Category: Covid-19 Vaccine

by Timothy McQuiston, Vermont Business Magazine The Vermont Department of Health reported last week that COVID-19 cases fell again from 58 to 44 to now 32, their lowest level since last summer. In addition, hospitalizations remain at a low level, and fatalities have eased back. There were 3 fatalities in this report. The pandemic death total now stands at 1,144 as of March 30, 2024 (the most recent data available). Total reported deaths in January were 28, which is the highest monthly total in a year, but only 16 in February and 10 so far reported in March.

The VDH reported last week that COVID-19 hospitalizations were at a statewide total of 8, which is the lowest they've been since last summer. COVID-19 activity remains in the "Low" range, according to the VDH.

Of the total deaths to date, 922 have been of Vermonters 70 or older. There have been 3 deaths of Vermonters under 30 since the beginning of the pandemic.

CDC states that already an estimated 97% of Americans have some level of immunity, from either vaccination or infection or both, which they said will help keep down new transmission and lessen serious outcomes.

More recently, on March 7, 2024, a study by a nationwide collaborative group including University of Vermont Larner scientists, published in Nature Communications, explored how the human body responded to mRNA COVID-19 vaccinessuch as PfizerBioNTech Moderna. Both vaccines work by helping the body produce antibodies against the COVID-19 viruss spike protein, but the study team found that the efficacy of the vaccines varied among subjects.

Researchers found that individuals over the age of 65, men, those with higher weight, smokers, diabetics, and those with a history of emphysema tended to have lower antibody levels. To contrast, subjects who had been diagnosed with COVID-19 previouslyparticularly those with COVID-19 severe enough to lead to hospitalizationhad significantly higher levels of anti-S1 than other groups in the study. Surprisingly, those who had taken the Moderna vaccine also reported a significantly higher level of anti-S1 than the PfizerBioNTech recipients.

Report Timeframe: March 24 to March 30, 2024

(see data tables below)

The hospitalizations dataset contains day-level data reported from all Vermont hospitals each Tuesday. Reported numbers are subject to correction.

The number of reportable COVID-19 cases is still available in this report, below. Laboratory-confirmed and diagnosed COVID-19 cases and COVID-19 outbreaks must still be reported to the Vermont Department of Health.

There were 3 outbreaks last week, of which 2 were in long-term care facilities and none in schools.

Vermont Department of Health recommendations: Preventing COVID-19 (healthvermont.gov)

Vermont has the second lowest state fatality rate in the US (132.5 per 100K; Hawaii 104.1/100K). Mississippi (447/100K) and Oklahoma (444.1/100K) have the highest rates. The US average is 297.3/100K (CDC data).

There has been a total of 1,187,509 COVID-related deaths to date in the US (CDC) and 7,042,222 globally (WHO).

Following an analysis of COVID-19 data, the VDH reported in January 2023 a cumulative 86 additional COVID-associated deaths that occurred over the course of the pandemic but had not been previously reported. Most of those deaths occurred in 2022.

COVID-19 Update for the United States

Early Indicators

Test Positivity

% Test Positivity

3.5%

(March 24 to March 30, 2024)

Trend in % Test Positivity

-0.6% in most recent week

Emergency Department Visits

% Diagnosed as COVID-19

0.5%

(March 24 to March 30, 2024)

Trend in % Emergency Department Visits

-14.5% in most recent week

These early indicators represent a portion of national COVID-19 tests and emergency department visits. Wastewater information also provides early indicators of spread.

Severity Indicators

Hospitalizations

Hospital Admissions

8,015

(March 24 to March 30, 2024)

Trend in Hospital Admissions

-15.3% in most recent week

Deaths

% of All Deaths in U.S. Due to COVID-19

1.2%

(March 24 to March 30, 2024)

Trend in % COVID-19 Deaths

-20% in most recent week

Total Hospitalizations

6,909,932

CDC | Test Positivity data through: March 30, 2024; Emergency Department Visit data through: March 30, 2024; Hospitalization data through: March 30, 2024; Death data through: March 30, 2024. Posted: April 8, 2024 3:21 PM ET

The Delta variant took off in August 2021, which resulted in the heaviest number of deaths before vaccines and their boosters helped alleviate serious COVID cases. Multiple Omicron variants are now circulating and appear more virulent than previous variants, but perhaps not more dangerous, according to the CDC.

New COVID-19 variant JN.1: Experts explain symptoms, how to spot and treat the new strain

AP April 5, 2023: WHO downgrades COVID pandemic, says it's no longer a global health emergency

Walk-in vaccination clinics run by the state closed on January 31, 2023. Learn more

Vermonters are reminded that all state COVID testing sites were closed as of June 25, 2022. PCR and take-home tests are available through doctors' offices, pharmacies and via mail from the federal government. The federal government officially ended its pandemic response as of May 11, 2023. See more information BELOW or here: https://www.healthvermont.gov/covid-19/testing.

Starting May 11, 2023, the CDC and Vermont Department of Health will no longer use the COVID-19 Community Level to measure COVID-19 activity in the U.S. and Vermont. Instead, Vermont's statewide COVID-19 level will be measured by the rate of COVID-19 in people being admitted to the hospital, per 100,000 residents.

Focusing on hospitalization data is a better estimate of how COVID-19 is impacting the community now that reported COVID-19 cases represent a smaller proportion of actual infections. This also allows us to compare Vermonts hospitalization levels with other parts of the country.

The Delta variant caused a surge in COVID-related fatalities last fall and into the winter.

The highest concentration of deaths was from September 2021 through February 2022. Overall, December 2020 and January 2022 were the worst months with 72 fatalities each.

The US confirmed its first case of COVID-19 on January 20, 2020.

Vermonters ages 6 months and older are eligible for COVID-19 vaccines. Getting vaccinated against COVID-19 is the safer way to build protection from serious illnesseven for those who have already had COVID-19. Learn more about COVID-19 vaccines (CDC)

COVID-19 vaccines are free and widely available. Anyone can get vaccinated in Vermont, including those who live in another state, are non-U.S. citizens, or who have no insurance. See Vermont's current vaccine rates

Know your rights when getting free vaccines.

