ReportWire

Tag: Vaccines

  • 90% reduction in COVID-19 deaths after booster dose: Hong Kong study

    90% reduction in COVID-19 deaths after booster dose: Hong Kong study

    [ad_1]

    Newswise — A booster (third) dose of a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine was associated with a 90% reduction in death in people with multiple health conditions compared to 2 doses, according to a new study from Hong Kong published in CMAJ (Canadian Medical Association Journalhttps://www.cmaj.ca/lookup/doi/10.1503/cmaj.221068.

    “We found a substantially reduced risk of COVID-19–related death in adults with multimorbidity who received a homologous booster dose of BNT162b2, an mRNA vaccine, or CoronaVac, an inactivated whole-virus vaccine,” writes Dr. Esther Chan, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong and Laboratory of Data Discovery for Health, Hong Kong, with coauthors. “These results support the effectiveness of booster doses of vaccines of 2 different technological platforms in lowering mortality among those with multimorbidity amid the Omicron epidemic.”

    As the Omicron (BA.2) variant epidemic hit Hong Kong in late 2021, the city reported the highest COVID-19 mortality rate worldwide relative to its population of 7.5 million people. Since November 11, 2021, older people, health care professionals and other priority groups were able to receive a booster dose of either the BNT162b2 mRNA (Fosun-BioNTech, equivalent to Pfizer-BioNTech outside China) or CoronaVac (Sinovac) vaccine. As of January 1, 2022, all others were eligible, resulting in more than 3 million people receiving booster doses in the first 4 months of 2022.

    “Our findings suggest that this timely, massive public health measure has plausibly played a pivotal role in lowering the mortality rate amid the epidemic, especially among people living with multimorbidity,” writes Francisco Lai, first author and a scientist at the Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong and Laboratory of Data Discovery for Health, Hong Kong, with coauthors.

    Researchers compared data on people aged 18 years or older with 2 or more chronic conditions, such as high blood pressure, diabetes and chronic kidney disease, who received a booster (third) dose between November 11, 2021, and March 31, 2022, compared to people who received only 2 doses. The study included 120 724 recipients of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine (87 289 who received a booster) and 127 318 CoronaVac recipients (94 977 who received a booster). There were more deaths among CoronaVac recipients than Pfizer-BioNTech recipients.

    The study findings “highlight the potential benefit from booster vaccination, specifically in vulnerable populations living with multimorbidity, and support the recent focus on older people and those with chronic conditions for future booster doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines beyond the first booster.”

    The robust results will contribute to the evidence base that getting boosted provides strong protection against death from COVID-19.

    “As the data on SARS-CoV-2 vaccination records used for this study was provided by the sole operator of vaccine roll-out in Hong Kong, with a unified recording system, and with linked clinical records provided by a territory-wide public health care provider, our data should be highly reliable and representative,” the authors conclude.

    [ad_2]

    Canadian Medical Association Journal

    Source link

  • Fauci Q&A: On Masking, Vaccines, and What Keeps Him Up at Night

    Fauci Q&A: On Masking, Vaccines, and What Keeps Him Up at Night

    [ad_1]

    Jan. 30, 2023 – When he was a young boy growing up in Brooklyn, Anthony Fauci loved playing sports. As captain of his high school basketball team, he wanted to be an athlete, but at 5-foot-7, he says it wasn’t in the cards. So, he decided to become a doctor instead. 

    Fauci, who turned 82 in December, stepped down as the head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases that same month, leaving behind a high-profile career in government spanning more than half a century, during which he counseled seven presidents, including Joe Biden. Fauci worked at the National Institutes of Health for 54 years and served as director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases for 38 years. In an interview last week, he spoke to WebMD about his career and his plans for the future. 

    This interview has been edited and condensed.

    It’s only been a few weeks since your official “retirement,” but what’s next for you?

    What’s next for me is certainly not classical retirement. I have probably a few more years of being as active, vigorous, passionate about my field of public health, public service in the arena of infectious diseases and immunology. [I’ve] had the privilege of advising seven presidents of the United States in areas that are fundamentally centered around our response and preparation for emerging infections going back to the early years of HIV, pandemic flu, bird flu, Ebola, Zika, and now, most recently the last 3 years, with COVID. What I want to do in the next few years, by writing, by lecturing, and by serving in a senior advisory role, is to hopefully inspire young people to go into the field of medicine and science, and perhaps even to consider going into the area of public service. 

    Almost certainly, I’ll begin working on a memoir. So that’s what I’d like to do over the next few years.

    Are you looking forward to going back and seeing patients and being out of the public eye?

    I will almost certainly associate myself with a medical center, either one locally here in the Washington, DC, area or some of the other medical centers that have expressed an interest in my joining the faculty. I am not going to dissociate myself from clinical medicine, since clinical medicine is such an important part of my identity and has been thus literally for well over 50 years. So, I’m not exactly sure of the venue in which I will do that, but I certainly will have some connection with clinical medicine.

    What are you looking forward to most about going back to doctoring?

    Well, I’ve always had a great deal of attraction to the concept of medicine, the application of medicine. I have taken care of thousands of patients in my long career. I spent a considerable amount of time in the early years of HIV, even before we knew it was HIV, taking care of desperately ill patients. I’ve been involved in a number of clinical research projects, and I was always fascinated by that because there’s much gratification and good feeling you get when you take care of, personally, an individual patient, when you do research that advances the field, and those advances that you may have been a part of benefit larger numbers of patients that are being taken care of by other physicians throughout the country and perhaps even throughout the world. 

    So those are all of the aspects of clinical medicine that I want to encourage younger people that these are the opportunities that they can be a part of, which can be very gratifying and certainly productive in the sense of saving lives.

    Looking back over your career, what were some of the highs and lows, or turning points?

    I first became involved in the personal care and research on persons with HIV, literally in the fall of 1981. [That was] weeks to months after the first cases were recognized. My colleagues and I spent the next few years taking care of desperately ill patients, and we did not have effective therapies because the first couple of years, we did not even know what the ideologic agent was. Even after it was recognized after 1983 and 1984, it took several years before effective therapies were developed, so there was a period of time where we were in a very difficult situation. We were essentially putting Band-Aids on hemorrhages, metaphorically, because no matter what we did, our patients continued to decline. That was a low and dark period of our lives, inspired only by the bravery and the resilience of our patients. A very high period was in [the late 1990s] and into the next century [with the development] of drugs that were highly effective in prolonged and effective suppression of viral loads to the point where people who were living with HIV, if they had access to therapy, could essentially lead a normal lifespan..

    We put together the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief program know as PEPFAR, which now, celebrating its 20th anniversary, has resulted in saving 20-25 million lives. So, I would say that is … the highest point in my experience as a physician and a scientist, to have been an important part in the development of that program.

    Do you feel like there’s any unfinished business? Anything you would change? 

    Certainly, there’s unfinished business. One of the goals I would have liked to have achieved, but that is going to have to wait another few years, is the development of a safe and effective vaccine for HIV. A lot of very elegant science has been done in that regard, but we’re not there yet, it’s a very challenging scientific problem. 

    The other unfinished business is some of the other diseases that cause a considerable amount of morbidity and mortality globally, diseases like malaria and tuberculosis. We’ve made extraordinary progress over the 38 years that I’ve been director of the institute We have a vaccine, though it isn’t a perfect vaccine [for malaria]; we have monoclonal antibodies that are now highly effective in preventing malaria; we have newer drugs, better drugs for tuberculosis, but we don’t have an effective vaccine for tuberculosis. So, malaria vaccines, tuberculosis vaccines, those are all unfinished business. I believe we will get there.

    These new COVID-19 variants keep getting more and more contagious. Do you see the potential for a serious new variant that could plunge us back into some level of public restrictions?

    Anything is possible. One cannot predict, exactly, what the likelihood of getting yet again another variant that’s so different that it eludes the protection that we have from the vaccines and from prior infection. Again, I can’t give a number on that. I don’t think it’s highly likely that will happen. 

    Ever since Omicron came well over a year ago, we have had sublineages of Omicron that progressively seem to elude the immune response that’s been developed. But the one thing that’s good and has been sustained is that protection against severity of disease seems to hold out pretty well. I don’t think that we should be talking about restrictions in the sense of draconian methods of shutting things down; I mean, that was only done for a very brief period of time when our hospitals were being overrun. I don’t anticipate that that is going to be something in the future, but you’ve got to be prepared for it. There are some things that have been highly successful, and that is the vaccines that were developed in less than 1 year. And now, our challenge is to get more people to get their updated boosters. 

    There’s already been criticism of the FDA’s discussion about of an annual COVID-19 vaccine. One criticism is that the COVID vaccines’ effectiveness appears to wane after several months, so it would not offer protection for much of the year. Is that a legitimate criticism?

    There’s no perfect solution to keeping the country optimally protected. I believe that it gets down to, “It’s not perfect, but don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.” We want to get into some regular cadence to get people updated with a booster that is hopefully managed reasonably well to what the circulating variant is. There are certainly going to be people – perhaps the elderly, some of the immune-compromised, and perhaps children – who will need a shot more than once per year, but the FDA’s leaning towards getting a shot that is [timed] with the flu shot, would at least bring some degree of order and stability to the process of people getting into the regular routine of keeping themselves updated and protected to the best extent possible. 

    Do you think we need to move on from mRNA vaccines to something that hopefully has longer-lasting protection?

    Yes, we certainly want next-generation vaccines – both vaccines that have a greater degree of breadth, namely covering multiple variants, as well as a greater degree of duration. So, the real question is, “Is it the mRNA vaccine platform that is inducing a response that is not durable, or is the response against coronaviruses not a durable response?” That’s still uncertain. Yes, we need to do better with a better platform, or an improvement on the platform; that could mean adding adjuvants, that could mean a [nasal] vaccine in addition to a systemic vaccine. 

    Do you always wear a mask when you go out into the world? How do you evaluate the relative risk of situations when you go out in public?

