Statement on the antigen composition of COVID-19 vaccines – World Health Organization (WHO)

Key points

The WHO Technical Advisory Group on COVID-19 Vaccine Composition (TAG-CO-VAC) meets regularly to assess the impact of SARS-CoV-2 evolution on the performance of approved COVID-19 vaccines. This includes meeting in person approximately every six months to determine the implications of SARS-CoV-2 evolution on COVID-19 vaccine antigen composition and to advise WHO on whether changes are needed to the antigen composition of future COVID-19 vaccines. The twice-yearly evidence review by the TAG-CO-VAC is based on the need for continued monitoring of the evolution of SARS-CoV-2 and the kinetics and protection of vaccine-derived immunity.

In May 2023, the TAG-CO-VAC recommended the use of a monovalent XBB.1 descendent lineage, such as XBB.1.5, as the vaccine antigen. In December 2023, the TAG-CO-VAC advised retaining the use of a monovalent XBB.1 descendent lineage, such as XBB.1.5, as the vaccine antigen. Several manufacturers (using mRNA, protein-based and viral vector vaccine platforms) have developed COVID-19 vaccines with a monovalent XBB.1.5 formulation which have been approved for use by regulatory authorities and introduced into COVID-19 vaccination programmes in some countries. Previous statements from the TAG-CO-VAC can be found on the WHO website.

The TAG-CO-VAC reconvened on 15-16 April 2024 to review the genetic and antigenic evolution of SARS-CoV-2; immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection and/or COVID-19 vaccination; the performance of currently approved vaccines against circulating SARS-CoV-2 variants; and the implications for COVID-19 vaccine antigen composition.

The published and unpublished evidence reviewed by the TAG-CO-VAC included: (1) SARS-CoV-2 genetic evolution with support from the WHO Technical Advisory Group on SARS-CoV-2 Virus Evolution (TAG-VE); (2) Antigenic characterization of previous and emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants using virus neutralization tests with animal antisera or human sera and further analysis of antigenic relationships using antigenic cartography; (3) Immunogenicity data on the breadth of neutralizing antibody responses elicited by currently approved vaccine antigens against circulating SARS-CoV-2 variants using animal and human sera, including modelling data; (4) Vaccine effectiveness estimates (VE) of currently approved vaccines during periods of circulation of XBB.1 and JN.1 lineages; (5) Preliminary immunogenicity data on immune responses following infection with circulating SARS-CoV-2 variants; and (6) Preliminary preclinical and clinical immunogenicity data on the performance of candidate vaccines with updated antigens shared confidentially by vaccine manufacturers with TAG-CO-VAC. Further details on the publicly available data reviewed by the TAG-CO-VAC can be found in the accompanying data annex. Unpublished and/or confidential data reviewed by the TAG-CO-VAC are not shown.

The TAG-CO-VAC acknowledges several limitations of the available data:

As of April 2024, nearly all circulating SARS-CoV-2 variants reported in publicly available databases are JN.1 derived variants. As virus evolution is expected to continue from JN.1, future formulations of COVID-19 vaccines should aim to induce enhanced neutralizing antibody responses to JN.1 and its descendent lineages. One approach recommended by TAG-CO-VAC is the use of a monovalent JN.1 lineage (GenBank: OY817255.1, GISAID: EPI_ISL_18538117, WHO Biohub: 2024-WHO-LS-001) antigen in vaccines.

The continued use of the current monovalent XBB.1.5 formulation will offer protection given the neutralizing antibody responses to early JN.1 descendent lineages, and the evidence from early rVE studies against JN.1. However, it is expected that the ability for XBB.1.5 vaccination to protect against symptomatic disease may be less robust as SARS-CoV-2 evolution continues from JN.1. Other formulations and/or platforms that achieve robust neutralizing antibody responses against currently circulating variants, particularly JN.1 descendent lineages, can also be considered.

In accordance with WHO SAGE policy, vaccination programmes should continue to use any of the WHO emergency-use listed or prequalified COVID-19 vaccines and vaccination should not be delayed in anticipation of access to vaccines with an updated composition. WHO stresses the importance of access to and equity in the use of all available COVID-19 vaccines.

Given the limitations of the evidence upon which the recommendations above are derived and the anticipated continued evolution of the virus, the TAG-CO-VAC strongly encourages generation of data on immune responses and clinical endpoints (i.e. VE) on the performance of all currently approved COVID-19 vaccines against emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants, and candidate vaccines with an updated antigen over time.

As previously stated, the TAG-CO-VAC continues to encourage the further development of vaccines that may improve protection against infection and reduce transmission of SARS-CoV-2.

Read more:

Statement on the antigen composition of COVID-19 vaccines - World Health Organization (WHO)

Use of an Additional Updated 20232024 COVID-19 Vaccine Dose for Adults Aged 65 Years: Recommendations of … – CDC

Summary

What is already known about this topic?

In September 2023, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommended updated (20232024 Formula) COVID-19 vaccination for all persons aged 6 months.

What is added by this report?

On February 28, 2024, ACIP recommended that all persons aged 65 years receive 1 additional dose of any updated (20232024 Formula) COVID-19 vaccine (i.e., Moderna, Novavax, or Pfizer-BioNTech).

What are the implications for public health practice?

Adults aged 65 years should receive an additional dose of the updated (20232024 Formula) COVID-19 vaccine to enhance their immunity and decrease the risk for severe COVID-19associated illness.

COVID-19 remains an important public health threat, despite overall decreases in COVID-19related severe disease since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. COVID-19associated hospitalization rates remain higher among adults aged 65 years relative to rates in younger adults, adolescents, and children; during October 2023January 2024, 67% of all COVID-19associated hospitalizations were among persons aged 65 years. On September 12, 2023, CDCs Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommended updated (20232024 Formula) COVID-19 vaccination with a monovalent XBB.1.5-derived vaccine for all persons aged 6 months to protect against severe COVID-19associated illness and death. Because SARS-CoV-2 continues to circulate throughout the year, and because of the increased risk for COVID-19related severe illness in persons aged 65 years, the protection afforded by updated vaccines against JN.1 and other currently circulating variants, and the expected waning of vaccine-conferred protection against disease, on February 28, 2024, ACIP recommended all persons aged 65 years receive 1 additional dose of the updated (20232024 Formula) COVID-19 vaccine. Implementation of these recommendations is expected to enhance immunity that might have waned and decrease the risk for severe COVID-19associated outcomes, including death, among persons aged 65 years.

Since June 2020, CDCs Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) has convened 39 public meetings to review data and consider recommendations related to the use of COVID-19 vaccines (1). On September 12, 2023, ACIP recommended that all persons aged 6 months receive updated (20232024 Formula) monovalent, XBB.1.5 component (updated) COVID-19 vaccination to protect against severe COVID-19associated illness and death (2).

As of February 3, 2024, approximately 6.7 million COVID-19associated hospitalizations and 1.1 million COVID-19associated deaths had occurred in the United States (3). Although the overall risk for COVID-19associated hospitalization and death has decreased, severe illness related to COVID-19 continues to be a public health problem, especially among older adults. COVID-19associated hospitalization rates remain higher among adults aged 65 years relative to rates among younger adults, adolescents, and children. During October 2023January 2024, 67% of all COVID-19associated hospitalizations were among persons aged 65 years (4). Further, COVID-19 death rates during January 1, 2023January 31, 2024, were highest among adults aged 75 years, followed by adults aged 6574 years (5,6). Whereas approximately 98%99% of the U.S. population has measurable antibody titers against SARS-CoV-2 from infection, vaccination, or both (hybrid immunity), adults aged 65 years are less likely to have immunity resulting from infection (including immunity from infection only or hybrid immunity), compared with adults aged 3049 years and 5064 years (7). In addition, immunosenescence, the age-related decline in the functioning of the immune system, results in a less complete immune response to novel antigens and a reduced ability to develop robust immunity after infections or vaccination (8). The pool of naive T-cells diminishes with age, and this insufficient naive T-cell pool affects the ability to generate neutralizing antibody responses and cytotoxic T-cells in response to SARS-CoV-2 (9).

Thus, adults aged 65 years are more likely than are younger adults, adolescents, and children to rely upon vaccination to increase immunity that might have waned and might need more frequent vaccine doses to maintain protection. Coverage with the updated COVID-19 vaccine among adults aged 65 years was 42% as of February 3, 2024 (10,11). Adults in this age group are more concerned about COVID-19 disease and had higher confidence in COVID-19 vaccine safety and vaccine importance than did younger adults (5). A nationally representative survey conducted during November 2023January 2024 indicated that 68.4% of adults aged 65 years who had received an updated COVID-19 vaccine dose definitely would get another updated vaccine if it were recommended, 27.2% probably would or are unsure if they would get another updated vaccine, and 4.4% said they probably or definitely would not. COVID-19 vaccines are currently on the commercial market, but access-related barriers and disparities in vaccine coverage remain (5); in the absence of any recommendations for an additional dose, access to vaccine would be limited among persons unable to pay out of pocket for the vaccine.*

On February 28, 2024, ACIP voted to recommend that all persons aged 65 years receive 1 additional dose of any updated COVID-19 vaccine (i.e., Moderna, Novavax, or Pfizer-BioNTech). This recommendation was based on continuing SARS-CoV-2 circulation throughout the year, increased risk for severe illness attributable to COVID-19 in adults aged 65 years, protection provided by the updated vaccines against JN.1 and other currently circulating variants, the expected waning of SARS-CoV-2 immunity, and additional implementation considerations, including facilitating clear communication and equitable access to vaccine (5).

In 2018, ACIP adopted the Evidence to Recommendations framework to guide the development of vaccine recommendations. Since November 2023, the ACIP COVID-19 work group met seven times to discuss the current policy question, i.e., whether adults aged 65 years should receive an additional dose of updated COVID-19 vaccine. Work group membership included ACIP voting members, representatives of ACIP ex officio and liaison organizations, and scientific consultants with expertise in public health, immunology, medical specialties, and immunization safety and effectiveness. Work group discussion topics included COVID-19 disease surveillance and epidemiology; COVID-19 vaccination coverage; and the safety, effectiveness, feasibility of implementation, and cost effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines. This report summarizes the ACIP recommendation for an additional dose of the updated COVID-19 vaccine for persons aged 65 years and the rationale, including evidence reviewed by the work group and presented to ACIP (https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/recs/grade/covid-19-additional-dose-adults-etr.html).

No clinical trial immunogenicity data on an additional dose of the updated COVID-19 vaccines exist; however, the initial dose elicits a robust neutralizing antibody response and provides protection against JN.1 and other circulating variants (12,13). Early vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates demonstrate that updated COVID-19 vaccination provided increased protection against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19associated emergency department and urgent care visits and hospitalization, compared with receipt of no updated vaccine dose (12,14). Although these early VE estimates show no substantial waning, based on data on effectiveness of original and bivalent COVID-19 vaccines, waning of vaccine-conferred immunity is expected. Effectiveness of an additional dose in older adults has been demonstrated for previously recommended additional original COVID-19 vaccine doses (15). Among adults aged 50 years who were eligible to receive a second original monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccine booster dose, VE against COVID-19associated emergency department and urgent care encounters during the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.2/BA.2.12.1 period 120 days after the third dose was 32% but increased to 66% 7 days after the fourth dose. VE against COVID-19associated hospitalization 120 days after the third dose was 55% but increased to 80% 7 days after the fourth dose (15). In addition, in a large cohort of nursing home residents during circulation of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron subvariants, receipt of a second original monovalent mRNA COVID-19 booster dose 60 days earlier was 74% effective against severe COVID-19related outcomes (including hospitalization or death) and 90% effective against death, compared with receipt of a single booster dose (16).

