Odisha recorded 61 new cases on Friday, taking the tally to 12,89,129, the Health Department said. The toll remained at 9,126 as there were no fresh deaths. There are 391 active cases in the state at present. In the last 24 hours, 24 more people recovered from the disease, taking the total recoveries to 12,79,559.
Read the original:
In a recent studypublished in PLOS ONE, researchers analyzed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) disinformation on Twitter.
The widespread usage of social media during the COVID-19 pandemic had resulted in an infodemic of dis- and misinformation regarding COVID-19, leading to potentially fatal consequences. Understanding the magnitude and impact of this false information is essential for the public health agencies to estimate the behavior of the general population with respect to vaccine uptake and non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) like social distancing and masking.
In the present study, researchers assessed tweets circulating on Twitter containing the hashtags #Plandemic and #Scamdemic.
On 3 January 2021, the team used Twint, a Twitter scraping tool, to collect English-language tweets containing the hashtags #Plandemic or #Scamdemic posted between 1 January and 31 December 2020. On 15 January 2021, the team subsequently employed the Twitter application programming software (API) to obtain the same tweets using corresponding tweet identities. The team provided descriptive statistics for the selected tweets, such as the correlating content of the tweet and user profiles, to determine the availability of the tweets in both datasets developed according to the Twitter API status codes.
Sentiment analysis of the tweets was performed by tokenizing the tweets and cleaning them. The tokens were subsequently transformed into their root form using natural language processing techniques, including lemmatizing, stemming, and removing stop words. Pythons VADER library was employed to recognize and categorize the sentiment of the tweet as either neutral, positive, or negative and the subjectivity of the tweet as either subjective or objective. VADER applied a rule-based analysis of sentiments with a polarity scale ranging between -1 and 1.
The subjective analysis was performed using TextBlob, which labeled each tweet on a scale of zero or objective to one or subjective. Objective tweets were considered to provide facts, while subjective tweets communicated an opinion or a belief. The team visualized a histogram of the subjectivity scores for the #Plandemic and #Scamdemic hashtags. The Python library was also used to label the primary emotion associated with each tweet as fear, anticipation, anger, surprise, trust, sadness, joy, disgust, positive, or negative.
The predominant topics discussed in the tweet library were recognized, and a machine-learning algorithm was applied. This algorithm identified the clusters of tweets using a representative group of words. The words with the highest weights in each cluster were used to define the content of each topic.
The study results showed that a total of 420,107 tweets comprised the hashtags #Plandemic and #Scamdemic. The team removed tweets that were retweets, replies, non-English, or duplicates to retain 227,067 tweets from approximately 40,081 users. Almost 74.4% of the total tweets were posted by 78.4% of the active Twitter users, while 25.6% of the tweets were posted by 21.6% of users whose account was suspended by 15 January 2021. The team noted that users with suspended profiles were likely to tweet more. Users who used both the hashtags had a 29.2% chance of being suspended as opposed to 25.9% for tweets using #Plandemic and 13.2% for tweets using #Scamdemic.
The team found that most of the users were aged 40 years and above. Moreover, the suspended users majorly included males and users aged 18 years and below and 30 to 39 years. Almost 88% of active users and 79% of suspended users tweeted from their personal accounts. Notably, objectivity was displayed by almost 65% of the tweets analyzed.
Emotion analysis of the tweets revealed that fear was the predominant emotion, followed by sadness, trust, and anger. Emotions like surprise, disgust, and joy were the least expressed ones while suspended tweets were more likely to display disgust, surprise, and anger.
The overall sentiment expressed by the tweets containing #Plandemic and #Scamdemic hashtags was negative. The overall mean weekly sentiments were -0.05 for #Plandemic, and -0.09 for #Scamdemic, wherein 1 and -1 denoted completely positive and negative sentiments, respectively.
The most frequently observed tweet topic was complaints against mandates introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic, which also included complaints against face masks, closures, and social distancing. This was followed by tweets with topics downplaying the dangers of COVID-19, lies and brainwashing by politicians and the media, and corporations and global agenda.
Overall, the study findings showed that the COVID-19-related tweets displayed an overall negative sentiment. While several tweets expressed anger against the restrictions during the pandemic, a significant proportion of tweets also presented disinformation.
Read the original:
#Plandemic and #Scamdemic tweets during the COVID-19 pandemic - News-Medical.Net
In a recent study posted to the medRxiv* pre-print server, researchers in the United States characterized differential host immune responses in acute coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) to inform future development of novel biomarkers for both diseases.
Study: Nucleic acid biomarkers of immune response and cell and tissue damage in children with COVID-19 and MIS-C. Image Credit: NIAID
To date, COVID-19 and MIS-C, both caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), have claimed more lives of children than pediatric mortality from influenza. Both these diseases manifest highly inflammatory states and have distinct signatures of cell injury and cell death, with more heterogeneity and multi-organ involvement observed in MIS-C.
Further, both these diseases show different levels of expression for some genes, including interferon-stimulated gene 15 (ISG15), sialoadhesin (SIGLEC1), and T Cell receptor beta variable 11-2 (TRBV11-2). Previous studies have also shown specific downregulation of T cell-mediated pathways in MIS-C. Furthermore, MIS-C has overlapping clinical symptoms with other inflammatory syndromes, such as Kawasaki disease (KD), making its diagnosis difficult.
A better understanding of the MIS-C pathogenesis is critical to improve its clinical diagnosis and inform targeted interventions as new variants of SARS-CoV-2 emerge. Previous analyses of MIS-C and COVID-19 relied on a single cell or bulk ribonucleic acid sequencing (RNA-Seq) of whole blood cells, which generally use proteomic and cytokine-based assays, have fewer markers, and lack standardized reference data.
Plasma cell-free RNA (cfRNA) and plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA) signals are derived from the cell death of circulating cells and peripheral tissues; whereas whole blood cellular RNA (wbRNA) signal originates primarily from circulating leukocytes. For dying cells, cfDNA enables precise quantification of cell numbers, whereas cfRNA enables the characterization of gene expression and pathways. Overall, wbRNA-, cfRNA-, and cfDNA-based approaches complement each other to provide a complete picture of the dynamic interplay between host and pathogen or between cell activation, proliferation, and cell death.
In the present study, researchers collected blood and plasma samples from children at three pediatric hospitals in the United States (US). They stratified all samples by diagnosis, collection time, and disease severity. They used plasma samples for cfRNA and cfDNA profiling using next-generation sequencing (NGS).
Study design and patient characteristics (A) Sample collection and processing overview.(B) Distribution of samples across analytes. (C) Distribution of disease severity for each sample group.
Likewise, they performed RNA-seq on wbRNA and compared wbRNA and cfRNA profiles from 96 paired samples in MIS-C and COVID-19. Lastly, they implemented BayesPrism and the Tabula Sapiens human single-cell transcriptome atlas as a reference to quantify cell-types-of-origin (CTO) of the cfRNA. The study cohort comprised 211 children diagnosed with COVID-19 or MIS-C and 26 controls.