    I’ve been vaccinated, doubly boosted, I’ve gotten infected, and I’ve gotten the bivalent boost. So, I evaluate things depending upon what the level of viral activity is in the particular location where I’m at. If I’m going to go on a plane, for example, I have no idea where these people are coming from, I generally wear a mask on a plane. I don’t really go to congregate settings often. Many of the events I do go to are situations where a requirement for [attending] is to get a test that’s negative that day. 

    When you’re in a situation like that, even if it’s a crowded congregant setting, I don’t have any problem not wearing a mask. But when I’m unsure of what the status is and I might be in an area where there is a considerable degree of viral activity, I would wear a mask. I think you just have to use [your] judgment, depending on the circumstances that you find yourself in.

    Doctors and health care professionals have been through hell during COVID. Do you think this might bring a permanent change to how doctors perceive their jobs?

    Health care providers have been under a considerable amount of stress because this is a totally unprecedented situation that we find ourselves in. This is the likes of which we have not seen in well over 100 years. I hope this is not something that is going to be permanent, I don’t think it is, I think that we are ultimately going to get to a point where the level of virus is low enough that it’s not going to disrupt either society or the health care system or the economy. 

    We’re not totally there yet. We’re still having about 500 deaths per day, which is much, much better than the 3,000 to 4,000 deaths that we were seeing over a year ago, but it is still not low enough to be able to feel comfortable. 

    As a scientist, even a semi-retired one, what scares you? What wakes you up at night with worry? 

    The same thing I have been concerned about for, you know, 40 years: the appearance of a highly transmissible respiratory virus that has a degree of morbidity and mortality that could really be very disruptive of us in this country and globally. Unfortunately, we’re in the middle of that situation now, finishing our third year and going into year 4. So what worries me is yet another pandemic. Now that could be a year from now, 5 years from now, 50 years from now. Remember, the last time a pandemic of this magnitude occurred was well over 100 years ago. My concern is that we stay prepared. [We may] not necessarily prevent the emergence of a new infection, but hopefully we can prevent it from becoming a pandemic.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Vaccines protected pregnant women during Omicron surge

    Vaccines protected pregnant women during Omicron surge

    [ad_1]

    Newswise — COVID vaccines and first boosters provided significant protection to pregnant women against severe complications and death, even after the arrival of the new Omicron variant, according to a study published this week in The Lancet medical journal.

    This study “demonstrates a vaccine effectiveness in preventing severe complications of severe COVID-19 of 76% following vaccination and at least one booster,” said Dr. Michael Gravett, an OB-GYN with the University of Washington School of Medicine who participated in the study, which was led by Oxford University. “Given the marked increased in maternal mortality and severe morbidity seen in our earlier studies prior to vaccination, the 76% efficacy is pretty impressive and really points to the need to get women vaccinated.”

    The main point of the study, which was completed before other variants came on the scene, is for pregnant women to get vaccinated and receive all their boosters, including the bivalent booster, he said.The bivalent booster contains components targeting the original strain of the virus as well as a component of the Omicron strain, which emerged in late 2021.

    As of the first week of January, 71% of pregnant women have received their primary COVID vaccines but only 19% have received the recommended bivalent booster, according the the U.S.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). In Washington state, only 29% of pregnant women have received the bivalent booster, Gravett said.

    Gravett noted that the study, one of the largest of its kind, compared outcomes of 1,545 pregnant women diagnosed with COVID-19 with those of 3,073 pregnant women without the infection. UW Medicine sites were one of three in the United States included in the study. Gravett and Dr. Alisa Kachikis guided the Seattle part of the study, which included around 75 women from UW Medical Center-Montlake, UW Medical Center-Northwest and Harborview Medical Center.

    The study was conducted between Nov. 27, 2021, and June 30, 2022, during which time the highly transmissible Omicron strain began to rapidly spread around the world. The study did not include the impact of vaccines and the second booster or the bivalent booster on later mutations of COVID-19.

    Vaccinated women were well-protected against severe COVID-19 symptoms and complications and had a very low risk of admission to an intensive care unit, the study found. Full vaccination with a booster conferred the greatest protection, the the researchers noted.

    COVID-19 infection during pregnancy was associated with increased risks of maternal morbidity, severe pregnancy complications, and hospital admission, especially among symptomatic and unvaccinated women. In particular, among unvaccinated women who developed severe COVID-19 symptoms the risk of pre-eclampsia was more than threefold higher than that of women without infection. Obese or overweight women with severe symptoms were at the highest risk for maternal morbidity and severe complications.

    Although much of the general population has become less concerned about new variants, pregnant women, especially unvaccinated pregnant women, should not take that attitude, Gravett said.

    “If you look at unvaccinated women, you still have an increased death rate, and increased neonatal mortality,” he said. “If you are vaccinated and boosted, especially with a mRNA vaccine, those levels drop by 81%.”

    In addition, researchers found no increase risk of vaccine side effects in mothers, fetuses or newborns and a decrease risk of preterm birth among vaccinated women.

    “Bottom line is we need to do a better job for women who may become pregnant, and make sure they receive the vaccines and the bivalent boosters,” he said.

    The next study will likely follow up with mothers and babies who received the vaccines and those who did not, Gravett said.

    [ad_2]

    University of Washington School of Medicine and UW Medicine

    Source link

  • FDA panel backs plan for annual COVID-19 booster, as new omicron subvariant continues to dominate in new cases

    FDA panel backs plan for annual COVID-19 booster, as new omicron subvariant continues to dominate in new cases

    [ad_1]

    A Food and Drug Administration advisory panel voted unanimously Thursday for Americans to get a once-a-year booster against COVID-19, with the strain to be decided midyear for a fall campaign, the Associated Press reported. 

    “This is a consequential meeting to determine if we’ve reached the point in the pandemic that allows for simplifying the use of current COVID-19 vaccines,” said the FDA’s Dr. David Kaslow.

    The panel agreed that people should get the same vaccine formula whether they’re receiving their initial vaccinations or a booster. Today, Americans get one formula based on the original coronavirus strain that emerged in 2020 for their first two or three doses, and their latest booster is a combination shot made by Pfizer
    PFE,
    -0.33%

    or Moderna
    MRNA,
    -0.90%

    that adds protection against omicron.

    The FDA would have to decide how to phase in that change.

    COVID-19 vaccines have saved millions of lives, and booster doses remain the best protection against severe disease and death. But Americans are tired of getting vaccinated. While more than 80% of the U.S. population has had at least one COVID-19 shot, only 16% of those eligible for the latest boosters — so-called bivalent doses updated to better match more recent virus strains — have gotten one.

    Separately, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention offered an update Friday on the strains that are dominant in the U.S., showing that XBB.1.5, the omicron sublineage that first emerged in small numbers in October, has extended its lead over other variants.

    XBB.1.5 accounted for 61.3% of cases in the week through Jan. 28, the data shows, up from 49.1% a week ago. The prior dominant variants, BQ.1.1 and BQ.1, together accounted for 31.1% of new cases.

    In the CDC’s Region 2, which includes New York, New Jersey, the U.S. Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico, XBB.1.5 accounted for 91.1% of new cases, up from 86.8% the previous week.

    The World Health Organization said this week that it now has data on XBB.1.5 from 54 countries, showing it has a growth advantage over other circulating strains but still appears no more severe.

    In its weekly epidemiological update, the agency said it has raised the confidence level of its risk assessment for XBB.1.5 to “moderate” from “low,” using these additional reports. The highest number of XBB.1.5 cases are showing up in the U.S., the U.K., Canada, Denmark, Germany, Ireland and Austria.

    The news comes as the seven-day average of new cases stood at 46,300 on Thursday, according to a New York Times tracker. That’s down 24% from two weeks ago. The daily average for hospitalizations was down 24%, at 34,833. The average number of deaths was 549, down 3% from two weeks ago. 

    Cases are currently climbing in eight states — Illinois, Tennessee, Minnesota, Alaska, South Dakota, Vermont, Kentucky and Kansas — as well as in the U.S. Virgin Islands and Washington, D.C.

    Coronavirus update: MarketWatch’s daily roundup has been curating and reporting all the latest developments every weekday since the coronavirus pandemic began

    Other COVID-19 news you should know about:

    • China’s claim that COVID cases and deaths have peaked and are falling fast is failing to take on board that testing is not keeping up with infections, the Guardian reported. China ended its zero-COVID policy in December and promptly saw a wave of cases spread across the nation. Its health authorities said this week that the worst is behind it, but experts are wary that it is underreporting numbers, as it has since the start of the pandemic. Now the pullback in testing is a factor, according to the Guardian. Daily tests had dropped to 280,000 by Monday, down from 150 million on Dec. 9, and 7.54 million on Jan. 1. Some provinces had enacted systems for collecting the results of residents or allowing residents to self-report, but the figures were “affected by the willingness of residents to test.”

    What’s seen as the world’s largest annual human migration is under way again in China for the Lunar New Year, after the country lifted pandemic restrictions. WSJ’s Yoko Kubota reports on how it’s expected to boost the economy–and the risk of new Covid-19 outbreaks. Photo: Cfoto/Zuma Press

    • South Korea says it will continue to restrict the entry of short-term travelers from China through the end of February over concerns that the spread of COVID may worsen following the Lunar New Year holidays, the AP reported. South Korea in early January stopped issuing most short-term visas at its consulates in China, citing concerns about the virus surge in the country.

    • Spain is set to end the mandatory use of face masks on public transport nearly three years after the start of the pandemic, the AP reported separately. Spanish Health Minister Carolina Darias said Thursday she would recommend that the government remove the health regulation when the cabinet meets on Feb. 7. Face masks will remain obligatory inside hospitals, health clinics, dentist offices and pharmacies.

    Here’s what the numbers say:

    The global tally of confirmed COVID-19 cases topped 669.9 million Wednesday, while the death toll rose above 6.82 million, according to data aggregated by Johns Hopkins University.

    The U.S. leads the world with 102.3 million cases and 1,107,559 fatalities.

    The CDC’s tracker shows that 229.6 million people living in the U.S., equal to 69.2% of the total population, are fully vaccinated, meaning they have had their primary shots.

