Daily Archives: September 1, 2021

If you have been diagnosed with COVID-19 and are at high risk for developing severe COVID-19, you may be eligible for monoclonal antibody treatment, which might prevent you from becoming sicker.

Antibodies are part of our natural defense against viruses such as SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. But they take time for the body to make. Antibodies designed to attack COVID-19 have been developed, and in several studies have been shown to reduce the risk of progressing to severe COVID-19 and hospitalization when given early to people who test positive for COVID-19. This therapy is given as an infusion through an IV at one of the UNC Health infusion centers.

The criteria for patients to be considered for Monoclonal Antibody infusion therapy are:

Monoclonal antibody therapy needs to be given as soon as possible after symptoms start to workideally within 4 days and no longer than seven days.

To find out if you are at high risk and eligible for COVID 19 Monoclonal Antibody infusion therapy, please call the UNC COVID Help Line at 888-850-2684, between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m., 7 days a week.

Providers outside of UNC Health can also call the Help Line for information about whether patients meet detailed criteria and can be referred to a UNC Health clinic for monoclonal antibody treatment. UNC Health providers should check the intranet resources for treatment criteria and referral information.

Go here to see the original:

Monoclonal antibody infusion therapy for COVID-19 | UNC-Chapel Hill - UNC Chapell Hill

`;// articleContent = document.querySelector(".article-content");// articleContent.innerHTML = articleContent.innerHTML + formbox;let firstParagraph = document.querySelector("div.article-content > p:nth-child(1)");if (firstParagraph !== null) {firstParagraph.insertAdjacentHTML("afterend", formbox);}function waitForElement(id, callback){var goStahp = setInterval(function(){if(document.getElementById(id)){clearInterval(goStahp);callback();}}, 100);}waitForElement("JotFormIFrame-212304983870155", function(){const expandButton = document.querySelector('h3.expand_box_click_to_open_covid_form');expandButton.addEventListener('click', function() {let box = document.querySelector('.corona_form_expand_box_covid_form');let first = 'opening';let second = 'open';let buttonAction = 'Hide story tip submission form';let deviceAction = "Tap";if (window.innerWidth > 666) {deviceAction = "Click";}// console.log(window.innerWidth);if(box.classList.contains(first)) {[first, second] = [second, first];buttonAction = `${deviceAction} to submit a coronavirus story tip`;}expandButton.innerHTML = buttonAction;box.classList.toggle(first);setTimeout(() => {box.classList.toggle(second);}, 0);});var ifr = document.getElementById("JotFormIFrame-212304983870155");if(window.location.href && window.location.href.indexOf("?") > -1) {var get = window.location.href.substr(window.location.href.indexOf("?") + 1);if(ifr && get.length > 0) {var src = ifr.src;src = src.indexOf("?") > -1 ? src + "&" + get : src + "?" + get;ifr.src = src;}}window.handleIFrameMessage = function(e) {if (typeof e.data === 'object') { return; }var args = e.data.split(":");if (args.length > 2) { iframe = document.getElementById("JotFormIFrame-" + args[(args.length - 1)]); } else { iframe = document.getElementById("JotFormIFrame"); }if (!iframe) { return; }switch (args[0]) {case "scrollIntoView":iframe.scrollIntoView();break;case "setHeight":console.log(`case: setHeight`);iframe.style.height = parseInt(args[1]) + 15 + "px";break;case "collapseErrorPage":console.log(`case: collapseErrorPage`);if (iframe.clientHeight > window.innerHeight) {iframe.style.height = window.innerHeight + "px";}break;case "reloadPage":window.location.reload();break;case "loadScript":var src = args[1];if (args.length > 3) {src = args[1] + ':' + args[2];}var script = document.createElement('script');script.src = src;script.type = 'text/javascript';document.body.appendChild(script);break;case "exitFullscreen":if (window.document.exitFullscreen) window.document.exitFullscreen();else if (window.document.mozCancelFullScreen) window.document.mozCancelFullScreen();else if (window.document.mozCancelFullscreen) window.document.mozCancelFullScreen();else if (window.document.webkitExitFullscreen) window.document.webkitExitFullscreen();else if (window.document.msExitFullscreen) window.document.msExitFullscreen();break;}var isJotForm = (e.origin.indexOf("jotform") > -1) ? true : false;if(isJotForm && "contentWindow" in iframe && "postMessage" in iframe.contentWindow) {var urls = {"docurl":encodeURIComponent(document.URL),"referrer":encodeURIComponent(document.referrer)};iframe.contentWindow.postMessage(JSON.stringify({"type":"urls","value":urls}), "*");}};if (window.addEventListener) {window.addEventListener("message", handleIFrameMessage, false);} else if (window.attachEvent) {window.attachEvent("onmessage", handleIFrameMessage);}});//

