Covid-19 News and Discussions

[Yommie]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1758537110271807874

 

[Yommie]

Sask. has nearly exhausted its supply of free COVID-19 tests

Saskatchewan's health ministry says its free, at-home COVID-19 test supply is almost gone.

saskatoon.ctvnews.ca

Sask. has nearly exhausted its supply of free COVID-19 tests​

Two COVID-19 antigen rapid tests are pictured in Calgary, Alta., on Tuesday, Jan. 4, 2022. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Jeff McIntosh

Josh Lynn
Digital News Supervisor CTV News Saskatoon
Follow | Contact
Published Feb. 16, 2024 5:44 p.m. EST
Share

• Link
• X
• Reddit
• LinkedIn
• Email

Saskatchewan's health ministry says its free, at-home COVID-19 test supply is almost gone.
The familiar green boxes were made available at many locations throughout the province during the pandemic.

However, with the federal government sending provinces their last supply of tests in 2022, the number of available tests has been dwindling.
"Saskatchewan has made every effort to use this stock responsibly by making the tests widely available to the public through more than 600 partnering distribution sites," a Ministry of Health statement said.

RELATED STORIES​

• Should older or expired COVID test kits still be used?
• Makers of COVID-19 protective equipment seek over $5 billion in damages from Ottawa
• School closures may not have been necessary to prevent spread of COVID-19, researchers at McMaster find

"Remaining test kits will continue to be available at public distribution locations across Saskatchewan while supplies last."
The ministry statement noted Saskatchewan's remaining test kits will expire in March.
Saskatchewan residents can still purchase rapid COVID-19 tests from retailers, the ministry said.

 

[Yommie]

California may have to pay $300M for COVID-19 homeless hotel program after FEMA caps reimbursement

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — California cities and counties still don't know how much they'll have to pay for Gov. Gavin Newsom's pandemic program to house homeless people in hotel rooms

www.thestar.com

California may have to pay $300M for COVID-19 homeless hotel program after FEMA caps reimbursement​

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — California cities and counties still don't know how much they'll have to pay for Gov. Gavin Newsom's pandemic program to house homeless people in hotel rooms after the Federal Emergency Management Agency said in October that it was limiting the number of days eligible for reimbursement.
State and local officials say they were stunned to learn via an October letter that FEMA would only pay to house homeless people at risk of catching COVID-19 for at most 20 days — as opposed to unlimited — starting June 11, 2021, which is when Gov. Gavin Newsom rescinded the sweeping stay-at-home order he issued in March 2020.
In response, the Governor’s Office of Emergency Services requested that FEMA reconsider the policy change, saying that it would cost cities and counties at least $300 million at a time when budgets are tight and that local governments had relied on assurances that the federal government would pick up the cost.
ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW

Late Tuesday, FEMA said in a statement that it will review California's Jan. 31 letter, but that all states had been provided “the same guidance and policy updates throughout the pandemic.”
Newsom announced the hotel housing program — called Project Roomkey — in March 2020 as part of the state's response to the pandemic. Homeless advocates heralded it as a novel way to safeguard residents who could not stay at home to reduce virus transmission. FEMA agreed to pay 75% of the cost, later increasing that to full reimbursement.
California officials argued to the federal agency that no notice was provided on the policy change.
Robert J. Fenton, the regional administrator for California who wrote the October letter, told CalMatters, which was first to report on the discrepancy last week, that the policy was not new.

“What I’m doing is clarifying the original guidance of the original policy and providing that back to them,” he told the nonprofit news organization.

• 2 days ago

FEMA declined Tuesday to make Fenton available to The Associated Press for an interview.
Brian Ferguson, a spokesperson for Cal OES, said earlier Tuesday that inaction by FEMA “would have a chilling effect on the future trust of local governments and the federal government” in times of crisis.

 

[Yommie]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/end-of-n-w-t-covid-funding-staffing-reductions-stanton-hospital-1.7116552

Stanton Hospital planning for staff cuts, fewer beds as COVID-era funding ends​

Health authority says it hopes federal funding could offset cuts set to happen at the end of March​

Luke Carroll · CBC News · Posted: Feb 15, 2024 7:47 PM EST | Last Updated: February 15

Yellowknife's Stanton Territorial Hospital. The end of COVID-19 funding from the territorial government may result in staffing reductions and the loss of some beds. But there's hope the recent federal funding announcement could offset these losses. (Sara Minogue/CBC)