    So far, just 51.4 million Americans, equal to 15.5% of the overall population, have had the updated COVID booster that targets both the original virus and the omicron variants.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • باحثو مايو كلينك يصممون لقاحات علاجية مخصصة لمكافحة السرطان

    باحثو مايو كلينك يصممون لقاحات علاجية مخصصة لمكافحة السرطان

    [ad_1]

    جاكسونفيل، فلوريدا لطالما حمت اللقاحات الناس من الأمراض الفتاكة لأجيال. فهل يمكنها أيضًا المساعدة في محاربة السرطان؟  يعمل باحثو مايو كلينك على تطوير لقاحات علاجية مخصصة للسرطان يمكنها استهداف خصائص الورم المميزة لكل شخص. إن هذا النهج الجديد، المبني على التقدم في الأبحاث الجينومية وتحليلات البيانات، يحمل إمكانات تحويلية لتعزيز قوة الجهاز المناعي للتعرف على الخلايا السرطانية ومهاجمتها.  

    يقول كيث كنوتسون، الحاصل على الدكتوراه، والقائد المشارك لبرنامج علم المناعة والعلاج المناعي في مركز مايو كلينك الشامل للسرطان في فلوريدا، والمؤسس المشارك لبرنامج اللقاح المخصص لمستضدات الورم في مايو كلينك: “بالنسبة لبعض مرضى السرطان، قد يحفز اللقاح أورامهم على الانكماش ويوفر مناعة طويلة الأمد ومقاومة للأورام”. تركز أبحاث الدكتور كنوتسون على منع تطور السرطان.  

    يقول الدكتور كنوتسون إن اللقاحات الفردية للسرطان مصممة بشكل مشابه للقاحات الإنفلونزا أو فيروس كورونا المستجد (كوفيد-19)، فالمكون الرئيسي هو بروتين محدد مرتبط بمرض معين.  

    ويوضح الدكتور كنوتسون: “عندما يتعلم الجهاز المناعي التعرف على هذا البروتين، يمكن أن يحفز إنتاج الخلايا التائية القاتلة لمكافحته”.  

    في استراتيجية لقاح السرطان العلاجية في مايو كلينك، يتكون العنصر الرئيسي من أجزاء من طفرات بروتين الورم الفريدة لدى الشخص، والمعروفة باسم مستضدات الورم. يتم صنع شظايا البروتين المجهرية من الطفرات الجينية في خلايا الروم. توجد مستضدات الورم على سطح الخلايا السرطانية فقط، وليس على الخلايا السليمة.  

    نظرًا لأن مستضدات الورم غريبة على الجسم، يمكن لجهاز المناعة التعرف عليها باعتبارها من الغزاة المسببين للأمراض. عندما يقترن اللقاح بالعلاج المناعي، يمكن أن يساعد في توليد استجابة دفاعية قوية.  

    يقول الدكتور كنوتسون: “الفكرة هي أنه إذا تمكنا من تحديد ما بين 20 إلى 30 بروتينًا متحورًا من سرطان الشخص، فيمكننا صياغة تلك البروتينات في لقاح. ثم يمكننا تحصين الناس بشكل متكرر أثناء خضوعهم للعلاج المناعي بحصار نقاط التفتيش المناعية”.  

    في النماذج الحيوانية ما قبل السريرية، قدم الدكتور كنوتسون وفريقه اللقاح ومجموعة العلاج المناعي لعلاج سرطان الثدي. ووجدوا أن العلاج المزدوج يطيل البقاء على قيد الحياة دون التسبب في سمية كبيرة.  

    ويقول: “نأمل أن نكون قادرين على تحقيق تلك النتائج في البشر”.  

    تبدأ عملية تطوير اللقاح في مركز مايو كلينك للطب الفردي من خلال عمل تسلسل جيني لخلايا الورم لدى المريض وتحليل الحمض النووي وسلاسل الأحماض الأمينية اللبنات الأساسية للبروتينات للعثور على مستضدات الورم المرشحة المحتملة. 

    تقوم يان أسمان، الحاصلة على دكتوراه، وهي متخصصة في المعلومات الحيوية في مركز الطب الفردي في مايو كلينك بفلوريدا، وأحد مؤسسي برنامج اللقاح المخصص لمستضدات الورم في مايو كلينك، على الاختيار الدقيق للمضادات الجديدة – بالإشراف على الاختيار الدقيق لمستضدات الورم. حيث تستخدم طرق تسلسل واسعة النطاق وخوارزميات حسابية لاختيار ما يصل إلى 36 من مستضدات الورم من بين المئات إلى الآلاف والتي قد تولد أقوى استجابة مناعية.  

    توضح الدكتورة أسمان: “من المعروف أن بعض الأورام تتسم بتغيرات كبيرة، مثل: إعادة ترتيب البنية الجينومية، حيث تنفصل قطعة الحمض النووي بأكملها وتندمج معًا مرة أخرى. هذه التغييرات الكبيرة تؤدي في الواقع إلى المزيد من مستضدات الورم الأجنبية وبالتالي إلى المزيد من المناعة”.   

    بعد ذلك، يقوم فريق الدكتور أسمان بالتحقق يدويًا من كل طفرة ودقة مستضدات الورم المرشحة الناشئة عن الطفرات.   

    تقول الدكتورة أسمان: “نحن نبحث عددًا هائلًا من التغييرات في أنسجة الورم. إنها عملية بيولوجية معقدة للغاية لتوليد مستضدات الورم، ولكننا نعمل على أتمتتها باستخدام الخوارزميات الحسابية، بما في ذلك نماذج التعلم الآلي”.   

    بمجرد اختيار مستضدات الورم، يقوم الدكتور كنوتسون بصياغة مكونات اللقاح لتوفير أقوى الاستجابات المناعية الممكنة لتدمير الورم بالكامل.   

    يقول الدكتور كنوتسون: “ثم نقوم بعد ذلك باختيار مستضدات الورم بعناية والتي يمكن تصنيعها بسرعة لتصل إلى درجة نقاء عالية من أجل إعطائها للمريض بشكل آمن وفي الوقت المناسب”. 

    يأمل الدكتور كنوتسون أن يتم إدخال هذه الاستراتيجية في التجارب السريرية قريبًا لعلاج أنواع مختلفة من السرطانات، وكذلك للوقاية من الأمراض.  

    ### 

    نبذة عن مايو كلينك 

    مايو كلينك هي مؤسسة غير ربحية تلتزم بالابتكار في الممارسات السريرية والتعليم والبحث وتوفير التعاطف والخبرة لكل مَن يحتاج إلى الاستشفاء والرد على استفساراته. لمعرفة المزيد من أخبار مايو كلينك، تفضَّل بزيارة شبكة مايو كلينك الإخبارية 

     

    جهة الاتصال الإعلامية: 

    شارون ثيمير، مايو كلينك للتواصل، [email protected] 

     

    [ad_2]

    Mayo Clinic

    Source link

  • FDA backs annual COVID vaccine for Americans with strain to be decided midyear

    FDA backs annual COVID vaccine for Americans with strain to be decided midyear

    [ad_1]

    The Food and Drug Administration is recommending that the U.S. decide each June which SARS-CoV-2 strains should be included in an annual fall booster shot.

    Doing so would allow updated COVID-19 vaccines to be ready for distribution “no later than September” each year, according to documents published by the regulator.

    The FDA’s Vaccines…

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Coordination of COVID-19 Vaccine Clinical Trials Produces a ‘Treasure Trove’ of Data and a Model for the Future

    Coordination of COVID-19 Vaccine Clinical Trials Produces a ‘Treasure Trove’ of Data and a Model for the Future

    [ad_1]

    Newswise — SEATTLE (Jan. 23, 2023) – The federally funded COVID-19 Prevention Network (CoVPN), headquartered at Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center in Seattle, was instrumental in the rapid development of safe, effective and lifesaving COVID-19 vaccines during earlier phases of the pandemic.

    Its vital work to expedite Phase 3 COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials also resulted in a highly collaborative and harmonized approach that can serve as a national and even international model for major research initiatives while also guiding responses to future public health emergencies.

    That’s the overarching theme from a new study published Monday, Jan. 23, in JAMA Network Open.

    “Our success, which depended entirely on the investments into HIV vaccine research, can be replicated for other important research initiatives and highlights the importance of investments that boost pandemic preparedness for years to come,” explained James G. Kublin, MD, MPH, executive director of CoVPN and senior and corresponding author of the study.

    Additionally, he and his colleagues, including  Alfredo Mena Lora, MD, assistant professor of medicine at the University of Illinois at Chicago, and co-first author Jessica Long, PhD, MPH, a postdoctoral fellow at the University of Washington Department of Medicine in Seattle, noted that the COVID-19 clinical trials produced a vast database of critical information that could help researchers answer pressing questions about this novel virus moving forward. 

    “The harmonization of data across trials is a new strategy that will set the standard for collaboration in future clinical trials,” said Mena Lora. 

    The authors detail how CoVPN was able to help secure authorized vaccines in less than a year by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the National Institutes of Health as part of Operation Warp Speed. Its mission was, and continues to be, to support the rapid development of vaccines for the U.S. and global populations by coordinating and implementing Phase 3 trials for COVID-19 vaccine candidates.

    CoVPN officials were able to leverage existing resources, including clinical and laboratory infrastructure, community partnerships and research expertise, to get clinical sites to quickly pivot to conduct the vaccine trials as soon as investigational products were ready for Phase 3 testing.

    “The CoVPN approach drew on years of experience and infrastructure from partnering networks and institutions, which not only allowed for rapid rollout of the trials, but also contributed to broader representation of trial participants,” said Long.

    Overall, CoVPN deployed five Phase 3 clinical trials involving more than 136,000 participants to test the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines. While doing so, it implemented several innovative procedures that were essential to its ultimate success. These included:

    • Harmonized study designs that were similar in relative size, number of endpoints and time to analysis.
    • A model that accelerated vaccine development by allowing phases to occur in parallel rather than sequentially. For example, vaccine manufacturing and scale-up were greenlighted while the trials were ongoing in anticipation of meeting efficacy targets.
    • Establishment of a single Data Safety Monitoring Board for review and oversight of all vaccine studies.
    • Targeted outreach and enrollment efforts supported by an online screening registry to ensure broad and diverse representation among study participants. Extensive engagement was conducted with communities and community leaders to build and enhance trust in the science to help enroll more Black, Indigenous and people of color (BIPOC) volunteers who are historically underrepresented in clinical trials.
    • A cross-platform approach that led to harmonization of data collection across trials and the ability to analyze data from all studies.

