Covid-19 News and Discussions


NHS rolls out new variant Covid vaccine as virus kills 100 a week​

The new vaccination project started this week with jabs between now and June

0_GettyImages-1306302358.jpg


We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you’ve consented to and improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and third parties based on our knowledge of you. More info


The NHS has started giving booster jabs of the Covid vaccine as the virus is still killing 100 people a week in England. People aged 75 years and older, residents in care homes for older people, and those aged six months and over with a weakened immune system will be offered a dose of COVID-19 vaccine.
Those who are eligible will be offered an appointment between now and June, with those at highest risk being called in first. If you are turning 75 years of age between April and June, you do not have to wait until your birthday, you can attend when you are called for vaccination.

Your GP may offer you the vaccine or you can book using the NHS app for Apple or Android. You can also find your nearest walk-in vaccination site from the NHS website.
Those getting the jab will be given a booster dose of a vaccine made by Pfizer or Moderna and approved in the UK. These vaccines have been updated since the original vaccines and target a different COVID-19 variant. These updated vaccines give slightly higher levels of antibody against the more recent strains of COVID-19 (Omicron).

The latest figures from the UK Health Security Agency show a slight increase in the number of Covid cases, and more than 100 deaths in the last week on March. The statistics will not now be updated until May as the Government has changed the way it reports Covid figures.
 

7 out of 10 American voters think COVID-19 came from a lab​

There are still questions about where the virus came from and whether we’ll ever be sure about its origins​

Published: April 17, 2024, 6:00 a.m. MDT Updated: April 17, 2024, 3:07 p.m. MDT
RFBY7RKHNFDDVP2WZ5AYZCU37Q.jpg

By Gitanjali Poonia

Gitanjali is a staff writer for the Deseret News where she writes about politics and culture.
Four years after COVID-19 swept the globe, there is still no consensus on where it came from. Did the COVID-19 outbreak jump from animals to humans? Or did it unintentionally escape from a laboratory in Wuhan, China, that was studying similar viruses? Virologists and the intelligence community are split, at least in part because of a lack of information.
Congress has shown frustration over the ambiguity, as both the House and Senate have launched investigations into the virus’ origins — but it appears the American public has already made up its mind.
When asked what theory they support, 69% of American voters said SARS-CoV-2 came from a lab, while only 31% said it emerged naturally, according to the latest Deseret News/HarrisX poll.
“The lab leak theory is the most widely believed origin story for the pandemic among voters across the political spectrum and most demographics,” said Dritan Nesho, the CEO of HarrisX.
The survey was conducted among 1,010 registered U.S. voters on March 25-26. It has a margin of error of +/- 3.1 percentage points.
B6DFU76CNZGU5GF7PDR4BWRAAA.jpg

How the wet market theory went mainstream​

The virus surfaced on a small scale in November 2019 in Wuhan, China. Initially, many scientists pointed to the open-air wet markets and said the coronavirus must have jumped from animals to humans. In February, the Chinese government temporarily closed these markets, where vendors sell live wild animals, like bats, badgers, wolf pups and bamboo rats.
By March 2020, a study published in Nature Medicine stated with certainty: “We do not believe that any type of laboratory-based scenario is plausible.” Their rationale wasn’t far-fetched. The two previous coronavirus outbreaks — severe acute respiratory syndrome, or SARS, and Middle East respiratory syndrome — had zoonotic roots.
Dr. Anthony Fauci, former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, who led the U.S. pandemic response, said in April 2020 on “Fox & Friends,“ the pandemic was a “direct result” of “unsanitary shopping” in those areas.
He later cited the March study from “highly qualified evolutionary virologists” as evidence for genetic sequences in COVID-19 evolving from bats.
Meanwhile, others pointed to evidence suggesting COVID-19 escaped from a lab. The proximity of the Wuhan Institute of Virology to the initial outbreak, the lab’s ties to a U.S. virology research organization and allegations that the virus’ genome was genetically manipulated backed this hypothesis.
But in the early days of the pandemic, this narrative, albeit controversial, did not have traction, due in part to several scientists speaking out against it and insinuating it was a conspiracy theory.
That started to change in June 2021, when comedian Jon Stewart, in an appearance on “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert,” reignited the debate, while making headlines, saying, “‘There’s been an outbreak of chocolaty goodness near Hershey, Pa. What do you think happened?’ Like, ‘Oh I don’t know, maybe a steam shovel mated with a cocoa bean?’ Or it’s the ... chocolate factory! Maybe that’s it?”

Why was the lab leak theory seen as conspiratorial?​

Richard H. Ebright, a molecular biologist at Rutgers University and a vocal proponent of the lab leak theory, said in an interview with the Deseret News he believes public officials in the National Institutes of Health and other researchers didn’t investigate the lab leak theory thoroughly because of a conflict of interest. Between 2014 and 2020, the Wuhan lab received $1.4 million from the NIH and U.S. Agency for International Development, according to the Government Accountability Office.
Ebright said the NIH, and the EcoHealth Alliance, which partnered with the laboratory in Wuhan, “knowingly and willfully (imposed) a two-part false narrative that shows natural spillover, (and) that was the consensus of scientists.”
At a congressional hearing in August 2022, Ebright gave testimony that he believes the Wuhan lab was engaged in “gain-of-function” research, and was quoted in a Wall Street Journal piece in February of this year making an even stronger case that the virus came from the lab.
The congressional Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic held a hearing Tuesday to examine the relationship scientific journals had with the government when looking at the origins of COVID-19.
Holden Thorp, editor-in-chief of the Science Journals, was present but the heads of Nature and The Lancet declined to participate. “Science is a work-in-progress, and so, when we see new data, we change the way we’re thinking,” said Thorp.
Thorp cited a letter Science published in May 2021 that determined “theories of accidental release from a lab and zoonotic spillover both remain viable.” This letter, co-authored by 18 scientists, “ushered in a new era of consideration and debate,” he said in his testimony.
Thorp denied facing threats of censorship from the federal government for publishing competing opinions — nor did Fauci or any other official make any threats, he said.

