The American Psychological Association defines creativity as the ability to produce or develop original work, theories, techniques, or thoughts.
While this obviously applies to artistry, it can apply equally to everyday activities in which one takes existing elements and creates something newsuch as using the ingredients of sourdough bread to make the pandemic food staple.
A new study from the Paris Brain Institute at Sorbonne University decided to investigate the effect the first COVID-19 lockdown had on creativity.
To explore its impact, they conducted a French-language online survey to learn more about peoples experiences with creativity during this first lockdown in France. The studys authors hoped to reconcile the seeming paradox of heightened creativity during a time of unusual stress.A n
The studys 343 participants said they were, on average, more creative during the lockdown than during the period before.
The findings were published in the journal Frontiers in Psychology.
In addition to listing self-perceived creativity changes, or subjective creativity change (SCC), as described above, the researchers presented participants with an inventory of 28 creative activities based on existing items often used by research psychologists, including the Inventory of Creative Activities and Achievements (ICAA). These included painting, cooking, sewing, gardening, writing, and decorating, among others.
Respondents were asked if they engaged in these activities more or less during the lockdown, how often, and why they did or didnt.
The top five creative activities in which the studys respondents said they engaged in were cooking, sports and dance programs, self-help programs, and gardening.
The researchers also inquired about pandemic obstacles that had to be overcome. There was no clear indication that a higher number of obstacles hindered creativity.
The extent of obstacles encountered was high for individuals who were more creative as well as for those who were less so.
The minute you set constraints, now the creative mind gets to work on how do I achieve the goal, conditional on these constraints? said Dr. Ajay Agrawal, University of Toronto, on the Disruptors podcast.
The two greatest factors in whether a persons level of creativity during the lockdown rose or fell were emotional or affective changes andto a slightly lesser degreewhether the pandemic gave them more free time.
The degree to which an individual exhibits opennessone of the Big Five personality traitsfollowed behind as a significant factor. The authors chose openness because this is the personality trait most associated with creativity.
According to the study, previous research suggests that a positive mood is correlated to creative activity, although there is still some debate.
The authors of the study confirmed that participants affective states aligned with SCC. The descriptors they asked participants about included anxiety and stress, motivation, psychological pressure, mood, and to a lower extent, loneliness and physical constraints.
Researchers found a link between positive mood and creativity, and one between negative affective states and less creativity.
Co-first author of the study Dr. Alize Lopez-Persem, suggests:
There is some evidence in the scientific literature that you need to feel good to be creative, while other evidence points the other way. Also, it is not known in which direction this process takes place: do we feel good because we are creative, or does being creative make us happier?
Here, one of our analyses suggests that creative expression enabled individuals to better manage their negative emotions linked to confinement and therefore to feel better during this difficult period. Dr. Alize Lopez-Persem
The elimination of commuting returned hours to many people, leaving them with more free time, although this was not likely true for everyone. Parents, for example, may have had less free time with children confined at home all day.
Participants were asked about how many hours they worked, how much free time, and how much personal space they had.
The authors came to this conclusion: An increase in free time was linked to higher creativity change.
Openness is defined by Psychology Today:
Openness to experience, or simply openness, is a basic personality trait denoting receptivity to new ideas and new experiences.
The studys survey included 11 questions regarding openness, and found that this trait, too, exhibited a correlation to the SCC results. However, as Dr. Emmanuelle Volle, co-author of the study told Medical News Today:
Openness indeed correlated with our subjective creativity change score, indicating that openness played a role in the way people thought their creativity changed during the lockdown. It also correlated with the rated creativity of the activities participants performed during this period.
However, it did not really draw a line [between being creative or not] because even after correcting for Openness, our creativity change score was still positive, and similarly correlated with free time and affective factors. In other words, free time and affective factors were found related to subjective creativity changes beyond Openness, he said.
Some coronavirus-positive patients who have completed treatment of the anti-COVID drug Paxlovid are rebounding into illness, and experts are urging people to be cautious if they develop COVID-like symptoms again and become infectious.
Its unclear how often post-Paxlovid rebound occurs, but UC San Francisco Department of Medicine chair Dr. Robert Wachter said he knows of at least one person who completed Paxlovid treatment and then became infectious again, spreading the virus to other family members.
It can happen, Wachter tweeted. If you develop recurrent symptoms and have a [positive] rapid test, you are infectious. Please act accordingly.
Los Angeles County Public Health Director Barbara Ferrer said post-Paxlovid COVID-19 relapses are real.