Social Sharing​

• Facebook
• X
• Email
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

The N.W.T. government is planning to cut staff and beds at the Stanton Territorial Hospital in Yellowknife, as a COVID-related boost in funding comes to an end on March 31.
The plan comes despite the hospital often being at capacity, and shortly after the territory's finance minister spoke of the numerous vacancies for health care workers in the N.W.T.
David Maguire, a spokesperson for the Northwest Territories Health and Social Services Authority (NTHSSA), confirmed the plan in an email, but said there's hope that recently announced federal funding could offset the cuts.
An NTHSSA employee with knowledge of the situation spoke with CBC News on the condition their identity not be disclosed because of possible implications to their employment.
They said they heard the cuts would involve the loss of a full-time emergency registered nurse position, a licensed practical nurse and all nursing aides on the medicine ward, though the exact number of nursing aides wasn't known.
Maguire told CBC the hospital has been planning for a return to pre-COVID levels due to the expiration of the funding boost, and this could result in "associated reductions to staffing."
"NTHSSA has been aware of the temporary nature of these increases, however, and used temporary staffing measures such as terms and transfer assignments that align with the funding lapse."
Maguire said the funding expiring at the end of March would result in the loss of three beds on the medicine unit (a return to 25 beds), a loss of three assessment rooms in the emergency department (a return to 12 rooms), and a loss of two beds in the ICU, which had been increased to six beds as required during the pandemic.
The funding was first granted to the hospital during the pandemic to scale up capacity to respond to the public health emergency. Maguire said it was extended another year to help the health authority to transition to the "COVID endemic."

Fiscal strategy​

The next territorial budget is scheduled to be debated in May, and although it's possible there could be more funding for the health authority, N.W.T. Premier R.J. Simpson and Finance Minister Caroline Wawzonek unveiled a new fiscal strategy aimed at saving $150 million a year.
The plan involves a review of all programs and services to find redundancies, which may lead to some programs and services being merged.
But Wawzonek said the review does not mean there will be job cuts. She said the territory has numerous vacancies and needs its public service, and specifically mentioned the shortage of teachers and nurses.
CBC News reached out to Wawzonek about the end of the COVID-19 funding and whether there would still be cuts at Stanton.
A spokesperson responded, saying the questions were operational, and redirected the request to the health authority.
They also wrote that the territorial government "looks forward to seeing the new federal funding applied to our HSS system as well as the final outcomes of that implementation, as internal planning discussions continue."

Federal funding a possible offset​

The funding is set to run out at the end of March, but Maguire said some of these changes could be offset by the $36 million in federal funding for health care Canada recently committed to.
Maguire said, for example, two detox beds will be added to the medicine unit as a result of the federal funding.
"At this time, the total known impact of final state staffing — after removal of COVID funding and addition of bilateral funding — is yet to be finalized."

• Federal gov't signs deals for $36M in health-care spending in N.W.T.

In a newsletter to staff, Lorie-Anne Danielson, the chief operating officer of the NTHSSA, acknowledged the end of the funding could affect the operations.
She also expressed optimism that the federal funding could "offset any capacity reductions related to COVID funding ending."
The possible reductions come at a time when healthcare across the territory, and the country, is struggling to operate.
Staff shortages have led to prolonged closures of the obstetrics unit in Yellowknife and last month there was a temporary pause on birthing services in Inuvik.
Stanton was also at capacity for weeks in January, while several health centres closed due to mechanical issues during a cold snap.

 

[Yommie]

25 states see 'high,' or 'very high' levels of respiratory illness activity: CDC

New CDC data updated Friday shows 25 states are experiencing ‘high’ or ‘very high’ levels of respiratory illness activity.

abcnews.go.com

25 states see 'high,' or 'very high' levels of respiratory illness activity: CDC​

COVID, flu hospitalizations remained steady compared to last week.
ByMary Kekatos and Youri Benadjaoud
February 16, 2024, 4:25 PM

• 
  
• 
  
• 
  

1:44

Why are so many Americans still dying of COVID?
Why are so many Americans still dying of COVID?
Nearly 1,500 Americans have died each week from the disease, as of Dec. 9, 2023, according to the CDC.


Half of all states are seeing high levels of respiratory virus activity, new federal data updated Friday shows.
Currently, 25 states plus New York City and Washington, D.C., are experiencing "high" or "very high" levels of respiratory illness activity, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
While this is higher than the 23 states experiencing "high" or "very high" activity levels last week, it is fewer than the peak of 38 states reporting "high' or 'very high' levels the week ending Dec. 30.

MORE: COVID patients are 4.3 times more likely to develop chronic fatigue, CDC report finds​

Respiratory illness activity is defined as people going to the doctor with symptoms including fever and a cough and/or sore throat from any respiratory disease including flu, COVID, RSV, and the common cold.
New weekly COVID hospitalizations remained steady with 21,373 recorded the week ending Feb. 10, slightly up from 21,204 the week ending Feb. 3. Despite the uptick, COVID hospitalizations remain lower than the same time last year.