The researchers identified signatures associated with cellular injury and death that distinguished MIS-C and COVID-19 and the involvement of previously unreported cell types in MIS-C using plasma cfRNA profiling. Plasma cfDNA profiling uncovered the involvement of multiple organs in MIS-C compared to COVID-19 and controls. On the other hand, the wbRNA analysis revealed a substantial overlap in pro-inflammatory pathways between MIS-C and COVID-19. In addition, it revealed pro-inflammatory pathways specific to each disease state. Together, these results provided new insights into the differential pathogenesis of MIS-C and COVID-19 to inform the development of the least invasive diagnostic tests for both acute COVID-19 and MIS-C.
The cfRNA data also uncovered enrichment of neuronal genes associated with synaptogenesis and cfRNA burden from Schwann cells, suggesting that the peripheral nervous system damage might occur in MIS-C. Future studies should elucidate the mechanisms governing neurologic involvement in acute MIS-C and their correlation with long-term neurodevelopment.
Furthermore, the observed increase of cfRNA from endothelial cells and cfRNA signatures of pyroptosis might explain the overlapping clinical presentations between MIS-C and KD in acutely ill children. The researchers also observed an increase in cell death and high levels of heterogeneity in tissues-of-origin (TOO) of cfDNA in MIS-C compared to COVID-19 and controls, consistent with the systemic inflammation observed in MIS-C.
The current large, multi-hospital study of 416 blood samples from 237 patients reported a longitudinal analysis of COVID-19 and MIS-C by deep sequencing of three nucleic acids, cfRNA, wbRNA, and cfDNA. Longitudinal sampling of these cell-associated and cell-free nucleic acids at acute, post-acute, one-month, and three post-hospitalization timepoints enabled a complete view of immune responses and tissue damage associated with MIS-C and COVID-19.
In wbRNA profiling, the researchers observed an opposing dynamics of the disintegrin and metalloproteinase with thrombospondin motifs (ADAMTS2) in MIS-C and COVID-19. While elevated ADAMTS2 levels returned to baseline in MIS-C at one-month post-hospitalization, the same did not occur in COVID-19 patients. Similarly, killer cell lectin-like receptor subfamily B, member 1 (KLRB1) levels in MIS-C recovered at one-month post-hospitalization but not in COVID-19. Despite the initial severity, most clinical MIS-C symptoms resolved within a few weeks, and inflammatory and injury biomarkers normalized. In cfRNA profiling, most biomarker measurements, such as CTO values, persisted at one month but returned to baseline after three months of hospitalization.
Overall, the study results demonstrated the usefulness of cfRNA and cfDNA as complementary nucleic acid biomarkers vis-a-vis conventional diagnostic methods based on wbRNA, cytokines, and proteomics in diagnosing complex disease states such as MIS-C.
medRxiv publishes preliminary scientific reports that are not peer-reviewed and, therefore, should not be regarded as conclusive, guide clinical practice/health-related behavior, or treated as established information.
Journal reference:
More:
Overlap in pro-inflammatory genes and pathways between COVID-19 and MIS-C - News-Medical.Net
In March of this year about two years after the COVID-19 pandemic took over the U.S. The Chronicle asked Bay Area experts: Is getting COVID inevitable?
At that time, the response was a qualified no. Even though the highly contagious omicron variant of the coronavirus had recently sent cases higher than ever, the experts said that at least in the near future, people who continued to take reasonable precautions against exposure, and who got vaccinated and boosted, could avoid the disease.
Since then, omicrons subvariants have sent case numbers soaring around the world once again, with even some who had dodged the coronavirus for two years getting infected, and some even getting reinfected.
That prompted a recent follow-up with the same experts, who this time were asked: For those still uninfected, have the chances of avoiding COVID grown even slimmer, or perhaps dwindled to nothing?
With some caveats, their answers remained largely unchanged: While COVID is now harder to avoid, getting it still does not have to be inevitable, at least in the short term.
I still dont think infection is inevitable, but the chances of dodging it have gone down since March, said Dr. Bob Wachter, the chair of medicine at UCSF.
Wachter reported last month that his wife, journalist and author Katie Hafner, had contracted the coronavirus after avoiding it for more than two years, and said last week that she has developed symptoms of long COVID.
However, I remain uninfected, Wachter told The Chronicle, and am still relatively careful (no indoor dining and KN95 in indoor spaces) Id give myself a 50-50 shot at staying uninfected through 2022.
Wachter added that its all math. He said that much of the population that hasnt gotten COVID which, by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Preventions latest estimate was about 40% of Americans, as of the end of February continues to be exposed to high levels of virus.
But that virus now, with each new variant, is better at infecting people and at partly evading the immunity from vaccination, he said. At the same time, he noted, many who were previously very careful are beginning to let their guard down, both because theyre tired and because they perceive (correctly) that the risk of a severe acute case (hospitalization or death) has gone down by a lot.
The risk of long COVID is very real, he said, but isnt as obvious to people as acute harm.
He thinks these two factors more infectious variants and reduced caution together will keep cases at a high plateau, which makes the virus harder, though still possible, to avoid.
Dr. Peter Chin-Hong, an infectious disease expert at UCSF, said in March that, biologically, its possible that everyone may eventually get COVID. But, he cautioned then, it was not the time to embrace that philosophy.
Now, he said, because of the specter looming of even more transmissible variants it is not only likely that more people will get infected, but it becomes easier for folks to get reinfected. He pointed to the Biden administrations recent estimate that there could be up to 100 million infections from the virus in the fall and winter.
But hes hopeful that an upcoming version 2.0 of the boosters could be more effective in preventing breakthrough infections, and that other developments, such as vaccines for the youngest children and improved treatments for those most at risk, protect those who do get the virus.
He urged people to get a booster shot, and for those who are over 50, to get a second booster. The older you are, the more urgent it is to get it to prevent serious disease and deaths, he said.
The viewpoint expressed by Stanford University infectious disease expert Dr. Abraar Karan in March has not changed: Widespread infections are not inevitable, but its still critical to try to prevent them, he said. The onus for that prevention, however, cant fall solely on individuals, he said, and doesnt come down only to isolation and masks.
What individual people do will only take them so far, he said. Community responsibility is also essential.
He noted that with the virus being so transmissible, even the most careful people himself included can get the coronavirus from their inner circle of friends and family whom they not be completely careful with all the time.
In the past, you could N95 your way through a wave, Karan said. Now, thats not the case while masking is still useful and important, he thinks so much more can be done to improve indoor air quality in both private and public spaces measures hes spent much of the pandemic advocating for that he says would drive community transmission down, no matter the variant, and make public spaces more safe for everyone.
He pointed out that better ventilation and air filtration which he thinks government and policymakers should push would not only help prevent the spread of COVID, but would help with any other airborne illness, allergens and even smoke from wildfires.
There are no downsides to this, only upsides, he said.
Karan argued that simply giving up and allowing infections to happen also has profound economic implications, as it can take many people out of work at the same time as is happening in his own hospital.
