of Lafayette Park. Why not?
The more I think about this, the more this seems an important question: D.C. Police continue to say they did not participate in clearing of Lafayette Park, but from article D.C. officials have yet to say whether they used tear gas to clear areas outside Park. Instead, D.C. cops
2/ are trying to get the case dismissed WITHOUT that fact being disclosed, but arguing no violation of constitutional rights EVEN IF THEY used tear gas. Why is that? Why won't D.C. officials say whether tear gas used outside Lafayette Park by D.C. Police???
Read 8 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(