Theyve happened in a significant enough number that theyve been noticed by lots of folks in lots of different places, she said.
In a statement on its website, the U.S Food and Drug Administration said it is aware of reports of COVID-19 symptoms returning following the completion of Paxlovid treatment. In some of these cases, patients tested negative on a direct SARS-CoV-2 viral test and then tested positive again, the FDA said.
The agency said that in the Paxlovid clinical trial, there have been some patients about 1% to 2% who tested negative and then became positive. The finding wasnt only in people who took Paxlovid; it also occurred in those who took the placebo.
Yet, judging by all the anecdotes, rebound sure seems more common than that were waiting for good data, Wachter tweeted. Wachter suggested that a person who has completed a course of Paxlovid and then tests positive again should be considered infectious.
Paxlovids clinical trial data were collected when the Delta variant of the coronavirus dominated nationwide, before the rise of the far-more-transmissible Omicron family thats circulating now.
The question is, Is this more common with Omicron? Were actually doing a lot of work right now to try to sort that out. Were talking to health systems, getting real world experience data, said Dr. Ashish Jha, the White House COVID-19 response coordinator.
But even if the rebound rate has remained unchanged, the number of people affected could seem far larger now based on wider use of the drug.
If you have 20,000 people getting Paxlovid every day ... even if it was only still 2%, that would mean 400 people are having rebound every day. So it is hard to know exactly how often it happens, Jha said during a briefing Wednesday.
However, he also noted that the people who have that rebound are not getting particularly sick, are not ending up in the hospital.
If the goal of this treatment, which it was, was to prevent hospitalizations and deaths, it is doing that incredibly well, he said.
Those who wish to be especially careful about the risk of infecting others may should consider wearing a mask in all indoor settings, even around family members of the same household, for a few more days or perhaps a week once the Paxlovid treatment is complete, Wachter said.
And Dr. Rochelle Walensky, director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said her agency would recommend putting your mask back on should symptoms recur.
Even a rapid negative test after completing the five-day course of Paxlovid might provide false assurance that a person is not contagious. A negative rapid test result suggests a person is probably not infectious, but theres still a slight chance perhaps 1% that a person can test negative and still be contagious, Wachter wrote.
Wearing masks for a few more days seems reasonable if youre being careful, he said.
Post-Paxlovid COVID-19 rebound still seems to be unusual, Wachter said, and is not harmful to the recovering patient. Wachter said news about the rebound should not discourage people from taking Paxlovid, given its high rate of efficacy against severe illness and death.
Data has shown that Paxlovid, manufactured by Pfizer, reduces the risk of hospitalization or death from COVID-19 by 89% among higher-risk adults who have not been hospitalized.
In addition, its plausible, but not proven, that lowering viral load quickly (which Paxlovid does) might lower the risk of long COVID, and make people less infectious, Wachter wrote.
The FDA agreed that the reports of post-Paxlovid COVID-19 rebound dont change scientists overall view of the drug being highly effective.
Most importantly, there was no increased occurrence of hospitalization or death or development of drug resistance, the FDA said. These reports, then, do not change the conclusions from the Paxlovid clinical trial which demonstrated a marked reduction in hospitalization and death.
The FDA said patients should wear a mask and stay home and isolate if they have any symptoms of COVID-19, regardless of whether they have been given an antiviral drug such as Paxlovid.
Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nations top infectious disease expert, said Wednesday that the National Institutes of Health also are looking to study whether a longer course of Paxlovid is needed.
A report by scientists at UC San Diego posted online Wednesday analyzed the case history of a traveler who returned to the U.S. following a trip to South Africa and had recurrent COVID-19 after completing a Paxlovid course. The scientists said the most likely possibility for the recurrent symptoms was insufficient drug exposure.
Among those observing the rebound was Dr. Paul Sax, an infectious disease expert at Harvard Medical School, who recounted in a recent blog post how a patient with COVID-19 rapidly recovered after taking Paxlovid but a week later called him back saying shed relapsed. Although the symptoms werent as bad as her initial illness, rapid test results showed she was clearly positive again.
Her biggest concern was getting back out in the world without infecting someone. She really wasnt that sick; she just wanted advice about when she could return to work and start socializing again, Sax wrote. Avoid close contact with others until that test clears, I said.
The patient completely recovered, and she began testing negative a few days later, Sax wrote.
Is COVID endemic? Here's what health experts are saying.