U.S. intelligence community unsure of COVID-19 origins​

The U.S. intelligence community has come to varied conclusions on the origins of the virus, suggesting both theories “remain plausible.”
Stephen Goldstein, a virologist and postdoctoral researcher at the University of Utah’s School of Medicine, told the Deseret News in a recent interview that although the FBI and the Energy Department agree COVID-19 likely came from a lab, they present different reasons for their conclusions and don’t display “a single coherent theory” backing their position.
RELATED
Where did COVID-19 come from? Utah researcher says new study confirms virus originated in market, not lab

Why scientists back the zoonotic origin theory​

Goldstein said while both hypotheses are plausible, he doesn’t believe there is sufficient evidence that the virus escaped from the Wuhan lab. He has authored two studies, one of them peer-reviewed, that confidently signal a zoonotic source behind the virus.
Goldstein’s research traced the virus based on Chinese data points and found that SARS-CoV-2 materialized from the southwest quarter of the wet market selling live mammals. But he still doesn’t have all the answers about the virus turning up in the market and jumping from the animal to the intermediate host.
Scientists also haven’t found the species responsible for the virus. But Goldstein said that’s because “nobody’s looked.”
“If you walked right up to the animal that had it and you didn’t stick a swab in its nose, you’re not going to find it,” he added.
The Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market sits closed in Wuhan in central China's Hubei province on Jan. 21, 2020. International scientists have examined previously unavailable genetic data from samples collected at a market in China close to where the first human cases of COVID-19 were detected and said they have found suggestions the pandemic originated from animals, not a lab. | Dake Kang
Goldstein agrees the lab accident theory was dismissed as a conspiracy at first. Facebook took down posts that claimed COVID-19 was man-made, which was on its list of misleading health claims, as did YouTube.
“I don’t think it was unreasonable to have questions like that early on. There’s a coronavirus lab there. Why wouldn’t people ask that question?” Goldstein said, but he is skeptical about the way the lab leak theory was advanced.
For Dr. Amesh Adalja of the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security both hypotheses are plausible due to the circumstantial evidence and a lack of transparent investigation into the virus’ origins immediately following the outbreak.

Americans want more information on the origins of COVID-19​

According to the Deseret News survey, half of Americans, or 49%, say they are satisfied with the government’s investigation into the virus, while 51% say they are unsatisfied.
But the responses differ along party lines. Only three out of 10 Republican voters were content with the inquiries into the virus’ origins, while 69% said they were unsatisfied. Among Democrats, seven out of 10 said they were satisfied, and 30% said they were dissatisfied with the federal government’s efforts. Among independent voters, a little over 40% were satisfied with the investigations and around 60% were unsatisfied.

Why do we need to study the origins of COVID-19?​

Adalja said uncovering the true source of COVID-19 is valuable, whether to set better biosafety standards for labs working with viruses or to avoid animals that can play a role in transmission. After researchers discovered SARS-CoV-1 originated from Palm Civet cats, people “stopped dealing with them as a food source,” he said.
Congress continues to examine the origins of COVID-19.
In the Democratic-controlled Senate, the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee launched an investigation into the origin of COVID-19 last month. Six House committees, led by Republicans, have joined forces and have requested EcoHealth President Peter Daszak to testify before Congress in a public hearing on May 1 to “correct the record” related to questions about his organization’s research in Wuhan.
But it’s possible the question of where COVID-19 came from may remain a mystery.
“I don’t think there’s any way to know other than to get data regarding biosafety lapses that might have occurred at the Wuhan Institute of Virology — a full listing of viruses that they were using for experiments — as well a proper accounting of all the animals that were at the wet market,” Adalja said.
 

Number in hospital with COVID-19 in B.C. hits new low for 2024 in latest update​

Hospital

ian-holliday-1-4645409.jpg

Ian Holliday
CTVNewsVancouver.ca Journalist
Contact
Published April 18, 2024 7:50 p.m. EDT
Share

The number of patients in B.C. hospitals with COVID-19 dropped to a new low for the year in the latest weekly update from the B.C. Centre for Disease Control.
The BCCDC reports 112 test-positive patients in provincial hospitals as of Thursday, a decrease of 29 – or more than 20 per cent – since this time last week.

covid-19-hospitalization-totals-reported-by-bccdc-1-6853426-1713484039613.png
The number of patients in hospital with COVID-19 in B.C. in published reports from the B.C. Centre for Disease Control in 2024 is shown. (CTV News)
The previous low for 2024 came at the start of this month, when there were 132 people reported in hospital with COVID in B.C.

