This story is part of an NPR nationwide analysis of states' revenue and budgets during the pandemic.
Texas state revenues have taken a serious beating, thanks largely to falling sales tax revenue since the beginning of the coronavirus pandemic.
The past few months have seen year-over-year sales tax revenue declines. Other revenue sources affected by COVID-19, including taxes on motor fuel, hotel occupancy and alcoholic beverages, have also experienced double-digit drops.
The crash in oil prices sent oil production tax receipts down a whopping 77% June 2020, compared with June 2019, with natural gas production receipts down 84%.
"The drops we've seen in some of our revenue sources ... those are bigger drops than we've ever seen, at least on a month-to-month basis," said Tom Currah, chief revenue estimator with the Texas comptroller's office.
All state agencies have been asked to pare their budgets by 5% for the two-year budget cycle. That translates to about 8.5% cuts in what's left of the cycle.
Andrew Schneider is the politics and government reporter for Houston Public Media.
Activists are calling on the pharmaceutical firm Gilead Sciences to study a drug for the treatment of Covid-19 that showed promise in curing cats of a coronavirus.
The drug, called GS-441524, is chemically related to remdesivir, an antiviral also made by Gilead, and one of the only treatments to successfully shorten the duration of Covid-19 recovery.
GS-441524 has also attracted attention for its promise to treat another potential coronavirus feline infectious peritonitis, or FIP. The drug has become an unapproved black market treatment for the disease, once universally thought to be fatal to cats.
In a letter sent to the heads of four government agencies currently developing treatments and vaccines for Covid-19, the left-leaning Public Citizen group called on Gilead to work collaboratively to begin development of the drug.
The group also accused Gilead of choosing to develop remdesivir, which is much further along in the clinical trial process than GS-441524, because it would remain under patent longer and therefore produce more profit.
It is sadly predictable that Big Pharma responds to a global pandemic by trying to bring to market only those drugs that maximize its profits, said Dr Michael Abrams, a researcher with Public Citizens health research group and lead author of the letter.
What is alarming here is that federal scientists and Trump administration regulators appear to be willing partners with Gilead in decisions that run distinctly counter to the governments primary imperative of advancing public health during this worldwide crisis, said Abrams.
Gilead specializes in antiviral treatments, and has drawn criticism in the past for its pricing policies. A patented hepatitis C cure costs $1,000 per pill or $84,000 per course in the United States. And the companys HIV prevention medication Truvada, which could significantly reduce transmission, can cost as much as $20,000 a year in the US.
But not all agree pricing alone is driving Gileads decisions. Derek Lowe is a drug discovery scientist and the author of In the Pipeline, a blog which covers early drug development. Lowe said remdesivir could be useful only for a relatively short period of time if a successful vaccine is developed, and that GS-441524 is years behind remdesivir.
Monoclonal antibodies and vaccines are, to my eyes (and not just mine) the answer to this pandemic, said Lowe. As those treatments become available, molecule-based antivirals such as remdesivir and GS-441524, will become less valuable.
Remdesivir was available for human use quickly because Gilead hoped to develop the drug to treat victims of Ebola. Although it failed as a treatment for that virus, remdesivir had an established dosing and safety profile, as National Institutes of Health researchers wrote.
Thats whats driving Gileads decision making they know that remdesivir is their bird-in-the-hand, and that pouring their (large but finite) resources into another compound to try to get it caught up could be a bad move, said Lowe. By the time they get it ready to launch, its possible that no one would care.
A spokesperson for Gilead said the decision to develop remdesivir had been taken because it had been shown to be more effective in certain key areas than GS-441524 and thus a better candidate for potentially treating Covid-19.
Reinforcing this decision was the ability to rapidly progress clinical trials with remdesivir, given the urgency of the global pandemic, the spokesperson added.
The fight against Covid-19-related conspiracy theories will be fought on multiple fronts. It requires a broad public health campaign and for social media companies to control the spread of disinformation. But all of us can play a part in this effort. Most people will know someone who has succumbed to conspiracy theories about the current crisis.
1. Acknowledge scale of the task
Lack of evidence of a conspiracy, or positive proof against its existence, is taken by believers as evidence of the craftiness of those behind the plot, and their ability to dupe the public. So arm yourself with patience, and be prepared to fail.