You are considered up-to-date if you are over the age of 6 years old and have received a bivalent (updated) COVID-19 vaccine.Learn more about kid vaccines

If you are unable or choose not to get a recommended bivalent mRNA vaccine, you will be up to date if you received the Novavax COVID-19 vaccine doses approved for your age group.

Find more on recommended doses from CDC

COVID Vaccine Information for Health Care Professionals

More on COVID-19 Vaccines (CDC)

Recommended COVID Vaccine Doses (CDC)

Find a COVID-19 vaccine near you.

Image

Use Vaccines.gov to find a location near you, then call or visit the location's website to make an appointment.

Vaccines.gov

Everyone 6 months of age and older is eligible to get a COVID-19 vaccination.Most children are also now eligible for a bivalent dose that offers increased protection against the original strain and omicron variants.

See more on recommended vaccine doses by age group (CDC)

Resources for parents and caregivers

https://www.vermontfamilynetwork.org/ccfk/

Tips for Helping Kids Feel Ready for Any Vaccine (Vermont Family Network)

#factsheet

What Families with Children Should Know About COVID-19 Vaccines (translated)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWcqHOgQIVg&t=5s

Conversations About COVID-19 Vaccines for Children with Vermont Pediatricians (American Academy of Pediatrics)

If you cannot get vaccines through any of the options above, our local health offices

offer immunization clinics by appointment.

Need a ride? If you do not have transportation to get a free COVID-19 vaccine or booster, please contact your local public transportation provider or callVermont Public Transportation Association (VPTA)

at 833-387-7200.

English language learners, or immigrant or refugee community members, who would like to learn about more about vaccine clinics can contact theAssociation of Africans Living in Vermont

(AALV) at 802-985-3106.

If you lost your vaccine card or your information is wrong:

Recommendations for keeping your vaccination card and record up to date

Find more COVID-19 translations

COVID-19 resources for people who are deaf and hard of hearing

Report your COVID-19 test results

Follow this link:

VDH: COVID cases, hospitalizations, deaths all fall - Vermont Biz

PORTLAND, Ore. A new study from the Oregon Health Authority finds no link between the COVID-19 vaccine and sudden cardiac deaths of young people.

Researchers took a look at nearly 1,300 deaths of people aged 16 to 30 between 2021 and 2022.

It was found that none of the deaths that happened within 100 days of vaccination were attributed to the vaccine.

However, 30 of those deaths were from COVID.

Only 3 of those people were vaccinated.

The OHA acknowledges some limitations to the study:

First, researchers could not exclude the possibility of vaccine-associated cardiac deaths more than 100 days after COVID-19 vaccination.

They also pointed out that published data indicate potential adverse events associated with vaccinations tend to occur within 42 days of vaccination.

Second, although nearly a million adolescents and young adults had received a COVID-19 vaccination during the period of the study, the research could not exclude a rarer event among vaccinees in this age group.

Heres more from the OHA:

OHA study: No link between COVID-19 vaccine, cardiac deaths

Article published in CDCsMMWRfinds no deaths attributed to mRNA shots

PORTLAND, Ore. COVID-19 vaccination is not linked to death from cardiac causes among previously healthy young people, according to an Oregon Health Authority (OHA) study published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

The study, appearing today in the CDCsMorbidity and Mortality Weekly Report(MMWR), examined nearly 1,300 deaths among Oregon adolescents and young adults ages 16 to 30 occurring over 19 months during 2021 and 2022. It found that none of the fatalities that happened within 100 days of receiving an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine dose was attributed to vaccination.

The findings answer a question thats lingered since early 2021 as state and federal public health agencies rolled out new mRNA vaccines during the pandemic: Do rare cases of myocarditis associated with COVID-19 vaccination put people at increased risk for cardiac death?

Study co-authors Paul Cieslak, M.D., and Juventila Liko, M.D., M.P.H., of OHAs Acute and Communicable Disease Prevention Section, say suggestions of an association between receipt of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine dose and sudden cardiac death among healthy adolescents and young adults are not supported by the Oregon data they reviewed.

According to information recorded on death certificates, among 1,292 deaths of persons 16 to 30 years of age from June 2021 to December 2022, none was found to have been caused by COVID-19 vaccination, said Cieslak, medical director for communicable diseases and immunizations.

Of 40 deaths that occurred among persons who had received an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine dose, only three occurred within 100 days after vaccination. However, two of the deaths were attributed to chronic underlying conditions, and the cause was undetermined for one. No death certificate attributed death to vaccination.

Cieslak noted there were 30 deaths among persons this age that were caused by COVID-19. Among these 30 decedents, he said, the states ALERT Immunization Information System (IIS) database had records for 22 (73%), only three of whom had received any COVID-19 vaccination.

Studies have shown significant reductions in COVID-19-related mortality among vaccinated persons; during the first 2 years of COVID-19 vaccine availability in the United States, vaccination prevented an estimated 18.5 million hospitalizations and 3.2 million deaths, Cieslak and Liko wrote in their report.

The researchers acknowledged two limitations in their findings.

First, they could not exclude the possibility of vaccine-associated cardiac deaths more than 100 days after COVID-19 vaccination. They also pointed out that published data indicate potential adverse events associated with vaccinations tend to occur within 42 days of vaccination.

Second, although nearly a million adolescents and young adults had received a COVID-19 vaccination during the period of the study, the research could not exclude a rarer event among vaccinees in this age group.

Nevertheless, Cieslak said, it is clear that the risk, if any, of cardiac death linked to COVID-19 vaccination is very low, while the risk of dying from COVID-19 is real. We continue to recommend COVID-19 vaccination for all persons 6 months of age and older to prevent COVID-19 and complications, including death.