RELATED STORIES​

The last time the BCCDC reported a hospitalized population lower than the total reported Thursday was last August, when there were just 76 people in provincial hospitals with the disease.
Thursday's total is a notable contrast to the number of patients reported in B.C. hospitals at this time last year. The BCCDC's update for April 20, 2023, showed 316 people in hospital with COVID, a total that was the second-highest of the year to that point.
Matching the decline in the hospital population this week, the BCCDC also reported lower numbers of new infections and a lower test positivity Thursday for the most recent epidemiological week, which spanned April 7 through 13.
There were 250 new, lab-confirmed cases during that time frame, down from 342 the week before.
The decrease wasn't purely the result of fewer tests being completed, either. While there were fewer lab tests for COVID conducted in the province during the week that ended April 13 than at any point since last September, the percentage of those tests that came back positive also declined relative to the preceding week.
Test positivity was 9.2 per cent for the week of April 7 to 13, down from 10.7 per cent the week before.
 

Dozens of COVID Virus Mutations Arose in Man With Longest Known Case​


By Dennis Thompson HealthDay Reporter

FRIDAY, April 19, 2024 (HealthDay News) -- An immune-compromised man with a year-and-a-half-long COVID infection served as a breeding ground for dozens of coronavirus mutations, a new study discovered.
Worse, several of the mutations were in the COVID spike protein, indicating that the virus had attempted to evolve around current vaccines, researchers report.
“This case underscores the risk of persistent SARS-CoV-2 infections in immunocompromised individuals, as unique SARS-CoV-2 viral variants may emerge,” said the research team led by Magda Vergouwe. She's a doctoral candidate with Amsterdam University Medical Center in The Netherlands.
The patient in questioned endured the longest known COVID infection to date, fighting with the virus for 613 days before dying from the blood disease that had compromised his immune system, researchers said.

U.S. Cities With the Most Homelessness

A man walks past tents housing the homeless on the streets in the Skid Row community of Los Angeles, California on April 26, 2021. - A federal judge overseeing a lawsuit that seeks to end the city's Skid Row homelessness crisis isn't backing down from his order requiring that all indigent persons in the area be offered shelter within six months. US District Judge David O. Carter is opening the door for more discussions by setting additional hearing dates and clarifying some portions of his ruling. (Photo by Frederic J. BROWN / AFP) (Photo by FREDERIC J. BROWN/AFP via Getty Images)
View All 28 Slides
Immune-compromised patients who suffer persistent infections give the COVID virus an opportunity to adapt and evolve, the investigators explained.
For instance, the Omicron variant is thought to have emerged in an immune-compromised patient initially infected with an earlier form of COVID, researchers said.
In this latest report, the man was admitted to Amsterdam University Medical Center in February 2022 with a COVID infection at age 72, after he’d already received multiple vaccinations.
He suffered from myelodysplastic and myeloproliferative overlap syndrome, a disease in which the bone marrow makes too many white blood cells, according to the U.S. National Cancer Institute.
Following a stem cell transplant, the man also had developed lymphoma, a cancer of the white blood cells, researchers said.
A drug he took for lymphoma, rituximab, depleted all the immune cells that normally produce antibodies for COVID, they added.

To clear his COVID, the man received a monoclonal antibody cocktail that ultimately proved ineffective.
In fact, gene sequencing showed that the coronavirus started mutating to evade the antibodies he’d received, a step that could have potentially undermined the effectiveness of the treatment in others, researchers said.
Gene sequencing of 27 nasal specimens taken from the man revealed more than 50 mutations in the COVID virus, including variants with changes in the spike protein targeted by vaccines.

“The prolonged infection has led to the emergence of a novel immune-evasive variant due to the extensive within-host evolution,” researchers said.
Such cases pose a “potential public health threat of possibly introducing viral escape variants into the community,” they added.
However, they noted that there had been no documented transmission of any COVID variants from the man into other people.
The researchers will present their findings at the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases meeting next week in Barcelona. Findings presented at medical meetings should be considered preliminary until published in a peer-reviewed journal.
 

Aging affects immune response and virus dynamics in COVID-19 patients, study finds​

Vijay Kumar Malesu
By Vijay Kumar Malesu Apr 18 2024 Reviewed by Susha Cheriyedath, M.Sc.
In a recent study published in the journal Science Translational Medicine, researchers investigated the impact of aging on immune response, viral dynamics, and nasal microbiome in 1031 hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients, using advanced profiling techniques to understand age-related differences in disease severity and immune function.
Study: Host-microbe multiomic profiling reveals age-dependent immune dysregulation associated with COVID-19 immunopathology. Image Credit: Corona Borealis Studio / ShutterstockStudy: Host-microbe multiomic profiling reveals age-dependent immune dysregulation associated with COVID-19 immunopathology. Image Credit: Corona Borealis Studio / Shutterstock

Background​

Age is a significant risk factor for severe COVID-19 outcomes, with older adults facing drastically higher risks of complications and mortality than younger individuals. Despite high vaccination rates, older adults are still profoundly vulnerable. Aging correlates with elevated levels of inflammatory cytokines, like interleukin-6 (IL-6), which are critical markers of COVID-19 severity, hinting at a link between aging and disease pathophysiology. Studies show that aging dampens both innate and adaptive immune responses, including reduced type I interferon (IFN) production. Additionally, older adults show enhanced inflammatory responses and impaired immune signaling when infected with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Further research is needed to fully understand the complex interactions between aging, immune response variations, and COVID-19 severity to improve treatment strategies and outcomes for older populations.