How soon could we see COVID-19 go from pandemic to endemic? Here's what we know now.
Just the FAQs, USA TODAY
COVID-19 infections continue to rise, driven by new and more infectious omicron subvariants, waning immunity from both vaccines and previous infections and fewer people masking up, health officials said at a White House briefing Wednesday.
About a third of Americans now live in an area with medium or high COVID-19 rates, withreported cases up26% from last week, said Dr. RochelleWalensky, director of theCenters for Disease Control an Prevention.
On average, about 3,000 Americans are being hospitalized per dayand 275 are dying. Walensky urged people in communities with higher infection and hospitalization rates to protect themselves by masking in indoor public placesand to get a booster shot if vaccinated and to get vaccinated if they're not.
Areas of increased infection and hospitalization include the Northeast and the eastern corridor, as well as parts ofthe upper Midwest.
"We've always said, put your mask aside when infection rates are low and pick it up again when infection rates are higher," she said.
WHAT IS YOUR COMMUNITY'S COVID-19 LEVEL?
A rising tide of omicron subvariantsis in part behind the rise, said Dr. Anthony Fauci, chief medical advisertoPresident Joe Biden.
There are now at least four omicron subvariants circulating in the United States. BA.2 is dominant, making up 50.9% of cases but BA.2.12.1 is almost equal to it with 47.5%.The newer strains are even more infectious than previous strains, adding to the increase in cases.
He urged people who test positive for COVID-19 to reach out to their health care providers "as soon as possible" to see if atreatment is appropriate for them, as treatments work better if begun quickly.
The administration's continuingpush for boosters and vaccination comes as a paper published Wednesday in the journal "Nature" showeda case of omicron in unvaccinated people provides very little immunity against other variants of the virus that causes COVID-19.
"Because omicron is so infective, we were really hoping that it would help bring us closer to 'herd immunity,'" said Dr. Melanie Ott, a virologist at the Gladstone Institutes in San Francisco and lead author on the paper.
Instead, thefindings showed people infected with omicron onlyget protection against infections fromomicron subvariants, not infections fromotherstrains of the virus. So far, there have been five main variants, alpha, beta, gamma, delta and omicron.
That's bad news for anyone who expects arecent case of COVID-19 will protect them against future cases of the rapidly mutating virus. But the good news, said Ott, is if they get vaccinated they have a shot at "super immunity."
People who'vehad omicron and also been vaccinated had the ability to neutralize all tested variants, not just omicron subvariants, the research showed.
"If you had omicron, why miss out on the benefit of getting that great enhanced immunity from infection plus vaccination?" she said.
A new generation of COVID-19 vaccines are expected this fall or winter, saidDr. Ashish Jha, the White House's new coronavirus response coordinator. He and others are talking with Congressto ensure funding is available so everyone who wants them can have them.
"We do not have the resources to do that right now," he said.
Jha is on leave from his position as dean of the Brown University School of Public Health and began his newWhite House position in March. He said he was spending "a lot of time up on the Hill" to convince Congress to authorize more emergency aid money for COVID-19, an effort which has thus far failed as Congress wrestles with more funding for Ukraine.
The same goes for promising new treatmentsseveral companies are now working on, he said.
"No one in the United States is in negotiations with these companies for these treatments because we don't have the resources. The companies know that, and therefore we can't ensure that Americans get access to the next generation of therapies," he said.
The COVID-19 briefing was the first the White Househas held in six weeks and also the first led by Jha.
Testing positive for COVID-19 raises a lot of questions. What should you do next? Who do you need to tell of your positive status? And, once the dust settles, what should you eat when you have COVID?
Official guidance around COVID-19 largely revolves around things like testing, isolation, and keeping tabs on your symptoms. Theres really nothing out there about a COVID diet, either to try to speed up your symptoms or make you feel better. But COVID-19 can come with some unpleasant symptoms like nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea that suggest you might want to alter your go-to eating habits.
So, what should you do diet-wise after you test positive for COVID? Heres what infectious disease experts recommend.
Its important to get this out of the way upfront: What you eat is unlikely to speed up the course of your illness or what kind of symptoms you experience.
Right now, theres no data that show that eating special types of food or taking certain vitamins for COVID-19 like vitamin D, zinc, or vitamin C are going to influence the course of your COVID, says Thomas Russo, M.D., professor and chief of infectious disease at the University at Buffalo in New York. But, he says, people are still looking at this. The absence of data doesnt exclude the possibility that some dietary modifications or enhancements will benefit you.