Read the original:

OHA Study Finds No Link Between COVID-19 Vaccine And Sudden Cardiac Deaths Of Young People - 750 KXL

David M. Higgins, a pediatrician at the University of Colorado and Childrens Hospital Colorado, sees patients and also conducts research but not the type of research thats done in the laboratory with beakers and things like that, as he puts it. Rather, his focus is on health services research, including the study of vaccine delivery, public access to vaccines, and vaccine hesitancy.

Hes particularly concerned about misconceptions regarding vaccine hesitancy, especially among parents which he says is not as widespread as many believe. As he wrote recently in an essay in The New England Journal of Medicine, co-authored with Sean T. OLeary: We believe vaccine hesitancy shouldnt be normalized when it is not the norm.

Our interview was conducted over Zoom and by email, and has been edited for length and clarity.

Undark: Although vaccine hesitancy has a long history, it seemed to spark increased discussion beginning in 2020, when the first vaccines for Covid-19 were developed. In your recent essay, you call for caution in the way we talk about vaccine hesitancy. What are your main concerns?

David Higgins: The dominant narrative, that the data doesnt support, coming out of mass media, social media, and just the national conversation about childhood vaccine hesitancy, seems to be this idea that parental hesitancy about routine childhood vaccines is now commonplace, and it's widespread.

This kind of narrative that the sky is falling tends to ignore the actual data, which show that an overwhelming majority of parents in the U.S., across political and ideological divides, continue to see the value of childhood vaccines, and continue to vaccinate their children according to recommendations from the American Academy of Pediatrics and the CDC.

UD:What trends have you noticed in terms of parents willingness to have their children receive routine vaccinations like measles, mumps, and rubella?

DH: There are multiple different data points, including research studies, national polls, and data out of the CDC, that really still paint a picture of broad support for the value of vaccines in children. For instance, some of the most recent data from the CDC says that 93 percent of parents of kindergarten students opted to vaccinate their kindergarteners with all of the state-required vaccines, and that vaccine coverage for children, by the time they're 2 years old, hasn't significantly changed since the start of the pandemic. And even further, only 1 percent of children born in 2019 or 2020 didn't receive any vaccines by their second birthday. That's a tiny percent of children.

We also have seen data from national polls, such as the Pew Research and [KFF], showing still robust confidence in the value of vaccines, such as vaccines for measles, with close to 9 out of 10 parents continuing to see the value and benefit of measles vaccines. We also did a study here in Colorado last fall, looking at changes in parental vaccine hesitancy from before the pandemic, throughout the pandemic, and after the pandemic and we didn't find large changes in parental vaccine hesitancy overall.

Now, we did find some changes and in whether parents trust vaccine information, and those types of changes, but we didnt find big changes overall. And those data collectively really continue to paint a picture of strong, robust confidence in the value of vaccines.

The research and the data that we see really paint a picture thats different than the dominant narrative that vaccine hesitancy for routine childhood vaccines is now commonplace and widespread and the norm.

UD: What should doctors keep in mind as they talk with people, and especially parents, about vaccines?

DH: The concern with this false narrative is that this can have negative repercussions on people such as doctors, health care professionals, public health professionals. We know that a strong recommendation for vaccines, when its formed in a way that presumes parents want to vaccinate their children, because that is still the norm we know that can actually increase vaccine acceptance.

So if a doctor or health care professional continually expects significant vaccine resistance because they misperceive the norm then their recommendation, if they give one at all, may be less effective. They may lose confidence in their ability to really have any influence on parental vaccine decision-making, if they assume that most parents are hesitant.

UD: In your essay you wrote, When it comes to parents themselves, normalizing vaccine hesitancy has the potential to be a dangerous self-fulfilling prophecy. Can you explain that idea in more detail?

DH: I am concerned that when parents see this narrative that they might start to think whether vaccines are a good idea for their children as well, when they didn't have those concerns in the first place. Normalizing vaccine hesitancy could unnecessarily contribute to parental self-doubt about the value of vaccines this idea that it seems that everyone else is hesitant about vaccines; maybe I should be hesitant too.

UD: A number of outbreaks of measles have been reported recently. Do we know how closely those outbreaks are associated with vaccine hesitancy?

DH: Thats a great question, because we unfortunately have seen an increase in measles cases across the U.S. this year. Measles is an incredibly, incredibly contagious disease, and really requires extremely high vaccination rates to prevent outbreaks and spread.

Now, vaccine hesitancy has a role in under-vaccination, or vaccine delay and refusal. However, the reality is more complicated than simply vaccine hesitancy is the only cause of measles outbreaks. It might be easy to blame the 7 percent of children who were under-vaccinated for measles by the time they reach kindergarten on anti-vaccine or science-denier parents but in reality we still have significant access issues as well. Unfortunately, accessing vaccines is still often far too difficult for families, especially families in marginalized communities.

To illustrate this, many families still cant find a primary care provider that has reasonable availability. During the unwinding of Medicaid last year, many families lost Medicaid insurance for their children, and they are having a hard time finding free vaccines for measles through great programs like the Vaccines for Children program.

Also, many parents simply haven't had the chance to ask a trusted health care professional about vaccines, and hear from them about the value of vaccines for diseases like measles. So the problem is, when the dominant narrative is that vaccine hesitancy alone drives under-vaccination for diseases like measles, then efforts to address access barriers to measles vaccines may fall short.

UD: Are you concerned about children in the U.S. not being up to date on their Covid vaccines?

DH: Yes, I am concerned. Lets simplify things and remove the Covid-19 name and all the polarizing baggage that may come with that name out of the equation. In our communities, we have a common and contagious respiratory disease that is still causing severe illnesses, hospitalizations, and deaths in children. And we have a safe and effective vaccine to prevent this disease. Yet, most children are not receiving it. That concerns me.

The reasons children have fallen behind on Covid-19 vaccines are complex and evolving, including attitudinal and access barriers. However, I am careful not to blame low pediatric Covid-19 vaccination rates squarely on parents or mislabel parents as being anti-vaccine.

Most parents I see whose children havent received recommended Covid-19 vaccines or parents who have concerns about Covid-19 vaccines arent anti-vax or science deniers. Usually, these parents accept other vaccines for their children. Many of these parents dont know and havent heard about the continued value of Covid-19 vaccines for their children from someone they trust. As health care providers, we must do a better job of sharing this continued value with parents with empathy and clear communication.