Doctors look over a COVID-19 patient in the Medical Intensive care unit (MICU) at St. Luke's Boi...Show more
Kyle Green/AP, FILE
Most counties are still in the low hospital admission category meaning fewer than 10 COVID-19 hospital admissions per 100,000 people.
Additionally, other metrics including test positivity and emergency department visits have continued to decline, CDC data shows.
Weekly COVID deaths have slightly declined to 2,152 for the week ending Jan. 20, the last week of complete data, from 2,457 the week ending Jan. 13.
Experts have previously explained that deaths are a lagging indicator and may take some time to fall after hospitalizations.
Last week, the CDC announced it was tracking a new COVID variant of COVID-19, known as BA.2.87.1, which has so far been detected nine times in South Africa, according to an update provided by the federal health agency last week.

There have not been any cases of this variant reported in the U.S. or anywhere outside of South Africa, but the CDC notes that the current public health risk appears low.

MORE: Long COVID research opens door for further exploration on post-viral illness​

Meanwhile, flu hospitalizations slightly declined from 11,073 the previous week to 10,787 the week ending Feb. 10, according to CDC data, with percent positivity for flu remaining stable overall.
Flu activity continues to remain elevated nationally, with increases in the mid-Atlantic, the Midwest, and the Great Plains, the CDC said.
The CDC estimates that there have been at least 24 million illnesses, 260,000 hospitalizations, and 16,000 deaths from flu so far this season.
Adults over age 65 continue to have the highest rates of both COVID and flu hospitalizations.
Additionally, RSV activity has decreased in many areas likely peaking nationally for this season. Infants under age 4 have the highest rates of RSV hospitalizations.

Tracy Gage, LVN, prepares a syringe at a flu and COVID vaccination clinic Kaiser Permanente Pa...Show more
Francine Orr/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images, FILE
Health officials continue to recommend that all eligible Americans get their updated flu and COVID vaccine as well as RSV shots, but trends continue to lag in the U.S.
Currently, only 47.6% of adults are vaccinated against the flu and 22.3% are vaccinated with the updated COVID vaccine. Additionally, just 21.9% of adults over age 60 have received the RSV vaccine, according to CDC data.
While half of all children, 50%, are vaccinated against the flu, just 12.4% have received the updated COVID vaccine.

 

[Yommie]

School closures may not have been necessary to prevent spread of COVID-19, researchers at McMaster find

An “extensive,” two-year review of COVID-19 in schools and daycares has revealed that these settings were not a significant source of transmission of the virus when infection prevention and control measures were used, researchers at McMaster University have found.

toronto.ctvnews.ca

School closures may not have been necessary to prevent spread of COVID-19, researchers at McMaster find​

Codi Wilson
CP24.com Journalist
Follow | Contact
Published Feb. 15, 2024 7:17 p.m. EST
Share

• Link
• X
• Reddit
• LinkedIn
• Email

An “extensive,” two-year review of COVID-19 in schools(opens in a new tab) and daycares has revealed that these settings were not a significant source of transmission of the virus when infection prevention and control measures were used, researchers at McMaster University have found.
The review was published Thursday in The Lancet Child and Adolescent Health(opens in a new tab) and examined more than 34,000 references, including databases, websites, and studies, related to transmission in child-care settings and schools across the globe.

The results of the review appear to cast doubt on the necessity of the repeated interruptions to in-person learning during the pandemic.

• Download our app to get local alerts on your device(opens in a new tab)
• Get the latest local updates right to your inbox(opens in a new tab)

RELATED STORIES​

• Ontario seeks municipal daycare audits, raising cost-cutting concerns
• COVID-19 reinfection rates high among people who are homeless, Toronto study says
• Ontario's COVID-19 wastewater data shows infection rate headed in 'the right direction'
• Peel Public Health investigating case of measles in child who recently travelled abroad