There has been some data to suggest that having certain levels of vitamin D can prevent you from getting COVID and even lessen the odds youll have a severe case if you happen to get infected. But theres no evidence that supplementation once youve been infected has a benefit, says Amesh A. Adalja, M.D., a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security. Even things like vitamin C are unlikely to make an impact, he says, adding, there is no evidence of benefits for vitamin C supplementation in people with sufficient levels.
You may have also heard that fermented foods can boost your immune system. And, while research has found that people who eat fermented foods have a more diverse gut microbiome, which can impact your immune response, its also unlikely to help once youre actually sick, says Richard Watkins, M.D., an infectious disease physician in Akron, Ohio, and a professor of internal medicine at the Northeast Ohio Medical University.
It really depends on your symptoms. At baseline, it is important to eat a normal diet and keep well-hydrated during your illness as fever can be dehydrating, Dr. Adalja says.
Youll want to eat plenty of fruits and vegetables, along with lean proteins to make sure youre meeting all of your nutritional needs and keeping your body in good working order, Dr. Russo says.
Beyond that, though, it really depends on your symptoms. If youre struggling with gastrointestinal issues, Dr. Russo says you could try the BRAT diet (Bananas, Rice, Applesauce, Toast) to see if it helps. But Dr. Adalja says that you really should just eat whatever is tolerable.
Another big potential symptom is losing your sense of taste and smell. If that happens to you, Dr. Watkins recommends still trying to eat a nutritious diet, even though you may not feel like eating much. It is important to maintain an adequate diet with enough calories, he says.
You can also throw scent training into the mix in an effort to recover your senses, Dr. Russo says. In case youre not familiar with the practice, scent training involves smelling certain strong scents, like cinnamon and citrus, and imagining what they smell like while you inhale. Studies have found it can help people recover their sense of smell and taste somewhat, but research is ongoing.
Again, its unlikely that any particular foods will influence the course of your illness, but eating certain foods could make you feel less-than-optimal while your body is fighting off the infection. Fast foods, fried foods, and things that are high in added sugar may simply make you feel crummy on top of already feeling bad from having COVID, Dr. Russo says. They may even increase inflammation in your body, although the occasional fried food or treat is unlikely to do that in the context of an otherwise healthy diet, says Jessica Cording, R.D., C.D.N., a dietitian and health coach, and author of The Little Book of Game-Changers.
Its also a good idea to steer clear of alcohol, Dr. Russo says, to prevent you from getting dehydrated and contributing to more bodily inflammation. You also dont want to run the risk of overdoing it and feeling even worse the next day, he says.
And, theres also this to consider, per Dr. Russo: Doctors cant rule out the possibility that alcohol could impact your bodys ability to fight infection. Better to be safe and give your body every edge to help clear the infection, he says.
This article is accurate as of press time. However, as the COVID-19 pandemic rapidly evolves and the scientific communitys understanding of the novel coronavirus develops, some of the information may have changed since it was last updated. While we aim to keep all of our stories up to date, please visit online resources provided by the CDC, WHO, and your local public health department to stay informed on the latest news. Always talk to your doctor for professional medical advice.
This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io
Media Advisory
Thursday, May 19, 2022
People who reported in a survey that they felt worried, depressed or lonely had a greater chance of being hospitalized after a COVID-19 diagnosis, suggests a study funded by the National Institutes of Health. The study, which analyzed survey data from more than 54,000 female nurses and their offspring, was conducted by Andrea L. Roberts, Ph.D., of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, and colleagues. It appears in Psychological Medicine.
Between April 2020 and April 2021, slightly more than 3,600 study participants tested positive for SAR-CoV-2 infection. Those who reported chronic (long-term) depression before the pandemic were 72% more likely to be hospitalized after their diagnosis for COVID-19. Those who scored high on likely indicators of depression (probable depression) when they began the study were 81% more likely to be hospitalized than those who did not. Being very worried about COVID-19 was associated with a 79% increase in risk for hospitalization. Moreover, those who reported persistent feelings of loneliness were 81% more likely to be hospitalized than those who did not. Feelings of anxiety and stress were not associated with a higher risk for hospitalization.
The authors said their findings suggest that psychological risk factors may increase hospitalization risk as much as physical risk factors, such as high cholesterol and hypertension. They called for additional research to determine if treatment to reduce depression and other forms of psychological distress, in addition to standard treatments, might reduce the severity of COVID-19.