UD: Have we learned all the lessons that we ought to have learned from the pandemic, or are there are there lessons that you feel might not have sunk in yet?

DH: I think its important to continually be learning lessons about how we have handled vaccine delivery, vaccine hesitancy and confidence, so that we can apply those lessons to the future. Because this is not the last time we will have either a pandemic or a new disease, or the last time that were going to have great vaccines that can really improve health and keep children healthy.

Vaccine hesitancy did not start with the Covid-19 pandemic. As pediatricians we have been addressing vaccine hesitancy for a very long time. In fact, vaccine hesitancy goes back as far as the first vaccine created for smallpox, over 200 years ago.

Theres a saying in vaccine delivery research that even the best vaccine is zero percent effective if it only sits in a vial, right? Vaccines dont save lives vaccinations save lives. Actually having people take the vaccines saves lives. And so we absolutely can continually improve on how we communicate about the value of vaccines, how we share information with families and parents, so that more and more children can get the benefits of vaccines.

Dan Falk

This article was originally published on Undark on April 5. Read the original article.

See original here:

Interview: Puncturing Misconceptions About Vaccine Hesitancy - Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance

More than 40 per cent of Hong Kong civil servants dismissed over the past five years were sacked over not complying with the citys vaccination requirements when Covid-19 rules were in place.

Out of the 50 dismissal cases as a result of misconduct, 21 were related to violating a policy requiring staff to be vaccinated against Covid-19.

From February 2022, at the height of Hong Kongs fifth and most fatal wave of Covid-19, visitors and staff at government buildings and offices were required to meet specific vaccination requirements unless they had valid medical exemptions. The policy was later rolled out to restaurants and other businesses.

The rule was meant to further speed up the strengthening of the protective barrier against the virus among civil servants so as to mitigate any impact on the governments anti-epidemic effort, authorities said at the time.

To encourage vaccinations, the government also gave civil servants an extra paid vacation day after receiving each jab.

The Civil Service Bureau provided the dismissal figures in writing in response to lawmaker Chau Siu-chung, who raised the matter as part of initial questions asked by legislators ahead of Legislative Council meetings to discuss the budget for this financial year.

Officials from the Civil Service Bureau will address lawmakers on the questions in person at a meeting on Monday afternoon. Officials from the Department of Justice and Education Bureau are also expected to attend to answer questions directed at them.

Among the 50 dismissal cases over misconduct, 20 were related to unauthorised absence/unpunctuality. Four were related to misconduct bringing disrepute to the government.

Separately, there were 74 dismissals due to criminal offences. Eighteen related to cases of shoplifting or theft, while 14 were in connection with sex-related offences.

In a February Legislative Council document, the Civil Service Bureau said the disciplinary mechanism ensures that appropriate punishments are meted out to officers who have misconducted themselves under the principles of fairness and impartiality.

Civil servants suspected of misconduct are given a fair hearing and sufficient opportunities to defend themselves, the document added, with the accused allowed to present witnesses to give evidence in hearings, and engage legal representation.

The bureau also said that civil servants who were aggrieved by the formal disciplinary punishment could appeal or apply for a judicial review, which are court procedures where a judge examines the decision-making processes of administrative bodies.

On Thursday, a teacher who lost her job at a government secondary school over online comments about police during the 2019 protests challenged the Civil Service Bureaus decision to dismiss her at the High Court. She was fired last July after authorities determined that her actions had negatively affected students and tarnished the governments reputation.

Support HKFP |Policies & Ethics |Error/typo? |Contact Us | Newsletter |Transparency & Annual Report | Apps

Help safeguard press freedom & keep HKFP free for all readers by supporting our team

Continue reading here:

Over 40% of Hong Kong civil service dismissals for misconduct in past 5 years linked to breach of Covid vaccine rules - Hong Kong Free Press

As someone who lost a family member to COVID-19, I believe House Bill 87, which prevents businesses that don't mandate the COVID vaccine from being sued if employees get sick willdo more harm than good.

My son-in-law was 48 when he died in February 2021 after catching COVID. My daughter became a widow at 37, and two teenaged girls lost their father. There was no vaccine available for my son-in-law. In February 2021, wearing masks, hand washing, and social distancing were the recommendations coming from officials.

My son-in-law was a military veteran and a working professional in the prime of his life.

He started feeling bad, developed a cough, tested positive for COVID-19, was seen by a doctor and prescribed medication for his cough. Three days later when he developed a fever, my daughter took him to the ER, and he was admitted to the hospital. Over the next three weeks, even though doctors and medical staff did all they could do for him, his condition worsened.

During that period, my daughter couldn't visit him. Before he was put on the ventilator, she did get to speak to him. Thankfully he was moved to an ICU room where she, my wife and I could see him, but he was sedated. On Feb. 6, 2021, my son-in-law died from COVID-19.

But my son-in-law wasn't the only one who died from COVID-19 that day. Across America, thousands of people died that day from the illness. I wore a mask then and still do, and I never caught COVID. But as a pastor, I understand and respect those that choose not to wear a mask.

I hope the Senate would come to a workable solution for both sides instead of being influenced by the callous, insensitive words of stateRep. Michael Echols.

RANDY PERKINS

Zachary

Excerpt from:

Letters: I lost someone to COVID. House Bill 87 won't help in the fight - NOLA.com

NewsWatch 12 has the details.

MEDFORD, Ore. -- A group of lawsuits against Asante's health care operations are sharing a day in federal court.

Thirteen federal court cases have a shared proceeding this afternoon with the U.S. District Court in Medford.

A sampling of the cases shows claims of religious discrimination against Asante by health care workers who invoked religion as their rationale for refusing to get COVID-19 vaccinations, claiming their employment with Asante subsequently was suspended, causing wrongful employment termination for exercising their religious beliefs.