    “This unique, cross-platform concept allowed for sharing of data from all of the studies and helped bridge gaps in understanding so we could better answer key research questions and guide policy decisions,” explained Kublin, who’s also a principal staff scientist at Fred Hutch. 

    Larry Corey, MD, an internationally renowned expert in vaccine development, and principal co-investigator of CoVPN, believes the success of COVID-19 clinical trials should be thought of as an important model for developing vaccines for significant infectious diseases globally.

    “Harmonizing study design, enrollment, clinical endpoints and methods for follow-up could very well become best practices that shape the future landscape of major research initiatives and pandemic responses,” he said. 

    Kublin and colleagues regard the vast database from more than 130,000 trial participants, including over 2,500 with documented COVID-19 cases, as a “treasure trove” of data that could help unlock mysteries about the virus. For example, they noted that the pooled data from five trials can help address specific questions such as:

    • How effective are vaccines for at-risk groups?
    • Can vaccines have an impact on long COVID?
    • Are safety, immunogenicity and vaccine efficacy different in special populations, such as people living with HIV?
    • What impact do chronic health conditions have on vaccine efficacy or protection duration?
    • What are the impacts of variants on both the population at large and within special communities?

    Additional CoVPN publications planned for the months ahead will address many of these topics. Researchers who have ideas for further investigation and want to collaborate with CoVPN can find more information here.

    # # #

    Publication #: JNO22-8432R

    DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.51974

    About the COVID-19 Prevention Network (CoVPN)

    The COVID-19 Prevention Network (CoVPN) was formed by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) at the U.S. National Institutes of Health to respond to the global pandemic. Through the CoVPN, NIAID is leveraging the infectious disease expertise of its existing research networks and global partners to address the pressing need for vaccines and antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. CoVPN works to develop and conduct studies to ensure rapid and thorough evaluation of vaccines and antibodies for the prevention of COVID-19. The CoVPN is headquartered at Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center in Seattle.

    # # #

    [ad_2]

    Covid-19 Prevention Network (CoVPN)

    Source link

  • COVID-19 symptoms 6 months after onset, role of vaccination for SARS-CoV-2 infection

    COVID-19 symptoms 6 months after onset, role of vaccination for SARS-CoV-2 infection

    [ad_1]

    Newswise — In this study of 1,832 U.S. adults, the risk of reporting symptoms for 28 or more days after COVID-19 onset was significantly higher in participants who were unvaccinated at the time of infection and those who reported moderate or severe acute illness symptoms. At six months after onset, participants had significantly higher risk of pulmonary, diabetes, neurological, and mental health encounters versus pre-infection baseline. 

    Authors: Stephanie A. Richard, Ph.D., of the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences in Bethesda, Maryland, is the corresponding author. 

     

    (doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.51360)

    Editor’s Note: Please see the article for additional information, including other authors, author contributions and affiliations, conflict of interest and financial disclosures, and funding and support.

    [ad_2]

    JAMA – Journal of the American Medical Association

    Source link

  • Vaccination gets a boost when people know their neighbors are doing it

    Vaccination gets a boost when people know their neighbors are doing it

    [ad_1]

    Newswise — AUSTIN, Texas — Just as a highly transmissible variant prompts officials to extend COVID-19 emergency status, one of the largest surveys ever conducted shows people are more willing to get vaccinated when health workers reveal how many others are doing so.

    The massive global survey spawned two papers — one recently published in Nature Human Behavior and another in Nature Communications—showing people greatly underestimate vaccine uptake — both worldwide and in their own communities. “Our study shows that accurate information about what most other people are doing can substantially increase intentions to accept a COVID-19 vaccine,” says Avinash Collis, co-author and assistant professor of information, risk, and operations management at The University of Texas McCombs School of Business.

    Key Takeaways:

    • Public health campaigns are more convincing when they focus on the percentage of people receiving vaccinations, as opposed to the dangers of refusing vaccination.
    • People all over the world severely underestimate vaccine uptake in their communities, in part because of wide coverage of vaccine hesitancy.
    • “But once they know that the majority has already received or are going to get the vaccine, they feel safer to get the vaccine,” says Collis.
    • The survey also found local health workers are the most trusted source of COVID-19 information, but in most countries, they don’t serve as public information sources. Politicians do — and they are the least trusted.
    • Facebook provided the survey sample and ads, yielding a record-setting 2 million responses in 67 countries.
    • The survey is a joint effort of The University of Texas at Austin, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Initiative on the Digital Economy, the World Health Organization, Johns Hopkins University and Meta.
    • Other academics are now using this data in their own vaccination research — including studies on vaccination campaigns and political trust in Latin America, understanding drivers of vaccine hesitancy in South Asia, and promoting hand-washing in sub-Saharan Africa. To date, more than 40 peer reviewed papers have been published by other research teams using this data.

    Read the McCombs Big Ideas story.

    [ad_2]

    University of Texas at Austin (UT Austin)

    Source link

  • U.S. Seniors Bearing Brunt of COVID Wave – Is Help Coming?

    U.S. Seniors Bearing Brunt of COVID Wave – Is Help Coming?

    [ad_1]

    Jan. 10, 2023 – It might appear that we’re back to some semblance of “normal” at this point in the COVID-19 pandemic. But many people remain at higher risk for serious outcomes like hospitalization and death, especially older Americans. 

    Legula Estiloz was diagnosed with COVID-19 at age 104, for example. “She and I both came down with COVID at the same time, a few days after Christmas of 2020,” her son Tim Estiloz says.

    “I went in to wake her up for her breakfast, and she was just drenched, sopping wet – her bed clothes and her nightgown,” Tim says. 

    Legula, a resident of The Willows, a skilled nursing community in Oakmont, PA, owned and operated by Presbyterian SeniorCare Network, sought care at nearby Magee Hospital. Both Legula and Tim were swabbed for COVID-19 and tested positive. They had low-grade fevers and fatigue. Legula lost her appetite for months. But neither lost their sense of smell or taste or had respiratory challenges. 

    The COVID-19 vaccines were not available at the time. “It is all the more miraculous that she survived it at that age, and without even the benefit of the vaccine to get her through it,” he says.

    Americans 65 and older are dying at disproportionately higher rates from COVID-19. For example, people ages 65 to 74 account for 22% of COVID-19 deaths, even though this age group represents less than 10% of the U.S. population, CDC figures show. The picture is more dire for those 75 to 84 – a group that accounts for 26% of deaths but less than 5% of the population.

    The oldest Americans, those 85 and over, account for 27% of deaths but make up only 2% of the U.S. population.

    Add to this the yet-to-be-fully appreciated impact of the latest Omicron subvariant on the rise, XBB.1.5, and the future remains anything but certain.

    Legula, who survived COVID-19, went on to have a heart attack and be diagnosed with breast cancer, all before spring 2020. 

    Her prognosis is good now, Tim says. “She’s doing quite well. I think for a period of time, she was doing better than me.” She plays notes on the piano, likes to “dance” in her wheelchair, and catches a ball thrown from 3 or 4 feet away “each and every time.” 

    To summarize her pandemic experience, Legula “battled breast cancer, had radiation treatment, she fell once, she survived COVID, and she survived a heart attack,” Tim says. Although the admitting doctor warned that his mother might not survive the night of her heart attack, she improved and in January 2021 celebrated her 104th birthday. 

    “And now, God willing, in a few days she’ll celebrate her 106th.”

    Bivalent Booster Buy-In

    A key factor in Legula’s recovery: She also is up to date on her COVID-19 vaccinations and boosters.

    The bivalent boosters – which target some Omicron strains and the original coronavirus – are 84% more effective at keeping seniors from being hospitalized, says David Gifford, MD, chief medical officer at the American Health Care Association/National Center for Assisted Living in Washington, DC.

    Jan. 3 preprint study published in the journal The Lancet backs that up. While it hasn’t been peer-reviewed, researchers studied 622,701 people ages 65 and older and found those who had received the bivalent booster were 81% less likely to be hospitalized and 86% less likely to die from COVID-19 than others who did not receive it.

    But only slightly more than one-third of Americans 65 and older, 38%, have received a bivalent booster, compared to 15% of all Americans 5 years or older, CDC data shows. So there is great room for improvement, experts say. 

    “We have this ongoing push among our members to increase booster acceptance rate among residents,” says Lisa Sanders, director of media relations at LeadingAge, a national association of nonprofit providers and aging services, including nursing homes, retirement community settings, and affordable housing for older adults. 

    One of the biggest misconceptions, she says, is “the thinking that the bivalent booster is not necessary.” In addition, ongoing education and access to vaccines remain important “because there is a lot of misinformation.”

    “The messaging has to be clear: You need to get the bivalent booster,” Sanders says, “especially now after the holidays and [when] new variants are emerging.”

    COVID and Congregate Living

    With older Americans more vulnerable to serious effects of COVID-19, a question that comes up is: What about settings where they live together, such as nursing homes, skilled nursing facilities, and other care centers? Earlier in the pandemic, these locations faced greater infection control challenges with the coronavirus.

    “Long-term care professionals have known since day one that older adults with chronic conditions are most vulnerable when it comes to this virus. They have been bedside to unspeakable tragedy these past 3 years,” Gifford says.

    “Unfortunately, ageism has been on full display during this pandemic, as evidenced by long term-care facilities begging public health officials for resources to no avail in the beginning,” he says.

    So where are they now?

    On the plus side, defenses and preventive measures have come a long way since the pandemic started, Gifford says. “While older adults are still most vulnerable, we have the tools to help protect them from serious illness and hospitalization. First and foremost, seniors need to stay up to date on their COVID vaccinations, which means getting the updated, bivalent booster.”