What people arent appreciating is that low level infections are a worthy goal even if we cannot eliminate covid. Stopping big surges should be the goal. It can be achieved if we stop superspreading, he said on Twitter. There are many ways to do this! We arent doing any of them right now.
Danielle Echeverria is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: danielle.echeverria@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @DanielleEchev
Read the original here:
Carlos del Rio does not mess around when it comes to the health of his 87-year-old mother. Even when he doesnt feel sick, a day before he plans to visit her, the professor of infectious disease at Emory University in Atlanta takes a home COVID-19 test. The next day, he tests again the moment he enters her house. I want to minimize the risk that Im infected as much as possible before I see her, del Rio says.
It doesnt take an infectious disease specialist to know that an 87-year-old is a high-risk person, but dual-testing the way del Rio does is not in any formal protocol for how to interact with a person of such advanced yearsits just a practice he developed on his own. In that way, the expert is a lot like the rest of usfollowing a testing rule book that hasnt really been written.
Earlier in the pandemic, home tests either didnt exist or, when they were authorized, were hard to get your hands on as demand soared and supply lagged. Now, there are plenty to be had: the federal government will ship several rapid tests to your home for free, and insurers are required to reimburse covered individuals for 8 tests per month, so people can stock up on them to use as needed. But exactly when are they needed? Should you test yourself before you travel? After? When youre visiting a home with young, unvaccinated children? Beforeor afteryou attend a dinner party? At this point, there is no general agreement on when to use them.
What, then, do the professionals dothe scientists who specialize in infectious diseases? To find out, TIME quizzed a few experts to determine how often they break out the tests in their own householdsand when they might ask other people to test before visiting or interacting with them.
If there is any situation in which a self-test is a must-do, its when you or a member of your household are experiencing symptoms consistent with COVID-19. But while taking the test is an important first step, the results might not tell you the whole story, warns Thomas Briese, associate professor of epidemiology at Columbia Universitys Mailman School of Public Health. Symptoms can appear before a persons viral load is high enough for a home test to detect it.
There is discussion about how sensitive those home tests are in comparison to a laboratory test, Briese says. After a negative test, I tend to re-test maybe a day or two later. As an alternative to a second home test, he says, a PCR test is also an option, and that is Brieses own preference, since PCR tests are more sensitive than home tests and likelier to produce a more accurate result. The downside, of course, is that a PCR test requires a visit to a clinic or testing center and results take longerusually 24 hours or more.
Whats more, those results arent perfect, warns Michael Mina, former assistant professor of epidemiology at Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health and now chief science officer at eMed, a home testing and treatment company. PCR tests, which look for genetic material from the coronavirus, can also produce a false negative if you have a low viral load at the time. If in doubt, isolating for at least five daysas the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommendscan help prevent the spread of COVID-19. Mina would even extend that five-day period to eight days, just to play it safe.
Theres a wide variability in how quickly people clear the virus, he says. Some people will clear it by four or five days; some people will take 15 days.
Read More: A New Test Can Help Reveal If Youre Immune to COVID-19
With mask mandates now lifted for air and other means of travel, COVID-19 is potentially easier to transmit on planes, buses, and trains than it was when we all kept our faces covered. Testing before you travel is one way to look out for others and make sure youre not the viral vector in a confined space.
That may help protect your fellow travelers, of course, but it doesnt mean that everyone is so careful, and you could wind up being not the person who spreads the disease, but the person who contracts it. For that reason, del Rio brings tests with him when hes on the road. When Im traveling Ill test myself two or three days after I arrive at my destination, he says. Then Ill do the same after I arrive home.
Mina, who is the father of a baby girl who is currently unvaccinated, is rigorous about testing the family before travelingespecially if they are visiting other people in their homes. If were going to be in someones house, we just dont want to be the ones who are responsible for bringing COVID in, he says.
Pre-pandemic, no one thought much about the health implications of a dinner party, but now thats changed. Del Rio makes it a practice of testing himself before gathering with a large group of people, especially if the get-together is indoors. In the summer months, there are more opportunities to be outside, but SARS-CoV-2 can spread in the open airthough significantly less efficiently than it does indoors.
If youre the host of a social event, things can be a little more delicate, raising the question of whether or not to ask your guests to test as a sort of admission ticket to your home. Here, del Rio plays it safe. Lets suppose we were going to have 10 or 12 people in our house: we would probably do testing, he says. Id make testing available right before they came in.
Mina agrees. We allow people to come in and we dont make a big thing about it, he says. We just say keep your mask on and test right before you come in and then just let it sit for 10 minutes. We all feel a lot more comfortable knowing that everyone is negative.
Visiting the vulnerablethe immunocompromised, the elderly, or unvaccinated babies and small childrenis another area in which the experts are in agreement about testing protocols. Minas parents are in their 70s and, like del Rio with his 87-year-old mother, he tests before visiting them. Briese tests before visiting anyone with any medical condition, even if he doesnt know if the person is immunocompromised. And while vaccines are now available for babies as young as 6 months, uptake is likely to be slow, and testing before visiting any baby is a considerate precaution.
Read More: Dogs Can Sniff Out COVID-19 and Signs of Long COVID, Studies Suggest
When COVID-19 cases are on the rise, it pays to be particularly vigilant. During the last surge, Mina and his family tested on average once a week, even if no one was showing symptoms.
Briese sees children as a special area of concern here, since they spend their days in school around so many other kids and in general have extensive social contacts. Even if there is no known case of COVID-19 in a childs social circle, the risk of transmission existsespecially during a surge. It might make some sense to test children on a more regular basis, he says.
That said, if you have a limited number of tests, you shouldnt necessarily test immediately after a known or suspected exposure to someone who is infected. If youve just been exposed, dont even bother testing for two days, says Mina. Wait at least that long, but often you have to wait three daysif not fourpost-exposure [to get an accurate result] because the virus has to have a chance to become detectable.
Ultimately, the experts agree, testing is a personal decision, and people have to find their own comfort level and risk tolerance. For everyone though, the goals should remain the same: avoiding both contracting the virus and passing it on to others. Masking and staying up-to-date on vaccinations are key elements in that anti-COVID-19 tool box. Rapid testing should be one, too.
More Must-Read Stories From TIME
Write to Jeffrey Kluger at jeffrey.kluger@time.com.
See the original post:
How to Use At-Home COVID-19 Tests, According to Experts - TIME
(CNN) Covid patients arent directly overwhelming hospitals right now, but ripple effects of the pandemic are keeping beds full and patients away from the care they need.
Mostnursing homes are limitingnew patients because of staffing shortages,driving the average hospital stay up to be longer than it was pre-pandemic.
In Washington, about 10% of patients currently in hospital beds no longer need hospital care, said Cassie Sauer, chief executive officer of the Washington State Hospital Association. Most are waiting for a spot at a nursing home or mental health facility.
Its a national phenomenon, said Sauer, who has experienced the effects first-hand. A family members hospital discharge was delayed after two nursing homes she was interestedin closed for Covid outbreaks.