2. Recognize the emotional dimension
Conspiracy theories seduce not so much through the power of argument, but through the intensity of the passions that they stir. Underpinning conspiracy theories are feelings of resentment, indignation and disenchantment about the world. They are stories about good and evil, as much as about what is true.
This gives conspiracy theories a strong emotional dimension. Tempers can flare and conversations turn into a shouting match. It is important to prevent this from happening. Be prepared to de-escalate the situation and keep the dialogue going, without necessarily giving ground.
3. Find out what they actually believe
A minority of committed believers treat conspiracy theories as the literal truth and are particularly resistant to persuasion. Many others might not see themselves as "believers," but are willing to accept that conspiracy theorists might be onto something and are at least asking the right questions. Establishing the precise nature, and extent, of someone's belief, will enable you to better tailor your response.
Background research will help you to focus the discussion on the substance of the claims. Never question someone's intelligence or moral sense, as this is the quickest way to end a conversation.
4. Establish common ground
One of the main problems with conspiracy theories is that they are not confined to tinfoil-hat-wearing kooks or political extremists. In times of crisis and uncertainty, they can contaminate the worldview of otherwise reasonable people.
Conspiracy theories make reality seem less chaotic, and tap into broader, often well-grounded concerns about the world such as the concentration of financial and political power, mass surveillance, inequality or lack of political transparency. So when talking about conspiracy theories, start by acknowledging these broader concerns and restrict your discussion to whether conspiracy theories can provide an adequate or meaningful answer.
Many people come to conspiracy theories through genuine, albeit misguided, curiosity about how to make sense of the world. They sometimes see themselves as healthy skeptics and self-taught researchers into complex issues. Avoid criticising or mocking this. Instead, present it as something that, in principle, you value and share. Your aim, after all, is not to make them less curious or skeptical, but to change what they are curious about, or skeptical of.
The kernels of truth on which conspiracy theories are based are a solid starting point for a discussion. Agreement on at least some of the facts will allow you to focus on the leap of imagination that allows two and two to make five.
5. Challenge the facts, value their argument
Debunking conspiracy theories requires a two-pronged approach. The first involves challenging evidence and its origins. Address specific claims and discuss what constitutes a credible source. Offer to look at the evidence together, including on fact-checking websites.
If you are talking to a staunch believer, he probably won't even engage with you on this. But if he has not yet fallen down the rabbit hole, he might, and this may lead him to start questioning his views.
Covid-19-related claims are in the same genre. Setting these conspiracy theories in their historical context can demonstrate that they offer nothing new, and don't ask the right questions about the pandemic and its causes. This just might encourage the person to direct their curiosity and skepticism to more worthwhile concerns.
6. Finally, be realistic
There is, of course, no guarantee that this advice will be effective. There are no incontestable arguments or fail-proof strategies that will always convert a conspiracy theorist to skepticism. Therefore, set realistic expectations. The aim of talking to conspiracy theorists is not to convert them, but to sow doubt about an argument, and hopefully enable them to gradually build up resistance to its seductive appeal.
Jovan Byford is a senior lecturer in psychology at The Open University. Disclosure: Byford does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond his academic appointment.
A coronavirus vaccine will likely be ready for distribution by the end of the year or early 2021, according to Dr. Anthony Fauci.
Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, said more than 25,000 people have registered to participate in clinical trials for possible vaccines.
From everything weve seen now in the animal data, as well as the human data we feel cautiously optimistic that we will have a vaccine by the end of this year and as we go into 2021, Fauci said during a Congressional hearing. I dont think its dreaming.
A vaccine would likely go to essential workers and high-risk individuals first before distributed to the public. The Department of Defense and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention would work together to distribute some 300 doses of the vaccine, Fauci said.
The U.S. currently has 4.6 million cases of coronavirus and at least 154,779 deaths.
Here are the latest coronavirus headlines:
Mississippi could be worst in country for COVID-19
The director of the Harvard Global Health Institute is warning that Mississippi could become number one in the country for coronavirus.
Mississippi will become the nations No. 1 in new cases/population. Already No. 1 on test positivity, Jha tweeted this week. Jha said Mississippis testing is down 8% while cases are up 37%.
Jha suggested Mississippi close or limit operations at stores, bars and restaurants.
As of Aug. 1, the state has reported 60,553 cases and 1,703 deaths.