About the study​

The present study utilized data from 1,031 participants enrolled in the IMmunoPhenotyping Assessment in a COVID-19 Cohort (IMPACC) observational cohort, which involved 20 hospitals across 15 medical centers in the United States from May 5, 2020, to March 19, 2021. It involved hospitalized individuals with reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rt-PCR) confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections, displaying typical COVID-19 symptoms. Blood and respiratory tract samples were collected within 72 hours of hospitalization, following a standardized protocol across participating institutions. Ethical approval was granted under the public health surveillance exception, with participant consent for follow-up involvement and data usage.
Statistical analysis was performed using R software. Initial assessments were done within 72 hours of hospital admission, followed by longitudinal evaluations at subsequent visits. Data analysis applied various statistical methods depending on the data type and required adjustments for factors like age, sex, and baseline disease severity. For longitudinal studies, age groups were divided into quintiles and analyzed for changes in viral abundance and immune response, employing linear and generalized additive models to account for the observed non-linear patterns. All p-values were adjusted using the Benjamini-Hochberg method, considering results statistically significant at p < 0.05.

Study results​

The study involved analyzing blood and nasal swab specimens from 1,031 vaccine-naïve adults hospitalized with COVID-19. These participants were part of the IMPACC cohort, sourced from 20 hospitals across the United States. They were categorized into five age quintiles, ranging from 18 to 96 years, with each group comprising between 187 and 223 individuals. Samples were collected at the time of hospital admission and during up to five follow-up visits. The distribution of ages showed that older individuals were often more severely affected by the disease, evident in both the initial severity of symptoms and the outcomes, including mortality.
Omics eBook Compilation of the top interviews, articles, and news in the last year.Download the latest edition
At the initial hospital visit, typically within 72 hours of admission, a range of diagnostic assays was conducted. These included transcriptional profiling of peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) and nasal swabs, serum inflammatory protein profiling, whole blood mass cytometry (CyTOF), nasal metatranscriptomics, and SARS-CoV-2 antibody (Ab) assays. A significant finding from these initial tests was that older adults displayed higher viral loads and experienced delayed viral clearance compared to younger patients. Moreover, age-related differences in immune cell populations were noted, with older adults showing higher proportions of various monocyte subtypes and activated T cells but lower levels of naïve T and B cells.
The study's longitudinal analysis revealed that these differences persisted over time, affecting viral load dynamics, antibody titers, and immune response. Specifically, the eldest participants not only retained high levels of the virus longer but also showed more significant fluctuations in antibody levels over time. Additionally, immune cell analysis by CyTOF highlighted that with advancing age, certain immune cell types, including different monocyte classes and differentiated natural killer cells, increased, suggesting shifts in immune system composition and function with age.
Changes in cytokine and chemokine levels measured in the participants' serum further underscored the impact of aging on the immune response. Older individuals showed elevated levels of inflammatory markers at hospital admission, which were linked to more severe disease outcomes.
Moreover, the analysis extended to the nasal microbiome and upper respiratory gene expression, revealing age-associated changes in the microbial composition and host gene activity. Changes in Toll-like receptor signaling and other immune pathways were evident, suggesting that older adults experience different immune modulations, possibly influencing their susceptibility to severe outcomes.
 
 

Public Health reports eight new high-risk COVID cases​

Author of the article:
Postmedia Staff
Published Apr 19, 2024 • 2 minute read


Join the conversation

COVID Update
Hastings Prince Edward Public Health (HPEPH) is highlighting the importance of young females and males receiving the HPV vaccine to help prevent HPV-related oral cancers. tif, BI, apsmc

Article content​

Hastings Prince Edward Public Health officials reported eight new high-risk cases as of April 17 in the region, the same as in the previous reporting period.
The health unit also reported eight active high-risk cases, the same as in the last health unit report.
There were no new deaths attributed to COVID-19 leaving the number of deaths since the pandemic to 150 in the region.
The average hospitalization rate at QHC hospitals due to COVID-19 was two persons.
One patient was listed in the Intensive Care Unit.
There were no outbreaks compared to recent outbreaks in high-risk settings.
The percentage of HPEC residents vacinated is 81% have completed primary series, but only 18% have receibed a dose in the past six months.

Advertisement 2

Story continues below


Article content





Classic Packard rolls into lake during owner's photo shoot​


Classic Packard rolls into lake during owner's photo shoot








Tracker dslogo
Across Canada, meanwhile, latest COVID-19 case numbers as of April 16 show a total of 4.95 million cases have been recorded since the pandemic began, an increase of 1,743 cases across the country.
Nationally, there were 59,139 deaths recorded since the pandemic began to date linked to COVID-19 with 31 new deaths recorded.
There were 28,886 weekly tests reported across Canada with 4.7 per cent positivity.



Start the conversation



Have your say Leave a comment and share your thoughts with our community.

Be the First to Comment

Article content


HPV Vaccinations



The Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine plays an important role in cervical cancer prevention; however, many people are unaware that it can prevent several other cancers, including oral cancers. April is Oral Health month, and in honour of this, HPEPH would like to highlight the importance of young females and males receiving the HPV vaccine to help prevent HPV-related oral cancers.

Advertisement 3

Story continues below


Article content


“This month we would like to remind parents of the importance of getting their children vaccinated against HPV for a variety of reasons,” says Kelly Palmateer, Oral Health Program Manager. “We have evidence that oral and throat cancers are increasing and we are learning more about the strong link between these cancers and HPV infections.”



Most young people are offered the HPV vaccine through school-based vaccines in Grade 7. However, the vaccines are publicly funded for all students until the end of Grade 12, so it is highly recommended that all young people are fully vaccinated before they finish high school. This provides the best possible protection as they enter adulthood.