    Florida at the Forefront

    The three U.S. states with the most residents ages 65 and older are California, Florida, and Texas. As a percentage, more than 1 in 5 Floridians, or 21%, for example, are in this age group, according to 2021 U.S. Census numbers. 

    With one of the country’s most vulnerable older populations, the Florida Health Care Association in Tallahassee continues to promote the effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccine and boosters. Kristen Knapp, senior director of strategy and communications for the association, says, “While the booster may not prevent infections, we know that it can help residents from becoming very sick or being hospitalized.” 

    COVID-19 vaccination is not a requirement for resident admission or staff employment. But Knapp says that, vaccinated or not, anyone who tests positive for COVID-19 is required to follow infection control protocols.

     The Feds Get Involved

    On Nov. 22, the White House announced a campaign to promote boosters in older adults. The focus is on reaching seniors and other communities hardest hit by COVID-19, making it even more convenient to get vaccinated, and increasing awareness through paid media.

    The initiative includes new enforcement guidance through the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to ensure nursing homes are offering updated COVID-19 vaccines as well as timely treatment to their residents and staff.

    Shortly thereafter, LeadingAge joined forces with American Health Care Association to create an “All Hands on Deck” initiative to help achieve the White House goals. One strategy is to get hospitals more involved. This is important, Sanders says, because about 90% of nursing home admissions involve people transferred from a hospital. 

    Ongoing Vigilance

    Future variants continue to be a threat, but the vaccines are incredibly effective in preventing hospitalizations and death, experts emphasize. 

    “We continue to monitor and prepare for anticipated surges, like this winter’s, and encourage everyone, including our residents and staff, to get their boosters,” Gifford says.

    There needs to be an ongoing vigilance that this is a community issue, Sanders says. “There’s a human tendency to want to push it away and say, ‘oh it’s their problem.’ 

    “Really, it’s all of our problem, and if we all take steps to protect ourselves and each other, we’ll be better off as a society.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • China takes first steps to punish countries that imposed testing mandates for Chinese travelers

    China takes first steps to punish countries that imposed testing mandates for Chinese travelers

    [ad_1]

    China on Tuesday suspended visas for South Koreans to enter the country for tourism or business in apparent retaliation for South Korea’s COVID-19 testing requirements for Chinese travelers, the Associated Press reported.

    No other details were given, although China has threatened to retaliate against countries that require travelers from China to show a negative result for a test taken within the previous 48 hours.

    That has not stopped about a dozen countries from following the U.S. in requiring Chinese travelers produce a test after China lifted most of its strict COVID-related restrictions for the first time since the start of the pandemic. The end of those restrictions has resulted in a surge of new cases.

    The World Health Organization and several nations have accused China of withholding data on its outbreak. The testing requirements are aimed at identifying potential virus variants carried by travelers.

    Separately on Tuesday, the head of the WHO for Europe said the surge of cases in China is not likely to have a big impact on Europe, although he cautioned against complacency.

    Hans Kluge told reporters it was “not unreasonable for countries to take precautionary measures to protect their populations” but called for such measures “to be rooted in science, to be proportionate and nondiscriminatory,” as AFP reported.

    Tens of thousands of people resumed travels in and out of China after the country lifted almost all of its border restrictions, ending three years of strict pandemic controls. Photo: Tyrone Siu/Reuters

    In the U.S., the seven-day average of new cases stood at 67,012 on Monday, according to a New York Times tracker. That’s up 2% from two weeks ago and below the recent peak of 70,508 on Christmas Eve.

    The daily average for hospitalizations was up 18% to 47,503. The average for deaths was 467, up 10% from two weeks ago. 

    Cases are currently rising in 21 states, along with Guam, Washington, D.C., and the U.S. Virgin Islands. They are led by Florida, where cases are up 90% from two weeks ago. On a per-capita basis, New York, New Jersey and Rhode Island are seeing the highest rates. New York has 37 cases per 100,000 people, New Jersey 35 and Rhode Island 31.

    Coronavirus Update: MarketWatch’s daily roundup has been curating and reporting all the latest developments every weekday since the coronavirus pandemic began

    Other COVID-19 news you should know about:

    • Thailand sent three cabinet ministers to welcome Chinese tourists with flowers and gifts as they arrived Monday at Bangkok’s Suvarnabhumi Airport after China relaxed travel restrictions, the AP reported. The high-profile event reflected the importance Thailand places on wooing Chinese travelers to help restore its pandemic-battered tourism industry. Before COVID, Chinese visitors accounted for about one-third of all arrivals.

    • Moderna Inc.
    MRNA,
    +3.10%

    is considering pricing its COVID vaccine at $110 to $130 per dose, the Wall Street Journal reported. That’s the same price range as mooted by Pfizer Inc.
    PFE,
    -1.59%

    and German partner BioNTech SE
    BNTX,
    +3.30%

    once their vaccine moves to the commercial market. For now, vaccines are being purchased and distributed by the U.S. government.

    Getting the flu can increase the risk of getting a second infection, such as strep throat. The Wall Street Journal’s Daniela Hernandez explains the science behind that, plus what it means for the rest of the winter and how we can protect ourselves from the tripledemic. Illustration: David Fang

    • India has detected the presence of all the COVID omicron subvariants in the community after testing more than 300 samples since late December, the health ministry said in a statement, Reuters reported. “No mortality or rise in transmission were reported in the areas where these variants were detected,” the ministry said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Moderna, CureVac and Ocugen offer updates on COVID vaccines, while China cracks down on critics of government’s pandemic response

    Moderna, CureVac and Ocugen offer updates on COVID vaccines, while China cracks down on critics of government’s pandemic response

    [ad_1]

    A flurry of announcements relating to COVID vaccines dominated headlines on the pandemic on Monday, with Moderna telling investors it expects to generate some $5 billion in sales in 2023.

    That’s down from $18.4 billion in sales in 2022. The company plans to boost spending on research and development to $4.5 billion this year, up from $3.3 billion in 2022.

    Moderna
    MRNA,
    +1.79%

    provided the update in advance of the company’s presentation at the annual J.P. Morgan Healthcare Conference in San Francisco.

    Separately, CureVac
    CVAC,
    +24.46%

     said preliminary data from its early stage trial for its COVID and seasonal flu shots had positive results to advance to the next stage of clinical testing.

    CureVac is developing the shots with GlaxoSmithKline
    GSK,
    -0.79%

     
    GSK,
    -0.75%
    .
     CureVac said the shot was well tolerated, and that neutralizing antibodies were beginning at the lowest tested dose for younger adults. The seasonal flu shot was also well tolerated with an increase in antibodies compared to those from a flu vaccine comparator in younger adults, CureVac said.

    Ocugen announced positive results in a trial of its COVID vaccine Covaxin, which uses the same vero cell manufacturing platform that has been used in the production of polio vaccines for decades. The Phase 2/3 trial involved 491 U.S. adult participants who received two doses of Covaxin or placebo 28 days apart.

    “Covaxin, an inactivated virus vaccine adjuvanted with TLR7/8 agonist, has been demonstrated in clinical trials to generate a broader immune response against the whole virus covering important antigens such as S-protein, RBD, and N-protein; whereas currently approved vaccines in the U.S. target only S-protein antigen,” the company said in a statement.

    Chief Executive Dr. Shankar Musnuri said the company is hoping the vaccine will offer an option for those who are still hesitant to take an mRNA vaccine, which uses newer technology.

    U.S. cases were lower on Sunday, according to a New York Times tracker. The seven-day average of new cases stood at 67,246, down 1% from two weeks ago.

    The daily average for hospitalizations was up 18% at 47,500., the highest level since last March. The average for deaths was 509, up 19% from two weeks ago.

    Hospitalizations are becoming concerning, according to the Times trackers, with the Northeast seeing the highest per capita rates, along with the Southeast.

    Coronavirus Update: MarketWatch’s daily roundup has been curating and reporting all the latest developments every weekday since the coronavirus pandemic began

    Other COVID-19 news you should know about:

    • China has suspended or closed the social-media accounts of more than 1,000 critics of the government’s COVID response, as the country rolls back harsh anti-virus restrictions and gears up for the coming Lunar New Year holiday, the Associated Press reported. The popular Sina Weibo social media platform said it had addressed 12,854 violations including attacks on experts, scholars and medical workers and issued temporary or permanent bans on 1,120 accounts. The ruling Communist Party had largely relied on the medical community to justify its tough lockdowns, quarantine measures and mass testing, almost all of which it abruptly abandoned last month, leading to a surge in new cases that have stretched medical resources to their limits. The party allows no direct criticism and imposes strict limits on free speech.

    Tens of thousands of people resumed travels in and out of China on Sunday as the country lifted almost all of its border restrictions, ending three years of strict pandemic controls. Some travelers expressed relief to be reunited with their families. Photo: Tyrone Siu/Reuters

    • Pfizer’s
    PFE,
    -4.77%

    antiviral Paxlovid has not been included in the Chinese government’s national reimbursement list that would have allowed patients to get it at a cheaper price throughout the country, saying it was too expensive, the AP reported separately. Although it is supposed to be prescribed by medical professionals, that hasn’t stopped people from scrambling to purchase it on their own through any means at their disposal—including buying generic Indian versions of the drug through the internet, according to local media reports.

    • The union representing a group of nurses at a New York City hospital reached a tentative contract agreement with its management, but close to 9,000 nurses at several other major hospitals were still preparing to go on strike, the AP reported. The New York State Nurses Association and BronxCare Health System said Saturday that a tentative agreement had been reached; the union said it included pay raises every year of its three-year term as well as staffing increases. Another hospital, Flushing Hospital Medical Center, got to a tentative agreement with nurses on Friday evening.

    Here’s what the numbers say:

    The global tally of confirmed cases of COVID-19 topped 664.3 million on Monday, while the death toll rose above 6.7 million, according to data aggregated by Johns Hopkins University.

    The U.S. leads the world with 101.2 million cases and 1,096,523 fatalities.

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s tracker shows that 229.3 million people living in the U.S., equal to 69.1% of the total population, are fully vaccinated, meaning they have had their primary shots.