Florida passes grim milestone
Florida has surpassed its record for the most COVID-19 deaths in a single week. The state has reported 1,230 coronavirus deaths in the past seven days. On Friday, the state had 257 coronavirus deaths, the most in a single day. On Sunday, Florida recorded 62 additional deaths, bringing its total to 7,084.
In the past week, Florida has recorded 63,277 new coronavirus cases.
33% of recent COVID cases in Louisiana are those between ages 18-29
More than 30% of the recent COVID-19 cases in Louisiana are between ages 18-29, health officials said.
Louisiana has added 3,477 new coronavirus cases since Friday with 33% among people between 18-29. Children under 18 account for 10% of the new cases, higher than the over-70 age group.
Louisiana has 119,000 coronavirus cases with 3,893 deaths.
The West Virginia Department of Health andHuman Resources (DHHR) reports as of 10:00 a.m., on August 3,2020, there have been 294,902 total confirmatorylaboratory results received for COVID-19, with 6,973 totalcases and 117 deaths.
In alignment with updated definitions fromthe Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the dashboard includes probablecases which are individuals that have symptoms and either serologic (antibody)or epidemiologic (e.g., a link to a confirmed case) evidence of disease, but noconfirmatory test.
CASESPER COUNTY (Case confirmed by lab test/Probable case):Barbour (29/0), Berkeley (634/23), Boone (79/0), Braxton (8/0), Brooke(60/1), Cabell (328/10), Calhoun (6/0), Clay (17/0), Doddridge (4/0), Fayette(131/0), Gilmer (16/0), Grant (80/1), Greenbrier (87/0), Hampshire (74/0),Hancock (98/4), Hardy (53/1), Harrison (197/1), Jackson (157/0), Jefferson(287/5), Kanawha (838/13), Lewis (26/1), Lincoln (67/1), Logan (154/0), Marion(175/4), Marshall (125/2), Mason (49/0), McDowell (43/1), Mercer (165/0),Mineral (111/2), Mingo (132/2), Monongalia (909/16), Monroe (18/1), Morgan(25/1), Nicholas (31/1), Ohio (255/0), Pendleton (37/1), Pleasants (7/1),Pocahontas (40/1), Preston (101/23), Putnam (171/1), Raleigh (189/7), Randolph(202/3), Ritchie (3/0), Roane (14/0), Summers (6/0), Taylor (52/1), Tucker(11/0), Tyler (12/0), Upshur (36/2), Wayne (183/2), Webster (3/0), Wetzel(40/0), Wirt (6/0), Wood (225/11), Wyoming (23/0).
As case surveillance continues at thelocal health department level, it may reveal that those tested in a certaincounty may not be a resident of that county, or even the state as an individualin question may have crossed the state border to be tested.Such is the case of Brooke and Randolph counties in this report.
Pleasenote that delays may be experienced with the reporting of information from thelocal health department to DHHR. Visitthe dashboard at www.coronavirus.wv.gov for more detailed information.
On July 24,2020, Gov. Jim Justice announced that DHHR, the agency in charge of reportingthe number of COVID-19 cases, will transition from providing twice-dailyupdates to one report every 24 hours. This became effective August 1, 2020.
Moderna Inc. is now entering Phase 3 clinical trials for one of the most promising COVID-19 vaccines currently in development.
SEATTLE More than a dozen potential COVID-19 vaccines are in development around the world, and a few are now entering the final phase of human test trials.
So far, only five companies have reached advanced clinical trials and seek to introduce a vaccine as early as the end of this year or early 2021.
Among the most promising so far is the vaccine being developed by Moderna Inc.
"This is really the great public health challenge for all generations," said Geoffrey Baird M.D., Ph.D., a board-certified pathologist at UW Medicine, and acting chair of Laboratory Medicine.
Baird said he is encouraged by the results seen in test trials so far. So, how does it work?
The Moderna Inc. vaccine works by injecting 0.1 milligrams of a lab-engineered piece of Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) into the body. The RNA works like a set of instructions for the body to begin creating antibodies. It does this by creating spike proteins on the outside of some cells to fend off any coronavirus. The spikes look just like the spikes on the outside of the virus that causes COVID-19.
The vaccine is being inoculated in two separate doses, each about a month apart.
"In the vaccine trial, one of the first thing they saw is people felt a little sick, explained Baird. They had some chills, some fever, and it made them feel under the weather. And that's a sign, believe it or not, that it's working. Your body is building an immune response."