“HPV vaccinations are about cancer prevention, and they’re a safe, free, and effective way to protect your children,” says Palmateer. “This Oral Health Month we are urging parents to educate themselves on the benefits of the HPV vaccine, many of which people may not already be aware of. Parents want to give their children the best start in life, and this vaccine gives them the chance to invest in their child’s future health.”



To find out more about the HPV vaccine or to book your child in for an HPV vaccine, please visit hpePublicHealth.ca/clinic/immunization-clinic.
 

Sask. father found guilty of withholding daughter to prevent her from getting COVID-19 vaccine​


donovan-maess-1-5939997.png

Donovan Maess
Multimedia Journalist - CTV News Regina
Follow |Contact
Updated April 19, 2024 8:50 p.m. EDT
Published April 19, 2024 2:14 p.m. EDT

Michael Gordon Jackson, a Saskatchewan man accused of abducting his daughter to prevent her from getting a COVID-19 vaccine, has been found guilty for contravention of a custody order.
Following two weeks of proceedings, the jury’s verdict handed down Friday found Jackson, 55, withheld his then 7-year-old daughter from her mother in late 2021 to early 2022. Police eventually found the pair in Vernon, B.C.

While the motive was undisputed, Crown prosecutor Zoey Kim Zeggelaar said the results of Jackson's actions were in direct contravention of the Order.
"The intent to carry out the act - that being the taking of the child from her mother - is where we directed our attention," she said.

There were 14 jury members selected to hear the two week long case. Prior to deliberations on Friday morning, two members were randomly removed.
“I am the judge of the law,” Justice Heather MacMillian-Brown told the jury on Friday morning. “You are the judge of the facts. It is your duty to judge what the facts are.”
“What matters is what [Jackson] did. Not the reasons for why [he] did it,” she added.
Justice MacMillian-Brown summarized evidence that was presented over the course of the trial and also reiterated advice she gave the jury over the course of the last two weeks.

“The torch now passes to you to decide a verdict based on the evidence in its entirety.” she said before releasing the jury to deliberate.
The 12 members of the jury were sequestered until their final verdict was reached. They took just two and a half hours to reach their unanimous decision.
“I am pleased that at the end of the day, there’s an outcome that has generated some accountability. I know that the individuals involved … they’ve waited a long time for this outcome to happen.”Zeggelaar said.
Despite the guilty verdict, Jackson's bail conditions allow him to remain out of custody.
He did not comment to media following the decision.
A date for his sentencing will be decided later.
 

Weekly case numbers from around Australia: 4,861 new cases (🔻3%)​

Australia: Case Update

Case data is from NNDSS Dashboard that is automated from CovidLive
  • NSW 1,629 new cases (🔺11%)
  • VIC 740 new cases (🔻23%)
  • QLD 927 new cases (🔺16%)
  • WA 293 new cases (🔺8%)
  • SA 1,015 new cases (🔺5%)
  • TAS 167 new cases (🔻63%)
  • ACT 49 new cases (🔻14%)
  • NT 41 new cases (🔺17%)
Notes:
  • These case numbers are only an indicator for the current trends as most cases are unreported.
  • Multiply these numbers by 20 or 30 to get a better indication of community case numbers.
  • SA is the only state that still collects and reports RAT results.
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. These have fallen slightly this week, from 1.4% to 1.3%.
r/CoronavirusDownunder - National FluTracker trends
National FluTracker trends
Hospitalisations in the eastern states appear stable or are decreasing slightly.
r/CoronavirusDownunder - NSW ED presentations and admissions for COVID-19 and the flu
NSW ED presentations and admissions for COVID-19 and the flu
Note: Hospitalisation numbers are getting too fragmented to be reliable with recent changes to some of the state reporting; with only partial and irregular updates. These are being excluded from the tallies.
 

Last updated 2pm 15 April 2024.
This data is updated weekly. All data on this page relates to cases recorded prior to 11:59 pm 14 April 2024.

COVID-19 cases summary​

New case average* RATs uploaded average*
374 ↓ 459 ↓
Cases in hospital as at midnight SundayCases in ICU as at midnight Sunday
152 **
Deaths attributed to COVID*Total deaths attributed COVID
1 ↓ 3,944
* 7 day rolling average
** Not currently available

Current situation​

Summary
In the last weekNew cases reported2618
Reinfections1634
Reinfections (< 90 days)43
Total since first New Zealand caseCases reported2627114
Reinfections358450
Reinfections (< 90 days)26337

Case outcomes since first New Zealand case

COVID-19 casesChange in the last weekTotal
Recovered33702620552
Deceased*83944*
*The Ministry of Health has recently switched its definition of 'deceased' from deaths within 28 days of testing positive for COVID-19 to deaths attributed to COVID-19. See the definitions section below for further details.

Deaths with COVID-19​

Cause of deathDied within 28 days of positive testDied more than 28 days after positive testTotalChange in the last week
COVID as underlying234812524736
COVID as contributory136410714712
COVID-attributed total371223239448
Not COVID17940*179412
Not available243024311
Total5749232598131*
*The change in total deaths with COVID may not be equal to the number of new deaths reported today. This is because deaths that occurred more than 28 days after a positive test that are subsequently determined to be unrelated to COVID are removed from the total.
Of the 31 people whose deaths we are reporting today: one was from Northland, eight were from Auckland region, three were from Waikato, two were from Bay of Plenty, one was from Hawke's Bay, one was from MidCentral, five were from Wellington region, two were from Nelson Marlborough, five were from Canterbury, three were from Southern.
Two were less than 10 years old, one was in their 30s, one was in their 50s, five were in their 70s, ten were in their 80s and 12 were aged over 90. Of these people, 13 were women and 18 were men.

