They ranged in age from 19 to 53, weekend warriors who likely grew up playing hockey on ponds, in youth leagues and on high school teams. Even as adults, they couldnt leave the ice behind. Yet despite their combined athleticism and skill, they were no match for the coronavirus.
Their fateful match-up occurred on June 16 in Tampa, Fla. For 60 minutes, the 22 men took turns grunting, sweating, spitting and checking their way up and down the ice in a bid to reach a hard rubber puck and control its trajectory with a stick.
Five days later, 14 of 22 players had developed symptoms of COVID-19. A 15th person, a staffer at the ice rink, also became ill. Thirteen of these 15 people went on to test positive for a coronavirus infection. The other two were not tested.
All of those sickened appear to have been infected by a single person who didnt develop any outward symptoms of COVID-19 until the day after he had suited up for the evening game.
None of the remaining eight players exhibited symptoms of COVID-19, so none were tested for infection. But if they had been, the documented infection rate might have been even higher.
For hockey players eager for a chance to lace up their skates, hit the ice and escape the pandemic for a while, the implications are grim.
The ice rink provides a venue that is likely well suited to COVID-19 transmission as an indoor environment where deep breathing occurs, and persons are in close proximity to one another, three members of the Florida Department of Health wrote in a report published this week by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
One of the authors, David Atrubin, identified himself as a hockey player in the Tampa area, ruling out antihockey bias as a likely motive for the finding.
The case highlights several characteristics of the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus that have made it so difficult to control.
The first is the role of silent spreaders. The index patient who developed a fever, cough, sore throat and headache the day after the game _ by all accounts felt fine on the evening he showed up at the rink to play.
Researchers have found that people infected with the coronavirus appear to be contagious starting roughly 2 1/2 days before their symptoms become evident. Indeed, one study published in the journal Nature found the peak of this viral shedding to come roughly 18 hours before symptoms set in.
The index patient spread the virus to eight of his 10 teammates, five of 11 players on the opposing team, and the rink staffer. (Neither of the two referees became ill.) Once they were infected, it would take an average of four to five days (and as long as 14 days) for the next round of victims to become sick. In that time, each is likely to have spread the coronavirus silently to others. (The Florida health officials did not report on cases beyond those tied directly to the game.)
Meanwhile, some of the eight players who never became sick might themselves have harbored the virus and spread it to others under the radar. Since they were not tested, theres no way to know.
The report also underscores a point on which scientists and public health officials have gone back and forth since early in the pandemic: That in the right conditions, the coronavirus appears to spread quite efficiently from one person to another through the air.
Thats especially true when individuals who are not wearing masks are standing close to _ or, in the case of hockey, checking, bumping, shouldering and driving to the net in close contact with other people.
None of the Tampa hockey players wore cloth face coverings during the game or when using their separate locker rooms. While playing, some used face-protecting metal cages or plastic half-shields. But those are better at guarding against a raised stick or a flying puck than coronavirus particles in the air.
While so-called aerosol transmission has long been a suspected factor in spread, it was not until this month that the CDC acknowledged those particles might be playing a key role in the pandemic.
U.S. health officials have long warned that an infected persons sneeze or cough might infect people at very close range. They also focused on the threat posed by droplets from those coughs and sneezes that land on doorknobs, handrails and other high-touch surfaces a threat that can be countered with frequent hand-washing and sanitizer use.
But despite evidence from super-spreader events in meatpacking plants, choir practices and high-intensity fitness classes, they resisted the growing surmise that enough virus to make someone sick could be expelled in the breath of an infected person, and then linger long enough in the air to be sucked in by another person.
In that June hockey game, droplets both large and small likely conspired to create a super-spreader event.
Hockey is mostly played in indoor rinks that are cavernous and open. But in places like steamy Tampa, ventilation from outside would mean an unwelcome loss of the cool air that helps maintain the ice.
Amateur teams typically play three periods that last 15 to 20 minutes each, alternating ice time with jostling against teammates on a bench within a plexiglass enclosure. As they jump on and off the ice, players tend to spit and expel mucus. The exertion of skating and either disrupting or fending off opposing players causes heavy breathing. Scrums and pile-ups in corners, where the puck often ends up, are common.