Stephanie Schulz, a board-certified independent patient advocate, said that one hospital she works with recently had 45 patients who all needed to be discharged within the same time frame and they were struggling to find appropriate care for all of them.
Another patient and their family were considering options that were three hours away from home.
So many people dont want to think Covid is still one of the reasons, but it is, Schulz said.
More than 60% of nursing homes are limiting new admissions because of staffing shortages, according to a survey conducted by the American Health Care Association in May. Most say its gotten worse since January.
The pandemic has made a really difficult job even tougher, said Mark Parkinson, president and CEO of the American Health Care Association, as employees are faced with intense work to prevent the spread of Covid.
Data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics shows that hundreds of thousands of employees have left the nursing home industry since the start of the pandemic.
And now, hospitals just arent able to discharge people like they typically could, he said. Theyre calling around to the nursing homes, and the nursing homes are saying we just cant take the patient because we dont have enough employees to take any patients at this time.
In fact, patients heading from a hospital to a skilled nursing facility required an average of four referrals in 2019 but that jumped to an average of seven referrals in the first five months of 2022, according to data shared with CNN by WellSky, a health care technology company with products utilized by hospitals across the country.
Those patients would stay in the hospital for an average of nine days in 2019, but are now in the hospital for an average of 10.5 days, according to the WellSky data.
Generally speaking, we as a country have worked our tails off to discharge particularly elective surgeries or pregnancies much, much quicker, and the level of outpatient surgery has gone through the roof. And yet, here we are in 2022 seeing length of stay balloon up in ways that weve never seen, when in fact most of everything weve done is to work that number down, said Bill Miller, chief executive office of WellSky.
Youre seeing these ballooned rates and Covid is, I think, the primary culprit. Its still working its way through the system.
Overall in the US, just 4% of beds are in-use by Covid-19 patients as hospitalizations hover at one of the lowest points of the pandemic, according to data from the US Department of Health and Human Services.
But one in five people in the US still lives in a county that the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention considers to have a high Covid-19 community level, where the health care system is at risk of being overwhelmed again.
We really need to have available capacity if there is another surge. Patients waiting in hospitals take up a lot of unnecessary space and staff time, Sauer said.
She estimates that hospital stays for Covid patients are about five days, on average. If someone waiting for a spot in a nursing home is in the hospital for more than 10 days, theyre occupying space that two Covid patients could have used and many stays are much longer than that.
While Covid admissions are low, the persistent strain on the broader health care system is leaving many hospital patients with tough decisions.
As the denials for discharge pile up, families are feeling like they really have no choice, Schulz says. They feel trapped in the hospital and like they have to take the first facility that accepts them.
Those hard decisions do have to sometimes be made to forego certain types of treatment just to get them out of the hospital, Schulz said even among patients with a terminal diagnosis.
Discharge delays have a compounding effect, too.
There can be such a gap between the start of discharge planning for a patient and when they find a spot that their care needs change and the process has to start all over again.
Having reassessments done on level of care includes all disciplines of the health care team. So youre bringing back in PT, OT, speech therapy, all the providers that are working with those patients, she said.
And potential exposure to Covid in the hospital requires patients to be held for at least a week, too.
Its quite a big domino effect. she said.
Sauer says the time to make adjustments is now.
I dont like that were waiting til things get really bad to respond like the notion that with hospitalizations, we reach a crisis point, then well ask people to take corrective action, she said.
Theres delayed care, thats a phenomenon across the country. And the people who cant get discharged from hospitals, thats a phenomenon across the country. And the lack of mental health care is also phenomenon across country. And short staffing. So we know hospitals are stressed, she said. I just dont want to wait til we get to the crisis to do something about it.
Read more:
With recent UK data suggesting that the BA.4 and BA.5 Covid variants are kicking off a new wave of infections, experts answer the key questions about reinfection and prevention.
Though rare at the start of the pandemic, reinfections have become increasingly common as the months and years wear on particularly since the arrival of Omicron, which prompted a 15-fold increase in the rate of reinfections, data from the Office for National Statistics suggests.
In part, this is because of a decline in protective antibodies triggered by infection and/or vaccination over time, but the virus has also evolved to evade some of these immune defences, making reinfection more likely.
The original Omicron BA.1 variant was itself massively immune-evasive, causing a huge breakthrough caseload, even in the vaccinated, said Danny Altmann, a professor of immunology at Imperial College London. It is also poorly immunogenic, which means that catching it offers little extra protection against catching it again. On top of that, theres now further evidence of the very marginal ability of prior Omicron to prime any immune memory for BA.4 or 5, the sub-variants that seem to be driving the latest wave of infections.
The virus has also evolved to become more transmissible, meaning even fleeting exposure to an infected person means you may inhale enough viral particles to become infected yourself.
There are definitely a lot of people who got Covid at the start of the year who are getting it again, including some with BA.4/5 who had BA.1/2 just four months ago, who thought they would be protected, said Prof Tim Spector, who leads the Zoe Health Study (formerly known as the Zoe Covid Study).
We still dont have enough data to work out exactly when the susceptible periods [for reinfection] are, which is one reason why we need people to keep logging their symptoms. We do know its still quite rare within three months, and it used to also be rare within six months, but thats not the case any more.
According to unpublished data from Denmark, which looked at reinfections with the BA.2 Omicron sub-variant within 60 days of catching BA.1, such reinfections were most common among young, unvaccinated people with mild disease. Other studies have similarly suggested that Covid-19 vaccination provides a substantial added layer of protection against reinfection by boosting peoples immune responses.
However, Omicron infection in itself appears to be a poor booster of immunity, meaning that if you were infected during earlier pandemic waves, your immune response is unlikely to have been strengthened by catching it again earlier this year.
In general, infections should be less severe the second, third or fourth time around, because people should have some residual immunity particularly if theyve also been vaccinated, which would further raise their levels of immune protection. However, there are always exceptions to this. Anecdotally, some people are getting it for longer this time around than they did the last time, Spector said.
It is also too early to know about the risk of long Covid associated with BA.4/5, he added.
As the UK heads into a period dominated by BA.4 and 5, the potential for reinfection seems high. Were in quite a serious situation due to a convergence of factors: a country where a moderately successful third booster campaign is now long past, with immunity waned and successive large waves of Omicron through to the emerging dominance of BA.4/5, said Altmann.
The bottom line is that we should all consider ourselves essentially unprotected, except perhaps from intensive care unit admission and death, and then, as before, with the risks increasing with age.
Face masks and ventilation continue to provide important additional layers of protection especially in crowded settings. I still wear a mask, but not a cheap mask I wear a proper FFP2 or 3 mask, said Spector. These new variants are still very much airborne and you need an even smaller amount to get infected, so I think a mask is definitely a good idea when as many as one in 30 people have it again.
More:
Covid reinfections in the UK: how likely are you to catch coronavirus again? - The Guardian
In the last two years, COVID-19 has followed a predictable, if painful, pattern: When coronavirus transmission has rebounded, California has been flooded with new cases and hospitals have strained under a deluge of seriously ill patients, a distressing number of whom die.