Eight of the cases list individual plaintiffs, and five of the civil cases have multiple plaintiffs, such asKather et al v. Asante Health System et al. For example, that case has 14 plaintiffs, including Michele Kather, Kourtney Selee, Alyssa Button, Justin Cirillo, Anna Drevenstedt, Ron Hittinger, Miles Kopish, Holly Martin, Tamara Rada, Jessica Stone, Michaela Begg, Myranda Miller, Ronda Osterberg and James Wilson. They list Asante Health System and Does 1 Through 50 as plaintiffs.

Their federal lawsuit seeks "damages for religious discrimintation in violation of Title VII ... and aiding and abetting religious discrimination."

A member of the Emergency Department staff of Asante Three Rivers Medical Center moves toward a patients room.

Today's court conference involves Asante Health System, Asante Rogue Regional Medical Center and Asante Three Rivers Medical Center as follow:

Salem-based attorney Ray Hacke is legal counsel for plaintiffs in three cases, including Kather.He said he believes all of today's Asante cases are COVID-19 vaccine related.

Hacke said Asante claims it accommodated employees who'd cited religion to decline COVID-19 vaccination by putting them on unpaid leave from work. He says, "Putting everybody on unpaid leave ... left people to choose between their faith and their employment."

A staff member of the Emergency Department at Asante Three Rivers Medical Center works at a computer terminal.

He said federal law is clear that employers should not penalize people who identify and articulate their religious beliefs as rationale for an allowed exemption from vaccination.He said, for example, Ronda Osterberg specifically spelled out her faith basis as rationale to Asante for declining COVID-19 vaccination, "then was fired outright."

Hacke said the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, with jurisdiction over Oregon, last year ruled that an employee's religious observance is a minor adjustment for employers to accommodate.

His three cases are among today's 13 cases he says are getting consolidated by the federal district court in Medford, including his largest plaintiffs case with 47 plaintiffs.

Hacke said he believes all 13 of today's cases involve Asante employee dismissals for refusing COVID-19 vaccine, and most of them involve religious discrimination claims for people who invoked their religion as a protected right for declining the vaccine, including Asante staff chaplain James Wilson. Hacke says a few cases might involve staff members who invoked protections in the federal Americans with Disabilities Act for medical exemptions from vaccination. His religious discrimination cases involve claims from more than 60 plaintiffs.

Hacke said one of his filings is a potential class-action case. He notes that with class action cases, instead of needing to prove all plaintiffs' cases, then legal counsel need to prove one case or a sampling of cases that are representative of other plaintiffs.He said Asante is resisting a class action which, "could involve a substantial amount of money."

Hacke said his three pending cases leave damages for court to determine. He said some of his clients have mitigated their damages, or financial losses from their claimed Asante employment dismissal, by going to work for Providence's Medford medical organization or returning to Asante after about six months, without vaccination. Hacke says Asante's reinstatement of those plaintiffs/employees and accommodating their religious exemptions later appears to undermine Asante's position of dismissing them in the first place.

Hacke said his cases leave the court to determine adequate compensation for distress, depression, anxiety and punitive damages because they involve factors that are unmeasurable, with real costs and losses somewhat determinable.

He said the federal court is coordinating these 13 cases to process them together through the judicial system.Hacke said other similar cases are underway in other places in Oregon.

Hacke said this way the ruling and the court processing of the cases should be consistent.

He said U.S. District courts in Oregon have 120 COVID-19 vaccination cases.

A staff member in the Critical Care Unit at Asante Three Rivers Medical Center treats a patient. Due to the influx of critically-ill patients suffering from COVID-19, staff had to add beds to some rooms.

He has three cases against Asante, with other federal cases pending against Rogue Community Health and another party.

Hacke explains that Title VII federal statute claims have "burden shifting" framework. He said first, plaintiffs must demonstrate their religious beliefs caused conflict. Second, he says the employee/plaintiff must show they informed the employer about the conflict. Third, Hacke said then-plaintiffs must show the employer in question did not accommodate the employee or the employer took adverse action against the employee/s.

Hacke says then the employer must show either undue hardship prevented reasonable accommodation for the employee or show that accommodation was made, which Asante says unpaid leave provides.

Hacke says unpaid leave is same as employment termination, and he says in the "burden (of proof) shifting," then the next step is plaintiff showing "pretext," or demonstrating the employer's case is inaccurate or its action is a not an accommodation.

Hacke expects the consistent, consolidated treatment by the federal court will have the cases advance or end as one. He says besides representing a plaintiff who was Asante's chaplain, his clients include a security guard and a person who worked remotely.

An isolation room at Asante Three Rivers Medical Center displayed a green check, indicating the room was occupied by a patient not suffering from COVID-19, and no special precautions were needed when entering. The colored sphere above the door is used to indicate negative pressure, ensuring airflow is into the room, not out of it.

Original post:

13 federal cases against Asante include religious discrimination for COVID vaccine refusal - KDRV

Claim:

In March 2024, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released a redacted 148-page study on myocarditis following COVID-19 vaccination.

In April 2024, a rumor circulated claiming that the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention had released a 148-page, completely redacted study the previous month on myocarditis following COVID-19 mRNA vaccination. One usershared the claim without context on X (formerly Twitter), garnering more than 18,000 views:

(X user @thehealthb0t)

Another X userlinked to a YouTube video of "The Jimmy Dore Show," posted at the end of March 2024, which discussed the topic at length and had received 13,000 likes and 124,000 views:

(X user @AgentOrangeUSMC)

This YouTube channel had 1.34 million subscribers at the time of this writing.

The document had been the subject of discussions during a hearing of the Novel Coronavirus Southwestern Intergovernmental Committee on March 15, 2024, which waslivestreamed.

"One hundred and forty eight pages," said Arizona state Sen. Janae Shamp as she held up blank pages during the hearing. "The entire thing is redacted. What good does a study do if there's nothing there?"

Peter McCullough, a cardiologist who contributed to the spread of misinformation during the COVID-19 pandemic, also was at the hearing. "We're witnessing an active cover-up of a colossal consumer safety debacle that is basically affecting the entire world," he said. He then accused the CDC and the FDA, as well as the U.K., European and Australian medicine regulation agencies, of being complicit in this alleged cover-up.