All of that happens in a space measuring 200 feet by 85 feet, surrounded by plexiglass for the safety of spectators. And thats before the spitting, shouting and shared surfaces players encounter in the locker room.
This game involved a limited number of players. Yet it appears to satisfy the criteria for a super-spreader event a single assembly of people capable of activating a wide net of infections that can quickly become too large for local public health authorities to track and contain.
The account was published in Fridays edition of the CDCs Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report.
Previous
Next
Holidays are usually for gatherings but many get-togethers are complicated or canceled because of COVID-19. USA TODAY
Americans would love to go on vacation. They're just not sure they shouldactually go.
Two surveys found many travelersexpress hesitation during the coronavirus pandemicabout taking a trip.
Sixty-seven percent of those responding to an AAA Travel survey released Thursday say they are uncertainabout whether to take avacation.
Online booking site Travelocity found 57% of Americans say they won't travel for the year-end holidays this year.
The findings are in line with advice from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which offers a worldmap that indicates thecoronavirus is a threat in just about every country, including the USA.
The AAA survey points to a trend that has become a theme of travel since the pandemic startedcausing broad shutdowns in March more trips by car, often to outdoor destinations and planned days or a week, not months, ahead of time.
About 80% of vacation trips will be by car, and places "known for outdoor recreation and socially distanced fun" will be particularly popular, AAA says.
As if to prove the point, two new outdoor-oriented destinations show up on AAA's list of most popular driving vacation destinations. Keystone, South Dakota, gateway to Mount Rushmore, takessixth place. Colorado, the Rocky Mountain State, adds Colorado Springs in 9th place.
The top 10 are:
Trips that allow people to take advantage of the great outdoors are particularly appealing this fall," Paula Twidale, senior vice president of AAA Travel, said in a statement.
Families are open to vacations at the end of the year, but are wary of the coronavirus. Most of those who take a trip will go by car. Here's how it was done 70 years ago when families loaded up the station wagon.(Photo: Ford, Ford)
She cited state and national parks, beaches and gardens as the kind of COVID-19-safe attractions that are popular.
The Travelocity survey found 25% ofrespondents surveyed in mid-September had planned to take avacation by the end of the year.
With the coronavirus pandemic, it is harder to go on vacation. Here are some ways to feel like you're on vacation by continuing to sit on your couch. USA TODAY
Despite the general trend toward booking trips on short notice, Travelocity found about 60% of those planning Thanksgiving or December holiday trips planned to book by the end of September.Those planning travelsaid they had already made travel arrangements.
"It's going to be a nontraditional holiday season this year, so families are gearing up to make the most of it by planning a holiday away from home and using their vacation days to travel,"Katie Junod, Travelocity's general manager, said in a statement.
Autoplay
Show Thumbnails
Show Captions
Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/2020/10/15/coronavirus-travel-surveys-find-americans-want-go-fear-covid-19/3647668001/
MATHEWS COUNTY, Va. (WAVY) Multiple studies show coronavirus numbers are on the rise for people in their 20s.
WAVY.com spoke with one 26-year-old from Mathews County who says the road to recovering from COVID-19 was quite a journey.
At the time I caught COVID, I was staying with my grandparents to take care of my grandmother who had just fallen and fractured a rib. I was there for about a month and was getting ready to go back to my normal life when I caught COVID, said Taylor OBier.
OBier, a former WAVY employee, says she and her parents did everything they could to prevent her grandparents from catching coronavirus. They ran errands for her grandparents, got their groceries, and prepared their meals so they didnt have to leave their house. Then, something happened OBier couldnt prevent.
I also found out about that time that a family member who had been around me had gotten COVID.
OBiers mind raced.
My grandma has breathing trouble as it is. My granddaddy has blood cancer. So its just like the two worst people to have COVID and then the place that I wanted COVID to stay away from the most was the place that I got it and it was brought into. So not only was I kind of fighting it myself, but I was scared to death that my grandfather was going to have extreme complications with it.
Shortly after coming in contact with the family member who tested positive for coronavirus, OBier says she got a headache that wouldnt go away. Then, the fever and chills started.
A first coronavirus test in July came back negative.
Which was so crazy to me because I knew that I had it. I knew that I had been in contact with somebody. I knew that I had all the symptoms, because a week in, thats when the fever was really bad, and the fatigue, I mean I slept, oh my gosh, I slept probably 12 hours a day. Each day was kind of crazy, zero energy. Zero appetite.