Case details​

Number of active cases
Change in the last weekTotal since first NZ case
Confirmed25072582892
Probable11144222
Total2618*2627114
*The change in total case numbers may not be equal to the number of new cases reported today due to data updating and reconciliation.

Definitions​

Active case - confirmedConfirmed cases are people who have received a positive PCR test OR someone who has received a positive result on a Rapid Antigen Test. For more details, see the COVID-19 case definition.
Active case - probableA probable case is when someone is diagnosed based on their exposure to other people with COVID-19 and on their symptoms.
ReinfectionsReinfections are cases in an individual who reported a case 29 or more days previously.
RecoveredRecovered cases are people who had the virus, where at least 7 days have passed since their symptoms started and they have not had symptoms for 72 hours, and they have been cleared by the health professional responsible for their monitoring.
DeceasedIncludes all deaths where COVID-19 is determined to have been the underlying cause of death or a contributory cause of death.

Cases reported each day​

Daily confirmed and probable cases​

New COVID-19 cases reported each day

This graph shows the count of all cases of COVID-19 every day (all cases – confirmed and probable) since the first New Zealand case in late February 2020. The graph shows the rapid increase of daily cases from mid-February 2022 to early March 2022, driven by the Omicron variant.
From mid-March to mid-April 2022, cases rapidly declined, followed by a period of slower decline until early July. This was followed by a rapid increase in cases, peaking in August before a steady decline in new daily cases. Reported new daily cases hit their lowest since February 2022 in September 2022.
New COVID-19 cases reported each day
This graph shows the count of all cases of COVID-19 every day (all cases – confirmed and probable) since the first New Zealand case in late February 2020. The graph shows the rapid increase of daily cases from mid-February 2022 to early March 2022, driven by the Omicron variant. From mid-March to mid-April 2022, cases rapidly declined, followed by a period of slower decline until early July. This was followed by a rapid increase in cases, peaking in August before a steady decline in new daily cases. Reported new daily cases hit their lowest since February 2022 in September 2022.

COVID-19 by location​

Total cases by location​

Total COVID-19 cases by location graph

This bar graph shows the total cases and their status by health district and those with recent travel history.
The ‘At the border’ data group includes cases detected in managed isolation or quarantine facilities from the period when these were operating, as well as cases with recent travel history from after that time. They are not included in the district totals. Before 17 June, people in managed isolation or quarantine facilities were included in the total of the relevant district.
Total COVID-19 cases by location graph
This bar graph shows the total cases and their status by health district and those with recent travel history.
The ‘At the border’ data group includes cases detected in managed isolation or quarantine facilities from the period when these were operating, as well as cases with recent travel history from after that time. They are not included in the district totals. Before 17 June, people in managed isolation or quarantine facilities were included in the total of the relevant district.

Total cases by location​

LocationActiveRecoveredDeceasedTotalNew cases in the last week
Auckland190246719266247175190
Bay of Plenty138115281184115603138
Canterbury434347132546348112434
Capital and Coast214185956177186347214
Counties Manukau217293453318293988217
Hawke's Bay73862391688648073
Hutt Valley8990922989110989
Lakes49514611115162149
Mid Central1159682220697143115
Nelson Marlborough1007983715780094100
Northland94813121458155194
South Canterbury4134791443487641
Southern214192843375193432214
Tairāwhiti1526675442673415
Taranaki70658911286608970
Unknown22273922842
Waikato205208961392209558205
Wairarapa4725664642577547
Waitematā263310585406311254263
West Coast2315864221590923
Whanganui2534579783468225
At the Border*027292627298NA
Total26182620552394426271142618
* Due to retiring the COVID-19 Protection Framework on 12 September 2022, the Ministry of Health no longer separately reports COVID-19 cases who have recently travelled overseas. These cases will be included in the weekly reporting on all COVID-19 community cases, but we will no longer distinguish between border and other cases.
You can also view a detailed breakdown of daily case numbers for each district since the beginning of the pandemic by clicking the ‘download’ button on the right hand side of this page: New Zealand COVID-19 data.

Note: we cannot give detailed information about cases in your district, city or town, as we must protect the privacy of the people concerned.

Also in this section​

Last updated: 15 April 2024
 

Who needs Paxlovid now? New guidelines suggest only highest-risk groups should get COVID drug​

Recommendations for provincial drug plans feature narrower definition of who should qualify​

lauren-pelley.JPG

Lauren Pelley · CBC News · Posted: Apr 20, 2024 4:00 AM EDT | Last Updated: April 20
Registered nurse Jose Pasion tends to a patient in the intensive care unit (ICU) at Scarborough Health Network’s Centenary Hospital, in north-east Toronto, on April 8, 2021.

A Toronto intensive care unit in 2021, before the arrival of COVID-19 vaccines and treatments such as Paxlovid. There are new Canadian recommendations for who should actually get the antiviral at this point, guided by a growing body of research suggesting the drug’s life-saving benefits now apply to a narrower definition of high-risk individuals. (Evan Mitsui/CBC)

Social Sharing​

  • Facebook
  • X
  • Email
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn

comments
This story is part of CBC Health's Second Opinion, a weekly analysis of health and medical science news emailed to subscribers on Saturday mornings. If you haven't subscribed yet, you can do that by clicking here.