But in a world awash in vaccines and treatments, and with healthcare providers armed with knowledge gleaned over the course of the pandemic, the latest wave isnt sticking to that script.
Despite wide circulation of the coronavirus the latest peak is the third-highest of the pandemic the impact on hospitals has been relatively minor. Even with the uptick in transmission, COVID-19 deaths have remained fairly low and stable.
And this has occurred even with officials largely eschewing new restrictions and mandates.
In some ways, thats what is supposed to happen: As health experts get better at identifying the coronavirus, vaccinating against it and treating the symptoms, new surges in cases shouldnt lead to excessive jumps in serious illnesses.
But todays environment is not necessarily tomorrows baseline. The coronavirus can mutate rapidly, potentially upending the public health landscape and meriting a different response.
The one thing that is predictable about COVID, in my mind, is that its unpredictable, said UCLA epidemiologist Dr. Robert Kim-Farley.
While its too soon to say for certain, there are signs the current wave is starting to recede. Over the weeklong period ending Thursday, California reported an average of just over 13,400 new cases per day down from the latest spikes high point of nearly 16,700 daily cases, according to data compiled by The Times.
By comparison, last summers Delta surge topped out at almost 14,400 new cases per day, on average.
And more than 8,300 coronavirus-positive patients were hospitalized statewide on some days at the height of Delta almost three times as many as during the most recent wave.
The difference in each surges impact on intensive care units has been even starker. During Delta, there were days with more than 2,000 coronavirus-positive patients in ICUs statewide. In the latest wave, however, that daily census has so far topped out at around 300.
That gap in hospitalizations illustrates how the pandemic has changed.
At the very beginning of the pandemic, we noted right away the game-changers were going to be vaccines, easy access to testing and therapeutics and now we have all those things, said Los Angeles County Public Health Director Barbara Ferrer.
It doesnt say the pandemics over. Thats not what weve accomplished, she stressed. What weve accomplished is weve reduced the risk, but we havent eliminated the risk.
And though hospitalizations have been lower, in the aggregate, during the latest wave, Ferrer noted that each infection still carries its own dangers not just severe illness, but the chance of long COVID, as well. Taking individual action to protect yourself, she said, carries the added benefit of helping safeguard those around you, including those at higher risk of serious symptoms or who work jobs that regularly bring them into contact with lots of people.
For me, it makes clear that layering in some protection is still the way to go while enjoying just about everything you want to enjoy, she said.
Californias most restrictive efforts to rein in the coronavirus ended almost exactly a year ago, when the state celebrated its economic reopening by scrapping virtually all restrictions that had long provided the backbone of its pandemic response.
Roughly a month later, with the then-novel Delta variant on the rampage, some parts of the state reinstituted mask mandates in hopes of blunting transmission.
Toward the end of the year, another new foe would arise: the Omicron variant. This highly transmissible strain brought unprecedented viral spread, sending case counts and hospitalizations soaring and prompting officials to reissue a statewide mask mandate for indoor public spaces.
The fury with which those two surges struck left some fearing, and others advocating for, the return of the stringent orders that restricted peoples movements and shut down broad swaths of the economy. However, both waves came and went without California officials resorting to that option.
And during this latest wave fueled by an alphanumeric soup of Omicron subvariants, including BA.2 and BA.2.12.1 such aggressive action seems off the table.
I think, deep in my heart, unless we see a new variant that evades our current vaccine protection, we are not going to need to go back to the more drastic tools we had to use early on the pandemic when we didnt have vaccines, when we didnt have access to testing, when we didnt have therapeutics, Ferrer said in an interview.
During both Delta and the initial Omicron surge, California carefully evaluated the unique characteristics of each variant to determine how to best handle the changes in the behavior of the virus, and used the lessons of the last two years to approach mitigation and adaptation measures through effective and timely strategies, according to the state Department of Public Health.
These lessons and experiences informed our approach to manage each surge and variant. In addition, there were more tools available for disease control during each subsequent surge, including the Delta and Omicron surges, the department wrote in response to an inquiry from The Times. So, rather than using the same mitigation strategies that had been used previously, CDPH focused on vaccines, masks, tests, quarantine, improving ventilation and new therapeutics.
The state has also eschewed its previous practice of setting specific thresholds to tighten or loosen restrictions in favor of what it calls the SMARTER plan which focuses on preparedness and applying lessons learned to better armor California against future surges or new variants.
Each surge and each variant brings with it unique characteristics relative to our neighborhoods and communities specific conditions, the Department of Public Health said in its statement to The Times.
Chief among those, the department added, are getting vaccinated and boosted when eligible and properly wearing high-quality face masks when warranted.
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends public indoor masking in counties that have a high COVID-19 community level, the worst on the agencys three-tier scale. That category indicates not only significant community transmission but also that hospital systems may grow strained by coronavirus-positive patients.
We certainly are not at a level at these numbers where you would say, OK, its now, quote, endemic, and we just go about business as usual, Kim-Farley said. I think, though, it is probably indicative of what we might see in the future going forward, that we will see low levels in the community, people can relax and let their guard down a bit. But there will then be other times when we might see surges coming in. ... Thats a time when we mask up again. So I think there may be some on and off a little bit, and hopefully these surges become fewer, more spread out and less intense as we go forward.
As of Thursday, 19 California counties were in the high community level Alameda, Butte, Contra Costa, Del Norte, El Dorado, Fresno, Kings, Lake, Madera, Marin, Monterey, Napa, Placer, Sacramento, San Benito, Santa Clara, Solano, Sonoma and Yolo. However, only Alameda County has reinstituted a public indoor mask mandate.
Ferrer has said Los Angeles County would do the same should it fall in the high COVID-19 community level for two consecutive weeks.
L.A. County, like the state as a whole, continues to strongly recommend residents wear masks indoors in public. But Ferrer acknowledged its a very tough needle to thread and said an unintended consequence of years of health orders might be that people dont grasp the urgency of a recommendation.
People are now assuming if we dont issue orders and require safety measures then its because its not essential, and thats not what we meant, she said. We have always benefited from having folks that are able to listen, ask questions and then, for the most part, align with the safety measures. And I think because its been such a long duration, because theres so much fatigue at this point and desperation in some senses to get back to customary practices, people are waiting for that order before they go ahead and take that sensible precaution.
Visit link:
Good evening. Im Karen Kaplan, and its Tuesday, June 21. Heres the latest on whats happening with the coronavirus in California and beyond.
Newsletter
Get our free Coronavirus Today newsletter
Sign up for the latest news, best stories and what they mean for you, plus answers to your questions.
Enter email address
Sign Me Up
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
California has been averaging 13,768 new coronavirus cases per day over the last week. If health officials had reported a number like that back in the early months of the pandemic, wed have been seriously freaking out.
What makes me so sure? Its at least four times higher than any statewide case count reported during the pandemics first spring, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In fact, California didnt see cases reach that level until late November 2020, when the devastating fall-and-winter surge was taking off. (We were definitely freaking out at that point.)