OBier decided she needed to take another coronavirus test.
I went and got tested at a different doctors office, I guess maybe more for my peace of mind than anything, to confirm you definitely have it, but also, other people around me. When I told them it came back negative and that was definitely false, they were like, Are you sure? So I guess it was kind of for other people, too, but also just for the contact tracing and stuff to make that a little easier because if Im coming back negative, theyre not reporting that to the state.
The test results from that second coronavirus test came back positive.
After about a week I was like, Im good. This is gone. Its out of my system. I felt really good for a day, and then the next day I woke up and thats when I felt it deep in my chest, and its a very different feeling than any other congestion that Ive had. I expected it to feel the same, but you can tell that its much deeper which is much more frightening obviously. What scared me the most was my shortness of breath. I remember getting up one morning and washing the dishes and that took me out of breath.
OBier says she has no pre-existing medical condition. She says her colds usually only last three days and she rarely, if ever, gets wiped out by illness.
To be 26 and to have that much difficulty with it was just very crazy to me and its very frightening, too, because you dont have any control over it.
With treatment of Tylenol and an inhaler, OBiers symptoms ended after roughly two weeks. During that time, her grandfather tested positive for coronavirus. After roughly two weeks, he also made a full recovery. OBiers family followed all protocols for quarantine and her grandmother never contracted the illness.
OBier says she has mixed feelings about coronavirus positivity numbers growing in her age group.
Its frustrating because I do see people that really dont care, but I do see people that do care and are just kind of having to choose between their mental health and their physical health and also their responsibility to society.
OBier has advice for those who have not been diagnosed with the virus: Do not to shame people that catch COVID.
She continued: I found through my experience that theres this weird shame with it that not a lot of people talk about, shame within yourself that you have it, but also shame from your peers and society that you have it. People look at you almost like you caught it on purpose, that you caught it because of negligence or ignorance, and that wasnt the case in my situation.
OBier says she fears that shame will prevent people those who test positive from telling others they came into contact with that they have the virus. She asks for understanding and vigilance to help stop the spread of the coronavirus.
When OBier goes out, she wears a mask, she carries anti-bacterial wipes and hand sanitizer, and she constantly washes her hands. She also tries to limit how much she goes to stores. She says she does have the antibodies, but she isnt sure how long they last, so its important to her to remain vigilant.
I kind of wish more people would take it seriously and be more cautious so we can kind of get over it together, because if we kind of had that mentality from the start, we might be in a different place now.
Buy Photo
The cavernous interior of the tent to be used for the testing in a parking lot at Miller Park park. On October 19 testing for Covid19 will begin at Miller Park, staffed by the guard, the Health Department and the county EMS team. The site will have a capacity of 1,500 to 2,000 tests each day.(Photo: Michael Sears / Milwaukee Journal Sentinel)
Wisconsin is struggling with a growing surge ofCOVID-19 cases that's showing no signof slowing down.
Health officials are encouraging people to get tested, especially those whoare experiencing symptoms of the virus or may have been exposed to someone who has it.
Here is some information on what to do and where to go to get tested for COVID-19 in the Milwaukee area. Be aware thatdifferent testing sites have different policies in terms of whether appointments are needed or symptoms are required.
The state Department of Health Services also maintains an up-to-datemap of Wisconsin's testing locations, including their hours and appointment information.People can also call 2-1-1 for information about getting COVID-19 testing.
Residents can also contact their health care providers to check their testing options.
The Wisconsin National Guard is conducting free, drive-throughtesting for those age 5 and older. No symptoms or appointments are required. The testing sites are located on the south side atUMOS, 2701 S. Chase Ave., and on the north side at theBarack Obama School -Custer Stadium site, 4300 W. Fairmount Ave.
Their current hours are from 11 a.m. to 6 p.m. Monday through Thursday and from 11 a.m. to 5 p.m.Friday and Saturday.
These National Guard sites are open through Saturday, but will be closed starting nextweek as the National Guard transitions out of its testing role in Milwaukee.
With the Wisconsin National Guard shifting its testing operation to other parts of the state, local leaders are providingtesting at two health centers and are set to open a central testing site at Miller Park on Oct. 19.