As we will demonstrate below, the redacted document was not in any sense a "study."

A clip of the intergovernmental committee's hearing was shared on X(archived)on March 18, 2024, and was viewed 4 million times and amplified more than 20,000 times.

(screen capture)

The CDC did release 148 redacted pages following a Freedom of Information Act request by The Epoch Times concerning "MOVING" (Myocarditis outcomes after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination) surveys. These pages, however, were not a study. Zachary Stieber, the Epoch Times reporter who made the FOIA request, posted on X that he had noticed "confusion" about the document:

(@ZackStieber / X)

The post (archived) to which he replied included the 148 blank pages. Clicking on the linked document and zooming in, a small inscription appears in the upper left corner of the first page:

(X screenshot)

The inscription (b)(5), seen above, is repeated on every page of the document. This refers to information that is exempted from FOIA requests. According to the U.S. Justice Department:

Exemption 5 of the FOIA protects "inter-agency or intra-agency memorandums or letters which would not be available by law to a party other than an agency in litigation with the agency."

This detail confirms that the 148 redacted pages did not constitute a study, but were instead communications within the CDC or between the CDC and other agencies. We contacted the CDC asking for more details on the reason for the redaction and will update this story if we receive an answer.

Stieber, in his post, added that the CDC team in charge of studying myocarditis outcomes following COVID-19 vaccinations has already shared several studies on the topic. He links to one of them, published in 2022 in The Lancet, which concludes:

After at least 90 days since onset of myocarditis after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination, most individuals in our cohort were considered recovered by health-care providers, and quality of life measures were comparable to those in pre-pandemic and early pandemic populations of a similar age.

The paper also recommends further study into the topic.

The CDC and other research institutions have indeed released several studies on the link between the COVID-19 vaccine and both myocarditis, which is an inflammation of the heart muscle, and pericarditis, which is an inflammation of the thin tissue that lines the heart. The CDC website links to 10 studies on myocarditis after the vaccine carried out between 2021 and 2022. As Stieber indicated in his post, the MOVING team told him it plans to publish another study with updated findings.

Several studies found that while myocarditis and pericarditis can follow mRNA vaccination, the data show vaccination protects against complications. For example, a study from Germany showed that the risk of dying from myocarditis from a COVID-19 infection is much higher than the risk of dying from myocarditis not caused by COVID-19.

Bemtgen, Xavier, et al. 'Myocarditis Mortality with and without COVID-19: Insights from a National Registry'. Clinical Research in Cardiology, vol. 113, no. 2, 2024, pp. 21622. PubMed Central, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00392-022-02141-9.

Kracalik, Ian, et al. ' Ian Kracalik, PhD Matthew E Oster, MD Karen R Broder, MD Margaret M Cortese, MD Maleeka Glover, ScD Karen Shields, BS et al. Show All Authors Published:September 21, 2022DOI:https://Doi.Org/10.1016/S2352-4642(22)00244-9 PlumX Metrics'. The Lancet, vol. 6, no. 11, Nov. 2022, pp. 78899, https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanchi/article/PIIS2352-4642(22)00244-9/fulltext.

Office of Information Policy | FOIA Guide, 2004 Edition: Exemption 5. 23 July 2014, https://www.justice.gov/archives/oip/foia-guide-2004-edition-exemption-5.

Vaccine Safety Publications | Research | Vaccine Safety | CDC. 27 Feb. 2024, https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/research/publications/index.html.

Video Player. https://www.azleg.gov/videoplayer/?clientID=6361162879&eventID=2024031052. Accessed 22 Mar. 2024.

Go here to read the rest:

CDC Redacted Study on Myocarditis After COVID-19 Vaccination? - Snopes.com

(Precision Vaccinations News)

During the recent pandemic in the United States, leading public health officials noted a shift in the attitudes of pregnant and recently pregnant women towards vaccination.

As per an Original Investigation published by The JAMA OPEN Network today, during the first waves of the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus outbreak, 76% of pregnant women received the COVID-19 vaccination.

Study participants were about31years of age and enrolled inthe U.S. CDC's Vaccine Safety Datalinkand were asked about their vaccination status.

Response rates were 43.5% for wave 1 (652 of 1500 individuals sampled) and 39.5% for wave 2 (575 of 1456).

Overall, 76.8% (95% confidence interval, 71.5%- 82.2%) reported having received one or more COVID-19 vaccinations.

Spanish-speaking Hispanic respondents had the highest weighted proportion of respondents with one or more vaccinations.

Additionally, these women were asked if they agreed with the statement that 'COVID-19 vaccines are safe.'

These researchers wrote on April 9, 2024, that there is decreasing confidence in COVID-19 vaccine safety in diverse pregnant and recently pregnant insured populations, which is a public health concern.

This study was supported by the U.S. CDC, contract number 200-2012-53581-0011, and no industry conflicts of interest were highlighted.

Excerpt from:

76% of Pregnant Women Received a COVID-19 Vaccination Precision Vaccinations News - Precision Vaccinations

From spring break parties to Mardi Gras, many people remember the last major normal thing they did before the novel coronavirus pandemic dawned, forcing governments worldwide to issue stay-at-home advisories and shutdowns.

Even before the first case of COVID-19 was detected in the U.S., fears and uncertainties helped spur misinformations rapid spread. In March 2020, schools closed, employers sent staff to work from home, and grocery stores called for physical distancing to keep people safe. But little halted the flow of misleading claims that sent fact-checkers and public health officials into overdrive.

Some peoplefalselyassertedCOVIDs symptoms were associated with 5G wireless technology. Faux cures anduntested treatmentspopulated social media and political discourse. Amid uncertainty about the viruss origins, some peopleproclaimedCOVID didnt existat all. PolitiFact named downplay and denial about the virus its2020 Lie of the Year.