COVID-19 vaccines have a favorable safety profile as demonstrated by robust safety surveillance during 3 years of COVID-19 vaccine use (17). Anaphylactic reactions have rarely been reported after receipt of COVID-19 vaccines (18). A rare risk for myocarditis and pericarditis exists, predominately in males aged 1239 years (19). No new safety concerns have been identified for the updated COVID-19 vaccine (5). Among adults aged 65 years, overall reactogenicity after COVID-19 vaccination is less frequent and less severe than among adolescents and younger adults (20). A statistical signal for ischemic stroke after Pfizer-BioNTech bivalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccine was detected in the CDC Vaccine Safety Datalink among persons aged 65 years, and information about this detection has been presented at previous ACIP meetings. Ongoing efforts to evaluate the signal have not identified any clear and consistent evidence of a safety concern for ischemic stroke with bivalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccines either when given alone or when given simultaneously with influenza vaccines (21). A recent VE study indicated that the bivalent COVID-19 vaccine was 47% effective in preventing COVID-19 related thromboembolic events (ischemic stroke, myocardial infarction, and deep vein thrombosis) among persons aged 65 years (22).

ACIP considered whether an additional dose of updated COVID-19 vaccine in persons aged 65 years is a reasonable and efficient allocation of resources. The societal incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for an additional dose of COVID-19 vaccine in persons aged 65 years was $255,122 per quality-adjusted life year saved for the base case estimate. ICER values were sensitive to probability of hospitalizations, costs, and seasonality assumptions. Estimates of ICER values that approximate cost effectiveness for those with higher risk for COVID-19associated hospitalization, such as persons with underlying conditions or those aged 75 years, were more favorable (23).

On February 28, 2024, ACIP recommended that all persons aged 65 years receive 1 additional dose of any updated COVID-19 vaccine (i.e., Moderna, Novavax, or Pfizer-BioNTech). This additional dose should be administered 4 months after the previous dose of updated COVID-19 vaccine. For initial vaccination with Novavax COVID-19 vaccine, the 2-dose series should be completed before administration of the additional dose. Because Novavax COVID-19 vaccine is currently authorized under Emergency Use Authorization, the recommendation for the updated Novavax COVID-19 vaccine is an interim recommendation.

Persons aged 65 years who are moderately or severely immunocompromised, have completed an initial series, and have received 1 updated COVID-19 vaccine dose should receive 1 additional updated COVID-19 vaccine dose 2 months after the last dose of updated vaccine. Further additional doses may be administered, guided by the clinical judgment of a health care provider and personal preference and circumstances. Any further additional doses should be administered 2 months after the last COVID-19 vaccine dose. Additional clinical considerations, including detailed schedules and tables by age for all age groups and vaccination history for those who are or are not moderately or severely immunocompromised, are available at https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/clinical-considerations/covid-19-vaccines-us.html.

Adverse events after vaccination should be reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). For licensed COVID-19 vaccines administered to persons aged 12 years, reporting is encouraged for any clinically significant adverse event even when whether the vaccine caused the event is uncertain, as well as for vaccination errors. For COVID-19 vaccines given under Emergency Use Authorization, vaccination providers are required to report certain adverse events to VAERS. Additional information is available at https://vaers.hhs.gov or by telephone at 1-800-822-7967.

Karen Broder, Mary Chamberland, Demetre Daskalakis, Susan Goldstein, Aron Hall, Elisha Hall, Fiona Havers, Andrew Leidner, Pedro Moro, Sara Oliver, Ismael Ortega-Sanchez, Kadam Patel, Manisha Patel, Amanda Payne, Huong Pham, Jamison Pike, Lauren Roper, Sierra Scarbrough, Tom Shimabukuro, Benjamin Silk, John Su, Evelyn Twentyman, Eric Weintraub, David Wentworth, Melinda Wharton, Michael Whitaker, JoEllen Wolicki, Fangjun Zhou, CDC. Voting members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (in addition to listed authors): Wilbur Chen, University of Maryland School of Medicine; Sybil Cineas, Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University; Camille Kotton, Harvard Medical School; James Loehr, Cayuga Family Medicine; Sarah Long, Drexel University College of Medicine. Members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices COVID-19 Vaccines Work Group: Beth P. Bell, University of Washington; Edward Belongia, Center for Clinical Epidemiology & Population Health, Marshfield Clinic Research Institute; Henry Bernstein, Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell Cohen Childrens Medical Center; Uzo Chukwuma, Indian Health Service; Paul Cieslak, Christine Hahn, Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists; Richard Dang, American Pharmacists Association; Jeffrey Duchin, Infectious Diseases Society of America; Kathy Edwards, Vanderbilt University Medical Center; Sandra Fryhofer, American Medical Association; Jason M. Goldman, American College of Physicians; Robert Hopkins, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences; Michael Ison, Chris Roberts, National Institutes of Health; Lisa A. Jackson, Jennifer C. Nelson, Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute; Denise Jamieson, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists; Jeffery Kelman, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services; Kathy Kinlaw, Center for Ethics, Emory University; Alan Lam, U.S. Department of Defense; Grace M. Lee, Stanford University School of Medicine; Lucia Lee, Anuga Rastogi, Adam Spanier, Rachel Zhang, Food and Drug Administration; Valerie Marshall, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; Dayna Bowen Matthew, George Washington University Law School; Preeti Mehrotra, Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America; Kathleen Neuzil, Center for Vaccine Development and Global Health, University of Maryland School of Medicine; Sean OLeary, American Academy of Pediatrics; Christine Oshansky, Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority; Stanley Perlman, Department of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Iowa; Marcus Plescia, Association of State and Territorial Health Officials; Rob Schechter, National Foundation for Infectious Diseases; Kenneth Schmader, American Geriatrics Society; Peter Szilagyi, University of California, Los Angeles; H. Keipp Talbot, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine; Jonathan Temte, American Academy of Family Physicians; Matthew Tunis, National Advisory Committee on Immunization Secretariat, Public Health Agency of Canada; Matt Zahn, National Association of County and City Health Officials; Nicola P. Klein, Kaiser Permanente Northern California; Cara B. Janusz, Lisa Prosser, Angela Rose, University of Michigan.

More:

Use of an Additional Updated 20232024 COVID-19 Vaccine Dose for Adults Aged 65 Years: Recommendations of ... - CDC

What to Know About the ‘FLiRT’ Variants of COVID-19 – TIME

The COVID-19 lull in the U.S. may soon come to an end, as a new family of SARS-CoV-2 variantsnicknamed FLiRT variantsbegins to spread nationwide.

These variants are distant Omicron relatives that spun out from JN.1, the variant behind the surge in cases this past winter. Theyve been dubbed FLiRT variants based on the technical names for their mutations, one of which includes the letters F and L, and another of which includes the letters R and T.

Within the FLiRT family, one variant in particular has risen to prominence: KP.2, which accounted for about 25% of new sequenced cases during the two weeks ending Apr. 27, according to data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Other FLiRT variants, including KP.1.1, have not become as widespread in the U.S. yet.

Researchers are still learning about the FLiRT variants, and many questions remain about how quickly theyll spread, whether theyll cause disease thats more or less severe than what weve seen previously, and how well vaccines will stand up to them. Heres what we know so far.

Despite KP.2's rise in the U.S., its too soon to tell whether the FLiRT family will be responsible for a major surge in cases, says Dr. Eric Topol, executive vice president at Scripps Research, who wrote about the FLiRT variants in a recent edition of his newsletter. For now, the amount of SARS-CoV-2 virus in U.S. wastewater remains minimal, according to the CDC, and hospitalizations and deaths have also continued to decline steadily since their recent peaks in January. At the global level, case counts rose from early to mid-April, but remain far lower than they were a few months ago.

KP.2 and its relatives will likely cause an uptick in cases, but my hunch is it wont be a big wave, Topol says. It might be a wavelet. Thats because people who were recently infected by the JN.1 variant seem to have some protection against reinfection, Topol says, and the virus hasnt mutated enough to become wildly different from previous strains. A recent study from researchers in Japan, which was posted online before being peer-reviewed, also found that KP.2 is less infectious than JN.1.

Vaccines still provide good protection against COVID-19-related hospitalization and death. But two preliminary studiesthe one from Japan and another from researchers in China, which was also posted online before being peer-reviewedsuggest the FLiRT variants may be better at dodging immune protection from vaccines than JN.1 was.

That isnt good, Topol says, especially since many people who got the most recent boosterroughly 30% of adults in the U.S. got it last fall, meaning their protection has begun to wane.

In an Apr. 26 statement, the World Health Organization recommended basing future vaccine formulations on the JN.1 lineage, since it seems the virus will continue to evolve from that variant. The most recent booster was based on an older strain, XBB.1.5.

The virus continues to evolve, but public-health advice remains the same: stay up-to-date on vaccines, test before gatherings, stay home when you're ill, and consider masking and avoiding crowded indoor areas, especially when lots of COVID-19 is going around.

More here:

What to Know About the 'FLiRT' Variants of COVID-19 - TIME

Hospitals no longer have to report COVID-19 hospitalization data, CDC says – 2 News Oklahoma KJRH Tulsa

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has lifted the requirement for hospitals to report COVID-19 hospitalization data to the Department of Health and Human Services.

Effective May 1, the CDC says reporting by hospitals of COVID-19 hospital admissions, hospital capacity or hospital occupancy data is no longer a mandate.

The CDC does however still strongly recommend voluntary reporting of the data.

Any data voluntarily reported after the May 1 date will become available on May 10.

This comes as COVID hospitalizations hit a record low.

Weekly COVID hospitalizations dropped to an all-time low of 5,615 hospitalizations for the week of April 20, according to the CDC.

Comparatively, hospitalizations for coronavirus peaked during the week of Jan. 15, 2022, with 150,650 hospitalizations, CDC data shows. This came amid a surge of infections from the omicron variant.

Federal officials have been collecting COVID-19 data from hospitals since the pandemic began in March 2020.

Science and Tech

5:31 PM, Mar 15, 2024

See more here:

Hospitals no longer have to report COVID-19 hospitalization data, CDC says - 2 News Oklahoma KJRH Tulsa

Covid-19 | Families grappling with vaccine-related fatalities deserve answers and support – Deccan Herald

The implications of such speculation are profound. If indeed these incidents are vaccine-related, who then bears the enduring burden of responsibility? Moreover, how can we trust the reliability and objectivity of those tasked with investigating these interconnections? These questions strike at the very core of the urgent need for thorough and transparent research, as well as accountability from all stakeholders involved in the development, distribution, and monitoring of vaccines.