NIH funding for the study was provided by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD), National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, and National Cancer Institute.
Valerie Maholmes, Ph.D., chief of the NICHD Pediatric Trauma and Critical Illness Branch, is available for comment.
Wang, S. Depression, worry, and loneliness are associated with subsequent risk of hospitalization for COVID-19: A prospective study. Psychological Medicine. 2022.
About the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD): NICHD leads research and training to understand human development, improve reproductive health, enhance the lives of children and adolescents, and optimize abilities for all. For more information, visit https://www.nichd.nih.gov.
About the National Institutes of Health (NIH):NIH, the nation's medical research agency, includes 27 Institutes and Centers and is a component of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. NIH is the primary federal agency conducting and supporting basic, clinical, and translational medical research, and is investigating the causes, treatments, and cures for both common and rare diseases. For more information about NIH and its programs, visit www.nih.gov.
NIHTurning Discovery Into Health
###
The number of pediatric hepatitis cases has risen to 450 globally.
Dr. Matt Binnicker, an expert in the diagnosis of infectious diseases, provides an update on the global outbreak of hepatitis in young children, and discusses the possible causes being investigated by scientists around the world, including the potential role of Covid-19.
During the fall of 2021, physicians in Alabama began to observe an unusual increase in the number of young children diagnosed with hepatitis - inflammation of the liver that may become a serious, life-threatening disease. At first, 5 children were admitted to Childrens of Alabama with symptoms of hepatitis, including yellowing of the eyes, jaundice, and an enlarged liver. Over the next 3 months, 4 more children were diagnosed, but each from a different part of the state and with no apparent epidemiologic link. The only common thread was most had experienced a gastrointestinal or upper respiratory illness in the days preceding their hospital admission, and each of the patients tested positive for adenovirus.
Fast-forward to May 2022, and the number of pediatric hepatitis cases has risen to 450 globally. Eleven children have died. In the United States alone, 109 cases across 25 states have been reported, with more than 90% of children requiring hospitalization, 14% requiring liver transplant, and 5 dying. While the exact cause remains a mystery, more than 50% of children have tested positive for adenovirus, raising suspicion that this common viral infection may be linked to the outbreak. But researchers are also investigating other potential causes, like Covid-19, or the possibility that Covid-19 precautions have decreased natural immunity to common viruses, such as adenovirus.
What is Adenovirus?
Adenoviruses are named from the tissue from which they were first isolated - the adenoids, which is the tonsil and lymphatic tissue where the nose and throat meet. There are more than 50 different types of adenoviruses that can cause disease in humans, and infection with one or multiple types is extremely common. Infection usually results from direct contact with respiratory droplets coughing or sneezing or through the fecal-oral route (touching your mouth with unwashed, contaminated hands). In those with a normal immune system, infection generally results in a mild or asymptomatic disease course, with common symptoms including a respiratory illness (cough, sore throat, runny nose), conjunctivitis (eye infection), or gastroenteritis (diarrhea, vomiting). Historically, adenovirus infection in otherwise healthy people has not been associated with liver inflammation.
Is Adenovirus causing a global outbreak of hepatitis in children?
Because many of the early cases of hepatitis occurred in children who had recently experienced a respiratory or gastrointestinal illness, specific testing for adenovirus was performed and the virus was identified in the blood of these patients. Of the 450 total cases to date, approximately 70% have tested positive for adenovirus, and additional studies have shown the majority of these to be adenovirus serotype 41, which is commonly associated with diarrhea and vomiting in infected individuals. Although these results seem to strongly suggest an association between adenovirus and hepatitis, liver biopsies performed in a subset of cases have not shown evidence of adenovirus infection, thereby prolonging the mystery as to the cause of the outbreak.
Could Covid-19 be behind the outbreak of child hepatitis?
Due to the lack of documented adenovirus infection in all reported child hepatitis cases, a significant amount of effort is focused on investigating other potential causes. One possibility is that Covid-19, along with infection by another common virus like adenovirus may result in liver disease. In some patients, Covid-19 may hyper-stimulate the immune system and increase the odds that a subsequent viral infection could trigger damaging inflammation.
A second possibility is that Covid-19 alone may be behind the rise in child hepatitis cases. Covid-19 has been associated with a condition called multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C), and a recent study found that children with Covid-19 are at increased risk for liver disease. However, only 18% of the child hepatitis cases have shown laboratory evidence of active SARS-CoV-2 infection. Ongoing studies are investigating whether the children have Covid-19 antibodies, which would suggest prior infection and strengthen the case that Covid-19 may be a contributor.