Four years later, peoples lives are largely free of the extreme public health measures that restricted them early in the pandemic. But COVID misinformation persists, although its now centered mostly on vaccines and vaccine-related conspiracy theories.

PolitiFact has publishedmore than 2,000 fact checksrelated to COVID vaccines alone.

From a misinformation researcher perspective, [there has been] shifting levels of trust, said Tara Kirk Sell, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security. Early on in the pandemic, there was a lot of: This isnt real, fake cures, and then later on, we see more vaccine-focused mis- and disinformation and a more partisan type of disinformation and misinformation.

Here are some of the most persistent COVID misinformation narratives we see today:

A Loss of Trust in the Vaccines

COVID vaccines were quickly developed, with U.S. patients receiving the first shots in December 2020, 11 months after the first domestic case was detected.

Experts credit the speedy development with helping tosave millions of livesand preventing hospitalizations. Researchers at the University of Southern California and Brown University calculated thatvaccines saved 2.4 million livesin 141 countries starting from the vaccines rollout through August 2021 alone. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data shows there were 1,164 U.S. deaths provisionallyattributed to COVIDthe week of March 2, down from nearly 26,000 at the pandemics height in January 2021, as vaccines were just rolling out.

But on social media and in some public officials remarks, misinformation about COVID vaccine efficacy and safety is common.U.S. presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has built his 2024 campaign on a movement that seeks to legitimize conspiracy theories about the vaccines. PolitiFact made that its2023 Lie of the Year.

PolitiFact has seen claims that spike proteins from vaccines arereplacing spermin vaccinated males. (Thatsfalse.) Weve researched the assertion that vaccines can change your DNA. (Thatsmisleading and ignores evidence). Social media posts poked fun at Kansas City Chiefs tight end Travis Kelce for encouraging people to get vaccinated, asserting that the vaccine actually shuts off recipients hearts. (No, it doesnt.)And some people pointed to an American Red Cross blood donation questionnaire as evidence that shots are unsafe.(PolitiFact rated that False.)

Experts say this misinformation has real-world effects.

A September 2023 survey byKFF found that 57% of Americanssay they are very or somewhat confident in COVID vaccines. And those who distrust them are more likely to identify as politically conservative: Thirty-six percent of Republicans compared with 84% of Democrats say they are very or somewhat confident in the vaccine.

Immunization rates for routine vaccines for other conditions have also taken a hit. Measles had been eradicated for more than 20 years in the U.S. but there have been recent outbreaks instates including Florida,Maryland, and Ohio. Floridas surgeon general hasexpressedskepticismabout vaccines andrejectedguidancefrom the CDC about how to contain potentially deadly disease spread.

The vaccination rate among kindergartners has declined from 95% in the 2019-20 school year to 93% in 2022-23,according to theCDC. Public health officials have set a 95% vaccination rate target to prevent and reduce the risk of disease outbreaks. The CDC also foundexemptions had risen to 3%, thehighest rate ever recordedin the U.S.

Unsubstantiated Claims That Vaccines Cause Deaths or Other Illness

PolitiFact has seen repeated and unsubstantiatedclaims that COVID vaccines have caused mass numbers of deaths.

A recent widely shared post claimed17 million people had diedbecause of the vaccine, despite contrary evidence from multiple studies and institutions such as the World Health Organization and CDC that the vaccines are safe and help to prevent severe illness and death.

Another online post claimed the booster vaccine hadeight strains of HIVand would kill 23% of the population. Vaccine manufacturers publish theingredient lists; they do not include HIV. People living with HIV were among the peoplegiven priority accessduring early vaccine rollout to protect them from severe illness.

COVID vaccines also have been blamed forcausing Alzheimersandcancer. Experts have found no evidence the vaccines cause either conditions.

You had this remarkable scientific or medical accomplishment contrasted with this remarkable rejection of that technology by a significant portion of the American public, said Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center at the Childrens Hospital of Philadelphia.

More than three years after vaccines became available, about 70% of Americans have completed a primary series of COVID vaccination,according to CDC figures. About 17% have gotten the most recentbivalent booster.

False claimsoften pullfrom and misuse datafrom theVaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. The database, run by the CDC and the FDA, allows anybody to report reactions after any vaccine. The reports themselves are unverified, but the database is designed to help researchers find patterns for further investigation.

AnOctober 2023 surveypublished in November by the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania found 63% of Americans think it is safer to get the COVID-19 vaccine than the COVID-19 disease that was down from 75% in April 2021.

Celebrity Deaths Falsely Attributed to Vaccines

Betty White, Bob Saget,Matthew Perry, andDMXare just a few of the many celebrities whose deaths were falsely linked to the vaccine. The anti-vaccine filmDied Suddenly tried to give credence to false claims that the vaccine causes people to die shortly after receiving it.

Cline Gounder, editor-at-large for public health at KFF Health News and an infectious disease specialist, said these claims proliferate because of two things:cognitive bias and more insidious motivated reasoning.

Its like saying I had an ice cream cone and then I died the next day; the ice cream must have killed me, she said. And those with preexisting beliefs about the vaccine seek to attach sudden deaths to the vaccine.

Gounder experienced thispersonally when her husband, the celebrated sports journalist Grant Wahl, died while covering the 2022 World Cup in Qatar. Wahl died of a ruptured aortic aneurysm but anti-vaccine accounts falsely linked his death to a COVID vaccine, forcing Gounder topubliclyset the record straight.

It is very clear that this is about harming other people, said Gounder, who was aguestatUnited Facts of Americain 2023. And in this case, trying to harm me and my family at a point where we were grieving my husbands loss. What was important in that moment was to really stand up for my husband, his legacy, and to do what I know he would have wanted me to do, which is to speak the truth and to do so very publicly.

Out-of-Control Claims About Government Control

False claims that thepandemic was plannedby government leaders and those in power abound.

At any given moment, Microsoft Corp. co-founder and philanthropist Bill Gates, World Economic Forum head Klaus Schwab, or Anthony Fauci, former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, are blamed for orchestrating pandemic-related threats.