The approval of Covishield for emergency use in early 2021, coupled with the waiver of traditional vaccine trial protocols by drug regulators, has the potential to profoundly affect public confidence in the vaccine. Or for that matter, any vaccine or medicine in the future. Such expedited measures, while aimed at swiftly delivering vital vaccines to the populace during the pandemic, raise citizenry concerns regarding consumer recourse in the event of adverse effects.

During a pandemic, the prevailing sentiment of overwhelming gratitude towards vaccines probably inadvertently overshadowed the need to conduct a fair and comprehensive assessment of potential side effects. It is all too convenient for some to attribute medical conditions solely to familial medical history and genetic predispositions, while disregarding the potential impact of vaccinations.

Any scepticism regarding vaccine safety has been met with resistance or even disdain.While vaccines undoubtedly play a crucial role in mitigating the spread of infectious diseases, including Covid-19, it is essential to maintain a balanced perspective.Acknowledging and thoroughly investigating potential side effects is not an indictment of vaccines themselves but rather a fundamental aspect of ensuring public health and safety. But where does one even start with this fundamental task?

While governments acted out of necessity to address the urgent health crisis, the focus on vaccine deployment must not overshadow the plight of individuals suffering from various side effects.While it may be theoretically untenable to hold governments solely accountable, questions arise regarding the accountability of vaccine manufacturers and distributors, entities with decades of clinical expertise and responsibility in ensuring product safety.

In medico-legal contexts, it is often tempting to dismiss adverse events as isolated incidents. However, in the case of vaccine design, where meticulous testing is paramount, the impact of Covid-19 vaccines on individuals' lives, including ongoing health challenges, cannot be disregarded. Families grappling with potential vaccine-related fatalities deserve answers and support, as do those contending with the enduring consequences of vaccine-related health issues.

In a humanitarian plea, one may ask: Is it too much to expect vaccine makers to acknowledge that testing may have been insufficient? After all, each vial of vaccine, while undoubtedly saving countless lives, may also carry the weight of families mourning lost loved ones or individuals grappling with vaccine-related health issues. But vaccines, as much as any healthcare, is a hard-nosed business. Such an expectation is a flawed contradiction to the principles of justice. At the altar of a legal framework, such expectations would need time and financial resources.

The prospect of pursuing a medico-legal case can feel daunting for families already burdened by the consequences of vaccine-related adverse events. The pharmaceutical industry, with its considerable resources and legal expertise, may seem formidable in comparison. Yet, it is essential to remember that every individual impacted by vaccine-related issues deserves to have their concerns heard and addressed with empathy and fairness. Do we have such fairness in the Indian society?

(Srinath Sridharan is a policy researcher and corporate adviser. X: @ssmumbai.)

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are the author's own. They do not necessarily reflect the views of DH.

Link:

Covid-19 | Families grappling with vaccine-related fatalities deserve answers and support - Deccan Herald

Hospitals no longer have to report COVID-19 hospitalization data, CDC says – Denver 7 Colorado News

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has lifted the requirement for hospitals to report COVID-19 hospitalization data to the Department of Health and Human Services.

Effective May 1, the CDC says reporting by hospitals of COVID-19 hospital admissions, hospital capacity or hospital occupancy data is no longer a mandate.

The CDC does however still strongly recommend voluntary reporting of the data.

Any data voluntarily reported after the May 1 date will become available on May 10.

This comes as COVID hospitalizations hit a record low.

Weekly COVID hospitalizations dropped to an all-time low of 5,615 hospitalizations for the week of April 20, according to the CDC.

Comparatively, hospitalizations for coronavirus peaked during the week of Jan. 15, 2022, with 150,650 hospitalizations, CDC data shows. This came amid a surge of infections from the omicron variant.

Federal officials have been collecting COVID-19 data from hospitals since the pandemic began in March 2020.

Science and Tech

4:31 PM, Mar 15, 2024

Continued here:

Hospitals no longer have to report COVID-19 hospitalization data, CDC says - Denver 7 Colorado News

Peer support valuable intervention for health worker stress during COVID-19, study shows – University of Minnesota Twin Cities

With healthcare worker (HCW) burnout one of the most pressing issues facing US clinicians, a new study in JAMA Network Open indicates that Stress First Aid, a peer-to-peer support intervention, improved the well-being of HCWs compared with usual care during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The study is one of the only randomized clinical trials published on provider burnout interventions, and an editorial on the study in the same journal suggests the findings highlight that workplace interventions in health care have the potential to make meaningful reductions in burnout and potentially lead to more robust and resilient health care institutions.

The study enrolled 2,077 HCWs employed at 28 hospitals or clinics across the country from March 2021 through July 2022. Participants were divided into two groups, one that revived standard care and one that received a peer-to-peer support intervention from trained healthcare workers.

Recipients of the intervention were also taught to respond to their own and their peers stress reactions, the authors said, using seven core actions: check, coordinate, cover, calm, connect, competence, and confidence.

For every 50 HCWs trained, one "champion" at each site was selected to then learn the training and continue training new workers. The main outcomes of the study were rates of psychological distress and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

In total, 862 participants (696 women [80.7%] and 159 men [18.4%]) were from sites randomly assigned to the intervention arm, with a baseline psychological distress score of 5.86 and a baseline PTSD score of 16.11.

A total of 1,215 study participants were not treated. That group had a baseline mean psychological distress score of 5.98 and a baseline PTSD score of 16.40.

When looking at self-reported symptoms, researchers found a 4.6-point reduction (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.1 to 1.0) on the 0- to 24-point psychological distress score and a 6.8-point reduction (95% CI, 13.2 to 0.3) on the 0- to 80-point PTSD symptom score, which were clinically meaningful effect sizes, the authors said.

But an intent-to-treat analyses revealed no overall treatment effect of the intervention. Furthermore, the treatment effect was seen most strongly in HCWs 30 years and younger.

"Given that we found a significant effect in younger HCWs," they wrote. "It could be helpful to focus future studies of this peer-to-peer support intervention on trainees (eg, residents and nursing trainees) to capture HCWs at a critical point in their early professional development, as the intervention was originally implemented in its first military setting to create culture change within a large system."

It could be helpful to focus future studies of this peer-to-peer support intervention on trainees .

In a commentary on the study, Anna OKelly, MD, from Harvard Medical School, and colleagues wrote that the study highlights the "importance of collegiality and mutual support in a cataclysmic crisis. On the basis of the results of their study, this may be especially meaningful for young health care workers who have yet to develop the most personally meaningful coping strategies, clinical confidence, and workplace community and networks that a longer career in health care may afford."

Continue reading here:

Peer support valuable intervention for health worker stress during COVID-19, study shows - University of Minnesota Twin Cities

ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations Post Pandemic Emergency COVID-19 Guidelines and Protocols – U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Newsroom

On May 11, 2023, ICE released the Post Pandemic Emergency COVID-19 Guidelines and Protocols, which supersedes the Pandemic Response Requirements (PRR) 10.0 released on November 1, 2022.

On November 1, 2022, ICE released a revised version of the PRR, which includes several updates and points of clarification to the previous version of the PRR released on June 13, 2022.

On June 13, 2022, ICE released a revised version of the PRR, which includes several updates and points of clarification to the previous version of the PRR released on April 4, 2022.

On April 4, 2022, ICE released a revised version of the PRR, which includes several updates and points of clarification to the previous version of the PRR released on Oct. 19, 2021.

On October 19, 2021, ICE released a revised version of the PRR, which includes several updates and points of clarification to the previous version of the PRR released on March 18, 2021.

On March 16, 2021, ICE released a revised version of the PRR, which includes several updates and points of clarification to the previous version of the PRR released on October 27, 2020.

On October 27, 2020, ICE released a revised version of the PRR, which updated the definition of and procedures surrounding severe psychiatric illness in ICEs identification of aliens at higher risk of severe illness from COVID-19; adjusted ICE procedures in notifying the detainee and his or her legal counsel within 12 hours that the detainee falls within the populations identified as potentially being at higher risk of severe illness from COVID-19 and/or subclasses certified in Fraihat v. ICE; added a requirement for non-dedicated ICE detention facilities to evaluate new admissions within five days of entering custody to determine if the detainee falls within the population identified as potentially at higher risk for serious illness from COVID-19; added a section on ICE procedures for handling vulnerable populations at high risk, to include performance standards for screening, testing and custody determinations, to include requiring all new arrivals into ICE detention be tested for COVID-19 within 12 hours of arrival (collection timeframe may extend to 24 hours if facility collection logistics require additional time); included updated procedures for the use of safe cleaning products, as well as reporting requirements and ICE investigations if adverse reactions to cleaning products are experienced by detainees; amended detainee transfers by discontinuing the transfer of ICE detainees except in certain circumstances, with transfers required to clear quarantine protocols and ICE Health Services Corps, and transfers for any other reasons requiring pre-approval by the local ERO Field Office Director; highlighted that extended lockdowns must not be used as a means of COVID-19 prevention practice; and established that medical isolation is operationally distinct from administrative or disciplinary segregation, or any punitive form of housing.

On September 4, 2020, ICE released a revised version of the PRR, a dynamic document that was developed in consultation with the CDC and is updated as new information becomes available and best practices emerge. This version of the PRR updates the list of COVID-19 symptoms recognized by the CDC; provides additional guidance on protocols for asymptomatic staff who have been identified as close contacts of a confirmed COVID-19 case; clarifies that whenever possible, ICE will limit transfers of both ICE detainees and non-ICE detained populations to and from other jurisdictions and facilities unless necessary for medical evaluation, medical isolation/quarantine, clinical care, extenuating security concerns, to facilitate release or removal, or to prevent overcrowding; updates isolation protocols for COVID-19 cases to incorporate the latest CDC guidance on discontinuing transmission-based precautions using a symptom-based or time-based strategy rather than a testing-based strategy; and provides additional information on testing for asymptomatic individuals with known or suspected recent exposure.

On July 28, 2020, ICE released a newly revised version of the PRR, which identifies additional populations potentially at higher risk for serious illness from COVID-19; provides updated guidance on personal protective equipment (PPE); updated guidance on hygiene practices; offers additional guidance when transporting a detainee with confirmed or suspected cases of COVID-19; includes direct reference to CDC guidance for individuals in medical isolation in detention facilities; and includes an updated testing section based on recently released CDC guidance.

On June 22, 2020, ICE ERO released a revised version of the PRR, which expanded the list of COVID-19 symptoms; identified additional vulnerable populations potentially at higher risk for serious illness from COVID-19; provided that if single isolation rooms are unavailable, individuals with confirmed COVID-19 should be isolated together as a cohort separate from other detainees, including those with pending test results and that suspected or confirmed COVID-19 cases maintain separation of groups by common criteria; and added facility compliance measures and updated visitation protocols.

On April 10, 2020, ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) released the COVID-19 Pandemic Response Requirements (PRR), a guidance document developed in consultation with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) that builds upon previously issued guidance. Specifically, the PRR sets forth specific mandatory requirements expected to be adopted by all detention facilities housing ICE detainees, as well as best practices for such facilities, to ensure that detainees are appropriately housed and that available mitigation measures are implemented during this unprecedented public health crisis.