In Ontario, schools were closed for a minimum of 135 days(opens in a new tab) to prevent the spread of COVID-19, with disruptions in three successive school years.
“We found that after that initial shutdown where everything was locked down, schools did not appear to have much impact on community level transmission when infection prevention control measures were in place,” Sarah Neil-Sztramko, an assistant professor at the university and the lead author of the review, said in a written statement.
The review, which was updated 18 times over the past two years, was launched in response to a need for “timely, up-to-date access to scientific evidence to guide decision making,” the authors said.
“The role of schools and daycares in COVID-19 transmission, from a growing number of studies, were reported in several reviews; the overall findings were mixed, and these reviews became quickly outdated as new and often higher-quality evidence emerged,” the authors wrote.
“The purpose of this living rapid review was to continually identify, appraise, and summarise emerging research evidence about the risk of transmission of COVID-19 among children and adults in schools and daycares, the effect of infection prevention and control (IPAC) measures on COVID-19 transmission within schools and daycares, and the effect of opening schools and daycares on community-level transmission.”
The review found that masking(opens in a new tab), vaccinations and test-to-stay policies were the best methods to reduce COVID-19’s spread in schools and daycares.
The effectiveness of strategies like mandatory quarantining, cohorting, and hybrid learning is uncertain and may have made “little to no difference in transmission,” the authors added.
“It is important to understand which measures mitigate transmission so that schools can remain open as much as possible, given the negative impacts that were found during COVID-19 when they were closed,” Neil-Sztramko said.
Remote learning(opens in a new tab), the review noted, was associated with increased educational disparities, especially for low-income families and those in remote areas with limited access to technology and resources.
“School closures also reduced opportunities for students to interact with their peers, which has been shown to have an adverse effect on their social and emotional development,” the review read.
“Additionally, the fear, stress, and isolation caused by the pandemic contributed to a substantial increase in loneliness, anxiety, depression, and other mental health problems.”
Decision-makers were faced with a difficult balancing act in their respective communities, the authors added.

“Although the data consistently show that children can both contract and transmit COVID-19, based on published reports to date, following reopening, the risk of widespread transmission from child to child and child to adult is low, particularly when IPAC measures(opens in a new tab) are in place and adhered to,” the review read.
“This trend appears to be consistent in the data collected with early variants of concern. Even when absolute case numbers were high, most infections originated from outside of school.”
The researchers said the review provides a “strong and factual foundation” on how to handle significant outbreaks of other variants or infectious diseases in the future.
“If there were to be another wave where community transmission was increasing and straining the health-care system, strategies such as masking, vaccination(opens in a new tab), and test-to-stay interventions are effective in fighting transmission, allowing schools to stay open,” Neil-Sztramko said.

 

[Yommie]

Will you need a Covid booster shot this spring? The CDC will discuss the matter this month

People who are most vulnerable to Covid complications, such as older people and those with weak immune systems, may be able to get another dose for protection.

www.nbcnews.com

CDC may recommend a spring Covid booster for some groups​

People who are most vulnerable to Covid complications, such as older people and those with weak immune systems, may be able to get another dose for protection.

Feb. 15, 2024, 4:03 PM EST
By Erika Edwards
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is considering whether to recommend yet another Covid booster shot this spring, especially for people most at risk for severe complications of the illness.
A spring booster would be the same vaccine that was approved last fall, which was formulated to target the XBB.1.5 subvariant. The vaccine is also very effective against the JN.1 subvariant, which is causing almost all Covid infections in the U.S. right now.

While it's unlikely that the majority of Americans would opt for another dose — just 21.9% of adults received the latest version of the vaccine — experts say that it's critical to make it available sooner rather than later.
"Waiting till the fall, I think, is a mistake," said Michael Osterholm, an infectious disease expert and director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota. "We have clear evidence that either vaccine or previous infection probably gives four to six months of relative protection against serious illness, hospitalizations and deaths, but wanes substantially after that."
Earlier this week, the CDC said it had no immediate plans to pull back on isolation guidelines for people who test positive for Covid.
Advisers to the CDC are expected to vote on whether to recommend a spring Covid booster during a meeting scheduled for Feb. 28, according to a source close to the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. It's expected that the panel will focus its discussion on those most vulnerable to Covid, including people age 65 and older and anyone with a weakened immune system, such as organ transplant recipients.
"The discussion will be aimed at the people who are most accepting of public health recommendations," said Dr. William Schaffner, an infectious diseases expert at Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, Tennessee. "The committee, in its rigorous fashion since the question has come up, will be considering a second dose for people at high risk or for people who wish to get it."
But even some vulnerable groups who usually adhere closely to their doctors' advice to get vaccinations are experiencing vaccine fatigue, said Dr. William Werbel, associate director of epidemiology and quantitative sciences with the Johns Hopkins Transplant Research Center in Baltimore.
"Some people have had seven, eight vaccines," Werbel said. "Transplant recipients would be more receptive and much more likely to follow recommendations, particularly if recommended by the transplant center, but the ceiling is kind of lowered because of this societal fatigue and societal disenchantment with Covid."