Baird reiterated that the COVID-19 vaccine does not cause COVID-19.
Around 30,000 test patients were recruited as part of the Moderna Inc. vaccine trial. Half of the test patients (15,000 people) are injected with the vaccine, and the other 15,000 receive a placebo.
Scientists are hoping many of the test subjects who received the placebo will stumble into the virus naturally out in the community and become infected. That way, researchers will know if the vaccine is working properly.
Scientists, including Dr. Anthony Fauci, are cautiously optimistic that a vaccine will be available to some groups before the end of 2020.
Yes, it's true, the supposed miracle cure for Covid-19 that is really no cure at all, is all over the news again, thanks to President Donald Trump and a group of true believers, who are re-upping their endorsement of its all-around wonderfulness.
Though distracting, the attention hydroxychloroquine is drawing raises a different but very important issue: whatever happened to the relentless US search for a Covid-19 cure?
The third entry, convalescent plasma, has been around even longer. A version of it was given during the 1918 Spanish Flu pandemic. It is cheap and available but requires a human source and must be given intravenously. Optimal use of these three therapies, including administering two or even all three together, has not been determined.
It turns out that while we have all been buzzing about hydroxychloroquine and the tantalizing race for a someday vaccine, too often we have been dismissive of the actual, not hypothetical, good thing in front of us -- direct treatment of the infection -- like an old high school friend you wish had never called.
Sure, the vaccine race is a great story, full of high-tech science, international intrigue and lots of money. Naked DNA and viral vectors and spike proteins are all very cool sounding for sure -- but this doesn't mean vaccines will solve the Covid-19 pandemic any time soon.
Maybe, with luck, in a few months we will have a probably-not-unsafe vaccine that shows some evidence of benefit for an uncertain duration in some patients. Maybe it will be made in China or Russia or some other country with which we have relationship issues.
The smallest group under development is antivirals, which happen to be the one proven effective way to treat viral infections. We have effective antivirals for many diseases including herpes (simplex and zoster), HIV, hepatitis B and hepatitis C.
Certainly, the time required to develop drugs is famously long and expensive. But then, so is development of a vaccine.
So why the slow roll? Granted, few of the deaths in Covid-19 infection are directly from viral invasion. Covid-19 kills by provoking overwhelming inflammation that damages heart, lung, brain and blood vessels. Inflamed blood vessels promote clotting.
One might argue that treatment to blunt the downstream effect of the virus, rather than the virus itself, may be appropriate.
I imagine this approach is less due to scientists' views on the cause of death and more due to the notion that one drug for one disease really doesn't cut the mustard anymore, at least from a commercial perspective.
The larger interest is to develop "platforms" for broader discovery, such as playing with the immune system, where insights from Covid-19 may have applicability to additional diseases, including cancer or arthritis.
This is a great long-term business strategy but wrong-headed in the midst of a crisis. When the house is burning down, you want the best firehose, not a disruptive technology that promises a new way to separate water into component molecules that can to be sent to a repository 600 miles away at the speed of light, reconstituted and dispersed over the flames.
The latter approach, if successful, may change society as we know it; but the former will keep people from burning to death.
A man with a mask depicting American flags jogs past the U.S. Capitol in April. More than three-quarters of respondents to the NPR/Ipsos poll support enacting state laws to require mask wearing in public at all times. Andrew Harnik/AP hide caption
A man with a mask depicting American flags jogs past the U.S. Capitol in April. More than three-quarters of respondents to the NPR/Ipsos poll support enacting state laws to require mask wearing in public at all times.
With the national death toll from COVID-19 passing the grim 150,000 mark, an NPR/Ipsos poll finds broad support for a single, national strategy to address the pandemic and more aggressive measures to contain it.
Two-thirds of respondents said they believe the U.S. is handling the pandemic worse than other countries, and most want the federal government to take extensive action to slow the spread of the coronavirus, favoring a top-down approach to reopening schools and businesses.
"We've come to a pretty dire place when it comes to both the death toll and the spread of coronavirus across the country," said Mallory Newall, a pollster with Ipsos. "Americans, as they grapple with the reality of just how grave the situation is, they're looking for sweeping, really broad, powerful action here."
While debates over masks and whether to reopen have dominated headlines, more than three-quarters of respondents support enacting state laws to require mask wearing in public at all times. And nearly 60% said they would support a nationwide order making it mandatory to shelter at home for two weeks.