Originally posted here:

ICE's Enforcement and Removal Operations Post Pandemic Emergency COVID-19 Guidelines and Protocols - U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Newsroom

COVID-19 Photo Contest Winners Capture Moments of Joy, Sorrow, Meaning in Crisis – Boston University

Back in those first days of the COVID-19 pandemic in the spring of 2020when flour was a hot commodity, hand sanitizer the new goldregistered nurse Jennifer Atkins headed to her local store to findnothing. The shelves had been stripped bare. She and one of her kids immortalized the moment with a lighthearted photoan image thats been named the winner of the Boston University Center on Emerging Infectious Diseases (CEID) Life in the Age of a Pandemic photo contest.

Open to all BU community members, the competition invited entries that caught the essence of what we have all gone through or [exemplify] your own unique experience from the last four years as it relates to the pandemic. Atkins phototitled, No toilet paper?!won her an iPad mini.

We were stunned to see completely empty shelves where there had once been abundant supplies of paper goods (toilet paper, facial tissues, and paper towels), wrote Atkins, who works at Boston Medical Centers Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, in her entry submission. This photo is my very flexible son Shay showing off the empty aisle (and nearly empty store).

While we may all be eager to consign the pandemic to history, Nahid Bhadelia, CEIDs founding director, says the photo contest was designed to help us recognizeand memorializehow it changed our world.

We tend to want to collectively forget when we have a traumatic event like the COVID-19 pandemic, says Bhadelia, a BU Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine associate professor of medicine who recently served on the White House COVID-19 Response Team. We wanted to capture these moments while theyre still fresh in our memories. Looking back now allows us to realize how much life has changed since the beginning of the pandemic.

The second-place entry was BU masters student Raina Levins (SPH25) photo of her socially distanced Northeastern University undergraduate graduation at Fenway Park. In May 2021, I felt very lucky to have a college graduation at all, Levin wrote in her submission. Students were spaced apart and each allowed only one guest. My aunt, who lives locally, was my guest of honor. While subdued, my graduation still felt festive, a reminder that we could still be together while physically distant.

As one of the judges, Bhadelia says she was struck by how personal many of the photos were and how people found joy or meaning in their everyday lives during a crisis.

The competition also had a popular choice category, with a vote open to BU faculty, staff, and students. The two winners were both PhD students: Aubrey Odom (CDS27, ENG27), for a snapshot of an isolated performer in New Yorks Central Park, and Stephanie Loo (SPH23), for a photo of a discarded mask encrusted with shells.

CEID brings experts together from a range of disciplines to help anticipate and take on global pandemicsleading research, hosting multidisciplinary events and webinars (its next one, on the H5N1 strain of avian flu, is happening on May 9), and partnering with government agencies and community organizations. But Bhadelia says the photo contest reinforces an important lesson for researchers who want to translate their work into action.

Pandemic policies need to start with individuals and communities, she says. People experience crises at a personal level. Policies that dont take that into consideration wont be effective long term.

Originally posted here:

COVID-19 Photo Contest Winners Capture Moments of Joy, Sorrow, Meaning in Crisis - Boston University

GRAPHIC: Food recalls on the rise post-COVID-19 – The Midwest Center for Investigative Reporting

The number of food recalls issued by the U.S. Department of Agriculture has increased in recent years, after a sharp decline during the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Each year, the Food Safety and Service Inspection division of the USDA issues recalls for food products when problems such as foreign material, undeclared allergens and pathogens are found.

The agency only issued 31 recalls in 2020, which was a 75% decline from the previous year.

In 2023, there were 65 food recalls issued, a 40% increase from the previous year.

2015 had the most food recalls in a single year, at 150 recalls. That was the most in a single year in the past dozen years.

Type of work:

Explainer A data-driven story that provides background, definition and detail on a specific topic.

Republish This Story

Republish our articles for free, online or in print.

John McCracken covers the industrial agriculture meat industry for Investigate Midwest. He has experience reporting at the intersection of agriculture, environmental pollution and climate change. He... More by John McCracken, Investigate Midwest

Go here to read the rest:

GRAPHIC: Food recalls on the rise post-COVID-19 - The Midwest Center for Investigative Reporting

"Elon" Plummets in Popularity as a Baby Name for Some Reason

According to BabyCenter's

Big Baby

Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk's name has clearly lost its luster among the parents of newborns.

According to BabyCenter's review of the data the name "Elon" has cratered in popularity over the last year, dropping from 120 babies per million in 2021 to just 90 babies per million, falling in the popularity rankings by 466 spots.

The name had seen a meteoric rise over the last seven or so years, but is currently falling out of favor big time, plummeting back down to 2019 levels.

The read? It seems like Musk's public reputation has been taking a significant hit.

Name Game

There are countless reasons why Musk could be less popular public figure than he was three years ago.

Especially since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, Musk emerged as a controversial figure, speaking out against vaccinations and lockdowns. He has also become synonymous with an unhealthy work culture, firing practically anybody standing in his way and forcing his employees to work long hours.

The fiasco surrounding Musk's chaotic takeover of Twitter has likely only further besmirched his public image.

For reference, other baby names that have fallen out of fashion include "Kanye" — almost certainly in response to the travails of rapper Kanye West, who's had a years-long relationship with Musk — which fell a whopping 3,410 spots over the last year.

More on Elon Musk: Sad Elon Musk Says He's Overwhelmed In Strange Interview After the Power Went Out

The post "Elon" Plummets in Popularity as a Baby Name for Some Reason appeared first on Futurism.

See more here:

"Elon" Plummets in Popularity as a Baby Name for Some Reason

Furious Fire Ants "Rain Down" on Hawaiian Residents and Bite Them in their Sleep

Hawaii has a big problem with little fire ants that have begun quite literally raining down on people from above and sting them.

Smol Means

Hawaii has a big problem: little fire ants that have begun quite literally raining down on people and stinging them — and it's reportedly changing life on the islands as residents know it.

In interviews with SFGate, Hawaiian officials described infestation scenes straight out of a horror flick, replete with people being bitten in their beds while sleeping, causing painful welts that can last for weeks.

"They’re changing the way of life for our residents here in Hawaii," Heather Forester of the University of Hawai'i's Hawaii Ant Lab told the Gate. "You used to be able to go out hiking and go to the beach. They can rain down on people and sting them."

"In heavily infested areas, the ants can actually move into people’s homes," she continued. "We have a lot of reports of them stinging people while they sleep in their beds."

Invasion

While little fire ants have been detected on the islands since 1999, this latest infestation – which has hit the island of Kauai the hardest — is reportedly the largest Hawaii's ever seen.

It's gotten so bad there that the Kauai Invasive Species Committee (KISC) has executed a huge public service announcement campaign to alert residents about help they can receive to detect or deal with these minuscule monsters, including home testing kits to detect them before they invade their houses.

Riverside Blues

This latest infestation, the Gate notes, appears to have begun on private property and spilled over a cliff and into a lush valley near the Wailua River that provides the ants with the opportunity to float downriver and create colonies elsewhere.

So far, it's unclear if the ants have gotten to the river — but when and if they do, it'll only get worse, officials say.

"That would infest the entire state park," KISC's Haylin Chock told the website. "If they are at that point, they can start climbing trees. It’s like a paradise for them. If that happens, how are we supposed to know where they are?"

The whole situation is taking the tenor of a plague, which the islands certainly don't need after being unduly impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic.

More buggies: These Dancing Bugs Are Straight Out of a Miyazaki Film

The post Furious Fire Ants "Rain Down" on Hawaiian Residents and Bite Them in their Sleep appeared first on Futurism.

Read more here:

Furious Fire Ants "Rain Down" on Hawaiian Residents and Bite Them in their Sleep

US Gov to Crack Down on "Bossware" That Spies On Employees’ Computers

In the era of remote work, employers have turned to invasive

Spying @ Home

Ever since the COVID-19 pandemic drove a wave of working from home, companies have been relentless in their efforts to digitally police and spy on remote employees by using what's known as "bossware." That's the pejorative name for software that tracks the websites an employee visits, screenshots their computer screens, and even records their faces and voices.

And now, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), an agency of the federal government, is looking to intervene.

"Close, constant surveillance and management through electronic means threaten employees' basic ability to exercise their rights," said NLRB general counsel Jennifer Abruzzo, in a Monday memo. "I plan to urge the Board to apply the Act to protect employees, to the greatest extent possible, from intrusive or abusive electronic monitoring and automated management practices."

Undoing Unions

In particular, Abruzzo is worried about how bossware could infringe on workers' rights to unionize. It's not hard to imagine how such invasive surveillance could be used to bust unionization. Even if the technology isn't explicitly deployed to impede organization efforts, the ominous presence of the surveillance on its own can be a looming deterrent, which Abruzzo argues is illegal.

And now is the perfect moment for the NLRB to step in. The use and abuse of worker surveillance tech in general — not just bossware — has been "growing by the minute," Mark Gaston Pearce, executive director of the Workers' Rights Institute at Georgetown Law School, told CBS.

"Employers are embracing technology because technology helps them run a more efficient business," Gaston explained. "… What comes with that is monitoring a lot of things that employers have no business doing."

Overbearing Overlord

In some ways, surveillance tech like bossware can be worse than having a nosy, actual human boss. Generally speaking, in a physical workplace employees have an understanding of how much privacy they have (unless they work at a place like Amazon or Walmart, that is).

But when bossware spies on you, who knows how much information an employer could be gathering — or even when they're looking in. And if it surveils an employee's personal computer, which more often than not contains plenty of personal information that a boss has no business seeing, that's especially invasive.

Which is why Abruzzo is pushing to require employers to disclose exactly how much they're tracking.

It's a stern message from the NLRB, but at the end of the day, it's just a memo. We'll have to wait and see how enforcing it pans out.

More on surveillance: Casinos to Use Facial Recognition to Keep "Problem Gamblers" Away

The post US Gov to Crack Down on "Bossware" That Spies On Employees' Computers appeared first on Futurism.

Read more:

US Gov to Crack Down on "Bossware" That Spies On Employees' Computers

COVID-19 Daily Update 8-4-2022 – West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources

The West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources (DHHR) reports as of August 4, 2022, there are currently 3,036 active COVID-19 cases statewide. There have been four deaths reported since the last report, with a total of 7,173 deaths attributed to COVID-19.

DHHR has confirmed the deaths of a 93-year old female from Marion County, a 75-year old male from Harrison County, a 78-year old male from Mercer County, and a 98-year old female from Harrison County.

Each death of a West Virginian is a loss felt by all, said Bill J. Crouch, DHHR Cabinet Secretary. We extend our sincere condolences to these families and encourage all eligible individuals to get vaccinated and boosted.