Northwest Health Center, 7630 W. Mill Road,and Southside Health Center, 1639 S. 23rd St., are now providing free, no appointment needed testing.
Hours atNorthwest Health Center andSouthside Health Center will be 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. Monday, Tuesday, Thursday and Friday and 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. Wednesdays.
The sites arestaffed by the Milwaukee Health Department with assistance from the Milwaukee Fire Department and a county EMS team.
The cavernous tent to be used for the testing in a parking lot at Miller Park park. On October 19 testing for Covid19 will begin at Miller Park, staffed by the guard, the Health Department and the county EMS team. The site will have a capacity of 1,500 to 2,000 tests each day.(Photo: Michael Sears / Milwaukee Journal Sentinel)
Testing will begin at Miller Parkon Monday.
The Miller Park site will be open 11 a.m. to 6 p.m. Monday through Friday.
The free, drive-throughtesting site will be for anyone age 5 and older.No symptoms or appointments are required. People who have symptoms or may have been exposed to someone with the virus are especially encouraged to get tested.
The Miller Park site will be staffed by the guard, the Health Department and the county EMS team.
As the guard transitions out of the city, officials anticipate a fully civilian testing staff by Nov. 25.
That site will have a capacity of 1,500 to 2,000tests each day.
A number of Milwaukee community health centers are offering testing with no income, insurance or immigration restrictions. Appointments are required, and you can call 2-1-1 or any of the centers below directly if you are experiencing symptoms.
On the north side:
Milwaukee Health Services Inc., 2555 N. King Drive or8200 W. Silver Spring Drive. Call 414-372-8080.
Outreach Community Health Centers, 210 W. Capitol Drive. Call414-727-6320.
Progressive Community Health Centers,3522 W. Lisbon Ave. Those with symptoms can call 414-882-2040 for an appointment at the outdoor drive-through.
On the south side:
Gerald L. Ignace Indian Health Center,930 W. Historic Mitchell St.Those with symptoms can call 414-383-9526 to make an appointment.
Sixteenth Street Community Health Centers,2906 S. 20th St.or 1032 S. Cesar E. Chavez Drive, for established patients only. The health center is accepting new patients forthose who do not have a doctor. Call 414-672-1353.
AdvocateAurora is providing community testing in Milwaukee, Kenosha and Green Bay. Testing is available to people who are either experiencing symptoms or have been exposed to someone who tested positive for COVID-19. Appointments are required. Those interested in getting tested can call the hotline at 877-819-5034 or go to www.aah.org/testing.
In Wisconsin, all Froedtert Health locations require an appointment. Call your primary care provider's office or the Froedtert hotline at 414-805-2000.
Ascension also requires appointments forCOVID-19 tests. Callthe hotline at 833-981-0711 or go to the website to get more information.
CVS is offering testing at locations in Milwaukee and surrounding communities, including inCudahy,Franklin, Menomonee Falls, Waukesha, Wauwatosa andWest Allis. Appointments are required.
You must provide identification and proof of insurance at your appointment.
Walgreens is offering testing at five Milwaukee-area locations.Testing for those eligiblerequires an appointment.
Patients need to bring a copy of their appointment confirmation email, photo identification and their insurance card, if applicable.
Walgreens uses pharmacist-guided self-administered tests, which are free for those who meet CDC criteria as determined by the screening form.
A testing site in Waukesha County is now doing free COVID tests five days a week at the Waukesha County Expo Center, 1000 Northview Road. The National Guard administers tests several days a week with health professionals filling in the remaining days.
The Waukesha Free Clinic, 237 Wisconsin Ave.,will administer COVID-19 tests from noon to 4 p.m.Tuesdayand Thursday, and from 11 a.m. to 4 p.m. alternating Fridayand Saturday.
The National Guard does free testing in Washington and Ozaukee counties on limited days. Testing is first come, first served and people are encouraged to register in advance. The sites can only test 300 people per day.
In Ozaukee County:
Ozaukee County Transit Services, 410 S. Spring St., Port Washington, from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Oct. 17 and 31;Nov. 7, 14 and 21; and Dec. 1 and 8.
In Washington County:
Washington County Fair Park, 300 Highway PV, just south of West Bend, from 11 a.m. to 7 p.m. on Oct. 13, 20 and27; Nov. 3, 10, 17 and 24; and Dec. 1 and 8.