In November, Rep. Matt Rosendale (R-Mont.)falsely claimedFauci brought the virus to his state ayear before the pandemic.There isno evidenceof that. Gates, according to the narratives, is using dangerous vaccines to push a depopulation agenda.Thatsfalse. And Schwab has not said he has an agenda to establish a totalitarian global regime using the coronavirus to depopulate the Earth and reorganize society. Thats part of aconspiracy theorythats come to be calledThe Great Resetthat has beendebunkedmanytimes.

The United Nations World Health Organization is frequently painted as a global force for evil, too, with detractors saying it is using vaccination to control or harm people. But the WHO has not declared thata new pandemicis happening, as some have claimed. Its current pandemic preparedness treaty is in no way positioned to remove human rights protections or restrict freedoms, asone post said. And the organization has not announced plans to deploy troops to corral people andforcibly vaccinate them. The WHO is, however, working on a new treaty to help countries improve coordination in response to future pandemics.

KFF Health Newsis a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFFan independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learnmore about us.

Report a correction via email | Editorial standards and policies

See original here:

Four Years After COVID-19, Confusion & Misinformation Persists - LevittownNow.com

Pharmaceutical watchdog, the Prescription Medicines Code of Practice Authority (PMCPA), found that the pharma giant promoted unlicensed medicines and violated its regulatory code five times.

Back in 2020, Dr Berkley Phillips, medical director of Pfizer UK, retweeted a post on X from a US employee which stated: Our vaccine candidate is 95 per cent effective in preventing COVID-19, and 94 per cent effective in people over 65 years old. We will file all of our data with health authorities within days. Thank you to every volunteer in our trial, and to all who are tirelessly fighting this pandemic.

The post was also re-shared by four other UK employees at the company.

However, the PMCPA ruled that the post had limited information about the vaccines efficacy, no reference to adverse events and no safety information.

Therefore, the message resulted in an unlicensed medicine being proactively disseminated on Twitter to health professions and members of the public in the UK the regulatory body said.

As a result of the misjudged tweets, Pfizer was charged 34,800 in administrative costs.

But, how much damage has this done to Pfizer's reputation? Will it trigger internal changes at the drugmaker and does it indicate a wider problem in the industry?

While Dr. Ila Bhatia, consultant and social media expert for the life sciences and healthcare industry, describes the event as less than ideal it is important to note that it was a few employees sharing posts and such information was not shared from Pfizers official handles.

Pfizer and its employees should indeed be more responsible in posting on social media platforms considering its a very well-known brand with a global presence. Such events lead to poor public perception, not just for the company and its brand but also the industry as a whole, she tells Bio Pharma Reporter.

This initial complaint prompted the PMCPA to further investigate Pfizers misuse of social media to misleadingly and illegally promote their COVID-19 vaccine the ruling said.

It found that this social media misbehaviour was even more widespread than initially estimated, extending right to the top of their UK operation.

In response, a Pfizer UK spokesman said the company is deeply sorry and fully recognises and accepts the issues highlighted by this PMCPA ruling.

Pfizer UK has a comprehensive policy on personal use of social media in relation to Pfizers business which prohibits colleagues from interacting with any social media related to Pfizers medicines and vaccines backed by staff briefings and training, the company said.

The personal use of social media by UK pharmaceutical industry employees in relation to company business is a challenging area for pharmaceutical companies, in which we continue to take all of the appropriate steps that are reasonably expected of a pharmaceutical company.

The drugmaker also said it was conducting a review into employees social media use to avoid future regulatory missteps.

Dr Phillips, the employee at the heart of the issue, said his retweet was accidental and unintentional.

That said, we immediately accepted the case ruling and do everything we can to ensure that our employees adhere to our strict social media policy and the industry Code of Practice when using their personal social media, he added.

As someone who has worked in clinical research for years, Olga Peycheva, managing director at Solutions OP, can understand the excitement to share positive news about a clinical trial.

I believe the employees probably never considered that this will be considered as advertising. The reason for this is that companies do not provide training on advertising to their clinical operation staff and this is something reserved for their sales teams only, she tells Bio Pharma Reporter.

Personally, I hope Pfizer will see this training gap and help their clinical operation employees better understand the complications of their social media activities.

However, Ben Kingsley, head of legal affairs at UsForThem, had a less forgiving perspective, commenting: "Its astonishing how many times Pfizers senior executives have been found guilty of serious regulatory offences in this case including the most serious offence of all under the UK Code of Practice.

Yet the consequences for Pfizer and the individuals concerned continue to be derisory. This hopeless system of regulation for a multi-billion dollar life and death industry has become a sham, in dire need of reform.

The news comes after Pfizers CEO previously found himself in hot water over his misleading comments about childrens vaccines, made during an interview with the BBC.

In the interview, Dr Albert Bourla said that there is no doubt in my mind that the benefits, completely, are in favour of vaccinating youngsters aged five to 11 against Covid-19.

He added that: Covid in schools is thriving and there are kids that will have severe symptoms.

These comments were made before the vaccine received approval by the UKs medical regulator for this age group and were found to have breached code of practice by the PMCPA.

Pfizer has evidently made several missteps in this area. But will the company exercise more caution in the future and will its latest oversight serve as a warning for the pharma industry as a whole?

Companies and their employees should be extremely careful about what they are posting in the public domain. Pfizer needs to take more measures to inform its employees to not share incomplete or unnecessary information on platforms without prior approval, Bhatia adds.

Bhatia also argues that, since this is a recurring issue, stringent measures should be undertaken to make sure those breaching the code are adequately penalised which sets an example for the future and reduces the chances of such event reoccurring.

Such blunders are likely to cause both inconvenience and embarrassment for major, public-facing companies like Pfizer. They can also increase mistrust between the public and pharmaceutical companies, especially during a heighted time like the pandemic.

Pfizer's latest slap on the wrist follows several other watchdog complaints, indicating that the company must take action internally.

See the article here:

Pfizer accused of 'bringing discredit' on industry with 'unnecessary' vaccine tweet - BioPharma-Reporter.com