The findings come as federal public health officials warn of a new phase in the pandemic, with widespread infections across the country, and as the president openly feuds with those advisers. The poll was conducted July 30-31 and surveyed 1,115 adults from the continental U.S., Alaska and Hawaii.
"We're doing absolutely worse" compared with other countries, said Laura Braslow, a Republican in Quakertown, Pa., who took part in the survey.
"We have a leader, and I use the term loosely, who is not providing leadership to this country at all," added Braslow, who didn't vote for Trump in 2016 and doesn't plan to back him in November.
"I mean if I have to suck it up and wear a mask, he should be sucking it up and wearing a mask. He should be showing the American public that this is the right thing to do."
Even some conservatives who plan to vote for Trump say the federal government should do more.
"I think a national approach would be better," said Kevin Reno, a Republican voter in Irving, Texas. "I think it would be effective, and it may be at the point here before too long that we have to do that."
Other measures that enjoy broad backing include government funding to expand testing for the coronavirus and make it free of charge, making any future vaccine available to all Americans, and a push to produce more personal protective equipment.
Mask mandates gain broad backing
Trump has resisted many of those proposals and tweeted Monday that America has done "MUCH better than most other Countries" in easing the impact of the coronavirus.
But most people surveyed disagree.
"I think we're doing worse," said Sophie McClellan, a Democrat from Jacksonville, Fla.
"I don't think we have adequate testing because it can take up to two weeks to get results," McClellan told NPR. She also said it was time for all states to impose public health mandates requiring masks in public places.
Trump has declined to wear a mask in public, but Monday he sent a message to supporters saying people should try to wear masks when they are not able to socially distance from others. The NPR/Ipsos survey found that for most Americans Democrats and Republicans mask wearing is not controversial.
Two-thirds of those surveyed favor a single, national strategy for combating the virus's spread, and about 60% support a single, national strategy for when businesses and schools can reopen.
On the question of schools, 66% of Americans say they prefer remote, distance learning for children in their area in the fall, a view shared overwhelmingly by Democrats. Republicans are more divided, with nearly 60% agreeing with Trump that schools should reopen and kids should return to classrooms.
When given a choice on returning to work, 69% said that, whenever possible, people should be allowed to work from home until a coronavirus vaccine becomes available. Thirty-one percent chose the option of people returning to offices and workplaces now, with safety precautions in place for employees.
Americans lean toward more relief, more aggressive measures
As Washington is deadlocked on aspects of a federal relief package, most people polled roughly two-thirds say the federal government should take on more debt to pass a bill that provides a payment for all Americans. A similar number want federal unemployment benefits extended.
"They're saying right now pass another stimulus bill, pass more unemployment benefits, do your part to get the economy going," said Ipsos' Newall, who noted a majority of Republicans also back another round of federal spending.
The poll also found:
"It's clear from this poll Americans want to do everything in their power to limit the spread of the virus," Newall said. "That means sweeping federal government action."
With the presidential election three months away, the coronavirus looms large as 46% of respondents said the pandemic is a top concern. And when thinking about choosing a candidate, two-thirds said each candidate's plan for economic recovery is a very important factor, followed by their plans for the coronavirus and for uniting the country.
Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, listens during a House subcommittee hearing on Friday. Kevin Dietsch/AP hide caption
Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, listens during a House subcommittee hearing on Friday.
Updated at 4:15 p.m. ET
A coronavirus vaccine could be ready for distribution by the end of the year, and distributed to Americans in 2021, the nation's top infectious disease specialist told lawmakers Friday.
While it typically takes years to develop vaccines, new technologies, the lack of bureaucratic red tape and the human body's robust immune response to COVID-19 have hastened the process, Dr. Anthony Fauci said.
"From everything we've seen now in the animal data, as well as the human data we feel cautiously optimistic that we will have a vaccine by the end of this year and as we go into 2021," said Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. "I don't think it's dreaming."
In contrast to the decades-long search for an HIV vaccine, COVID-19 is more likely to respond to a vaccine, Fauci said. HIV vaccine development has been so difficult because the body doesn't make a strong immune response to that virus, he explained. With COVID-19, the immune response is much stronger.
More than 250,000 people have already registered their interest in participating in clinical trials, Fauci said. He urged Americans to sign up at CoronavirusPreventionNetwork.org "so that you can be part of the solution of this terrible scourge."