CURRENT ACTIVE CASES PER COUNTY: Barbour (48), Berkeley (161), Boone (50), Braxton (17), Brooke (28), Cabell (144), Calhoun (8), Clay (6), Doddridge (8), Fayette (83), Gilmer (9), Grant (8), Greenbrier (69), Hampshire (33), Hancock (32), Hardy (47), Harrison (109), Jackson (41), Jefferson (77), Kanawha (267), Lewis (21), Lincoln (45), Logan (81), Marion (91), Marshall (62), Mason (53), McDowell (50), Mercer (137), Mineral (37), Mingo (56), Monongalia (123), Monroe (45), Morgan (21), Nicholas (38), Ohio (73), Pendleton (7), Pleasants (7), Pocahontas (13), Preston (23), Putnam (113), Raleigh (180), Randolph (17), Ritchie (13), Roane (37), Summers (22), Taylor (25), Tucker (12), Tyler (13), Upshur (35), Wayne (55), Webster (19), Wetzel (13), Wirt (9), Wood (198), Wyoming (47). To find the cumulative cases per county, please visit coronavirus.wv.gov and look on the Cumulative Summary tab which is sortable by county.

West Virginians ages 6 months and older are recommended to get vaccinated against the virus that causes COVID-19. Those 5 years and older should receive a booster shot when due. Second booster shots for those age 50 and over who are 4 months or greater from their first booster are recommended, as well as for younger individuals over 12 years old with serious and chronic health conditions that lead to being considered moderately to severely immunocompromised.

Visit the WV COVID-19 Vaccination Due Date Calculator, a free, online tool that helps individuals figure out when they may be due for a COVID-19 shot, making it easier to stay up-to-date on COVID-19 vaccination. To learn more about COVID-19 vaccines, or to find a vaccine site near you, visit vaccinate.wv.gov or call 1-833-734-0965.

To locate COVID-19 testing near you, please visit https://dhhr.wv.gov/COVID-19/pages/testing.aspx.

View original post here:

COVID-19 Daily Update 8-4-2022 - West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources

Pedagogies, Communities, and Practices of Care after COVID-19 – Knox College

The Mellon Foundation awarded $150,000 to Knox College for a research project entitled Pedagogies, Communities, and Practices of Care after COVID-19. Cate Denial, Bright Distinguished Professor of American History, chair of History, and director of the Bright Institute, is the principal investigator.

Over the past two years, administrators, faculty, and staff have held higher education together with willpower and determination in the face of a global pandemic. The result, for many, has been burnout and exhaustion. This project responds to that crisis with a plan to identify, cultivate, and support national leadership in applying practices of compassion and care to working conditions in higher education. Denial will coordinate 36 individuals from community colleges, four-year institutions, regional states, and flagship research institutions, including online educators. These individuals, representing diverse social identities, will explore the meaning of, and opportunities within, a practice of care in the academy.

Im so grateful for the encouragement and support of the Mellon Foundation in funding this project, said Denial. Care and compassion offer a strong foundation from which to build, change, and rethink community as the pandemic continues. Faculty and staff working conditions are student learning conditions, making it particularly important to think critically about the ways in which we labor, and new approaches to work that will increase accessibility, employ trauma-informed practices, and evolve our pedagogies to affirm that care is at the center of what we do.

Read more:

Pedagogies, Communities, and Practices of Care after COVID-19 - Knox College

Monkeypox can’t use the same at-home testing playbook as COVID-19 – The Verge

After two years of COVID-19, the conversation around monkeypox testing gives off an unnerving sense of deja-vu. The similarities are right there: painful swabs, the struggle to even find a test, bottlenecks, and a long wait for results. But the diseases are different enough that experience with COVID-19 didnt give researchers much of a leg up in their efforts to improve the monkeypox testing process.

In the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, experts bemoaned the lack of investment in rapid, at-home testing for various diseases in the United States. The thought was that if the infrastructure had been in place before the coronavirus emerged, it would have been easier to scale up testing and maybe help control the pandemic. Eventually, that scale-up happened anyway. Money and resources flooded into testing projects, and soon, at-home COVID-19 tests became ubiquitous. That experience was supposed to set the stage for a future with easy access to home tests for any number of diseases once they popped onto the scene.

Against that backdrop, it would seem that monkeypox might offer a perfect test case. Its an unfamiliar disease spreading rapidly, and theres high demand for tests. But monkeypox isnt the best benchmark for whether that future is going to materialize, says Ben Pinsky, the medical co-director for point of care testing at Stanford Health Care. Its a different enough infection, he says.

Monkeypox isnt a respiratory disease like COVID-19, where the nose and mouth are the clear targets both for the virus and for testing. Monkeypoxs telltale signs are painful, blister-like sores, and it can come with other symptoms like fever and muscle aches. Right now, monkeypox tests involve swabbing the sores that appear over the course of an infection. There arent at-home tests for other lesions like herpes, for example, Pinsky says. There is still a lot of work to do to figure out if people are able to successfully swab their own lesions, which could be painful or difficult, he says.

The reliance on lesions means that patients can only be tested once the telltale signs of the disease appear which is a sign they probably should be isolated from others anyway. Someone who was exposed to monkeypox and has a fever but no lesions wouldnt be able to take a test. People can test for COVID-19, on the other hand, without waiting for any specific symptoms to appear. Im a strong advocate for home testing of diseases, but you have to have the right sample at the right time, and we arent there yet, says Paul Yager, a professor in the department of bioengineering at the University of Washington, in an email to The Verge.

It might be possible to test for monkeypox through saliva or semen, according to one small study of 12 patients done in June. And some companies are working on tests that dont involve lesions at all. A California-based company, Flow Health, developed a saliva-based molecular test for monkeypox, which asks people to spit in a tube and then send in the sample for PCR testing.

The test is not authorized or approved by the Food and Drug Administration. Its offered through a program that lets certified labs develop and run their own in-house tests without going through the normal regulatory process. Right now, the FDA still says monkeypox tests should be run on lesions. The company is sharing its saliva test data with the FDA as the agency checks to see if it should update its guidance, Flow Health CEO Alex Meshkin told The Verge.

Theres still a lot of work to do in order to figure out how and when the monkeypox virus shows up in different parts of the body over the course of the disease, which will influence how effective and accurate tests that dont use lesions might be. If the monkeypox virus shows up in saliva before lesions develop, for example, then a saliva-based test could help flag the disease early on. But if it doesnt, that type of test might not be as useful. Meshkin says Flow Health has tested someone who closely interacted with monkeypox patients but didnt yet have lesions and that the tests of that person came up positive. Itll take testing more patients, though, to know for sure when and how the virus shows up.

Along with the science being different, the regulatory and political landscape around monkeypox also breaks from COVID-19. At the moment, monkeypox hasnt been declared a federal public health emergency in the United States. That changes the way various groups might go about developing tests. Right now, COVID-19 at-home tests are primarily available under emergency use authorizations an accelerated process that lets tests come to market more quickly during an emergency. Meshkin says Flow Health is prepared to file for an emergency use authorization if a public health emergency is declared, which reports say could come this week.

Without the emergency authorization, companies that do home testing arent able to take some of the same steps that they did during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. They also cant take the approach of Flow Health, which doesnt need FDA signoff to run saliva tests at its lab. An at-home test, by definition, doesnt use a lab to start diagnosing patients. Those factors may contribute to why many rapid testing platforms that sprang up in response to COVID-19 didnt pivot straight to monkeypox. Cue Health, which has a rapid molecular COVID-19 test, is working on a variety of diagnostics tests but didnt specify which they were, spokesperson Shannon Olivas said in an email to The Verge. Detect, which also has a rapid molecular COVID-19 test, said its in the concept phase for a monkeypox test, chief technology officer Eric Kauderer-Abrams said in an email to The Verge.

Those are all reasons why monkeypox testing takes more work than building directly on the COVID-19 experience. But they arent excuses. The health system could still have been far better prepared for this particular outbreak. The disease has been common in Africa for years, but global public health has largely failed to devote resources to understanding and preventing it. A Nigerian doctor who tried to raise alarms about the disease in 2017 wasnt taken seriously by officials and the international medical community. If thered been more attention to the disease over the past few years, infectious disease experts might have a better understanding of how the virus affects the body giving them the type of information theyd need to develop easier home tests more quickly.

Even if we set aside home testing and the logistical differences between the two diseases, youd think that, after two years of a brutal pandemic, the US would have learned how urgent testing can be to get a handle on an infectious disease outbreak. Theres still more demand for testing than there are tests available, and some people who suspect they have the disease are being dismissed by doctors while they struggle to manage painful symptoms. Unlike the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, monkeypox is a known disease with existing tests, treatments, and vaccines, but the sluggish response to US outbreaks shows just how few lessons the public health system has learned even after a two-year crash course in how disease can disrupt the world.

Link:

Monkeypox can't use the same at-home testing playbook as COVID-19 - The Verge

COVID-19 update as of Aug. 4: Cook County stays in high community risk level, Evanston in the medium risk level – Evanston RoundTable

The total number of new cases of COVID-19 in Evanston was 163 for the week ending Aug. 3, compared to 185 for the week ending July 28, a decrease of 12%. The seven-day average of new cases in the state also decreased by 12%; hospitalizations declined by 4%.

Cook County, including Chicago, remained in the high community risk level. City officials say Evanston is in the medium risk level.

The number of new cases being reported is significantly lower than the actual number of new cases being contracted because many new cases are not being reported. [1] Some researchers estimate that the actual number of new cases is between six and ten times higher than the number being reported.

Illinois: On Aug. 4, the number of new cases in the state was 4,149.

The seven-day average of new cases in Illinois on Aug. 4 was 4,345, down from 4,962 on July 28, a12.4% decrease. The chart below shows the trend.

Evanston: Evanston reported there were 28 new COVID-19 cases of Evanston residents on Aug. 3. (Evanston is reporting COVID-19 data with a one-day delay.)

There was a total of 163 new COVID-19 cases of Evanston residents in the week ending Aug. 3, compared to 185 new cases in the week ending July 28, a decrease of 12%.

The chart below shows the trend.

No Evanstonians died due to COVID-19 during the week ending July 28. The number of deaths due to COVID-19 remains at 155.

Northwestern University. The latest data reported on NUs website shows that between July 22 and July 28, there were 65 new COVID-19 cases of faculty, staff or students. Cases of Evanston residents are included in Evanstons data for the relevant period, Ike Ogbo, Director of Evanstons Department of Health and Human Services, told the RoundTable. NU will update its data tomorrow.

The weekly number of new cases per 100,000 people in Illinois is 239 in the seven days ending Aug. 4.

As of Aug. 3, the weekly number of new cases per 100,000 people in Evanston was 220. As of Aug. 4, the number was 211 for Chicago, and 226 for Suburban Cook County. An accompanying chart shows the trend.

There were 1,416 hospitalizations in Illinois due to COVID-19 on Aug. 3, compared to 1,476 one week ago.

The chart below, prepared by the City of Evanston, shows the trends in hospitalizations due to COVID-19 at the closest two hospitals serving Evanston residents.

The CDC and IDPH look at the combination of three metrics to determine whether a community level of risk for COVID-19 is low, medium, or high. They are: 1) the total number of new COVID-19 cases per 100,000 people in the last 7 days; 2) the new COVID-19 hospital admissions per 100,000 in the last 7 days; and 3) the percent of staffed inpatient hospital beds occupied by COVID-19 patients. [2]

The City of Evanston reported this evening, Aug. 4, that Evanston is in the mediumrisk category. IDPH reported today that Cook County, including Chicago, is in the high risk category. Lake, DuPage, Will, Kane, and McHenry Counties are also in the high risk category.