A third hypothesis is that the significant reduction in adenoviral infections during the Covid-19 pandemic due to precautionary measures such as masking, distancing, and lockdowns has resulted in decreased natural immunity in young children, increasing their susceptibility to infection and potentially more severe disease. Although possible, this hypothesis seems unlikely, as cases have occurred in children up to the age of 16. Older children are much more likely to have been exposed to adenoviruses, and therefore, possess a level of natural immunity.
Over the next several weeks, new data from a case-controlled study in Britain should provide clearer insight into whether adenovirus infection is an incidental finding or has a causal relationship with child hepatitis. Until then, parents and caregivers should be on the lookout for signs and symptoms of hepatitis in young children, including fever, abdominal pain, and yellowing of the eyes and skin.
Full coverage and live updates on the Coronavirus
How risky is being indoors with our 10-year-old granddaughter without masks? We have plans to have birthday tea together. Are we safe?
That question, from a woman named Debby in California, is just one of hundreds Ive received from concerned people who are worried about COVID-19. Im an epidemiologist and one of the women behind Dear Pandemic, a science communication project that has delivered practical pandemic advice on social media since the beginning of the pandemic.
How risky is swim team? How risky is it to go to my orthodontist appointment? How risky is going to the grocery store with a mask on if no one else is wearing one and my father is an organ transplant recipient? How risky is it to have a wedding with 200 people, indoors, and the reception hall has a vaulted ceiling? And on and on.
These questions are hard to answer, and even when we try, the answers are unsatisfying.
So in early April 2022, when Anthony Fauci, the presidents chief medical advisor, told Americans that from here on out, each of us is going to have to do our own personal risk assessment, I put my head down on my desk.
Individualized risk assessment is not a reasonable ask, even for someone who does risk assessment for a living, let alone for the rest of us. Its impossible to evaluate our own risk for any given situation, and the impossibility of the task can make us feel like giving up entirely. So instead of doing that, I suggest focusing on risk reduction. Reframing in this way brings us back to the realm of what we can control and to the tried and true evidence-based strategies: wearing masks, getting vaccinated and boosted, avoiding indoor crowds and improving ventilation.
A cascade of unknowable variables
In my experience, nonscientists and epidemiologists use the word risk to mean different things. To most people, risk means a quality something like danger or vulnerability.
When epidemiologists and other scientists use the word risk, though, were talking about a math problem. Risk is the probability of a particular outcome, in a particular population at a particular time. To give a simple example, the chances that a coin flip will be heads is 1 in 2.
As public health researchers, we often offer risk information in this format: The probability that an unvaccinated person will die of COVID-19 if they catch it is about 1 in 200. As many as 1 in 8 people with COVID-19 will have symptoms persisting for weeks or months after recovering.
To embark on your personal risk assessment, as Fauci casually suggested, you first have to decide what outcome youre talking about. People often arent very specific when they consider risk in a qualitative sense; they tend to lump a lot of different risks together. But risk is not a general concept. Its always the risk of a specific outcome.
Lets think about Debby. First, theres the risk that she will be exposed to COVID-19 during tea; this depends on her granddaughter. Where does she live? How many kids at her school have COVID-19 this week? Will she take a rapid test before she comes over? These factors all influence the granddaughters risk of exposing Debby to COVID-19, but I dont know any of them and likely neither does Debby. Given the lack of systematic testing, I have no idea how many people in my own community have COVID-19 right now. At this point, our best guess at community rates is literally in the toilet monitoring sewage for the coronavirus.
If I assume that Debbys granddaughter does have COVID-19 on the appointed day, I can start thinking about Debbys downstream risks: whether shell get COVID-19 from her granddaughter; the chances that shell be hospitalized and that shell die; and the probability that shell have long COVID. I can also consider the risk that Debby will catch COVID-19 and then give it to others, perpetuating an outbreak. If she gets sick, the whole hierarchy of risks comes into play for everyone Debby sees after she is infected.
Finally, there are competing risks. If Debby decides to skip the party, there may be risks to her own or her granddaughters mental health or their relationship. Many skipped celebrations in many families could negatively affect the economy. People could lose business; they could lose their jobs.