    So far, just 48.2 million Americans, equal to 15.4% of the overall population, have had the updated COVID booster that targets both the original virus and the omicron variants.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Vaccine and prior SARS-CoV-2 infection confer long-lasting protection against omicron BA.5

    Vaccine and prior SARS-CoV-2 infection confer long-lasting protection against omicron BA.5

    [ad_1]

    Newswise — A new study led by Luís Graça, group leader at the Instituto de Medicina Molecular João Lobo Antunes (iMM, Lisbon) and full professor at the Medical School of the University of Lisbon, and Manuel Carmo Gomes, associate professor with aggregation at the Faculty of Sciences of the University of Lisbon (Ciências ULisboa), both members of the Direção Geral de Saúde (DGS) Technical Committee for Vaccination against COVID-19 (CTVC), and published today in the scientific journal Lancet Infectious Diseases*, shows that the protection conferred by hybrid immunity against the SARS-CoV-2 subvariant omicron BA.5, obtained by the infection of vaccinated people, lasts for at least eight months after the first infection.

    This study follows the results published in September by the same researchers in the New England Journal of Medicine** where they showed, by studying the widely vaccinated Portuguese population, that infection by the first omicron subvariants of SARS-CoV-2, circulating in January and February 2022, conferred considerable protection against the omicron BA.5 subvariant circulating in Portugal since June and which remains the predominant variant in many countries. However, the stability of the protection conferred by the so-called hybrid immunity, the immunity conferred by the combination of vaccination and infection, was not yet known. 

    “In September, we had observed that infection by the first omicron subvariants conferred protection for the BA.5 subvariant about four times higher than vaccinated people who were not infected on any occasion, showing the importance of hybrid immunity for protection against new infections. Now, we show that this protection conferred by vaccination together with previous infections is stable and maintained until at least eight months after the first infection”, explains Luís Graça, co-leader of the study. 

    As in the previous study, the researchers used the national COVID-19 case registry until September 2022, which is especially comprehensive due to the legal requirement to register all cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection at the time to gain access to sick leave during mandatory isolation days. “We used the national COVID-19 case registry to obtain the information of all cases of SARS-CoV-2 infections in the population over 12 years old residing in Portugal. These data from the Portuguese population allows us to conclude about hybrid immunity because vaccination had already covered 98% of this population by the end of 2021. The virus variant of each infection was determined considering the date of infection and the dominant variant at that time”, explains Manuel Carmo Gomes, co-leader of the study. 

    About the calculations performed with these data, João Malato, first author of the study, explains: “With these data, we calculated the relative risk of reinfection over time in people vaccinated with previous infections by the first omicron subvariants of SARS-CoV-2, allowing us to conclude on the level of protection against reinfection. We found that protection remains high 8 months after contact with the virus.” 

    “The protection afforded by hybrid immunity is initially about 90%, reducing after 5 months to about 70%, and showing a tendency to stabilize at a value of around 65% after 8 months, compared to the protection in vaccinated persons that were never infected by the virus. These results show that hybrid immunity conferred by infection with previous subvariants of SARS-CoV-2 in vaccinated people is quite stable”, adds Luís Graça about the protection conferred by hybrid immunity.

    This study shows that infection by previous subvariants of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, which causes COVID-19, has the ability to confer additional protection compared to the protection conferred by vaccination alone, and that this protection is stable.

     

    This work was developed at the Instituto de Medicina Molecular João Lobo Antunes (iMM, Lisboa) and the Direção Geral de Saúde, in colaboration with researchers from the Centro de Estatística e Aplicações da Universidade de Lisboa, the Faculdade de Ciências da Universidade de Lisboa and Los Alamos National Laboratory (USA). This work was funded by the Horizon 2020 research and innovationfrom the European Union, Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT, Portugal) and the National Institute of Health.

     

    * João Malato, Ruy M Ribeiro, Eugénia Fernandes, Pedro P Leite, Pedro Casaca, Carlos Antunes, Válter R Fonseca, Manuel Carmo Gomes, Luís Graça. (2022) Stability of hybrid vs. vaccine immunity against BA.5 infection over 8 months. Lancet Infectious Diseases. 

    ** João Malato, Ruy M Ribeiro, Pedro P Leite, Pedro Casaca, Eugénia Fernandes, Carlos Antunes, Válter R Fonseca, Manuel C Gomes, Luís Graça. (2022) Risk of BA.5 Infection among Persons Exposed to Previous SARS-CoV-2 Variants. New England Journal of Medicine.387(10):953-954. Doi: 10.1056/NEJMc2209479. 

    [ad_2]

    Instituto de Medicina Molecular

    Source link

  • How Worried Should We Be About XBB.1.5?

    How Worried Should We Be About XBB.1.5?

    [ad_1]

    After months and months of SARS-CoV-2 subvariant soup, one ingredient has emerged in the United States with a flavor pungent enough to overwhelm the rest: XBB.1.5, an Omicron offshoot that now accounts for an estimated 75 percent of cases in the Northeast. A crafty dodger of antibodies that is able to grip extra tightly onto the surface of our cells, XBB.1.5 is now officially the country’s fastest-spreading coronavirus subvariant. In the last week of December alone, it zoomed from 20 percent of estimated infections nationwide to 40 percent; soon, it’s expected to be all that’s left, or at least very close. “That’s the big thing everybody looks for—how quickly it takes over from existing variants,” says Shaun Truelove, an infectious-disease modeler at Johns Hopkins University. “And that’s a really quick rise.”

    All of this raises familiar worries: more illness, more long COVID, more hospitalizations, more health-care system strain. With holiday cheer and chilly temperatures crowding people indoors, and the uptake of bivalent vaccines at an abysmal low, a winter wave was already brewing in the U.S. The impending dominance of an especially speedy, immune-evasive variant, Truelove told me, could ratchet up that swell.

    But the American public has heard that warning many, many, many times before—and by and large, the situation has not changed. The world has come a long way since early 2020, when it lacked vaccines and drugs to combat the coronavirus; now, with immunity from shots and past infections slathered across the planet—porous and uneven though that layer may be—the population is no longer nearly so vulnerable to COVID’s worst effects. Nor is XBB.1.5 a doomsday-caliber threat. So far, no evidence suggests that the subvariant is inherently more severe than its predecessors. When its close sibling, XBB, swamped Singapore a few months ago, pushing case counts up, hospitalizations didn’t undergo a disproportionately massive spike (though XBB.1.5 is more transmissible, and the U.S. is less well vaccinated). Compared with the original Omicron surge that pummeled the nation this time last year, “I think there’s less to be worried about,” especially for people who are up to date on their vaccines, says Mehul Suthar, a viral immunologist at Emory University who’s been studying how the immune system reacts to new variants. “My previous exposures are probably going to help against any XBB infection I have.”

    SARS-CoV-2’s evolution is still worth tracking closely through genomic surveillance—which is only getting harder as testing efforts continue to be pared back. But “variants mean something a little different now for most of the world than they did earlier in the pandemic,” says Emma Hodcroft, a molecular epidemiologist at the University of Bern, in Switzerland, who’s been tracking the proportions of SARS-Cov-2 variants around the world. Versions of the virus that can elude a subset of our immune defenses are, after all, going to keep on coming, for as long as SARS-CoV-2 is with us—likely forever, as my colleague Sarah Zhang has written. It’s the classic host-pathogen arms race: Viruses infect us; our bodies, hoping to avoid a similarly severe reinfection, build up defenses, goading the invader into modifying its features so it can infiltrate us anew.

    But the virus is not evolving toward the point where it’s unstoppable; it’s only switching up its fencing stance to sidestep our latest parries as we do the same for it. A version of the virus that succeeds in one place may flop in another, depending on the context: local vaccination and infection histories, for instance, or how many elderly and immunocompromised individuals are around, and the degree to which everyone avoids trading public air. With the world’s immune landscape now so uneven, “it’s getting harder for the virus to do that synchronized wave that Omicron did this time last year,” says Verity Hill, an evolutionary virologist at Yale. It will keep trying to creep around our defenses, says Pavitra Roychoudhury, who’s monitoring SARS-CoV-2 variants at the University of Washington, but “I don’t think we need to have alarm-bell emojis for every variant that comes out.”

    Some particularly worrying variants and subvariants will continue to arise, with telltale signs, Roychoudhury told me: a steep increase in wastewater surveillance, followed by a catastrophic climb in hospitalizations; a superfast takeover that kicks other coronavirus strains off the stage in a matter of days or weeks. Omens such as these hint at a variant that’s probably so good at circumventing existing immune defenses that it will easily sicken just about everyone again—and cause enough illness overall that a large number of cases turn severe. Also possible is a future variant that is inherently more virulent, adding risk to every new case. In extreme versions of these scenarios, tests, treatments, and masks might need to come back into mass use; researchers may need to concoct a new vaccine recipe  at an accelerated pace. But that’s a threshold that most variations of SARS-CoV-2 will not clear—including, it seems so far, XBB.1.5. Right now, Hodcroft told me, “it’s hard to imagine that anything we’ve been seeing in the last few months would really cause a rush to do a vaccine update,” or anything else similarly extreme. “We don’t make a new flu vaccine every time we see a new variant, and we see those all through the year.” Our current crop of BA.5-focused shots is not a great match for XBB.1.5, as Suthar and his colleagues have found, at least on the antibody front. But antibodies aren’t the only defenses at play—and Suthar told me it’s still far better to have the new vaccine than not.

    In the U.S., wastewater counts and hospitalizations are ticking upward, and XBB.1.5 is quickly elbowing out its peers. But the estimated infection rise doesn’t seem nearly as steep as the ascension of the original Omicron variant, BA.1 (though our tracking is now poorer). XBB.1.5 also isn’t dominating equally in different parts of the country—and Truelove points out that it doesn’t yet seem tightly linked to hospitalizations in the places where it’s gained traction so far. As tempting as it may be to blame any rise in cases and hospitalizations on the latest subvariant, our own behaviors are at least as important. Drop-offs in vaccine uptake or big jumps in mitigation-free mingling can drive spikes in illness on their own. “We were expecting a wave already, this time of year,” Hill told me. Travel is up, masking is down. And just 15 percent of Americans over the age of 5 have received a bivalent shot.