He added that he would recommend a spring booster to his patients if the CDC signs off on one.
Experts generally recommend waiting at least two months after a Covid vaccination or Covid infection before getting another shot, even for high-risk patients.
Vaccination rates are higher for people ages 65 and older, at 42%, according to the CDC. Research shows that people who got the latest booster shot were 54% less likely to be infected with Covid this winter. That level of protection held against the strain found in nearly all circulation of Covid right now: JN.1.
The CDC is not required to follow the advice of its advisory panels, but it usually does.
As of this month, emergency room visits, hospitalizations and deaths from Covid are down, according to the latest CDC data.
"We're lucky that the vaccines are safe," Werbel said, "certainly much safer than getting Covid."

 

[Yommie]

Do I have to stay home if I have COVID in 2024? The rules might surprise you.

People have stopped paying much attention to COVID-19, but some precautions are still important for protecting the most vulnerable people from the disease.

www.usatoday.com

Do I have to stay home if I have COVID in 2024? The rules might surprise you.​

Karen Weintraub
USA TODAY

Amidst reports this week that federal officials are considering changing COVID-19 isolation guidelines, experts offered reminders that the coronavirus remains dangerous, killing more than 1,000 people a week nationwide and more than 2,000 a week as of last month.
But the approach to prevention has shifted now that most Americans have been infected and vaccinated at least once.
There are also treatments available for the most vulnerable, though they are dangerously underused and most of the people who end up hospitalized are among the vulnerable groups who missed the opportunity to get an updated vaccine or a timely treatment, experts say.
"We're not going to prevent COVID anymore ‒ people are going to get COVID," said Dr. Anand Parekh, chief medical adviser for the Bipartisan Policy Center, a think tank.

But what's important is preventing hospitalizations, severe illness and deaths in the face of a virus that "is much more transmissible than the flu or than a regular rhinovirus that gives you the common cold," he said.
So how hard should you be trying to avoid COVID-19 and what should you do if you get it?

That depends on your level of risk and risk tolerance, experts say.
"The science hasn't changed, but the public's perception (has) and the willingness of the public to inconvenience themselves has definitely dropped since the early days of the pandemic," said Dr. Daniel Griffin, an infectious disease specialist with Optum and a co-host of the podcast "This Week in Virology."

Even early in the pandemic when 2,000 people were dying daily in New York, the vast majority of Americans decided that isolating themselves when they fell ill was inconvenient, he said.
About 75% of people typically hide their illnesses when they are sick even though they know it might be harmful to others, because they don't want to miss out, especially on social activities, according to a recent study.

"People are already going to the office, they're going to school, they're taking their antihistamine, so no one notices," he said.
Most people have been quick to forget the lessons learned during four years of the pandemic, Griffin said. "For the elderly, for the immunocompromised, we're turning back to our previous rugged individual approach to public health."

What should you do if you get sick?​

Anyone who has a respiratory illness ‒ a cough, stuffy nose, often a fever ‒ should assume they have either COVID-19, the flu, or RSV, each of which kills tens of thousands of vulnerable Americans a year, said Dr. Paul Offit, a pediatrician and infectious disease specialist at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia.
"We've added COVID-19 to the pantheon of winter respiratory viruses," he said.

Offit recommends that people at risk for severe disease from COVID-19, including those who are pregnant, immunocompromised, or over 65, get tested quickly if they develop these symptoms so they can benefit from the very effective available treatments: Paxlovid and the antiviral Molnupiravir.
People who are not at high risk should assume they have one of these highly contagious infections and wear a mask to protect the vulnerable, he said.

Dr. William Schaffner, an infectious disease specialist at Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, said he's one of the few people in his Nashville, Tennessee, region still masking in public. He and his wife are caring for a family member undergoing chemotherapy for cancer and he doesn't want to bring anything home.
Schaffner said the government should offer more attention and support for treating high-risk people who catch COVID-19. Many doctors are hesitant to prescribe Paxlovid even to extremely vulnerable patients because they don't understand the medication, Schaffner said. He said he wished there was a "911 equivalent" that doctors could call for advice.
Parekh, speaking on Day 9 of his own mild COVID-19 infection, said the current system assumes people at high risk will be willing and able to go through "nine hoops to get Paxlovid."

When is it OK to return to work?​

Still testing positive but with a faint red line, Parekh, from the Bipartisan Policy Center, said he'd stayed home for the first three days and then benefitted from a weekend before coming to work wearing an N95 mask to conform to CDC guidelines.