If you consider yourself at a higher risk of serious illness from COVID-19 — because of your age, or maybe due to preexisting health issues — you might assume you'll be able to get treatment with Paxlovid when the time comes.
And you might assume the steep cost of the antiviral drug would be automatically covered by your provincial health plan.
But all that might change. There are new Canadian recommendations for who should actually get Paxlovid at this point, guided by a growing body of research suggesting the drug's life-saving benefits now apply to a narrower definition of high-risk individuals.
The expert committee for the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH), the body providing advice for the country's publicly funded health care systems, released draft recommendations earlier this year which offer fresh guidance for how drug plans should cover the treatment.
It stipulates Paxlovid should only be reimbursed for patients in two scenarios: If someone is severely immunosuppressed (such as organ transplant recipients) or moderately immunosuppressed (such as someone undergoing cancer treatment, individuals with advanced HIV infections, or anyone with moderate immunodeficiencies).
Simply being older or unvaccinated — both factors long thought to hike someone's risk of serious illness or death from COVID — didn't make the cut.
The recommendations were provided to drug plans on April 11 as part of a negotiation process during which provinces decide whether or not to follow suit.
Multiple medical experts said if provincial decision makers do choose to align with the committee's suggestions, Canadians would only be eligible to get Paxlovid covered if they meet the narrow criteria for severe or moderate immunosuppression.
Those potential changes may come as a surprise to many Canadians who've long been eligible under broader provincial guidelines — including some that currently allow people as young as 60 to access the drug based on their age and other related risk factors.
But multiple experts told CBC News that who is truly high-risk now, four years into the pandemic, has changed. And narrowed eligibility is based on the latest research into how well the drug works for various groups, said University of British Columbia researcher Colin Dormuth, whose own findings helped inform the CADTH recommendations.
"The risk of something bad happening to you because of COVID-19 is now very low," Dormuth said.
WATCH | Concerns Paxlovid may not be reaching enough patients:

ST_PELLEY_PAXLOVID_clean.jpg

COVID drug Paxlovid may not be reaching enough patients​


3 months ago
Duration2:17
Data from various provinces shows there is ample supply of Paxlovid — an antiviral drug meant to keep high-risk people with COVID out of hospitals — raising questions over whether enough patients who need it are getting it.

Who's most at risk has 'changed over time'​

In the early years after SARS-CoV-2 first struck, the arrival of Pfizer's oral antiviral drug — a combination of the medications nirmatrelvir and ritonavir — was hailed as a game-changer.
But its rollout was marred by controversy. There were reports of symptom "rebound" after the five-day treatment, which was later found to happen whether or not people took the drug. Some physicians also questioned who actually benefited from Paxlovid as the pandemic evolved. And, perhaps not surprisingly given all that debate, there was often low uptake, which left hundreds of thousands of treatments sitting unused across Canada.
Most recently, the federal government stopped its purchases of Paxlovid as of March 31, leaving future procurement up to the provinces. Most of Canada's remaining inventory also expired at the end of March, with a smaller portion expiring on May 31, said a spokesperson for the Public Health Agency of Canada.
Now multiple studies, including Dormuth's, are shedding light on where Pfizer's drug actually fits into the COVID treatment picture at this point in the pandemic.
Published in a letter to members of the medical community from the University of British Columbia (UBC) Therapeutics Initiative, Dormuth's observational study looked at more than 6,000 B.C. residents. It showed Paxlovid was associated with reduced chance of severe illness in people at the highest risk, but found no evidence that it made a difference for anyone else.
"Even just within older people over 70, we didn't find an improvement in terms of reducing one's chance of being hospitalized or dying," Dormuth told CBC News.
"The bottom line is that for most people with COVID-19, Paxlovid will not make you feel better any faster, and will not lower your chance of [serious illness]."
The results, which have not been peer-reviewed, align with Pfizer's own findings. The drugmaker's latest trial data, published in the New England Journal of Medicine earlier this month, looked at standard-risk groups — people who had risk factors and were vaccinated, along with unvaccinated individuals.
That trial found there weren't any major differences in COVID-related hospitalizations and deaths, nor was there any difference in how long people had symptoms, whether or not people had Paxlovid.
With ICU beds filling up in Quebec City and Lévis, COVID-19 patients are being transferred to other regions of the province.

As of April 2024, the COVID-19 pandemic has caused more than seven million global deaths, making it the fifth-deadliest pandemic or epidemic in history. (Ivanoh Demers/Radio-Canada)
The Pfizer research also included participants of various ages. Age alone "is at best an arbitrary marker for risks … and needs to be contextualized among other risk factors such as vaccination status and comorbidities," wrote the Therapeutics Initiative team at UBC in their latest letter.
The draft CADTH guidelines for the province's drug plans also stressed that the risk factors involved in developing severe COVID once included a wide range of factors including older age, but "have changed over time" as population immunity increased.
Many experts now agree that widespread vaccination and prior infections helped the vast majority of people develop immunity to what was once a brand-new threat, reducing rates of serious illness. Vaccines are also thought to dramatically ward off the possibility of developing long COVID.
And in Canada, the number of patients dying of COVID has plummeted, even among the oldest adults — though they still face highest rates of hospitalizations and ICU stays, which can erode someone's quality of life.