Now that were two-plus years into the outbreak, that case count barely registers with the public as a cause for concern.
Pretty much every public health leader from CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky on down has lobbied hard for people to get their COVID-19 boosters, but only 47% of eligible Americans have done so. State and local health officials strongly recommend that people wear masks in indoor public settings, but most dont.
To some degree, this nonchalance is a sign of COVID-19 burnout. Were tired of letting the coronavirus dictate what we can and cannot do. We just want our lives to go back to normal.
At the same time, theres a reason that masks are strongly recommended but not required (at least, not yet): Although the Omicron variant is circulating widely and the current wave includes the third-highest peak of the pandemic, the number of people hospitalized with COVID-19 is still quite manageable, and deaths arent rising out of control.
Friends from Palisades Charter High School ride the MTA Expo Line in Los Angeles.
(Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)
Thats not to say the deaths are negligible California reported 74 deaths on Monday and was averaging 30 deaths each day over the prior week. (Plenty of those deaths were preventable; the risk of death for unvaccinated people is more than 10 times higher than for those who are vaccinated and boosted, state health officials report.)
But compared with earlier periods of the pandemic, we have a lot more tools at our disposal to stave off COVID-19s worst effects. And these tools are a lot more targeted than the stay-at-home orders, capacity restrictions and mandates weve had in the past.
The most important tools are vaccines: 72% of Californians are fully vaccinated, and 58% of those eligible have received at least one booster shot.
Adding to that is the natural immunity people have gained by surviving an infection. In December, the CDC estimated that nearly 95% of Americans had coronavirus antibodies due to vaccination, past infection or a combination of both.
There are also plentiful coronavirus test kits, antiviral pills such as Paxlovid and Lagevrio (also known as molnupiravir) and the IV medicine Veklury (remdesivir). (Monoclonal antibodies used to be on this list, but they arent very effective against Omicron and its subvariants.)
And lets not discount all the experience doctors, nurses, respiratory therapists and other healthcare professionals have acquired by caring for millions of COVID-19 patients.
This helps explain why the current wave, fueled by the Omicron subvariant known as BA.2.12.1, has seen far fewer hospitalizations than last years Delta surge despite causing more infections.
The current wave peaked with about 16,700 new daily cases in California, compared with almost 14,400 during the Delta days. But Delta sent 8,342 coronavirus-positive patients to the states hospitals on its worst day, while BA.2.12.1 hasnt surpassed 2,808.
ICU admissions diverged even more. With Delta, there were as many as 2,008 infected patients in intensive care units throughout the state at the same time. That number hasnt risen above 300 in the current wave.
At the very beginning of the pandemic, we noted right away the game-changers were going to be vaccines, easy access to testing and therapeutics and now we have all those things, Los Angeles County Public Health Director Barbara Ferrer told my colleague Luke Money.
That progress is something to appreciate, but it doesnt guarantee were out of the woods. If another variant comes along thats able to circumvent our vaccines and treatments, we could go back to seeing hospitalizations and deaths rising higher for a given increase in infections.
We certainly are not at a level at these numbers where you would say, OK, its now, quote, endemic, and we just go about business as usual, UCLA epidemiologist Dr. Robert Kim-Farley told Money.
I think, though, it is probably indicative of what we might see in the future, he added. Hopefully these surges become fewer, more spread out and less intense as we go forward.
California cases and deaths as of 4:40 p.m. on Tuesday:
Track Californias coronavirus spread and vaccination efforts including the latest numbers and how they break down with our graphics.
If youre having trouble swallowing the glass-half-full outlook outlined above, youre not alone. What looks like hard-won progress to some seems like complacency or even capitulation to others.
Dr. Elisabeth Rosenthal is most definitely in the latter camp. In an Op-Ed, the editor in chief of Kaiser Health News lays out the litany of ways in which America has simply surrendered the fight against the coronavirus.
The countrys vaccination rate has stalled out at around 67% (though itll probably rise a bit now that the shots have been made available to the nations 18.7 million children under 5). Boosters are even less popular than the initial doses.
President Biden requested $22.5 billion to continue funding the countrys COVID-19 response, including money to pay doctors who care for uninsured patients and cash to buy vaccines, tests and treatments. The Senate responded with a $10-billion package that doesnt include any funds to help squelch outbreaks overseas. Now even that compromise bill is being held up by the politics of immigration.
Dr. Ashish Jha, the White House COVID coordinator, has warned that we would see a lot of unnecessary loss of life if the money doesnt materialize. So far, that hasnt been enough of an incentive to break the impasse.
The lack of urgency is shared by state and local governments, in Rosenthals view. Theyve rescinded mask mandates even for high-risk settings, including places like bars and music venues where people crowd together indoors. Health officials arent acting with urgency to get more people boosted even though its become increasingly clear that a booster dose is essential to ward off Omicron.
When the government wont take preventive measures seriously, its hard to blame private employers for following suit. Few stores still require workers and customers to mask up; even if mask rules are still posted, theyre rarely enforced. (The latest example: Broadway theaters in New York City announced Tuesday that mask use during performances would become optional next week.)
In March, the Biden administration unveiled a plan to help Americans coexist with the coronavirus as safely as possible. The plans stated goal is to get back to our more normal routines. Who wouldnt get behind that?
Unfortunately, in response, our elected representatives and much of the country essentially sighed, preferring to move on and give up the fight, Rosenthal writes.
The problem isnt just that people are sick of caring about public health. The problem is that its inherently difficult to make people care about it.
Thats because if public health officials are respected, well-funded and allowed to do their job heres the result: Literally nothing happens, Rosenthal writes. Outbreaks dont lead to pandemics.
Maria Fernanda works on contact tracing in a half-empty office at the Florida Department of Health in Miami-Dade County in 2020.
(Lynne Sladky / Associated Press)
Health officials cant go around crowing about the bad stuff that didnt happen. But when people dont take their warnings seriously, theyre the ones who are blamed.
Theyre also the ones who get short shrift from politicians and the public. In the year before the pandemic, the CDCs budget was cut by 9%, according to the Trust for Americas Health. Money for programs like suicide prevention and HIV care was only slightly higher in 2020 than it was in 2008, after accounting for inflation.
At the state level, spending on public health didnt see significant growth between 2008 and 2018, except for programs aimed at preventing injuries, according to a 2021 study in the journal Health Affairs. State health departments weathered big cuts to cope with the Great Recession, and that funding hadnt been restored by the time COVID-19 came along, leaving them ill equipped to respond, the study authors wrote.
The cuts have resulted in the elimination of at least 38,000 state and local public health jobs, Rosenthal notes. Thats partly why states and cities have yet to spend much of the $2.25 billion allocated in March 2021 by the Biden administration to help reduce COVID disparities, she writes. There are now too few on-the-ground public health officials who know how to spend it.