Contact Mary Spicuzzaat (414) 224-2324 ormary.spicuzza@jrn.com. Followheron Twitter at @MSpicuzzaMJS.
Our subscribers make this reporting possible. Please consider supporting local journalism by subscribing to the Journal Sentinel at jsonline.com/deal.
Read or Share this story: https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/2020/10/16/here-places-you-can-find-coronavirus-test-milwaukee-area/3656038001/
While coronavirus vaccine trials are ongoing and a U.S. vaccine has yet to be approved, state health officials are planning ahead for how to eventually immunize a large swath of the population. Chandan Khanna/AFP via Getty Images hide caption
While coronavirus vaccine trials are ongoing and a U.S. vaccine has yet to be approved, state health officials are planning ahead for how to eventually immunize a large swath of the population.
Updated at 1 pm, to include comment from the White House and the Department of Health and Human Services
Even the most effective, safest coronavirus vaccine won't work to curb the spread of the virus unless a large number of people get immunized. And getting a vaccine from the manufacturers all the way into people's arms requires complex logistics and will take many months.
Now, public health officers across the country are rushing to finish up the first draft of plans for how to distribute a coronavirus vaccine if and when it is authorized, and they're grappling with a host of unknowns as they try to design a system for getting the vaccine out to everyone who wants it.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention gave state immunization managers only 30 days to draft a comprehensive COVID-19 vaccine distribution plan. Friday is the day those plans are due.
The timing of vaccine research and planning is politically fraught with the presidential election a few weeks away. When the CDC announced the October deadline last month, critics worried that political pressure was tainting the process, since President Trump has repeatedly promised a vaccine will be ready soon.
"If you listen to the White House, [vaccine distribution] could be just a matter of weeks away," New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo told reporters on Thursday. He and Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson sent a letter to Trump on behalf of the National Governors Association asking for a meeting to talk through the many unanswered questions about the process.
"We need to know: What is the plan? What does the federal government do, what do you expect the states to do? When does it start? Who funds it?" Cuomo said. "Let's figure it out now because this virus has been ahead of us every step of the way it's about time this country catches up."
In a written response to the governors on Friday, Trump administration official Douglas Hoelscher said the White House has already provided states with several opportunities to discuss plans for vaccine distribution, and that a meeting with Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar was being arranged.
Planning fast with changing expectations
For dozens of public health officials across the country, the process over the past month has been like "herding a lot of cats," says Claire Hannan, director of the Association of Immunization Managers. "It's really cramming three to six months worth of strategic discussions ... into 30 days," she says.
States need to lay the groundwork for distribution now, says James Blumenstock, vice president for pandemic response and recovery for the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials. That means deciding who's in charge of responsibilities such as ordering supplies, signing up vaccine providers, training staff, and running mass vaccination clinics and outreach campaigns, he explains. They'll also need a data management system to track who received an initial vaccine dose and to remind them to come back for their second dose.
"We have been working feverishly over the past few weeks," says Decrecia Limbrick, assistant director of the Department of Health in Houston, which is one of several large cities that receives funding directly from the CDC. "I think we're ready to submit a plan a 'Version 1' of a plan."
Then there are conflicting messages from the Trump administration. "Originally there had been talk about hurrying up and getting your plan done because the vaccine will be ready before the election," says Kris Ehresmann, director of infectious disease for Minnesota's Department of Health. When the Food and Drug Administration recently said that vaccine trials must allow two months after the last experimental dose is administered, that guidance "changes the timeline" again.
"It's pretty much like being in a continuous earthquake," she adds. "The ground is constantly moving."
Despite the tight timeline, "all jurisdictions appear to be on target to meet the [Friday] deadline," Michael Pratt, spokesperson for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, wrote in a statement to NPR. "Once received at CDC, we will conduct a review of the draft plans and provide feedback to jurisdictions in the next two weeks. The team reviewing each plan will include CDC and [Department of Defense] staff."
Pratt noted that CDC has been holding weekly conference calls with immunization managers, and has already "answered nearly 400 distinct questions from states."
Overcoming logistical hurdles
Nobody knows which vaccine will be authorized first, when that will happen, which populations it will be authorized for, and how many initial doses will be available.