"I've been asking myself, just in terms of the convenience, how other people could do this," said Parekh, acknowledging that not everyone can work from home or time their infection for a weekend.
He's worried that much of the public is now a few years away from their last vaccination and people are not staying home if they're sick, so it's likely that "a lot more people potentially could be walking around with COVID-19 and be infectious."
Still, many people don't have the luxury of taking a day off work.
On a recent trip, Offit saw ‒ and heard ‒ an airport cleaner sniffling, sneezing and coughing. He watched people's faces change as they saw the man and they quickly moved away.
"If we value human life," he said, "we should make it easier for people" who are sick to take a day off. It would also save businesses money in the long run if one sick worker didn't get all their co-workers sick, he said.

"But at the very least, he should have worn a mask," Offit said of the airport worker.

What about testing?​

Dr. Michael Mina has been a fan of rapid testing since the earliest days of the pandemic and says they can still play a vital role in fighting COVID-19.
Mina, an epidemiologist and immunologist, said he thinks people should test themselves if they think they might have COVID-19 and stay at home if at all possible, if they test positive, particularly if the line is strongly red.

"If it's positive, especially if it's dark, you know you're infectious," said Mina, also chief science officer at eMed, a home testing company.
Typically, he said, people are most contagious in the first few days of an illness.
Mina's upset with new state regulations in California and Oregon – which may become a federal model. These rules say people should isolate only if they have a fever and other symptoms are mild or improving.

Fever is a terrible metric for deciding whether someone is contagious with COVID-19, Mina said. Many people are contagious without ever having symptoms or have symptoms other than fever.
Other people may feel quite sick with COVID-19, but the virus is contained in their gastrointestinal system, rather than shedding from their respiratory tract, so they wouldn't be contagious, he said. A test from a person in this scenario would show up negative.

"Symptoms alone have always been a poor indicator ‒ both positive symptoms and the absence of symptoms," Mina said.

Do people with COVID-19 need to isolate themselves?​

Guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention still calls for people to isolate themselves for five days if they test positive and then wear a mask in public for five more days.
There were reports this week that the guidance was about to change, but CDC officials said they're not ready to make a change yet.

Several experts said it makes sense to change the rules because few people are following the current guidelines.
Any change needs to be supported by lots of public communication Offit said.
"The CDC should be out in front of the media every other day and explain what's going on," he said. If they want to change a recommendation, they should be explaining the science behind that change and "keep pounding it out there."

The goal of any policy change should be to get people to isolate for the first two to three days of illness when people are the most contagious, said Griffin, an infectious disease specialist.
"If you can actually come up with guidance that more people will follow, you can effectively reduce the amount of people out there who are highly transmissible," he said.

Is it still worthwhile to get vaccinated?​

Yes, all the experts say vaccination is still worth the effort and sore arm, particularly for people in high-risk groups or for anyone who doesn't want to miss an important life event, like a wedding or a trip.

Most Americans got their last shot more than a year ago, which means that when they catch COVID-19, the immunity they got from it will have faded. They won't get as sick as a person who'd never been vaccinated or exposed to the virus at all, but they will get sicker than if they'd had a recent shot, experts say.
That's just how the immune system works.
Immune protection typically fades over time, which is why people can catch a cold year after year. Plus most viruses, like the one that causes COVID-19, mutate over time, so the body isn't prepared for precisely the one that arrives the year after an infection or shot.

A vaccine, like an infection or probably even an exposure that's not enough to cause illness, Mina said, gives the body a reminder, a memory "boost" that helps it fight off illness.
The current COVID-19 vaccine doesn't prevent all infections. But a vaccine almost certainly reduces the severity of illness, experts say, along with the risk for long COVID, in which symptoms linger for months or years after the initial infection is gone.

In terms of side effects, most people will still get a sore arm. Some might feel lousy for a day or two. People who had a severe reaction to an earlier dose of the COVID-19 vaccine should talk to their doctors before getting another one.
For everyone else, the vaccines available in the United States and worldwide have been shown to be remarkably safe overall.
Anything given to tens of millions of healthy people will have negative consequences for some.
Teenage boys and young men have a higher risk for myocarditis and pericarditis, a swelling of the heart muscle and area around the heart. But Mina noted that the risk for these is higher during a COVID-19 infection than following a vaccination.
Vaccination during pregnancy has also been shown to be safe and to protect the newborn.
The bottom line, Offit said: if you're sick and can't stay home, wear a mask.
"The goal is to keep people out of the hospital, out of the ICU and out of the morgue," he said.