Continue reading here:

San Antonio Zoo to vaccinate its animals against COVID-19 very soon - KXAN.com

As the coronavirus continues to surge across the United States, hospitals are again filling up with ill COVID-19 patients. And the vast majority of those patients are unvaccinated, as two new charts help make exceedingly clear.

One of those charts shows that from January 24 to July 24, vaccinated individuals were hospitalized with COVID-19 at a much lower cumulative rate than unvaccinated individuals. And the difference in rates between the two groups has only grown over time. By late July, a total of about 26 adults per 100,000 vaccinated people had been hospitalized for COVID-19. Thats compared with about 431 hospitalized people for every 100,000 unvaccinated individuals a rate roughly 17 times as high as for those who were vaccinated. The datacome from 13 states, including California, Georgia and Utah.

That trend held when the researchers charted hospitalization rates on a weekly basis too. From January to July, weekly hospitalization rates among unvaccinated people were six to 31 times as high as those in vaccinated people, the researchers report August 29 at medRxiv.org.

The accumulation of hospitalizations in each group over time, which that first chart shows, illustrates the risk of developing severe COVID-19 overall. And its message is clear: If youre vaccinated during this pandemic, your risk of hospitalization is much, much lower than if youre not vaccinated. The weekly rate, on the other hand, is a bit like the speedometer on a car providing a glimpse of whats happening week by week as the coronavirus spreads. Its message is also clear: The risk of a vaccinated person becoming hospitalized remains low at any given time, while the risk for unvaccinated people can fluctuate, probably as a result of community transmission.

The findings, along with other recent research out of Los Angeles County, remind us that if you are not yet vaccinated, you are among those highest at risk, Rochelle Walensky, director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said August 24 in a White House news briefing. Please do not underestimate the risk of serious consequences of this virus.

As of August 26, more than 100,000 people are hospitalized for COVID-19 in the United States, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services a level not seen since January amid the winter surge.

A separate study, described August 24 in Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, that focused on Los Angeles County also showed that while COVID-19 vaccines dont always stop infections, the shots still prevent people from landing in the hospital. Thats even with the spread of the highly contagious delta variant, which has raised concerns among public health officials because some vaccinated people who get infected can transmit the coronavirus to others (SN: 7/30/21).

On July 25, when the delta variant was prevalent in the county, unvaccinated people were nearly 30 times as likely to be hospitalized as vaccinated people, the researchers found. Only one vaccinated person for every 100,000 people was hospitalized for COVID-19. Among unvaccinated people, there were around 29 hospitalizations per 100,000 individuals. In that same study, unvaccinated people were five times as likely to be infected as vaccinated people.

While the vaccines dont protect against infection as well as they do against severe disease, the shots are keeping people off ventilators and from dying, Kathryn Edwards, an infectious disease pediatrician at Vanderbilt University School of Medicine in Nashville, said August 26 in a news briefing sponsored by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. We cannot lose the forest for the trees.

Headlines and summaries of the latest Science News articles, delivered to your inbox

Thank you for signing up!

There was a problem signing you up.

Read more:

These charts show that COVID-19 vaccines are doing their job - Science News Magazine

zimmytws | iStock | Getty Images

A new report released by the Social Security Administration on Tuesday reveals new estimates of just how much the Covid-19 pandemic has impacted the program's already ailing trust funds.