Adding to this uncertainty is the likelihood that the first coronavirus vaccines will be extremely challenging to handle. The CDC playbook notes that the vaccines will likely require cold chain storage (possibly "ultra-cold" storage, which is colder than Antarctica), must be given in two doses a certain number of days apart, and could have a minimum order of 1,000 doses.
"For routine vaccines, [providers] will order 10 doses at the time or 20 doses at a time," explains Michigan Department of Health and Human Services immunization director Bob Swanson. "It makes it more difficult to think about how are we going to use a thousand doses for at risk populations across a rural county?"
Initially, the focus will be on the priority groups who will be first in line to get immunized. The specifics of who that will be are still getting worked out by a CDC advisory committee, although front-line health workers will almost certainly be at the top of the list. There are also concerns about distributing the vaccine equitably to communities that, for instance, speak different languages or are difficult to reach, especially at first when doses are limited.
As immunization managers look ahead to the coming year, different places around the country face a range of challenges.
Then there are seasonal issues. During a North Dakota winter, freezing temperatures and snowfall make outdoor drive-through clinics untenable, says Molly Howell, North Dakota's immunization program manager, so they're considering using warehouses or sporting venues for mass vaccination campaigns so that people can gather indoors while maintaining physical distance. "Those are some of the ways that we're trying to be creative about vaccinating people safely during the pandemic," she says.
In Houston, officials are thinking ahead to the complications of the hot and humid summer. "If we get those hot days, we want to obviously ensure that we maintain the integrity of the vaccine," says Limbrick of the Houston Department of Health, and they have to think about taking care of the medical staff who have to administer the vaccine in those conditions.
"After [health officials] push that button on Friday afternoon, on Saturday morning, they're going to continue to work on their planning efforts going forward over the days and weeks and months ahead," says Blumenstock of ASTHO. And when the first vaccine is authorized, "it's going to be close to a yearlong effort," he says, to immunize everyone across the country who wants to be vaccinated.
Finding the money to execute plans
CDC Director Robert Redfield told Congress last month that states are going to need about $6 billion to distribute vaccines.
"This is going to take substantial resources," Redfield told lawmakers. "The time is now for us to be able to get those resources out to the state[s]."
On Thursday, ASTHO and the Association of Immunization Managers wrote a letter formally requesting $8.4 billion from Congress for these efforts.
The letter notes that so far the CDC has distributed $200 million to states, territories and a few large cities to fund the vaccine planning process but it describes this sum as "merely a down payment." And with the election looming, the chances of a new COVID-19 relief bill getting through the legislature anytime soon are dim.
"The funding I don't have control over, but I do have control over how we're going to get vaccines out when they're available," says Swanson. "And I will tell you, public health is strong, and public health works hard, and immunizations are public health's bread and butter."
Michigan has received $5.9 million so far, and Swanson says that money has gone to getting the state's immunization registry up to speed, and to local health departments for staffing.
The lack of clarity about funding troubles Dr. Kelly Moore, associate director of immunization education at the Immunization Action Coalition and the former director of Tennessee's immunization program.
States need additional funds to be able to carry out the plans they're submitting to the CDC, she says. "They need to be able to invest in manpower, in I.T. systems and in the people to use them," she explains, adding that those who are brought in to run the vaccination campaigns from other parts of the health department like STD clinics and family planning will also need to be backfilled.
"A lot of things need to be paid for with these billions of dollars," she says. "Even the best laid plans can't be executed if you don't have the resources to do so."
Scientific consensus on the COVID-19 pandemic: we need to act now The Lancet
Dr. Paul Offit, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania and a member of the F.D.A.s vaccine advisory panel, said that pausing a trial is a huge logistical challenge especially for one like Johnson & Johnsons, with plans for 60,000 volunteers in 10 countries.
Its this big warship that you just stop moving, Dr. Offit said.
Once a trial is paused, a safety board may ask for a volunteer who experienced an adverse event to be unblinded in other words, to find out if the volunteer got the placebo or the treatment. If the volunteer received a placebo, then the treatment cant be the cause of the event and the trial can continue.
If it turns out that the volunteer got the treatment, the board does a flurry of detective work. The members look over the medical records. They may ask for more information about volunteers health or even order new tests not just for the people who experienced adverse events, but for everyone in the trial.