    The pace at which new SARS-CoV-2 variants and subvariants take over could eventually slow, but the experts I spoke with weren’t sure this would happen. Immunity across the globe remains patchy; only a subset of countries have access to updated bivalent vaccines, while some countries are still struggling to get first doses into millions of arms. And with nearly all COVID-dampening mitigations “pretty much gone” on a global scale, Hodcroft told me, it’s gotten awfully easy for the coronavirus to keep experimenting with new ways to stump our immune defenses. XBB.1.5 is both the product and the catalyst of unfettered spread—and should that continue, the virus will take advantage again.

    [ad_2]

    Katherine J. Wu

    Source link

  • How Many Republicans Died Because the GOP Turned Against Vaccines?

    How Many Republicans Died Because the GOP Turned Against Vaccines?

    [ad_1]

    No country has a perfect COVID vaccination rate, even this far into the pandemic, but America’s record is particularly dismal. About a third of Americans—more than a hundred million people—have yet to get their initial shots. You can find anti-vaxxers in every corner of the country. But by far the single group of adults most likely to be unvaccinated is Republicans: 37 percent of Republicans are still unvaccinated or only partially vaccinated, compared with 9 percent of Democrats. Fourteen of the 15 states with the lowest vaccination rates voted for Donald Trump in 2020. (The other is Georgia.)

    We know that unvaccinated Americans are more likely to be Republican, that Republicans in positions of power led the movement against COVID vaccination, and that hundreds of thousands of unvaccinated Americans have died preventable deaths from the disease. The Republican Party is unquestionably complicit in the premature deaths of many of its own supporters, a phenomenon that may be without precedent in the history of both American democracy and virology.

    Obviously, nothing about being a Republican makes someone inherently anti-vaccine. Many Republicans—in fact, most of them—have gotten their first two shots. But the wildly disproportionate presence of Republicans among the unvaccinated reveals an ugly and counterintuitive aspect of the GOP campaign against vaccination: At every turn, top figures in the party have directly endangered their own constituents. Trump disparaged vaccines while president, even after orchestrating Operation Warp Speed. Other politicians, such as Texas Governor Greg Abbott, made all COVID-vaccine mandates illegal in their state. More recently, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis called for a grand jury to investigate the safety of COVID vaccines. The right-wing media have leaned even harder into vaccine skepticism. On his prime-time Fox News show, Tucker Carlson has regularly questioned the safety of vaccines, inviting guests who have called for the shots to be “withdrawn from the market.”

    Breaking down the cost of vaccine hesitancy would be simple if we could draw a causal relationship between Republican leaders’ anti-vaccine messaging and the adoption of those ideas by Americans, and then from those ideas to deaths due to non-vaccination. Unfortunately, we don’t have the data to do so. Individual vaccine skepticism cannot be traced back to a single source, and even if it could, we don’t know exactly who is unvaccinated and what their political affiliations are.

    What we do have is a patchwork of estimations and correlations that, taken together, paint a blurry but nevertheless grim picture of how Republican leaders spread the vaccine hesitancy that has killed so many people. We know that as of April 2022, about 318,000 people had died from COVID because they were unvaccinated, according to research from Brown University. And the close association between Republican vaccine hesitancy and higher death rates has been documented. One study estimated that by the fall of 2021, vaccine uptake accounted for 10 percent of the total difference between Republican and Democratic deaths. But that estimate has changed—and even likely grown—over time.

    Partisanship affected outcomes in the pandemic even before we had vaccines. A recent study found that from October 2020 to February 2021, the death rate in Republican-leaning counties was up to three times higher than that of Democratic-leaning counties, likely because of differences in masking and social distancing. Even when vaccines came around, these differences continued, Mauricio Santillana, an epidemiology expert at Northeastern University and a co-author of the study, told me. Follow-up research published in Lancet Regional Health Americas in October looked at deaths from April 2021 to March 2022 and found a 26 percent higher death rate in areas where voters leaned Republican. “There are subsequent and very serious [partisan] patterns with the Delta and Omicron waves, some of which can be explained by vaccination,” Bill Hanage, a co-author of the paper and an epidemiologist at Harvard, told me in an email.

    But to understand why Republicans have died at higher rates, you can’t look at vaccine status alone. Congressional districts controlled by a trifecta of Republican leaders—state governor, Senate, and House—had an 11 percent higher death rate, according to the Lancet study. A likely explanation, the authors write, could be that in the post-vaccine era, those leaders chose policies and conveyed public-health messages that made their constituents more likely to die. Although we still can’t say these decisions led to higher death rates, the association alone is jarring.

    One of the most compelling studies comes from researchers at Yale, who published their findings as a working paper in November. They link political party and excess-death rate—the percent increase in deaths above pre-COVID levels—among those registered as either Democrats or Republicans, providing a more granular view. They chose to analyze data from Florida and Ohio from before and after vaccines were available. Looking at the period before the vaccine,  researchers found a 1.6 percentage-point difference in excess death rate among Republicans and Democrats, with a higher rate among Republicans. But after vaccines became available, that gap widened dramatically to 10.4 percentage points, again with a higher Republican excess death rate. “When we compare individuals who are of the same age, who live in the same county in the same month of the pandemic, there are differences correlated with your political-party affiliation that emerge after vaccines are available,” Jacob Wallace, an assistant professor of public health at Yale who co-authored the paper, told me. “That’s a statement we can confidently make based on the study and we couldn’t before.”

    Even with this new research, it is difficult to determine just how many people died as a result of their political views. In the “excess death” study, researchers dealt only with rates of excess death, not actual death-toll numbers. Overall, excess deaths represent a small share of deaths. “On the scale of national registration for both parties,” Wallace said, “we’re talking about relatively small numbers and differences in deaths” when you look at excess death rates alone.

    The absolute number of Republican deaths is less important than the fact that they happened needlessly. Vaccines could have saved lives. And yet, the party that describes itself as pro-life campaigned against them. Democrats are not without fault, though. The Biden administration’s COVID blunders are no doubt to blame for some of the nation’s deaths. But on the whole, Democratic leaders have mostly not promoted ideas or enforced policies around COVID that actively chip away at life expectancy. It is a tragedy that the Republican push against basic lifesaving science has cut lives short and continues to do so. The partisan divide in COVID deaths, Hanage said, is just “another example of how the partisan politics of the U.S. has poisoned the well of public health.”

    What’s most concerning about all of this is that partisan disparities in death rates were also apparent before COVID. People living in Republican jurisdictions have been at a health disadvantage for more than 20 years. From 2001 to 2019, the death rate in Democratic counties decreased by 22 percent, according to a recent study; in Republican counties, it declined by only 11 percent. In the same time period, the political gap in death rates increased sixfold.

    Health outcomes have been diverging at the state level since the ’90s, Steven Woolf, an epidemiologist at Virginia Commonwealth University, told me. Woolf’s work suggests that over the decades, state policy decisions on health issues such as Medicaid, gun legislation, tobacco taxes, and, indeed, vaccines have likely had a stronger impact on state health trajectories than other factors. COVID’s high Republican death rates are not an isolated phenomenon but a continuation of this trend. As Republican-led states pushed back on lockdowns, the impact on population death rates was observed within weeks, Woolf said.

    If the issue is indeed systemic, that doesn’t bode well for the future. Other factors could explain the higher death rate in Republican-leaning places—more poverty, less education, worse socioeconomic conditions—, though Woolf said isn’t convinced that those factors aren’t related to bad state health policy too. In any case, the long-term decline of health in red states indicates that there is an ongoing problem at a high level in Republican-led places, and that something has gone awry. “If you happen to live in certain states, your chances for living a long life are going to be much higher than if you’re an American living in a different state,” Woolf said.

    Unfortunately, this trend shows no signs of breaking. The anti-science messaging that fuels such a divide is popular with Republican leaders because it plays so well with their constituents. Far-right crowds cheer for missed vaccine targets and jokes about executing scientific leaders. In an environment where partisanship trumps all—including trying to save people’s lives—such messaging is both politically effective and morally abhorrent. The data, however imperfect, demand a reckoning with the consequences of such a strategy not only during the pandemic but over the past few decades, and in the years to come. But to acknowledge how many Republicans didn’t have to die would mean giving credence to scientific and medical expertise. So long as America remains locked in a poisonous partisan battle in which science is wrongly dismissed as being associated with the left, the death toll will only rise.

    [ad_2]

    Yasmin Tayag

    Source link

  • “Tripledemic” severely strains children’s hospitals

    “Tripledemic” severely strains children’s hospitals

    [ad_1]

    “Tripledemic” severely strains children’s hospitals – CBS News


    Watch CBS News



    Pediatric hospitals are in crisis mode due to a wave of respiratory illness. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said 45 states are reporting “high” or “very high” levels of influenza. Janet Shamlian is at a children’s hospital in Tennessee with the details.

    Be the first to know

    Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.


    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Chinese Communist Party zero-covid “volunteers” have suffered from stress and anxiety, study shows

    Chinese Communist Party zero-covid “volunteers” have suffered from stress and anxiety, study shows

    [ad_1]

    Newswise — “Volunteers” tasked with enforcing the Chinese Communist Party’s zero-covid policies have suffered from stress and anxiety, a new study shows.

    Having to act as a “buffers” between disgruntled citizens and the Party’s image has led to “grassroots fatigue”, high workloads and people being put under intense pressure, researchers have found.

    These members of residents committees are responsible for monitoring and tracing sick residents and enforcing quarantines, as well as administering vaccines and achieving centrally set vaccination targets.

    Academics conducted 37 semi-structured interviews during summer 2021 in eight Shanghai estates in three districts. This included secretaries and directors from residents committees, government officials, representatives from property management companies and people who worked in party-community and social centres, as well as social workers, volunteers and residents.

    They found an increasingly pressurized grassroots infrastructure, then exhausted after 18 months of mobilizational governance, in which party secretaries are required to shoulder ever greater workloads and manage increasingly hierarchical chains of command.