Each of these probabilities is influenced by a cascade of fickle conditions. Some of the factors that shape risks are in your control. For example, I decided to get vaccinated and boosted. Therefore, Im less likely to end up in the hospital and to die if I get COVID-19. But some risks are not in your control age, other health conditions, gender, race and the behavior of the people all around you. And many, many of the risk factors are simply unknowns. Well never be able to accurately evaluate the whole volatile landscape of risk for a particular situation and come up with a number.
Taking charge of what you can
There will never be a situation where I can say to Debby: The risk is 1 in 20. And even if I could, Im not sure it would be helpful. Most people have a very hard time understanding probabilities they encounter every day, such as the chance that it will rain.
The statistical risk of a particular outcome doesnt address Debbys underlying question: Are we safe?
Nothing is entirely safe. If you want my professional opinion on whether its safe to walk down the sidewalk, I will have to say no. Bad things happen. I know someone who tore a tendon in her hand while putting a fitted sheet on a bed last week.
Its much more practical to ask: What can I do to reduce the risk?
Focusing on actions that reduce risk frees us from obsessing over unanswerable questions with useless answers so we can focus on what is within our control. I will never know precisely how risky Debbys tea is, but I do know how to make the risks smaller.
I suspect the question folks are really asking is: How can I manage the risks? I like this question better because it has an answer: You should do what you can. If its reasonable to wear a mask, wear one. Yes, even if it isnt required. If its reasonable to do an at-home antigen test before you see your vulnerable grandparents, do that. Get vaccinated and boosted. Tell your friends and family that you did, and why. Choose outdoor gatherings. Open a window.
Constantly assessing and reassessing risks has given many people decision fatigue. I feel that too. But you dont need to recalibrate risks of everything, every day, for every variant, because the strategies to reduce risk remain the same. Reducing risk even if its just a little bit is better than doing nothing.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
The pandemic and its attendant anxiety, boredom, and loneliness have not been good for people who struggle with alcohol use. According to a new study published in JAMA Network Open, alcohol-related deaths among U.S adults ages 25 and up increased 25% in 2020, and 22% in 2021, compared to average annual deaths from 2012 to 2019.
Led by Dr. Yee Hui Yeo, an internal medicine physician at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles, the study relied on a massive database maintained by the U.S. Centers for Disease and Control and Prevention (CDC) that registers nearly all deaths in the U.S. and their causes. From 2012 to 2019, about 11 to 15 annual U.S. deaths per 100,000, among adults who were at least 25 years old, were caused by alcohol-use disorder (AUD). But during 2020, that number rose to an average of 19 deaths per 100,000; in 2021, it was 20.
Not all groups were affected equally. Men and women were similar in alcohol-related mortality, with both showing a 25% increase in 2020. Age was a much more significant factor. Far and away, the hardest-hit age group was the youngest measured25 to 44 year oldsamong whom deaths rose by 40% in 2020 and 33% in 2021. In the 45-64 year old age group, deaths increased 22% and 17%, respectively; for those 65 and older, the increased mortality rates were 17% and 22%.
Isolation, stress, and the accompanying urge to self-medicate with alcohol were not the only reasons the researchers believe the death rates climbed. Across the nation, visits to doctors fell during lockdowns, exacerbating health problems for people suffering from all manner of conditions, including AUD. Therapy groups to help treat substance dependence were unavailable (or less available) during COVID-19 lockdowns, although some did move online.
Alcoholics Anonymous and rehab centers, in which it is common to have shared rooms, were closed down during the pandemic, said Yeo in an email to TIME. Even when they reopened, the capacity was reduced. Additionally, individuals with AUD may have avoided going to detoxification centers due to the fear of contracting COVID-19.
The actual numbers may be worse than what the study shows, since AUD is often overlooked as a contributing factor when there is a more-immediate cause of death like heart attack or stroke. We know that alcohol use disorder is often under-reported, Yeo said in a statement that accompanied the release of the study, so actual mortality rates related to alcohol may be even higher.
Going forward, Yeo expects that these numbers will decline. COVID-19 vaccinations, the pandemic-era expansion of Medicaid benefits, and the reopening of societyincluding homeless shelters, rehab centers, and social support groupsshould all help to ease the number of alcohol-related deaths, he says. But lagging indicators of alcohol abuse may still keep death rates above average for a while.
There may, Yeo told TIME, be a rising tide of AUD-related complications such as liver disease, mental health issues and cardiovascular disease during the post-pandemic era.
More Must-Read Stories From TIME
Write to Jeffrey Kluger at jeffrey.kluger@time.com.
Those in need of COVID-19 treatments can now find them at The Giant Companys in-store pharmacies.