The board uses this evidence to come to a conclusion about whether the treatment most likely had anything to do with the event. On very rare occasions, for example, some vaccines can cause a nerve disorder called Guillain-Barr syndrome. But the condition takes weeks to develop. If a volunteer shows signs of Guillain-Barr syndrome on the day of a vaccine injection, it cant be the cause.
Regulators then review the decision of these boards and may accept it or ask for more information. For trials that are running in several countries at once, this review can make pausing a trial even more of a challenge. After AstraZeneca paused its global trials on Sept. 6 for a review, regulators in Brazil, India, Japan, South Africa and the United Kingdom all gave the green light for the trial to resume. But American regulators are still keeping the U.S. trial on pause as they continue to look over the evidence.
If a safety board rules that an adverse event most likely was not a result of the vaccine or treatment, it may allow the trial to start up again. If, on the other hand, theres some urgent problem a contaminated batch of drugs, for example the trial may have to stop. When the evidence isnt so clear, the board may let the trial resume with extra tests or exams. A second case of the same event might be more common than you would expect from chance, forcing the trial to end.
AUSTIN, Texas The share of Texans who think that the coronavirus is a significant crisis continues to decrease, according to data from the latest in a series of polls measuring Texas attitudes toward the COVID-19 pandemic and Texans reported behavior in response to it.
In April, 66% of Texans felt that the coronavirus was a significant crisis. In June, that belief was held by 57%, and now in October, 53%. The latest poll, conducted Sept. 25 to Oct. 4 by The University of Texas at Austin and The Texas Tribune, repeats similar sets of questions from polls conducted in April and June.
A team of researchers affiliated with the Texas Politics Project and the Department of Government at The University of Texas at Austin designed the poll. The April and October polls were conducted in partnership with The Texas Tribune, and the June poll was conducted by the Texas Politics Project in response to the pandemics continuing impact on Texas. All three polls surveyed samples of 1,200 self-declared registered voters in Texas. Data was collected over the internet by YouGov.
Most of this drop in perceived seriousness can be attributed to changes in the attitudes of Republicans and political independents, said James Henson, co-director of the statewide poll and director of the Texas Politics Project at UT Austin. Among Texas Democrats, the share saying that COVID-19 is a significant crisis has changed very little.
The polls also registered a decrease between the June and October polls in the share of Texans who say they would try to get a coronavirus vaccine if it became available at low cost. Less than half of Texans (42%) said they would try to get a vaccine in the most recent poll, a significant drop from the 59% who said they would in the June UT/Texas Politics Project poll.
It seems that the question of a COVID vaccine has become somewhat partisan, said Daron Shaw, co-director of the poll and Frank C. Erwin, Jr. Chair of State Politics at UT Austin. Beyond the normal reticence about vaccines, some others mostly on the political left are suspicious about the efficacy of a vaccine approved by people who might be influenced by the current administration.
The polls showed that individuals concerns about community spread and contracting the virus continue to drop, even as case counts fluctuate. In April, 54% of Texans said that they were either extremely (28%) or very (26%) concerned about the spread of the coronavirus in their community, but that concern dropped to 47% in June and now stands at 40%. The share that are not very or not at all concerned has also seen an increase, from 17% in April, to 26% in June, to 30% in October.
Individual concern follows a similar pattern, with concern about contracting the coronavirus peaking in April at 54%, but then declining to 48% in June, and 44% in October. The share who report being unconcerned has risen from 17% to 27% to 32% during the same period.
Ultimately, the decline in concern appears to reflect some groups accommodation of pandemic conditions, even if it doesnt correspond with the actual, collective experience of the virus as a dire public health threat, said Joshua Blank, research director for the Texas Politics Project.
As concerns dropped, Texans also became more lax about more serious social distancing practices. The share who say that they are living normally, coming and going as usual increased from 9% in April, to 19% in June, to 27% in October polling. The share only leaving when they have to or not leaving home at all has declined from 72% in April to 34% in October. However, more Texans report wearing masks when they do go out, with 87% saying they wear one when coming into contact with others outside their home in the most recent poll, up 6 points from 81% who said the same in June.