    At the pandemic’s height, government officials were also sent into communities to assist with grassroots COVID management. In the second phase they went door-to-door providing information about the vaccine, alongside working in their usual party jobs. They were expected to do this voluntary work. One party worker described the work as ‘voluntary’, but when asked if she could choose not to go, she replied, ‘it seems like we cannot”.

    One residents committee secretary told researchers: “Now it seems like the public is forcing Party members onto the moral high ground in all issues. It feels like, if you are a Party member, you have to do this. If you don’t, you will be ashamed of your title of Party member.”

    The research, by Dr Catherine Owen from the University of Exeter and Xuan Qin from Fudan University, is published in the Journal of Chinese Political Science.

    Dr Owen said: “Since Spring 2022, when Chinese citizens have become increasingly dissatisfied with the on-going commitment to zero-COVID, the high costs of resource mobilisation and the hierarchical chain of command have resulted in intensified workloads and intense pressure on local cadres, leading to grassroots fatigue.

    “Following the emergence of Omicron and the hike in public dissatisfaction with the on-going lock-down policies it was the grassroots cadres that filtered out public discontents, protecting the Party’s overall image.”

    Another residents committee secretary said: “Now the secretary and the director are under too much pressure. It’s just hard work, and the psychological pressure is too great. We have indicators for every job, including vaccination, and every residential area has a ranking every day. I’m too anxious to sleep at night. Because the city has indicators for the district, the district has indicators for the streets, and the streets have indicators for the residential areas, it is very anxiety-inducing”.

    Researchers found tensions were created because higher-level authorities have asked for compulsory enforcement of policies at grassroot levels, but citizens are not formally required to comply. Local volunteers were told to meet vaccination targets, but mandatory vaccination was prohibited. This put the grassroots cadres in the impossible position of having to meet rigid targets without the authority to enforce the policy.

    Dr Owen said: “Leeway for street-level bureaucrats to adapt or customise decisions from above during periods of campaign governance is very limited. The tension between the requirement for comprehensive compliance and the basic need for personal freedom is a result of top-level design, but it is experienced and negotiated at the grassroots level.”

    [ad_2]

    University of Exeter

    Source link

  • So much for coordination: EU countries ignore pandemic lessons amid China’s COVID surge

    So much for coordination: EU countries ignore pandemic lessons amid China’s COVID surge

    [ad_1]

    Press play to listen to this article

    Voiced by artificial intelligence.

    It didn’t take long for EU countries to abandon the biggest lesson of the pandemic. 

    The principle of collective response to health threats, which underpins the European Union’s so-called Health Union, was ignored at the first sign of trouble. 

    All it took was a surge in COVID cases in China for several EU countries to go their own way and implement travel measures that the bloc’s scientific experts have criticized as “unjustified.” 

    With China abandoning its zero-COVID policy, countries such as the U.S. and Japan have tightened border controls for travelers from China. Italy was the first EU country to act, imposing mandatory testing for travelers arriving from China, leaving the EU to scramble to get ahead of another disjointed bloc-wide response that marked some of the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic.

    A meeting of the EU Security Committee on Thursday resulted in countries deciding to not take any joint measures on travel, with the Commission tweeting that “coordination of national responses to serious cross border threats to health is crucial.” But that hasn’t stopped Spain from imposing its own measures, with the health ministry announcing Friday that travelers arriving from China need to be fully vaccinated or have a negative test.

    The fear from countries like Italy, the U.S., Japan and now Spain is that China could be a breeding ground for new variants. But the current scientific opinion is that this is unlikely, given that China is way behind the curve when it comes to variants and those that are present in China won’t be able to compete with the strains circulating outside the country. 

    But that’s not stopping an EU political spat from kicking off. 

    With Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni urging the EU to take joint action, acknowledging that action by Italy alone “may not be completely effective unless it is taken by the whole EU,” she’s being joined by prominent EU parliamentarians. The head of the European Parliament’s center-right bloc, the European People’s Party’s Manfred Weber, has called for bloc-wide mandatory testing for travelers from China.

    Knee-jerk responses

    There are echoes of earlier national differences on COVID policies, “with more competition rather than coordination about what to do,” said Paul Belcher, consultant in European public health and adviser to the European Public Health Alliance. But Belcher said this was finally overcome with joint approaches on things such as vaccines and new EU structures that made decision-making processes easier. 

    These included the new EU Health Union, which is meant to ensure better health security coordination when a crisis hits. The underpinning principle? Prepare and respond collectively.

    Now, the disagreements over China “show that this default to knee-jerk national responses hasn’t entirely gone away,” said Belcher. 

    EU countries aren’t done with discussing the issue. POLITICO’s Brussels Playbook reports that the Council’s so-called integrated political crisis response mechanism — the EU’s defacto crisis forum — will take place next week.

    Patients in the lobby of the Chongqing No. 5 People’s Hospital in Chongqing | Noel Celis/AFP via Getty Images

    European Health Commissioner Stella Kyriakides also indicated to health ministers in a letter sent Thursday evening that the situation was “evolving.” She said that countries should assess their national practices regarding genomic surveillance of the virus — and to scale up capacity if needed — plus implement wastewater surveillance, including sewage water from airports.

    “If a new variant of the SARS-CoV2 virus appears — be it in China or in the EU — we must detect it early in order to be prepared to react fast,” Kyriakides said in the letter seen by POLITICO. Guidance from the Commission is also on its way.

    Where Kyriakides did express concern was with the lack of reliable epidemiological data coming out of China. The health commissioner has also reached out to her Chinese counterparts and offered public health expertise including variant-adapted EU vaccine donation.

    China’s secrecy is also a concern raised by World Health Organization Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, who has called for “more detailed information” from China.

    “In the absence of comprehensive information from #China, it is understandable that countries around the world are acting in ways that they believe may protect their populations,” he tweeted. 

    Carlo Martuscelli contributed reporting.

    [ad_2]

    Ashleigh Furlong and Suzanne Lynch

    Source link

  • Beijing clamps down on social media critics of COVID policies

    Beijing clamps down on social media critics of COVID policies

    [ad_1]

    As China’s dramatic U-turn on its zero-COVID measures continues, Beijing has shut down or suspended more than a 1,000 social media accounts in a clampdown on critics of its pandemic policies.

    Sina Weibo, a Chinese equivalent of Twitter, said it had issued temporary or permanent bans on 1,120 accounts after addressing more than 12,800 violations, including attacks on experts, scholars and medical workers, the Associated Press reported.

    China in December abandoned its strict zero-COVID policy, which included months-long lockdowns, after a wave of protests against the draconian measures spread to several cities and university campuses across the country, with demonstrators in Shanghai calling for President Xi Jinping to step down. Since then, the country has seen a new surge in cases, overwhelming Chinese health services and alarming the rest of the world.

    The anti-lockdown protests, some of which were organized through social media, were the first major show of resistance from the public under Xi’s rule. Freedom of speech is limited under China’s authoritarian government and criticism of the Communist Party often brings punishments. 

    Sina Weibo “will continue to increase the investigation and cleanup of all kinds of illegal content, and create a harmonious and friendly community environment for the majority of users,” the company said in a statement dated Thursday, according to the AP. 

    China is bracing for the outbreak to spread further as people travel en masse from the country’s cities for the Lunar New Year later this month. Nonetheless, as of January 8, travelers arriving in China will no longer face coronavirus quarantine measures.

    The skyrocketing number of patients has already led to overcrowded hospitals and empty pharmacy shelves, with people hoarding medicines like paracetamol, a common medicine to treat pain and fever.

    A forecast by health analytics company Airfinity estimated in November that China risks between 1.3 million and 2.1 million deaths by lifting its zero-COVID policy, due to low vaccination rates, the use of less effective vaccines, and a lack of hybrid immunity. 

    The EU has struggled to mount a coordinated response to COVID risk from arrivals from China since travel bans from the country were lifted. Italy was the first to break from the pack, announcing its own border control measures, with France, Germany, Spain and Sweden following suit — drawing a rebuke from Beijing.

    [ad_2]

    Susannah Savage

    Source link

  • Inoculation from the vaccine does not transfer over to blood transfusion patient

    Inoculation from the vaccine does not transfer over to blood transfusion patient

    [ad_1]

    Fact Check By:
    Newswise

    Truthfulness: False

    Claim:

    The parents of Baby Will are right to insist on unvaccinated blood. The safety of the blood supply is unknown. We have a medical community which is not trustable on anything vax related.

    Claim Publisher and Date: Steve Kirsch, among others on 2022-12-04

    In New Zealand, the parents of a baby who needs life-saving open heart surgery insist that his blood transfusion comes from donors who haven’t had the COVID-19 vaccine. Anti-vaccine campaigners have recently used this case to focus on the lingering claim that those who have not been vaccinated against COVID-19 have “clean blood” or “pure blood” and that it’s dangerous for them to receive a transfusion from someone who is vaccinated.  For example, anti-vaccine activist Steve Kirsch claims that because of COVID-19 vaccination, “The safety of the blood supply is unknown.” The parents of the baby have appeared on far-right conspiracy theorist Alex Jones’ Infowars podcast, defending their position. 

    The claim is completely false. Blood from an inoculated person cannot transfer any of the messenger RNA to the blood recipient. The vaccines that are available in the U.S. would not pose any risk of infecting either the recipient of the vaccine with the virus that causes COVID-19 or anyone who might receive a blood transfusion from that person, since none of the available vaccines use a live attenuated virus. The Association for the Advancement of Blood & Biotherapies have issued guidance to help doctors answer patient questions on the issue.

    “There is absolutely no contraindication,” says Edward Michelson – Professor and Chairman, Department of Emergency Medicine, Paul L. Foster School of Medicine (PLFSOM), Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center El Paso.

    “There is no increased risk in receiving blood from vaccinated donors. When it comes to your medical care, you should listen to your doctor, not Alex Jones,” says Dr. Brian Labus, Assistant Professor, School of Public Health at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas

     

     

    [ad_2]

    Newswise

    Source link