Public health was front and center for awhile in the pre-vaccine era, when people were more afraid of the coronavirus and of having to use an iPad to say goodbye to a loved one hooked up to a ventilator in an ICU. Now our attention has shifted to mass shootings, inflation, the war in Ukraine and the abortion case before the U.S. Supreme Court.
A trio of anthropologists from George Washington University agree its important to keep COVID-19s victims at the top of our minds, especially when so much of the culture is determined to behave as if things are already back to normal. And they have some ideas for doing so.
Sarah E. Wagner, Roy R. Grinker and Joel C. Kuipers start by suggesting a national commission to take a hard look at how the country allowed the pandemics death toll to exceed 1 million. By documenting how we got here, the country would be holding itself accountable ultimately an act of healing for survivors, they write.
They also recommend a national day of remembrance for COVID-19 victims. Resolutions in both the House of Representatives and the Senate would turn the first Monday in March into COVID19 Victims and Survivors Memorial Day.
A designated national memorial day would make the pandemic visible for decades to come, they write.
See the latest on Californias vaccination progress with our tracker.
Its been a year and a half since the first COVID-19 vaccines received emergency use authorization from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. During that time, the conversation around the vaccines has shifted from how to stop unscrupulous people from jumping the line to how to entice holdouts to roll up their sleeves.
So if you found yourself feeling ho-hum about the latest vaccine news that COVID-19 shots are now available for kids as young as 6 months try looking at it from McKenzie Packs perspective.
Pack has a 3-year-old son named Fletcher. Hes not old enough to remember a time before the pandemic. But once the vaccine builds up his coronavirus immunity, he can start doing things he would have otherwise taken for granted.
Hes never really played with another kid inside before, McKenzie Pack said. This will be a really big change for our family.
That change was made possible by the FDAs decision to grant emergency use authorization to two COVID-19 vaccines for infants, toddlers and preschoolers. Both are reformulated versions of the mRNA vaccines available to U.S. adults.
The one from Moderna is a two-shot series for kids ages 6 months to 5 years. Each injection contains one-quarter the dose used for adults. The two shots should be given four to eight weeks apart; young children with compromised immune systems should get a third dose as well.
The vaccine from Pfizer and BioNTech requires three doses for everyone. The first two shots are given three to eight weeks apart, and the third one follows at least eight weeks after the second dose. Its made for children ages 6 months to 4 years, and contains one-tenth the dose used in the adult vaccine.
The CDCs vaccine advisory panel spent two days debating the pros and cons of the vaccines before endorsing them on Saturday. Walensky accepted their advice and urged parents and caregivers to make a date with a needle, even for children whove already had COVID-19.
In clinical trials, the pediatric vaccines were less effective than the adult versions were when they began rolling out 18 months ago. Thats because new coronavirus variants especially versions of Omicron have become more adept at evading antibodies induced by the shots. The trial data suggested the new vaccines would probably reduce the risk of COVID-19 symptoms in young children by 30% to 60%.
We cannot let the perfect be the enemy of the good, said Dr. Oliver Brooks, chief healthcare officer of Watts Medical Corp. in Los Angeles and a member of the CDCs Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. Thats the bottom line.
The advisors said they were persuaded by evidence that young childrens antibody response to the new vaccines was on par with the antibody response seen in older children and adults, two groups for which the vaccine has been shown to be protective. Clinical trials also established that the vaccine was safe among nearly 8,000 young children, there were no deaths and very few serious adverse events, such as high fever.
The Western States Scientific Safety Review Workgroup a coalition of public health experts from California, Nevada, Oregon and Washington conducted its own review over the weekend and announced its support for the new vaccines on Sunday.
California has ordered almost 400,000 doses, and it began allowing parents and caregivers to book appointments on the My Turn site on Tuesday. But many providers that showed up in search results didnt appear ready to accommodate the youngest children.
The website for the L.A. County Department of Public Health notified users that vaccines for children younger than 5 were on the way. It provided a list of sites that were expected to offer the vaccine as soon as it arrives. A spokesman for the department said most of those sites should have doses available by Wednesday.
Both the county health department and the state offered a heads-up that pharmacies couldnt vaccinate children under age 3. That means a visit to a pediatrician or health clinic is in order.
In other COVID-19 vaccine news, a study published last week in the New England Journal of Medicine found that two initial doses without a follow-up booster offered essentially no lasting protection against an infection with Omicron. Researchers also reported that an infection was about as good as a booster at preventing a new Omicron-fueled illness.
On the plus side, the study found that either type of immunity offered lasting protection against serious illness, hospitalization and death.
I think this is really the important part: The immunity against severe COVID-19 was really very much preserved, said study co-author Laith Jamal Abu-Raddad, an infectious disease epidemiologist at Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar.
Moving on to treatments, Pfizer said Paxlovid didnt seem to help COVID-19 patients who were not at high risk of becoming severely ill. That became clear in a study testing its antiviral drug in a broader population of people who were relatively healthy and unvaccinated, or who were fully vaccinated but had a medical condition that made them more vulnerable to a serious case of COVID-19.
California is having trouble getting Paxlovid to patients who need it. In the month since the state began its test-to-treat system, fewer than 800 people received a prescription, even though thousands of Californians became infected each day.
The programs goal is to make antivirals available right away to high-risk patients who test positive for a coronavirus infection, since the drugs work best when taken shortly after symptoms begin. A total of 1,219 people had been screened for the drugs as of mid-June, and 768 got Paxlovid pills.
I think its a new concept that people are still getting used to, said Katharine Sullivan, who oversees a test-to-treat site in west Berkeley.
And finally, the World Health Organizations latest weekly report on COVID-19 said there were more than 8,700 deaths in the week that ended June 12. That number is notable because it represents a 4% increase over the prior week and the first increase since early May.
The Americas saw the largest increase in the COVID-19 death toll (21%), followed by the Western Pacific region (17%). Europe, Southeast Asia, the eastern Mediterranean and Africa all saw declines.
Todays question comes from readers who want to know: Whats the criteria for having a high COVID-19 community level?
This is important because if and when L.A. County crosses this threshold and stays there for two weeks, its indoor mask mandate will return.
To back up for a moment, COVID-19 community levels are a measure the CDC uses to gauge how the coronavirus and the disease it causes are affecting peoples health in a particular place, either directly (through illness) or indirectly (by placing undo strain on local healthcare resources, making them unavailable to others). They come in three flavors: low, medium and high.
Three factors determine a countys COVID-19 community level: the number of new infections diagnosed over the last week; the number of new COVID-19 patients admitted to local hospitals over the last week; and the percentage of hospital beds occupied by patients with COVID-19.
There are multiple combinations of these variables that would qualify a county (or state or territory) as having a high COVID-19 community level.
Start with the coronavirus case count. See whether your county has recorded at least 200 new cases per 100,000 people over the last week. L.A. County did: It saw 337 cases per 100,000 residents in the last week.
Since were over the 200 mark, were ineligible for the low level. But we can stay in the medium level if we have fewer than 10 new COVID-19 hospitalizations per 100,000 residents over the last week and fewer than 10% of hospital beds are filled by COVID-19 patients.