In April, 57% of Texans said that efforts to deal with the coronavirus were going well in the U.S., and 64% felt the same about those efforts in Texas. Today, only 45% say that efforts are going well in the U.S., 51% in Texas. The share saying that things are going badly has similarly increased from 40% to 49% when thinking about the countrys efforts, and from 29% to 44% when considering Texas.
The date files and supporting material for the latest poll are now available at the Texas Politics Project website. Publicly available resources also include hundreds of downloadable graphic files in multiple formats for both the overall sample and major subgroups for teaching, research and presentations. These include more than 180 items related to COVID-19 and the pandemic.
The October University of Texas/Texas Tribune Poll is the 41st statewide poll conducted in Texas by a team of researchers based in the Department of Government and the College of Liberal Arts at UT Austin. For access to data sets and thousands of graphics useful for teaching and presentations, visit theirpolling data archive.
by: Nexstar Media Wire and The Associated Press
Democratic presidential candidate former Vice President Joe Biden participates in a town hall with moderator ABC News anchor George Stephanopoulos at the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia, Thursday, Oct. 15, 2020. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster)
WASHINGTON Democrat Joe Biden is hedging on whether he would mandate that all Americans be vaccinated against COVID-19.
Biden said Thursday during a town-hall-style event in Philadelphia that it would depend on the reliability of the vaccine.
He says that it would have to have a very positive impact and how you can affect positively 85% of the American public, and that he would likely receive the vaccine if it met that criteria.
Biden says we should be talking about mandating the vaccine, knowing that its difficult to enforce. But likewise, he says, its difficult to enforce a mask mandate, though scientists suggest they slow the spread.
You can go to every governor and get them in a room, he says. The words of a president matter, no matter whether theyre good, bad or indifferent, they matter.
It was as Orwellian a ploy as any Americans have seen in the past four years: a president whos running for re-election interfering with an agency thats supposed to be apolitical, in service of a campaign promise that no credible expert thinks is achievable and then accusing that same agency of partisanship. In any other administration, it would be a major scandal. Under Mr. Trumps leadership, it has become commonplace.
The most shameful of all Mr. Trumps meddling has been at the C.D.C., an agency designed to confront exactly the kind of pandemic America is now facing. Political appointees have prevented scientists at the agency from publishing a range of crucial guidelines and edicts meant to shepherd the nation through the pandemic. As a result, decisions across the country about school openings and closings, testing and mask-wearing have been muddy and confused, too often determined by political calculus instead of evidence.
The C.D.C.s director, Dr. Robert Redfield, has repeatedly walked back statements that counter the presidents own sunny assessment of the pandemic. Other scientists at the agency have been muzzled altogether holding few news conferences and giving almost no talks or interviews in the nine months since the coronavirus first reached American shores. Morale at the agency has reached a low point, with many career civil servants there telling The Times that they might resign if Mr. Trump wins re-election, and others speculating that the C.D.C.s ability to function at all, in this pandemic or the next, is in serious jeopardy.
The most immediate impacts of these machinations are plain to see. Pollution is up, fines for polluters are down, carbon emissions have risen and are poised to rise further. Hundreds of thousands of lives have been lost, and millions of livelihoods destroyed, by a pandemic that could have been contained. The nations standing in the wider world, and public trust here at home, have been eroded almost beyond recognition.
The longer-term impacts will be equally dire. Consider a future in which the empirical truths ferreted out by doctors, scientists and engineers no longer have currency because there is no one left to act on them. Real medicine and snake oil are sold on the same shelf, with no good way to tell the two apart. Vaccines are developed, but even the most pro-science families dont trust them enough to make use of them. We resign ourselves to the lead in our water, the pesticides in our food and the toxins in our baby bottles because we know that no one will resolve these crises in our favor. Lies and shrugs become the official response to any disease that threatens us.
Some of these things are already beginning to happen. Agencies that use science to protect human health have long been plagued by a lack of funding and too much political interference. But a world in which these agencies become fully ornamental would be dangerously different than the world we currently inhabit.
Its hard to say what chance science or civics have against so foolish and self-serving a commander in chief. But for now, at least, there is still cause for hope. Earlier this month, the F.D.A. updated its criteria for emergency authorization of a coronavirus vaccine, against Mr. Trumps stated wishes. After a brief standoff, the administration quietly backed off its opposition to the new guidelines, which should make it all but impossible for the president to rush a product through in the next few weeks.