While Evanston has more than 200 new cases per 100,000 people, the city reported this evening that Evanston has a 7-day total of 5.12 new hospital admissions per 100,000 people, and that it has 2.61% staffed inpatient hospital beds that are occupied by COVID patients (using a 7-day average).

The city has not said which hospitals or how many hospitals it is considering in making its analysis of community risk.

The CDC and IDPH recommend that people in a community with a high transmission rate should take the following precautions:

FOOTNOTES

1/The City of Evanston says that the State, the County and the City do not have a mechanism to report, verify or track at home test results. Because a positive at home test is regarded as highly accurate, most people who test positive in an at home test do not get a second test outside the home that is reported to government officials. The number of new COVID-19 cases reported by IDPH and the City thus significantly understates the actual number of new cases that are contracted. Some studies estimate the cases are underestimated by 600% or more.

2/ CDC recommends the use of three indicators to measure COVID-19 Community Levels: 1) new COVID-19 cases per 100,000 population in the last 7 days; 2) new COVID-19 hospital admissions per 100,000 population in the last 7 days; and 3) the percent of staffed inpatient beds occupied by patients with confirmed COVID-19 (7-day average).

The chart below illustrates how these indicators are combined to determine whether COVID-19 Community Levels are low, medium, or high. The CDC provides many recommendations depending on whether the COVID-19 Community Level is low, medium, or high.

Read more here:

COVID-19 update as of Aug. 4: Cook County stays in high community risk level, Evanston in the medium risk level - Evanston RoundTable

Covid-19, Gender And Immune Response: What’s The Relationship? (Part Two) – Forbes

This is the second installment in a two part series which analyzes biological sex differences in immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Part one focuses primarily on Covid-19 related viral entry, innate and adaptive immune responses to Covid-19 and their correlation to epidemiological evidence. This article will highlight the role of sex hormones in SARS-CoV-2 immune responses, examine sex differences in response to vaccines, and consider their possible therapeutic implications.

Paper cut out illustration of a man and a woman facing each other

Covid-19 disease severity and mortality differ between men and women, but the reasons for such differences are not well understood. Part one of this series delves into sex differences in response to SARS-CoV-2 infection and notes how stronger immune responses seen in females likely contribute to the better outcomes observed. This second and final installment will analyze two more elucidating factors: the role of sex hormones on SARS-CoV-2 immune responses and sex differences in immune responses to vaccines. These components, in particular, pose potential therapeutic directions for treating and understanding Covid-19.

Sex Hormones and SARS-CoV-2 Immune Responses

FIGURE 1: Men possess higher levels of androgens such as testosterone and dihydrotestosterone. Women, in contrast, have elevated levels of estrogen and progesterone. The first section of this article will concentrate on the role of androgens, estrogen and progesterone on Covid-19 disease progression and outcomes.

Androgens

In their review The Immune Response to Covid-19: Does sex matter?, Ho et al. analyze the complex relationship between sex hormones and SARS-CoV-2 immune response. They first consider androgenssuch as testosterone and dihydrotestosteronewhich males possess higher levels of than females.

Ho et al. find that androgen receptor expression may impact two essential enzymes to SARS-CoV-2 viral entry: furin and transmembrane serine protease 2 (TMPRSS2). Furin is a calcium-dependent enzyme which cleaves the spike protein into the configuration needed for priming and activation. Transmembrane serine protease 2 (TMPRSS2) primes the SARS-CoV-2 protein for entry into host cells. The theory is, since increased androgen receptor expression can upregulate furin and TMPRSS2, the higher androgen receptor expression seen in men increases their susceptibility to severe forms of Covid-19.

Although the clinical association observed between androgenic alopecia and severe Covid-19 would suggest this mechanism to be true, studies on androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in prostate cancer patients with Covid-19 do not necessarily support this claim. Androgen deprivation therapy reduces the number of androgen receptors available for activation through medicine or surgery. The therapy was expected to decrease androgen receptor expression in prostate cancer patients with Covid-19, thereby restricting androgen regulation of TMPRSS2 and reducing the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. In contrast to this notion, the treatment did not improve infection risk, ICU admission, hospitalization or mortality in comparison to controls.

Randomized clinical trial results with antiandrogens, medicines which block androgen receptors and inhibit androgen synthesis, further complicate these associations. One randomized controlled trial revealed that Covid-19 patients given nitazoxanide/azithromycin therapy with antiandrogen dutasteride experienced decreased viral shedding, inflammatory markers and time-to-remission compared with placebo; another found that antiandrogen proxoludamine reduced the 30-day hospitalization rate and risk ratio amongst men with Covid-19. On the other hand, a third trial with enzalutamide increased Covid-19 related hospitalization stay.

Male sex steroids seem to perform varying roles with respect to Covid-19. The culminating conclusion from these studies suggests that both low and high androgen levels can correlate with poor Covid-19 prognoses. As Ho et al. state in their review, further investigation in this arena is needed.

Estrogens

Female sex hormone estrogen appears to mediate several beneficial immune responses. A study of hospitalized Covid patients correlated higher estradiol levels to decreased disease severity. And as mentioned in part one, estrogen promotes strong immune responses in women and likely contributes to the observed discrepancy in innate and adaptive immune responses between sexes.

Inflammation in female innate immune responses reduces when estrogen activates anti-inflammatory cytokines, inhibits the nuclear factor kappa B (NF-B) pathway, and decreases the release of inflammatory cytokines. Women also have better priming of adaptive immune responses to viruses. This is thought to be influenced by estrogen; estrogen can help regulate immune cells called plasmacytoid dendritic cells (pDCs) which, in turn, promote the production of interferon alpha, an important antiviral cytokine in innate immunity. These mechanisms may translate to the better disease outcomes witnessed in women than men with Covid-19.

Estrogen has also been found to regulate several proteins which are involved in SARS-CoV-2 viral entry: furin, TMPRSS2, angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and a disintegrin and metalloprotease 17 (ADAM17). It, too, suppresses immune enzyme dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP4), thereby blocking another potential means of SARS-CoV-2 viral entry.

Researchers are exploring possible therapeutic applications for estrogen in Covid-19 interventions. Two examples include a study on the effect of selective estrogen receptor modulators on Covid-19, and a randomized control trial analyzing the efficacy of an estradiol/progesterone therapy in reducing disease severity in hospitalized Covid patients.

Progesterone

Ho et al. complete their study of sex hormones in Covid-19 with progesterone. Progesterone levels tend to be higher in women than men and are associated with general anti-inflammatory effects. These anti-inflammatory effects include but are not limited to the ability to increase T regulatory cells, enhance antiviral immune pathways and disrupt endocytic pathways used by viruses to enter host cells. It is hypothesized, therefore, that progesterone may decrease the risk of hyperinflammation and SARS-CoV-2 related cytokine storm.

There is therapeutic potential in administering progesterone to treat Covid-19. A study of hypoxemic men hospitalized with Covid-19 observed that short term subcutaneous progesterone decreased hospitalization stay and supplemental oxygen needed. Additional research is needed to understand the specific mechanisms at work and its promising impacts on Covid-19 treatments.

Sex Differences in Vaccine Immune Responses

Vaccines are crucial to Covid-19 control and have been invaluable in reducing lives lost to severe forms of the disease. As a result, Ho et al. emphasize the importance of understanding sex differences in response to Covid-19 vaccines. They state, sex differences should be taken into account as a biological variable for adjusting sex-personalized vaccine dosage and considering vaccine efficiency.

These considerations seem most pertinent to women. Two studies, one systematic review and one meta analysis, found that vaccination prevented Covid-19 disease less effectively in women than in men. Similarly, a 2021 CDC report observed that women received 61% of administered Covid-19 vaccines at the time yet accounted for 79% of adverse events. The discrepancies in vaccine response could be due to several factorsage, hormonal differences (as explored in this article) and sex differences intrinsic to SARS-CoV-2 immune response (see part one of this series)but more studies are needed to clarify these possible correlations.

Conclusions

Contemporary research reveals that sex hormones and biological sex do influence immune responses and vaccines, although specific mechanisms have yet to be fully understood. Ho et al. call for biological sex to be considered in basic, translational and clinical Covid-19 research. More extensive research on biological sex and Covid-19 could open potential therapeutic avenues and improve the specificity of those strategiesbe it through the use of sex hormone therapies or through the adjustment of vaccine dosage based on gender.

Read the original post:

Covid-19, Gender And Immune Response: What's The Relationship? (Part Two) - Forbes

‘We need to monitor and adjust’ | Some demand COVID-19 safety plans ahead of the new school year starting – WCNC.com

An online petition is gathering signatures to present to local school boards and administrators.

NORTH CAROLINA, USA With multiple variants of the COVID-19 virus, the result has been hundreds of thousands of infections. In some cases, people who have been infected multiple times. With the start of the new school year approaching, health advocates worry without a COVID-19 safety plan within schools, things may worsen.

Long Covid Families is a national nonprofit based in Charlotte that works with patients who experience lasting complications after getting the virus. The organization's concern is that more people may be at risk of getting long COVID.

We now know because of the evolution of the virus that it is very easy for people to get re-infected," Long Covid Families founder Megan Carmilani said. "We dont have a lot of conclusive evidence about what the effect of reinfection is, but the evidence we do have is concerning.

Long Covid Families along with other supporting organizations have created an online open letter, gathering signatures to present to schools boards and administrators about the need for a COVID-19 safety plan in schools.

Part of that plan includes improving classroom ventilation and returning to masks when there is a surge in cases.

"I think we need to monitor and adjust and if we do that wed keep infections down, prevent disability, prevent loss of productivity and loss of learning," Carmilani said.

Some parents add without a plan they're even less likely to feel comfortable sending their at-risk children back into the classroom.

I have twin girls and they are both in the Hospital/Homebound programwith CMS," parent Stacy Staggs said. "A COVID infection for them would be catastrophic."

As part of the COVID-19 safety plan, the need for adequate cleaning supplies, protective gear and janitorial staff is another request.

Starting next week, Long Covid Families is hosting an online Back To School Conference to provide resources on COVID-19 prevention and advocacy in schools. Registration is free.

School Safety & Violence

The Center for Safer Schools sponsored a back to school safety conference in Greensboro this week called The RISE Conference. The conference's title acronym stands for resiliency, information, support, and empowerment.

The goal is to give educators and school leaders the tools to keep students safe.

We want to focus not just on the physical safety, but the mental safety and the school climate because what we know what happens in the community comes into the school," Center for Safer Schools executive director Karen Fairley said.

Some of this week's conversations at the conference included threat assessments, internet crimes against children, bullying and active shooter response. Superintendents, principals, school social workers and school resources officers were all invited to attend and discuss the best school safety decisions together.

"Building better partnerships, being open to have these partnerships because its going to take all of us together to work to keep North Carolina schools safe," Fairley said.

The Center for Safer Schools says the goal is to have more conferences like this in other cities across the state once the new school year begins.

Contact Briana Harper atbharper@wcnc.comand follow her onFacebook,TwitterandInstagram.