 

[Yommie]

Fani Willis' father testifies, claims he predicted COVID-19 pandemic | LiveNOW from FOX​

 

[Yommie]

Long COVID specialist: People should "come together" and fight disease | CUOMO​

 

[Yommie]

West Palm Beach church giving away thousands of doses of COVID medication​

 

[Yommie]

Health Headlines: Could a spring COVID booster be in our future?​

 

[Yommie]

https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/zoos-sa-leads-landmark-study-to-protect-vulnerable-animals-against-covid/news-story/c9896df14243b2b45cd895bd2c048ace

Zoos SA leads landmark study to protect vulnerable animals against Covid​

Zoos South Australia has lead a landmark study using an Adelaide-developed vaccine to protect vulnerable animals against Covid.
Brad Crouch


Zoos South Australia has lead a landmark study using an Adelaide-developed vaccine to protect vulnerable animals against Covid.
Published results show the vaccine is a “safe and effective veterinary SARS-CoV-2 vaccine.”
The work lead by Zoos SA veterinarian David McLelland follows sickness and death of zoo animals overseas which contracted the disease.
It used the veterinary Covid vaccine SpikeVet, an offshoot of the human vaccine SpikeoGen developed by Nikolai Petrovsky’s Bedford Park-based Vaxine company which is licenced in the Middle East for human use.
Nine Australian zoos including Adelaide and Monarto as well as in NSW, Victoria, WA, Queensland and the ACT participated in the study which saw 354 zoo animals, representing 38 species, receive 867 doses.
These included lions, tigers, leopards, cheetahs, servals, lemurs, meerkats, pygmy hippopotamus, Australian sea lions, dingoes, foxes, African wild dogs, red pandas, otters, sun bears, hyenas, tamarins, monkeys, mandrills, langurs, gibbons, capuchins, orang-utans, gorillas, chimpanzees and domestic goats.

David McLelland with the Meerkats at the Adelaide Zoo. Picture: Ben Clark


Vaxine donated the SpikeVet vaccine which the study found was well tolerated across all species, with minor adverse effects observed in less than 2 per cent of animals vaccinated.
Immunised animals developed antibodies able to neutralise Covid variants including the Wuhan, Mu and Omicron strains.
“These results from a range of zoo species support the ongoing development of SpikeVet as a safe and effective veterinary SARS-CoV-2 vaccine,” the paper states.
“SpikeVet was found to have an excellent safety profile in the zoo animals vaccinated in this study.”
Mr McLelland told The Advertiser work in ongoing to protect zoo animals from Covid.
“So far the results show this vaccine to be safe and effective,” he said.
“While it was a trial of zoo animals, each species is its own mini trial. Over the course of a broad range of species it gives us confidence using the vaccine safely gives an extra layer of protection.”

Professor Nikolai Petrovsky of Vaxine. Picture: Roy VanDerVegt
Prof Petrovsky said the work is the largest and most comprehensive study of Covid-19 vaccination of zoo populations anywhere in the world.

“The data speaks for itself – not only have these precious zoo animals all been protected, but this study has provided invaluable data on how best to immunise such diverse animal populations as and when the need arises,” he said.
“On our side Vaxine committed all its resources to allow the success of this project at no cost because it saw this as being very much in the public good and no-one else was coming forward to help the zoos in their endeavours to protect their precious animals.”
The study paper notes: “The decision by a zoo to vaccinate any particular species, or individuals/groups, should be based on a risk assessment incorporating a range of considerations including species susceptibility to SARS- CoV-2, risk of exposure in the particular animal management situation, practicalities and animal welfare implications of vaccine delivery, health status of the animal, and the purpose of vaccination.”

 

[Yommie]

https://www.reddit.com/r/CoronavirusDownunder/comments/1as2r9k/weekly_case_numbers_from_around_australia_7415

Weekly case numbers from around Australia: 7,415 new cases (2%), 1,340 hospitalised, 10 in ICU​

Australia: Case Update

• NSW 2,458 new cases (4%); 800 hospitalised
• VIC 743 new cases (11%); 180 hospitalised; 9 in ICU
• QLD 1,602 new cases (8%); 292 hospitalised
• WA 283 new cases (23%); 29 hospitalised
• SA 1,530 new cases (5%); N/A hospitalised
• TAS 649 new cases (10%); 23 hospitalised; 0 in ICU
• ACT 73 new cases (18%); 16 hospitalised; 1 in ICU
• NT 77 new cases (45%); 0 hospitalised

Notes:

• Older more detailed surveillance reports can be accessed using the state and territory links above.
• These case numbers are only an indicator for the current trends as most cases are unreported.
• Multiply by 20 or 30 to get a better indication of actual community case numbers.
• NSW, VIC, QLD, WA and the ACT no longer collect or report RAT results.

Data is sourced from CovidLive that pulls data from the NNDSS Dashboard for case numbers (updated daily) and the National Dashboard for hospitalisations (updated monthly).
Flu tracker tracks cold and flu symptoms (fever plus cough) and is another useful tool for tracking the level of respiratory viruses in the community.