Drug still 'lifesaving' for high-risk individuals​

It all paints a reassuring picture of this virus' trajectory.
Yet the grim reality is that deaths from COVID remain a routine occurrence, with more than 30 Canadians losing their lives in the last week of March.
The question now is just how many of those deaths could be prevented — and whether the people who could benefit most from Paxlovid are the ones actually getting the drug.
U.S. infectious diseases physician Dr. Amesh Adalja, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins University Center for Health Security, also stressed Paxlovid was never designed to lessen people's symptoms in the general population, but rather to prevent severe disease.
And while it still works for that purpose, he warned misconceptions around the drug mean it ends up being under-prescribed in high-risk populations.
"'Keeping you alive' isn't resonating with people as much as 'decreasing your sore throat faster' or something like that," said Adalja.
"If people misunderstand what it does and it doesn't deliver on something that it was never designed to do, and people form a negative evaluation of the drug, that creates apprehension around prescribing it, and patients aren't asking their doctors for it."
WATCH | In 2022, thousands of Paxlovid doses went unused in Canada:

CRAWLEY_PAXLOVID_PILE_UP_MPX.jpg

Thousands of doses of COVID-19 antiviral treatment remain unused​


2 years ago
Duration2:02
Hundreds of thousands of doses of Paxlovid, a treatment for COVID-19, have gone unused in Canada because of difficulties in getting it to the right patients at the right time.

Adelja argued eligibility should remain more broad, allowing anyone with known risk factors — such as being 65 and up, pregnant, obese, or having other health issues or immunodeficiencies — to access the drug.
"Right now… Paxlovid is the best we have and it's really lifesaving for high-risk individuals," he said.
Anyone who considers themselves high risk should speak to their primary care provider about the drug if they do catch COVID, Dormuth said, adding he's concerned that people who truly need the drug might not be the ones accessing it in Canada.
In B.C. alone, roughly 300 people each week take Paxlovid, according to data cited by UBC's Therapeutics Initiative.
But with much less PCR testing and collection being done at this point in the pandemic, and no one collecting at-home rapid testing results, Dormuth said we've lost "critical data" to help understand who's getting sick and why.

'Resources aren't infinite' as drug costs $1,200+​

The reality, he added, is "resources aren't infinite."
Pfizer's drug is pricey, costing $1,288.88 per five-day course, CADTH's documents show, prompting some experts to question if widespread purchasing and prescribing would actually save enough lives to justify those costs. (Should provinces no longer cover Paxlovid, it's also possible ineligible people may also have the option of paying out-of-pocket, or through private insurers, but again, it all depends on what each province decides.)
"As soon as we spend a dollar on one thing, we can't spend it on something else," Dormuth added.
With SARS-CoV-2 still circulating, multiple experts agreed that more front line treatments could come down the pike, making further studies into drug efficacy essential.
"We definitely continue to need more research on what treatments actually work for COVID in the acute phase, and we still don't have that evidence," said Unity Health public health specialist Dr. Andrew Pinto, the director of the University of Toronto's Upstream Lab.
Pinto is part of a Canadian team doing ongoing research into Paxlovid and other existing and future treatments through the cross-country CanTreatCOVID trials, which have so far enrolled roughly 450 participants.
The goal, he said, is eventually pooling results with the larger PANORAMIC trials happening in the U.K.
"COVID is still with us, and will likely continue to be with us," he said. "It's still quite a deadly disease compared to other respiratory infections."
 

S. Korea to fully shift to 'endemic' from Covid-19 pandemic in May​


BERNAMA
  • 19-04- 2024 03:33 PM
facebook sharing button

twitter sharing button

whatsapp sharing button


email sharing button

print sharing button

Pix for representational purpose only/REUTERSPixPix for representational purpose only/REUTERSPix

SEOUL: South Korea is set to fully shift to an “endemic” approach to the Covid-19 pandemic, lifting some last-remaining mandates, including indoor mask requirements for hospitals, from next month, officials said Friday.


The disaster level of Covid-19 will be downgraded to the lowest tier in South Korea in a way that fully returns to a pre-pandemic stage some four years after the outbreak, Yonhap news agency quoted the health authorities
ADVERTISEMENT

The Central Disaster and Safety Countermeasures Headquarters (CDSCH) said it will lower the four-grade Covid-19 crisis level from the second highest “alert” to the lowest “concern” from May 1.
“The current epidemic situation itself is very stable, with a low fatality rate and no particularly dangerous variants observed,“ the CDSCH said.

The decision came more than four years after the country's first case of Covid-19 was reported on Jan 20, 2020.
ADVERTISEMENT


Consequently, some remaining mandatory indoor mask requirements for hospitals and other facilities will be completely lifted, and government-level response organisations, such as the CDSCH, which has overseen disaster-controlling measures since the Covid-19 outbreak, will be disbanded.
Most of the government's medical assistance will be also brought to an end.
The government will no longer cover Covid-19 testing or hospitalisation costs for some severely ill patients, while patients will have to pay partly for Paxlovid, an oral anti-viral pill.
ADVERTISEMENT


While the Covid-19 vaccine will continue to be freely available to everyone until the 2023-2024 season, it will subsequently be limited to high-risk groups, such as individuals, aged 65 and above, and those who are immunocompromised.
The health authorities emphasised the importance of personal responsibility despite the downgrade in crisis level.
“Although the crisis level has been downgraded, we must prioritise rest when unwell for the betterment of society,“ said Jee Young-mee, who heads the CDSCH.
“If you experience symptoms of Covid-19, please promptly seek medical attention and adhere to personal quarantine practices, including frequent handwashing.”
ADVERTISEMENT
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top