More here:

'We need to monitor and adjust' | Some demand COVID-19 safety plans ahead of the new school year starting - WCNC.com

God, No, Not Another Case. COVID-Related Stillbirths Didn’t Have to Happen. – ProPublica

This story contains descriptions of stillbirths.

ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up for Dispatches, a newsletter that spotlights wrongdoing around the country, to receive our stories in your inbox every week.

Late one afternoon last October, Dr. Shelley Odronic sat in her office and, just as she had thousands of times before, slid a rectangular glass slide onto her microscope.

A pathologist who works in rural Ohio, Odronic leaned forward to examine tissue from the placenta of a woman who had recently given birth. She increased the magnification on the microscope. Never had she seen so many tiny, congealed reservoirs of blood or such severe inflammation of the tissue, a sign the placenta had been fighting an infection.

Right away, I knew it wasnt compatible with life, Odronic said.

She asked her secretary to print out the patients chart. In dark letters were the words fetal demise. A stillbirth, the death of a fetus at 20 weeks or more of pregnancy. But that didnt solve the mystery. Odronic had examined many placentas from pregnancies that ended in stillbirth. None looked like this withered and scarred.

Odronic kept reading. No chronic medical conditions. Good prenatal care. Then, buried in the middle of the report, she spotted something. Seven days before the stillbirth, the mother had tested positive for COVID-19. Odronic wondered if the virus could explain the damage to the placenta. In the world of placenta pathology, a new affliction is unusual, especially one so dramatic in presentation and so devastating in effect.

Her mind traveled to Dr. Amy Heerema-McKenney, a pathologist at Cleveland Clinic and an expert on the placenta, who had trained Odronic during residency. Odronic went to sleep that night with a pit in her stomach and a plan to call her former teacher in the morning.

Heerema-McKenney was in her office when the phone rang. As she listened, she knew that what Odronic was describing was what she and her colleagues had observed repeatedly over the past several months: a patient positive for the coronavirus, a placenta destroyed by COVID-19, a baby stillborn.

Their next discovery was equally stunning. None of the stillbirths they studied involved a pregnant person who had been fully vaccinated. The doctors checked with colleagues across the country and around the world. The fatal pattern held.

Unvaccinated women who contracted COVID-19 during pregnancy were at a higher risk of stillbirths. They also were more likely to be admitted to the intensive care unit, give birth prematurely or die. Yet their greatest protection the COVID-19 vaccine sat largely untouched, buried under doubt, polluted by disinformation.

How Misinformation About COVID Vaccines and Pregnancy Took Root Early On and Why It Wont Go Away

Pharmaceutical companies and government officials failed to ensure that pregnant people were included in the early development of the COVID-19 vaccine, a calamitous decision made amid the urgency of a rapidly spreading pandemic. That decision left pregnant people with little research to rely on when making a critical decision on how best to keep the babies growing inside of them safe.

At the same time that research was excluding pregnant people from vaccine trials, a full-scale assault on vaccination was unfolding online. Taking advantage of the lack of data, conspiracy theorists, anti-vaxxers and even some medical professionals spread false claims about the vaccines safety in pregnancy, leading many pregnant people to delay or refuse the vaccine. Even now, with numerous studies unequivocally announcing the safety of the vaccine for pregnant people, some doctors have failed to communicate the dangers of COVID-19 to pregnant people or the vaccines role in mitigating it.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention contributed to the confusion with vague early messaging about whether pregnant people should get vaccinated. While Americans lined up at pharmacies and stalked vaccine websites in hopes of securing a shot last year, pregnant people had some of the lowest vaccination rates among adults, with only 35% fully vaccinated by last November. Meanwhile, many Americans were already moving on to their boosters after federal officials that month expanded eligibility for the additional shots to anyone 18 or older. And much of the country was beginning to return to pre-pandemic life. The Sunday after Thanksgiving, for instance, set the record for the busiest day of air travel since March 2020.

November also marked a key moment in the understanding of COVID-19s impact on stillbirths. A CDC study looking at 1.2 million births in the first 18 months of the pandemic found that more than 8,000 pregnancies ended in stillbirths, including more than 270 of them in patients with a documented COVID-19 diagnosis at the time of delivery.

Although stillbirths were rare overall, babies were dying. The risk of a stillbirth nearly doubled for those who had COVID-19 during pregnancy compared with those who didnt. And during the spread of the delta variant, that risk was four times higher.

Indeed, doctors discovered that some stillbirths resulted from COVID-19 directly infiltrating the placenta, a condition they named SARS-CoV-2 placentitis. Cases were found even in people whose COVID-19 symptoms were mild or nonexistent. In some cases, however, placentas were discarded with medical waste without being tested for COVID-19, and parents never learned what led to their babys stillbirth.

COVID-19 also led to stillbirths among pregnant people who became exceedingly ill after contracting the virus. It damaged their lungs and clotted their blood, putting their babies in such severe distress that they were born before they could take their first breath.

These are pregnancies that should not have ended, Heerema-McKenney said.

She and others had tried to alert the CDC as well as maternal and state health organizations to their findings, but she said they either didnt get a response or were told they needed to collect more data and publish studies. Pathologists are experts in disease diagnosis, dealing with death and illness from the safe distance of their labs. Convincing obstetricians who met with patients daily or doctors who were making policy recommendations was a challenge.

I tried to sound the alarm. We tried so hard to get people to listen, Heerema-McKenney said. It was a really frustrating place to be as pathologists doing these autopsies, looking at these placentas and saying, God, no, not another case.

Around the same time Heerema-McKenney was examining the damaged placentas, Ginger Munro was on life support in a hospital 250 miles away in another part of Ohio.

She and her husband, Kendal, had been trying to have a child for five years. They hadnt expected that shed get pregnant in the middle of a pandemic. But when her pregnancy test came back positive in the spring of 2021, she rushed to post a picture of it in an online pregnancy group. Is it just me or can you see the 2 lines?? she asked.

The pandemic had already brought much change to their lives. Ginger, who lives in the small town of Washington Court House in southwest Ohio, quit her job as assistant nutrition director with the countys Commission on Aging. She stationed hand sanitizer throughout her house and in her car, and she only went grocery shopping early in the morning. If she noticed someone in an aisle, she skipped it.

I knew the virus was real, she said, but I was terrified to take the vaccine.

Ginger worried that the vaccines development had been rushed, and she hadnt seen any data showing it was safe for pregnant people. At this point, the CDC had not explicitly recommended the vaccine during pregnancy. Ginger already worried she was tempting fate by getting pregnant at 40; she said she didnt want to risk endangering her baby by taking the vaccine.

Besides, if it was really important, her doctor would have mentioned it, and, she said, she would have followed his advice. But, she said, he never did. Her family hadnt gotten vaccinated either. In a mostly rural county where less than half of the residents were vaccinated, they were hardly alone.

Her doctor declined to comment through a spokesperson at the hospital system where he works; the spokesperson said the hospital couldnt disseminate information about the vaccine to pregnant patients before it was recommended.

Gingers pregnancy progressed without complications. She and Kendal shared the news of a new baby with Gingers two daughters from a previous marriage. At their kitchen table, near a sign that read eat cake for breakfast, Sophia, then 14, covered her mouth with both hands while Hailee, then 18, simply beamed.

At a backyard gender reveal three months later, Gingers growing belly resembled a basketball against her tiny frame. She leaned in to kiss her husband, her long, dark hair falling onto her shoulders. Red confetti rained down on the deck.

Kendal, an aircraft maintenance and avionics manager at an airport two counties away, worked through the pandemic. In the summer, when they realized his cough was actually COVID-19, it was too late. Ginger was sick.

What the Placenta Does

The placentas job is as critical as it is clear: keep the baby alive.

For the most part, it does that well. The placenta is the first organ to develop after conception, and it connects to the fetus through the umbilical cord, which delivers oxygen. The placenta provides nourishment, expels waste and does much of the work of the fetuss lungs, kidneys and liver as they develop. The dark-red organ typically is solid, with a sponge-like texture and blood vessels that spread out like the branches of a tree.

The placenta also acts as a shield against most viruses, but when its attacked by COVID-19, the branches can collapse, killing the cells, cutting off oxygen to the fetus, leaving holes to be filled by pools of blood. In response to the infected and dying cells, inflammation and scarring spread throughout the placenta.

Unable to survive the damage to the placenta, many babies were stillborn.

Having trouble reaching her doctor, she went to two different emergency rooms. One, she said, declined to treat her with monoclonal antibodies, which research had shown can be an effective treatment for pregnant people with COVID-19. The other, which described her in medical records as an exceedingly pleasant individual admitted with symptomatic COVID-19 pneumonia, transferred her about an hour away to the University of Cincinnati Medical Center. There, records show, she was admitted with acute respiratory distress syndrome due to COVID-19.

The University of Cincinnati doctor asked Ginger and Kendal who was on FaceTime because of the hospitals COVID-19 protocols about fetal priority. Ginger made her wishes clear: Save the baby, their baby, the baby they had tried so hard to have. Kendal, who was worried about both his wife and their unborn child, said he went along with Ginger in that moment.

You were so scared, Kendal wrote in a notebook that night. We told each other over and over how much we loved each other.

They hung up so the doctors could insert a breathing tube. Before they could begin, Kendal called back three more times just to hear her voice.

Doctors put Ginger on ECMO, a form of life support reserved for the sickest patients. Kendal, Hailee, Sophia and Gingers mother and sister were later allowed in the hospital two at a time, and they prayed at her bedside nearly every night. Ginger was sedated, her face swollen and obscured by tubing, her cheeks flattened by the crush of the ventilator straps, her wrists tied down so she wouldnt accidentally pull out her breathing tube.

Her family took solace in knowing the babys heartbeat was steady and her ultrasounds were normal. The doctors gave Ginger medication to help the babys lungs mature in case she was born early. After more than 30 days on ECMO, doctors took Ginger off the machine only to put her back on the next morning. She was the first patient in the hospitals history to be placed on ECMO twice.

The plan, records show, was to deliver at 28 weeks. But the day after Ginger was put back on life support, Kendal got the call telling him the baby was on her way. As doctors prepared for the delivery in Gingers intensive care room, the family camped out in the waiting room, jittery from excitement and vending machine snacks. They talked about baby names and future family outings. They pulled the waiting room chairs together to form makeshift beds and covered themselves with blankets they brought from home.

They dont know if they actually fell asleep before a nurse burst through the doors screaming at them to follow. Shes coming! Shes coming! They didnt make it far before they were blocked by doctors and nurses, some huddled over an incubator in the middle of the hall and the rest crowded around Ginger.

Hailee tried to peer over the sea of blue scrubs to catch the first glimpse of her little sister. She smiled beneath her black mask. Shell be OK, she said to herself.

But after a few minutes of trying to revive the baby, a doctor told Kendal it was time. Kendal nodded, asked for a chair and collapsed as he tried to process his daughters death.

Then another wave of grief washed over him. Someone would have to tell Ginger.

Content Warning

Warning: The following image shows a stillborn baby. The Munro family had photos taken of their daughter to preserve their memory of her.

Gingers medical records describe a baby born at 27 weeks without signs of life after an uncomplicated delivery. Her placenta had separated from the wall of the uterus, the risk of which studies have shown increases with COVID-19.