The administration is preparing for wide distribution, with the hope that the current vaccine candidate will prove effective in phase three trials, Fauci said. Fauci said the administration is taking "financial risk" to prepare for distribution once the vaccine is shown to be safe and effective.
The Department of Defense and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention would work together to distribute a vaccine to Americans in phases. Government committees will determine who needs the vaccine first, Fauci said. That will likely include essential workers and people at greater risk.
The Food and Drug Administration would still need to grant final approval before any vaccine is administered to the public.
Lawmakers at the hearing drew attention to issues of importance to them and their supporters. Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, appeared especially concerned about state edicts limiting attendance at religious gatherings without also putting similar restrictions on political protests.
"Do protests increase the spread of the virus?" Jordan asked Fauci.
"Crowding together, particularly when you're not wearing a mask, contributes to the spread of the virus," Fauci responded.
"Should we limit the protesting?" Jordan pressed.
"I'm not sure what you mean," Fauci said.
"Should government limit the protesting?"
"I don't think that's relevant," Fauci said, adding: "I'm not in a position to determine what the government can do in a forceful way."
"Well, you make all kinds of recommendations. You've made comments on dating, on baseball, on everything you can imagine," Jordan said.
The back and forth lasted for several minutes as Fauci repeatedly declined to discuss which specific activities should be limited. "I'm not going to opine on limiting anything, I'm telling you what ... is the danger. And you can make your own conclusion about that. You should stay away from crowds no matter where the crowds are."
"Any crowd in which you have people close together without masks is a risk," Fauci said later in response to accusations by Jordan that he had changed his position several times on many things. "And I'll stick by that statement. It's a public health statement. It's not a judgment on why you're there in the crowd; it's a judgment related to the fact that you're in the crowd."
Democratic lawmakers defended the protests. "I'm sitting here as the result of a protest," said Rep. James Clyburn, D-S.C., who was chairing the hearing.
He met the late Rep. John Lewis from Georgia years ago while protesting, Clyburn said. "Trying to get off the back of the bus. Trying to integrate schools. Trying to be able to shop in a 5- and 10-cent store and not be arrested for trespassing."
"I'm glad the government did not limit our protests," Clyburn said, adding that the protesters on the Black Lives Matter Plaza in Washington, D.C., were peaceful.
Republican lawmakers expressed a desire to get students back in school as soon as possible. It's not just about education, said ranking Republican Rep. Steve Scalise of Louisiana. Schools perform several other important functions, he said, including detecting thousands of cases of child abuse every year.
CDC Director Robert Redfield said he agrees that getting K-12 students back to school for face-to-face learning is in the public health interest. In-person school attendance helps children's mental health, contributes to good nutrition and lets counselors detect child abuse, he said.
"As a grandfather of 11 grandkids, I want these kids back in school," Redfield said.
There was also a question from Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer, R-Mo., on the widely discredited theory that hydroxychloroquine is an effective treatment of COVID-19.
A Henry Ford Health System study finding it effective was flawed, Fauci said, calling it "a noncontrolled, retrospective cohort study that was confounded by a number of issues." No randomized, placebo-controlled study has shown the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine, he said.
Physicians at Mount Desert Island hospital believe at least 35 out-of-staters carrying COVID-19 have been on the island this summer and could have spread the disease in the community.
The Bar Harbor hospital sounded a public warning about the situation Friday, but had not said how many people it thought were involved. The estimate from the hospitals front-line medical personnel includes people with positive test results and people presumed positive because they were in the same traveling party as an infected person. Because the affected people took tests in their home states, all 35 have been essentially invisible to state and local authorities through official channels.
Because of crippling one-to-two-week delays at the major national test processors, the people involved didnt learn they had tested positive until they were already traveling in Maine. The hospital learned of their presence only when the infected individuals phoned it for advice.
Our physicians and care practitioners on the front lines of our COVID-19 testing and counseling efforts estimate that there are 35 individuals and families or more who are potential spreaders either because one of the family members is positive and they all traveled together or because they met family or friends on MDI before receiving a positive result, spokesperson Oka Hutchins said by email.
Dr. Julius Krevans Jr., the hospitals chair of infection prevention, said Monday that the situation presents a real threat.
Persons with out-of-state addresses with (the coronavirus) are a particular concern of mine. The failure to acknowledge, track and trace these individuals has both direct and indirect public health fallout, Krevans said by email. Maine, by virtue of both its geography and excellent state leadership, has done very well so far, but this situation represents a clear and present danger that should be addressed.