The latest CDC figures show that L.A. County hospitals are admitting 7.3 new COVID-19 patients per 100,000 residents per week, and that 3.5% of hospital beds are devoted to patients with COVID-19. That means our COVID-19 community level is still medium. But if either metric climbs too high, well be reclassified into the high category.
If our new case count were below 200 per 100,000 residents per week, we could still have a high COVID-19 community level if we had at least 20 new hospitalizations per 100,000 per week, or if at least 15% of hospital beds were filled with COVID-19 patients. However, those combinations are a lot less likely.
You can look up the COVID-19 community level for any U.S. state, territory or county on the CDC website.
We want to hear from you. Email us your coronavirus questions, and well do our best to answer them. Wondering if your questions already been answered? Check out our archive here.
(Shawn Thew / Associated Press)
He was the last person I expected to catch the coronavirus, but this pandemic is full of surprises.
The National Institutes of Health announced Wednesday that none other than Dr. Anthony Fauci had come down with a mild case of COVID-19. Fauci, 81, is fully vaccinated and double-boosted and still well enough to work from home, where he is isolating according to CDC guidelines.
Less than two months ago, the nations top infectious disease expert heralded the arrival of more of a controlled phase of the pandemic. But he was quick to add: By no means does that mean the pandemic is over.
In this case, Im sure he wishes hed been wrong about that.
Resources
Need a vaccine? Heres where to go: City of Los Angeles | Los Angeles County | Kern County | Orange County | Riverside County | San Bernardino County | San Diego County | San Luis Obispo County | Santa Barbara County | Ventura County
Practice social distancing using these tips, and wear a mask or two.
Watch for symptoms such as fever, cough, shortness of breath, chills, shaking with chills, muscle pain, headache, sore throat and loss of taste or smell. Heres what to look for and when.
Need to get a test? Testing in California is free, and you can find a site online or call (833) 422-4255.
Americans are hurting in various ways. We have advice for helping kids cope, as well as resources for people experiencing domestic abuse.
Weve answered hundreds of readers questions. Explore them in our archive here.
View post:
Coronavirus Today: Flipping the script on COVID-19 - Los Angeles Times
A recent study published in Clinical Infectious Diseases assessed deaths due to fungal infections during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in the United States (US).
Study: Increased deaths from fungal infections during the COVID-19 pandemicNational Vital Statistics System, United States, January 2020December 2021. Image Credit: Kateryna Kon/Shutterstock
Yeasts, molds, dimorphic fungi, and yeast-like fungi are common fungal pathogens. Clinically, fungal infections result in superficial lesions as well as life-threatening conditions. Severe infections typically affect immunosuppressed individuals like cancer patients, recipients of solid organ or stem cell grafts, users of immunosuppressive medication, etc.
More than a million people have succumbed to COVID-19 in the US to date. Moreover, COVID-19 might elevate the risk for severe fungal infection due to COVID-19-associated immune dysfunction, lung damage, and therapies, impairing the host immune system against pathogenic fungi. Evidence suggests that severe fungal infection in COVID-19 patients could result in poor clinical outcomes.
The present study analyzed data from the US National Vital Statistics System (NVSS) to examine demographic information, fungal disease burden, and temporal trends. They used provisional mortality data for 2021 and final mortality data for 2018 2020 from NVSS. Deaths involving fungal infections were identified and coded according to the International Classification of Diseases, tenth revision (ICD-10) codes. Deaths involving COVID-19 were similarly coded.
The number, percentage, and age-adjusted rates of fungal deaths from January 2018 to December 2021 were analyzed by the fungal pathogen, year, and COVID-19 association (whether COVID-19 was a contributory factor). The monthly number of fungal deaths during the COVID-19 pandemic was examined by investigating whether COVID-19 contributed to mortality; concurrent monthly COVID-19 deaths were also analyzed.
Data on fungal deaths between January 2020 and December 2021 were stratified by the COVID-19 association; the age-adjusted death rates were examined by race/ethnicity, sex, fungal pathogens, and the US census division of residence.
Between 2018 and 2021, 22,700 deaths occurred due to fungal infections/pathogens. The number of fungal deaths per 100,000 people for 2018 and 2019 was similar, with 4746 and 4833 deaths, respectively, and the age-adjusted rate was 1.2 during both years. However, it increased to 5922 in 2020, with a mortality rate of 1.5. Likewise, about 7199 (fungal) deaths were observed in 2021, with a rate of 1.8.
COVID-19-associated deaths during 2020 and 2021 accounted for 21.9% of the 13,121 fungal deaths in that period. COVID-19 represented the most common underlying cause of death (90.5%) among the COVID-19-associated fungal deaths, accounting for 0.3% of COVID-19 deaths during 2020-21. Candida and Aspergillus were the common fungal pathogens constituting 24.4% and 16.4% of the total number of fungal deaths for 2020-21.
Nevertheless, the pathogen was unspecified for more than 35% of all fungal deaths in the same period. Notably, COVID-19-associated fungal deaths were predominantly due to Candida and Aspergillus infections relative to non-COVID-19-associated fungal deaths. On average, 399 fungal deaths were recorded per month during 2018-19, and 423 fungal deaths occurred during the peak of the first COVID-19 wave (April 2020). Nonetheless, it peaked in January 2021 and October 2021 with 690 and 718 fungal deaths coinciding with the COVID-19 mortality peak(s).
Most deaths from fungal infections in 2020-21 were recorded in males (59.7%) and people aged 65 or above. The age-adjusted rates for COVID-19-associated fungal deaths were higher for individuals who were non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaska Native (AI/AN) [1.3], Hispanic (0.7), and Black (0.6) than non-Hispanic White (0.2) and non-Hispanic Asian (0.3) populations.
Consistently, for non-COVID-19-associated deaths from fungal infections, the age-adjusted death rates were higher in AI/AN (3), Hispanic (1.9), and non-Hispanic native Hawaiian (NHPI) [2.4] and Black populations than White (1.1) or Asian (1.2) individuals. The crude fungal death rate was higher for people from non-metropolitan areas than metropolitan residents.
The age-adjusted fungal death rates were higher in the Mountain (2.1) and Pacific (2) US census divisions but lower in the New England (1.3) division. Mountain and West South-Central divisions showed higher rates (0.5) of non-COVID-19-associated deaths, while it was lower in New England division (0.2).
The researchers observed that more people died from fungal infections in 2020-21, an upward trend compared to preceding years. COVID-19-associated fungal deaths drove this increase, highlighting the critical significance of fungal infections in COVID-19 patients. Fungal deaths increased in tandem with COVID-19 peaks in January and October 2021 but not in April 2020.
In conclusion, the study demonstrated that fungal infections pose a substantial burden in the US. These results might help inform efforts to identify, treat, or prevent severe fungal infections in COVID-19 patients, particularly in some ethnic and racial groups and geographic regions.
Read more from the original source:
Deaths due to fungal infections during the COVID-19 pandemic in the US - News-Medical.Net