When Ginger woke up, she looked down at her sunken belly and realized she had given birth. She assumed her daughter was in the newborn intensive care unit. Ginger was barely able to speak around the tube in her trachea, but after a few days in which no one brought the baby to her, she couldnt wait any longer. Ginger turned to her mother and sister and mouthed the words, Wheres the baby?

The room fell silent. They called Kendal, who rushed to the hospital. He told her what had happened. He described their daughters dark hair and her long fingers and toes, just like her mothers.

Ginger, who had always loved the sweet smell of a newborns breath, whispered to her husband.

Did you smell her breath?

She wasnt breathing, he said.

In the hurried quest for a safe and effective COVID-19 vaccine, pharmaceutical companies and government officials did not include pregnant people in their initial plans. Its a failure that continues to reverberate.

They absolutely should have been included in COVID vaccine trials from the beginning, said Kathryn Schubert, president and CEO of the Society for Womens Health Research, a Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit that advocates for the inclusion of women in research and clinical trials.

Researchers and advocates have spent more than four decades trying to dismantle the belief that its unsafe or unethical for pregnant women to participate in clinical trials. A couple years ago, it seemed like they had finally prevailed.

Shortly before leaving office, President Barack Obama signed into law the 21st Century Cures Act, which established the Task Force on Research Specific to Pregnant Women and Lactating Women. The group found longstanding obstacles, including liability concerns, to including pregnant and lactating people in clinical research. It concluded that recommending halting medication or forgoing treatment while pregnant may actually endanger the health of the mother and her fetus more than the treatment itself.

The need for everything from asthma to depression medication doesnt stop when a person gets pregnant, and when a catastrophic event such as a pandemic hits, experts said, pregnancy should not preclude someone from receiving life-saving treatment.

Around the same time, researchers discovered that the Zika virus, which was mainly transmitted through mosquitoes, could pass from a pregnant person to their fetus and cause severe birth deformities. A second group of experts joined together to develop separate guidance on including pregnant people in the research, development and deployment of pandemic vaccines.

Both groups pushed to remove pregnant women from a list of vulnerable populations that required additional review before being allowed to participate in research. Instead of proving that pregnant women should be included, manufacturers would need to provide compelling evidence for why they shouldnt.

In 2018, the federal task force issued recommendations calling for including pregnant and breastfeeding people in biomedical research, and the Department of Health and Human Services adopted some of the guidance. But a gap remained between what the task force and others insisted was needed and what was actually happening.

We were frustrated because COVID-19 provided an opportunity to implement the recommendations of the task force, said Dr. Diana Bianchi, the director of the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development and the chair of the task force.

In February 2021, Bianchi and her colleagues published an article lamenting the exclusion of those who were pregnant or breastfeeding from the initial COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials. Pregnant and lactating persons should not be protected from participating in research, but rather should be protected through research, they wrote.

Ruth Faden, the founder of the Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics, helped lead the group that issued the guidance after Zika. She and others urged manufacturers to include pregnant people in the development of the COVID-19 vaccine as part of Operation Warp Speed, the federal program that provided billions of taxpayer dollars to pharmaceutical companies to speed up vaccine production.

There is a playbook in place so that when the U.S. launches Operation Warp Speed, it should be pretty obvious what should be done, she said. Its not like no one knows how to do this, either ethically or technically.

Nevertheless, it doesnt happen, Faden added. Once again, pregnant people are left behind.

A spokesperson for Pfizer said the company followed guidance from the Food and Drug Administration. Although pregnant people were not included in the initial vaccine clinical trials, Pfizer tested its vaccine on pregnant rats and did not identify any safety concerns. The company subsequently launched a clinical trial with pregnant women but halted it because at that point the vaccine had already been recommended for pregnant people.

Similarly, Moderna also studied its vaccine on pregnant animals, but the company said it made the decision to prioritize the study of the safety and efficacy of the vaccine in adults who werent pregnant. It called that approach consistent with the precedent to study new vaccines in pregnant women only after demonstration of favorable benefit and risk in healthy adults.

In response to questions from ProPublica, Johnson & Johnson referred a reporter to its website, which didnt address the relevant issues.

Some government officials, including several from the Food and Drug Administration, said they support having pregnant women take part in clinical studies of vaccines for emerging infectious disease, including COVID-19. A spokesperson for the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, which is part of the National Institutes of Health, said the agency did not dictate the protocol development for the trials and said that responsibility lies with the companies.

The failure to include pregnant people early on in COVID-19 vaccine trials was, at least in part, a casualty of the tremendous urgency to respond to an intense public threat and develop the vaccine as quickly as possible, Faden said. But multiple groups had published road maps on how to ethically include pregnant people without slowing down that process.

I cant tell you how many pregnant people might not have died or how many stillbirths might not have occurred if the playbook had been followed, she said, but Im willing to bet it was a significant chunk that would have been prevented if there had been a full-throated, evidence-based recommendation for COVID-19 vaccines in pregnancy almost simultaneous to when it was available for the rest of the adult population.

By the time the CDC specifically recommended the vaccine for pregnant people, in August 2021, the damage had been done.

A dizzying and vague series of advisories led to confusion and delayed vaccinations. When the COVID-19 vaccines were first made available in December 2020, the CDC said health care workers and residents of long-term care facilities should be prioritized, but the shots were not explicitly recommended for pregnant people. Instead, the agency said on its webpage for vaccines and pregnancy that pregnant health care workers may choose to be vaccinated. In explaining that decision, the CDC said that experts had considered how mRNA vaccines, which do not contain the live virus, work. They concluded that the vaccines are unlikely to pose a risk for people who are pregnant.

However, the CDC added, the potential risks of mRNA vaccines to the pregnant person and her fetus are unknown because these vaccines have not been studied in pregnant women.

In January, the World Health Organization recommended against pregnant people getting the vaccine unless they faced increased risk, such as complicating comorbidities or exposure to the virus due to a job in health care, but the agency later reversed course.

A few months later, in March 2021, the CDC continued its lukewarm messaging that pregnant people may choose to be vaccinated. The agency listed some points for pregnant people to consider discussing with their health care providers, starting with how likely they are to be exposed to COVID-19.

After a promising study showed that the vaccine was safe for pregnant people, CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky said at a White House briefing in late April that the CDC was recommending the vaccine for them. But the CDC did not update its website to reflect her comments and said the agencys guidance had not changed: Pregnant people may choose to be vaccinated.

Once again, pregnant people were put in the precarious position of receiving ambiguous and inconsistent recommendations. In May 2021, the CDC reiterated that pregnant people faced an increased risk of getting severely ill from COVID-19, but the language surrounding the vaccine If you are pregnant, you can receive a COVID-19 vaccine was noncommittal.

A CDC spokesperson, responding to questions from ProPublica, said in an email that pregnant people were part of the first recommendations in December 2020 that encouraged people 16 and older to get vaccinated. At that time, data about the safety and efficacy of the vaccine during pregnancy was limited because pregnant people had been excluded from pre-authorization clinical trials, so the CDC included additional supporting language for pregnant people, saying they were eligible and could choose to receive the vaccine. The agency said its recommendations were based on available evidence and evolved throughout the pandemic.

Before making changes to its guidance, the CDC had its team of scientists review available data to ensure that there was an abundance of evidence.

For each update to the statement of risks during pregnancy, multiple types of studies and the strength of evidence for each were reviewed, another CDC spokesperson said. These reviews of the evidence were accompanied with discussions among subject matter experts both internally and externally with clinical partners for an ultimate determination of risk.

Dr. Cynthia Gyamfi-Bannerman, a perinatologist and chair of the department of obstetrics, gynecology and reproductive sciences at the University of California, San Diego School of Medicine, shared the daunting task of making vaccine recommendations for pregnant people as part of COVID-19 task forces for two leading organizations, The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine.

In the beginning, she said, the only pregnancy-specific data they had came from a few dozen participants who were inadvertently included after becoming pregnant during the clinical trials and from some pregnant animal data.

It played out in real time in the COVID pandemic because we see the effects of not including pregnant people in these trials, Gyamfi-Bannerman said. We couldnt make a strong recommendation, so pregnant people were hesitant. I think that directly led to fewer people using the vaccine than we would have wanted.

At the end of June 2021, the CDC added a general update to its website to reflect the dangers of the delta variant tearing across much of the country. Getting vaccinated prevents severe illness, hospitalizations, and death, it wrote. Unvaccinated people should get vaccinated and continue masking until they are fully vaccinated.

But it wasnt until Aug. 11, eight months after the first vaccine was administered, that the CDC issued its formal recommendation that pregnant and breastfeeding people get vaccinated.

The vaccines are safe and effective, Walensky said in a statement at the time, and it has never been more urgent to increase vaccinations as we face the highly transmissible Delta variant and see severe outcomes from COVID-19 among unvaccinated pregnant people.

August would prove to be the deadliest month for COVID-19-related deaths of pregnant people. The CDC issued an emergency call the next month strongly recommending the vaccine to pregnant people, noting that approximately 97% of pregnant people hospitalized with COVID-19 were unvaccinated. The dangers to symptomatic pregnant people included a 70% increased risk of death, and their developing babies could face a host of perils, including stillbirths.

Researchers have yet to determine exactly why some pregnant people with COVID-19, vaccinated and unvaccinated alike, deliver stillborn babies, while others do not. Attempts to answer that question have been hindered, in part, by incomplete data. The CDCs statistics on COVID-19-related fetal and maternal deaths are undercounts. The CDC has data on less than 73,000 birth outcomes following a mothers confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis in 2020 and 2021, of which 579 were pregnancy losses.

That information was sent in by fewer than three dozen health departments, and those estimates dont include states like Mississippi, which in September reported 72 COVID-19-related stillbirths since the start of the pandemic, nearly double what the state would have expected, according to data from the Mississippi State Department of Health. Preliminary state data shows total stillbirths increased there in 2020 then dipped in 2021, but were still higher than pre-pandemic numbers.

A separate CDC database shows more than 220,000 COVID-19 cases and at least 305 deaths among pregnant people.

CDC recognizes that pregnant people faced challenging decisions about how to best protect themselves in the setting of uncertainty related to both the infection and the COVID-19 vaccine, a CDC spokesperson said, adding, COVID-19 vaccination remains one of the best ways to protect yourself and your family from serious illness from COVID-19.

Heartbroken and determined, Jaime Butcher has emerged as an unofficial ambassador for the vaccine, posting in online pregnancy and stillbirth forums about the risks of being pregnant and unvaccinated.

No one, she said, told her of the risks. Doctors, the CDC and health officials, she continued, arent doing enough to inform people. Even now, well into the pandemics third year, the message still isnt getting through.

I kept seeing it happening more and more to women and it wasnt talked about, she said. They just say, Oh, get the vaccine, which is great, but they dont talk about what getting the virus can do to pregnant women.

As a wedding planner, Butcher was surrounded by love. She found it with her husband, then in the daughter growing in her belly, who they named Emily after Butchers grandmother.

Continued here:

God, No, Not Another Case. COVID-Related Stillbirths Didn't Have to Happen. - ProPublica