The Carlisle chain announced May 19 its Giant and Martins stores have Molnupiravir and Paxlovid in stock. The antiviral medications are used to treat COVID-19 and must be prescribed by a customers healthcare provider.
Paxlovid, a five-day course of pills from Pfizer, has become the go-to option against COVID-19 because of its at-home convenience and impressive results in heading off severe disease. Paxlovid has been proven to be nearly 90% effective at cutting the risks of getting hospitalized or dying because of COVID.
Molnupiravir, developed by Ridgeback Biotherapeutics in partnership with Merck, is a series of capsules taken over five days.
The treatments are free for everyone regardless of insurance status or coverage. Customers will be asked for their insurance card to cover the dispensing fee, but those without insurance will be given the product free of charge.
Fox News medical contributor Dr. Marty Makary says the coronavirus has reached the endemic phase.
While face masks arent mandatory on public transportation or in related transportation hubs, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends COVID-19 testing before travel.
The national health agency suggests people "consider" getting a viral test laboratory, rapid point-of-care or self-tests done "as close to the time of departure as possible," so travelers will know if they have a "current" coronavirus infection before they depart.
These tests, if completed by a concerned party, should be done no more than three days before travel, according to the CDC.
Although pre-travel testing isnt mandated on most forms of domestic transportation, the CDCs guidance has been updated at a time when coronavirus infections are on the rise in the U.S.
CDC 'COVID-19 BY COUNTY' TOOL HELPS YOU LOOK UP GUIDELINES BY LOCAL AREAS
Johns Hopkins Universitys COVID-19 Dashboard reported more than 100,000 coronavirus cases in the U.S. on Wednesday, May 18.
People can get tested for COVID-19 with viral laboratory and rapid point-of-care tests at health care centers or with self-tests that can be done at home or on-the-go. (istock)
Infections had been on a decline since the end of March but are now increasing steadily.
"Given the the spread of infections thats happening across the country, we know [the] use of rapid tests is a very effective way of keeping infections down," said Dr. Ashish Jha, coordinator of the White Houses COVID-19 Task Force, at Wednesday's press briefing.
"You can test yourself before you go to a large gathering, before you go visit someone vulnerable," Jha continued. "Theres very good evidence that the use of rapid tests can reduce the amount of infections thats happening out there. So this is one of the tools we have, one of the capabilities we have."
SHOULD YOU STILL WEAR A MASK TODAY? WHAT ALL OF US SHOULD KNOW NOW
Outside of testing, another pre-travel tip officials at the CDC offer travelers during the lingering pandemic include checking their intended destinations infection risks with the CDCs online COVID-19 Community Level tool, which identifies infection risks weekly by county.
The CDC also recommends checking mandates about mask wear, vaccination, testing and quarantining from local governments and airlines. Travelers with medical conditions or who have prescribed medications that weaken immune systems are advised to consult their doctors before they make their journeys.
Travel is not recommended by the CDCs standards if a person shows COVID-19 symptoms (regardless of vaccination status) or receives a positive viral test.
If a positive COVID-19 test is received, the CDC says self-quarantining should be done for "a full 10 days." Travel can usually be resumed after this point.
COVID-19 FACE MASKS GIVEN RISE OF OMICRON SUBVARIANTS: WHAT TO KNOW
People who have been in close contact with someone who received a positive COVID-19 test are advised to quarantine for five days and practice coronavirus safety precautions if travel is necessary after six to 10 days of exposure, which could include viral testing and mask wear.
Some travelers who have been in close contact with someone who has COVID-19 can skip testing and isolation if they tested positive for the virus within the past 90 days, but the CDC still recommends mask wear when in public or optional viral tests if symptoms start to show up.
As of April 18, 2022, masks are no longer required on public transportation conveyances and transportation hubs in the U.S., which includes airports and planes. (iStock)
The CDC reiterates that it recommends "well-fitting" masks or respirators for people over the age of two "in indoor areas of public transportation (such as airplanes, trains, buses, ferries) and transportation hubs (such as airports, stations, and seaports), especially in locations that are crowded or poorly ventilated such as airport jetways."
The agency also urges the public to be "up to date" with COVID-19 vaccines before traveling.
GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE
On Tuesday, May 10, the TSA announced that its preparing for a "busy summer travel season."
The security agency explained that daily passenger volumes have increased at checkpoints nationwide, and it anticipates this volume could match or "occasionally exceed those of 2019 for the first time since the pandemic began."