The problem has apparently been building for weeks, and the hospital has been trying to establish a partnership with the Maine Center for Disease Control and Prevention to organize timely contact tracing using local resources. The official U.S. practice is for public health officials in an infected persons home state to organize the tracing of their contacts, even if most of those contacts took place hundreds or thousands of miles away in Downeast Maine.
Hutchins said the hospital recognizes that the Maine CDC is managing multiple challenges and because of that has been offering local resources to partner with the agency to contact trace. The hospital also wants the agency to register the infected individuals in the Sara Alert system, a tool used by Maine and several other states to allow COVID-19-positive individuals to report their symptoms and help medical providers contact trace among their own staff.
To address this, we need the support of the Maine CDC and their network of contract tracers to follow these individuals and enroll them into the Sara Alert system, Hutchins said. One of the ideas that we floated earlier this summer is potentially asking retired clinicians regionally and statewide to help call and trace.
Asked about the Maine CDCs response to the situation, agency spokesman Robert Long said via email that MDI Hospital has log-in credentials to the Sara Alert system and could add contact information on the individuals themselves, regardless of place of primary residence. As of Monday morning, he said, there is no indication that anyone from MDI Hospital had completed the training to use the Sara Alert system.
Asked about this, Hutchins said: Our understanding of the Sara Alert system is that it would not provide what we need to address this issue, but we will seek guidance from the CDC on potential opportunities to do so.
Long also said the Maine CDC has worked since March to help health care providers and hospitals prepare for such situations, and would continue to do so. Communication among all parties is essential in all aspects of the states pandemic response, he wrote.
He also noted that nonresidents are supposed to quarantine upon arrival in Maine until they receive their test results though this is not true of residents of Connecticut, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York and Vermont, whom Gov. Janet Mills exempted because of the low prevalence of the disease in those states.
Maine CDC encourages people from other states who receive delayed positive test results from their home states to continue checking in with medical providers in Maine as a way of helping to ensure that local health care systems have the most complete information on potential transmission in their communities, Long said.
Thats exactly how the Bar Harbor hospital learned of the presence of the nonresidents infected with COVID-19: They called for advice after receiving their test results. In a statement on its Facebook page Friday, the hospital encouraged out-of-state visitors in the same situation to contact them, and said it was providing counseling and contact tracing assistance for those it heard from. (The number for this is 207-801-5900.)
The hospital has been at the center of acommunity-wide effort to regularly test hundreds of front-line tourism workers such as cashiers, hotel clerks and servers, as well as tourists, and provide them with masks. Last week it processed three positive COVID-19 tests, all from people who reside outside of Hancock County after having had no positives since May 16.
Our community and our state have done a very good job of keeping COVID-19 precautions in place, and because of this, the incidence of COVID-19 in our community has remained low, the hospital said in its statement. We urge all residents and visitors to remain vigilant in their COVID-19 precautions masking, physical distancing and handwashing continue to be the best tools we have to slow the spread of COVID-19.
As of Wednesday, no residents of Bar Harbor had tested positive, according to the Maine CDCs zip-code-level data, and the towns of Mount Desert and Southwest Harbor each had between one and five cases. As of Sunday, Hancock County as a whole had 34 resident cases, 15 of them added after July 28, a period when outbreaks were confirmed at blueberry businesses in the towns of Ellsworth and Hancock.
The proportion of COVID-19 tests from out-of-staters that are coming back positive in Maine has increased throughout July, with nonresidents now testing positive in Maine at a rate more than four times that of residents. For the month as a whole, there were 57 positive tests of non-residents reported to the CDC out of the 1,773 taken, a positivity rate of 3.2 percent, though the rate has been over 4 percent since July 19.
It isnt clear whether the challenge affecting MDI is happening elsewhere in the state. Spokespeople for the two largest hospital networks in the state, Maine Health and Northern Light Health, said they dont routinely compile such information and were not aware of any specific instances, though they said it was possible they had occurred.
York Hospital, which serves tourism-intensive York County, doesnt track it either, but one of their infectious disease physicians, Dr. Evangeline Thibodeau, said Friday via email that anecdotally, she had heard of such scenarios many times.
Invalid username/password.
Please check your email to confirm and complete your registration.
Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.
Previous