 

[Yommie]

Opinion: A harsh truth: The world economy never recovered from the COVID-19 pandemic

It appears the pandemic left some deep wounds in the economy, something few economists saw coming

www.theglobeandmail.com

A harsh truth: The world economy never recovered from the COVID-19 pandemic​

JOHN RAPLEY
SPECIAL TO THE GLOBE AND MAIL
PUBLISHED YESTERDAY
Open this photo in gallery:

Epidemic control workers wear PPE to prevent the spread of COVID-19 as they guard an area with communities in lockdown on Dec. 1, 2022, in Beijing.KEVIN FRAYER/GETTY IMAGES
108 COMMENTS
SHARE
BOOKMARK
John Rapley is an author and academic who divides his time among London, Johannesburg and Ottawa. His books include Why Empires Fall (Yale University Press, 2023) and Twilight of the Money Gods (Simon and Schuster, 2017).
Britain sank into recession this week. So did Japan, with its decline so bad that it lost its spot as the world’s No. 3 economy.
It is increasingly apparent that the world economy is showing some of the chronic weakness we associate with long COVID. It appears the pandemic left some deep wounds in the economy – something few economists saw coming.
On the contrary, back in the early months of the pandemic, some of them were growing breathless with excitement that when the lockdowns were lifted, a new Roaring Twenties would erupt. Central banks were pumping trillions of dollars into the financial system and governments were handing their citizens trillions more in support. With little for them to spend it on while economies were closed, it stood to reason that on reopening there would be a storm of spending, putting the economy on steroids.
But that didn’t happen. Yes, there was the inevitable rebound once lockdowns were lifted. However, a repeat of the 1920s was never on the cards, since the world had changed so much in the intervening century. Instead, we got a big bump in 2022 followed by a reversion to the mean last year, the average for the decade. Even more surprising is that the mean seems to have fallen. If the world economy is back on track, it’s apparently a slower track.
Last month the World Bank released its updated report on Global Economic Prospects. It drew a gloomy picture of slowing growth, marking what it calls a “wretched milestone” – a world economy that is expected to grow at its slowest rate in three decades: 2.4 per cent this year, with perhaps a slight improvement next year. As to all that money sitting on the sidelines, it’s still sitting there. Investment is expected to rise at 3.7 per cent a year, barely half the average of the last decade, potentially making slow growth a permanent feature of the postpandemic world.
Soon afterward the IMF issued its own projections. Although a little more upbeat on growth than the World Bank’s, the fund echoed its partner’s assessment. The basic problem is that of the three big engines of the world economy, namely Europe, China and the United States, only the last is doing as well as hoped.
China is struggling, as I wrote recently, but Europe is doing even worse. Outside of Eastern Europe the continent’s economy barely budged last year, and European manufacturing is now in recession. By the IMF’s reckoning, six of the world’s 10 worst-performing economies last year were to be found there. Canada is keeping good company.
Only the U.S. presents a bright spot in the developed world, with the World Bank predicting 1.6 per cent growth this year after last year’s 2.5 per cent. But even that performance needs to have an asterisk placed next to it, since it’s been fuelled by a massive run-up in debt. Subtract the money borrowed in the past couple of years from the economy’s added output, and the U.S. would actually be going backward.
The mistake made by those who imagined we’d come roaring back to life was to assume the post-COVID economy would resemble the pre-COVID one, just with more money sloshing around. But the pandemic brought changes to global labour markets and supply chains whose impact has been inflationary, particularly in the aging societies of the West. Meanwhile although the huge run-up in debt staved off economic collapses and kept asset prices from tanking, it has also hobbled recoveries.

With Western governments having added an average of a quarter of GDP to their debts, most now are hesitant to borrow more to invest in fixing the problems they had let fester before the pandemic, whether a it’s lack of housing, decaying infrastructure or struggling health care systems. Moreover, a lot of the money pumped by central banks into the financial system ended up fuelling asset bubbles, from corporate bonds to crypto and real estate. These bubbles have now become obstacles to growth.
It’s therefore telling that the part of the world economy that has shaken off the pandemic and bounced back to full speed is the developing world. Having run up comparatively little debt during the pandemic, both governments and private sectors there have relatively more fiscal space to think big. Albeit with considerable variation, developing countries are on the whole doing reasonably well, with South Asia leading the pack at an expected growth rate of 5.6 per cent this year, and sub-Saharan Africa coming in next at 3.8 per cent.
Put it all together and the dynamism in the world economy is shifting away from its traditional growth poles. The old money may still be in the West and China, but the new money will increasingly be made in the South.