The results show the funds from which the program pays benefits have been "significantly affected" by both the pandemic and the ensuing recession of 2020.

Now, the fund that pays retirement and survivor benefits known as the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund will be able to pay full benefits as scheduled only until 2033. That is one year earlier than last year's projections.

At that time, the program will only be able to pay 76% of those scheduled benefits.

The Disability Insurance Trust Fund, meanwhile, will be able to pay benefits until 2057 eight years sooner than last year's estimates. At that time, Social Security will be able to pay 91% of those benefits.

Combined, both trust funds are estimated to be able to pay full benefits as scheduled until 2034, one year earlier than last year's projections, at which point 78% of benefits will be payable.

Notably, last year's projections did not take the effects of Covid-19 into account.

Though the depletion dates have been bumped up sooner, benefits will still be paid once those dates are reached.

In addition, though the cost-of-living adjustment for next year was projected to be 3.1%, that increase will likely be closer to 6% due to recent increases in the Consumer Price Index, senior administration officials said. That is in line with recent estimates.

That would be the highest increase in decades, due to recent price increases in areas like cars and energy. The COLA for this year was 1.3%.

While this report is the first to show the effects of the Covid-19 pandemic on Social Security, the full effect of persistent inflation likely will not be known until next year's report, said Shai Akabas, director of economic policy at the Bipartisan Policy Center.

A sustained inflation rate of more than 2% could have a meaningful impact on the program's finances, he said.

Here's a look at more retirement news.

The Aug. 31 release date of the annual Social Security trustees report is also the latest in at least 25 years, Akabas noted. Typically, the report comes out in April, though it has been released later than that in the past.

"It's concerning from that standpoint of wanting to make sure we're keeping a close eye on the program's finances," Akabas said.

While the report's results point to the need to fix the program either through increased taxes, benefit cuts or a combination of both it is unlikely to spur lawmakers to act immediately, Akabas said.

That's because the estimates for the program are not as dire as projected in the immediate aftermath of the onset of Covid-19 last year. Prior to the economic recovery, the Bipartisan Policy Center had projected the trust fund used to pay retirement benefits could run out as soon as 2029 to 2033.

Continued here:

Social Securitys funds have been significantly affected by Covid-19. Heres how that could impact your benefits - CNBC

PIERRE, S.D. (KELO) Nine soldiers with the South Dakota National Guard are helping Monument Health with COVID-19 testing in the western part of the state.

The soldiers were activated to Belle Fourche, Custer, Rapid City, Spearfish and Sturgis.

The soldiers are activated under FEMA Title 32, so their efforts will be federally funded.

In a statement, Governor Kristi Noem says she spoke with all three South Dakota hospital systems to ask what they needed as cases start to rise again.

Monument shared a need for help with testing efforts.

Testing efforts help us to identify and isolate cases to slow the spread of the virus, Noem said in the email.

The members began their work Tuesday morning.

Testing volume in August was 115 percent higher than it was in July, according to Emily Leech, Director of the Monument Health Laboratory Services.

The health care system says that in the last seven days, 2,856 COVID-19 PCR tests were completed and 844 were positive for a positivity rate of 29.6 percent.

Leech says assistance from the National Guard will allow Monument Health to test more patients and fully utilize testing equipment.

The latest update from the state health department said the Rapid City hospital was at 100 percent capacity.

A month ago, the Monument Health system had fewer than 10 hospitalized COVID-19 patients. As of Monday, Aug. 30, the number had increased to 110.

Dan Daly with Monument Health says as of Tuesday, the health care system has 108 COVID-19 patients. He says that is more than the 104 patients treated when COVID-19 peaked in November 2020 in South Dakota.

A Monument spokesman tells us they are not turning anyone away. He says if someone needs a bed, they will find one.

Here is the original post:

South Dakota National Guard activated to help with COVID-19 testing efforts - KELOLAND.com

NEW MEXICO (KRQE) As COVID-19 cases spike, testing is jumping just as quickly. This is causing a slow down in New Mexicans getting results.The New Mexico Department of Health is looking at ways to speed up the process. The amount of tests being done is way up compared to last year and even month to month. Mandatory COVID testing for employees and a surge in cases has people waiting days to get their results.

When my son had to get tested because he came into contact with somebody and that took forever. It was about five days to wait for him to get it. and I was like pacing, like please hurry you know I dont want him to have anything but luckily we were good, said Evita Sinclaire.

NMDOH says they are working on expanding testing services at the public health offices. The department is trying to balance getting people vaccinated and getting people tested.

In the last two weeks, more than 172,000 tests were done in New Mexico. That compared to less than 80,000 over the same two-week period in 2020. In the last 30 days, the state conducted more than 312,000 tests. That is 175,000 more than the previous 30 days.

In some cases tests are sent out of state, slowing down the ability for people to get their tests quicker. According to NMDOH, other in-state lab services are ramping up their testing turnaround again.

We do need to be patient and recognize with so many people testing you know we can only work so fast collectively in the health world to be able to get those test results back, you know expect to wait a few days, says David Morgan, a spokesperson with NMDOH.

If you are required to get weekly COVID tests for work the health department is recommending people use Vault testing. This allows people to have COVID tests delivered to your home every week.

The other concern is Balloon Fiesta starting the first weekend in October. The department says there are efforts underway to determine a temporary alternate site away from Balloon Fiesta Park for COVID testing.

More:

State looking at ways to speed up the COVID-19 testing process - KRQE News 13

What if the stated goal is simply, Kids need to be in school, period. Considering the devastating costs of having children out of school last year, including dramatic and quantifiable learning loss in math and reading, this is a very reasonable and defensible goal. How might that then drive policy? Setting that goal would mean deploying more tools to keep children in school, like using rapid antigen tests and allowing kids who test negative to go to in-person class rather than mass quarantining hundreds or thousands of children who had close contact to people with the virus, as is happening now. Or, we accept that there will be more cases in children, recognizing that disease severity for a vast majority of kids is low.

Another hard question that is most likely also causing confusion and disagreement is how we define severe disease in children. Children can get Covid, but their death and hospitalization rates are much lower than for adults. The inflammatory syndrome MIS-C is rare. Long Covid has gained wide attention, but recent studies have shown that rates are low among children and not dissimilar to effects caused by other viral illnesses.

Were not being cavalier by raising these points. Consider that in Britain the government doesnt require masks for children in schools, and its not clear it will advise kids to get vaccinated, either. Britain has experts, as we do, and they are looking at the same scientific data we are; they most assuredly care about childrens health the same way we do, and yet, they have come to a different policy decision. Schools were prioritized over other activities, and the risks of transmission without masks were considered acceptable.

This reveals the crux of the problem in the United States. Its not just the C.D.C., but everyone including us public health experts who is not always connecting our advice or policy recommendations to clear goals. The conflict is not about masks or boosters, its about the often unstated objective and how a mask mandate or a boosters for all approach may or may not get us there.

We use schools as the example here, but much of the same applies to broader societal questions over mass gatherings, live entertainment and returning to offices. There are questions around how vaccinated people should live their lives if the vaccines reduce the likelihood of spread but dont absolutely and completely prevent breakthrough infections and transmission, which was never going to be the case.

If the goal is zero spread, which we think is not realistic, then the country would need to keep many of the most restrictive measures in place an approach that has serious public health consequences of its own. If the goal is to minimize severe disease, some states with high vaccination rates might already be there. Low-vaccination states would still have work to do before loosening restrictions. Treating the country as a whole just doesnt make sense right now because of the widespread differences in vaccination rates.

The emergence of the Delta variant has, understandably, caused many Americans to step back and use caution. But the same questions will be there when we emerge from this Delta surge, whether in a few weeks or next spring. We shouldnt let ourselves off the hook with easy decisions today. At some point, the country needs to have an honest conversation with itself about what our goals really are.

See the article here:

Opinion | The Hard Covid-19 Questions Were Not Asking - The New York Times