Category: Corona Virus Vaccine

newarkadvocate.com wants to ensure the best experience for all of our readers, so we built our site to take advantage of the latest technology, making it faster and easier to use.

Unfortunately, your browser is not supported. Please download one of these browsers for the best experience on newarkadvocate.com

See the rest here:

Knapsack: Public health and politics are an unhealthy mix - The Newark Advocate

Look - whether we like it or not, the problems that COVID-19 continues to present need to be addressed. Luckily for Idaho, the risk level is relatively low according to COVIDActNow.org but we're still seeing some cases.

According to COVIDActNow.org, Ada County is seeing about 3.4 weekly COVID admissions per 100k with Canyon County seeing exactly the same numbers.

As for the state, COVIDActNow says that Idaho has had "74 new COVID hospital admissions" over the last week.

Now, we get it - people get sick. But, what if they didn't have to? Is that naive of us to even ponder?

Don't worry, we're not here to push you to get vaccinated or anything of that sort. We're simply here to present you with some data and facts we came across.

There has been a ton of talk about legalization lately and understandably so. People on both sides have strong arguments butwhat ifone of the solutions to combating a virus like COVID-19 could be found in marijuana?

We're not saying you need to go and make the trip to Ontario to get some of that green stuff to spark up this evening... but some believethere is enough science out there to support the claim (which is what it is) that cannabis could aid in the fight against getting ill.

Let's look at what we know - what do you think?

New study shows cannabis may be key in fighting coronavirus.

Gallery Credit: Stephanie Gull

Thinking of administering vaccines to the mammals of Idaho? A proposed bill would make doing so a misdemeanor. Looks look at the animals you definitely don't want to vaccinate...

Gallery Credit: Chris Cardenas

Feeling ill? You may want to check this out...

Gallery Credit: Credit: Mateo, 103.5 KISS FM

Continue reading here:

Is Cannabis The Solution To Idaho's COVID-19 Problem? - 104.3 WOW Country

Over the last few years, the general assumption has been that a Covid infection or vaccination is likely to buy you a few months of protection. But any time we get a new variant that is especially adept at evading the immune system, like JN.1, that assumption gets thrown into question.

JN.1 currently accounts for about 93 percent of cases nationwide, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Its unusual for a single variant to make up almost all cases, but JN.1s dominance gives us a unique window into the risk of reinfection for many people.

If you had Covid when cases rose over the summer, or if you received the updated vaccine in the fall, heres what to know.

You may be vulnerable to reinfection if you were infected over the summer, when earlier variants drove an uptick in cases.

That doesnt mean youll definitely get sick. You should have some protection, for sure, said Aubree Gordon, an infectious disease epidemiologist at the University of Michigan. Immunity is an individual cocktail that stems from how many times youve been previously infected, your vaccination history, underlying medical conditions and more. People who are 65 and older, immunocompromised or who have underlying medical conditions are generally at greater risk of reinfection, said Fikadu Tafesse, a virologist at Oregon Health & Science University.

If a person is exposed to the same variant or a very similar one in the months that follow a bout of Covid, their body is often equipped to recognize and combat it before it can cause an infection. Scientists disagree on exactly how long that protection lasts, but estimates range from around two to six months.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit andlog intoyour Times account, orsubscribefor all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?Log in.

Want all of The Times?Subscribe.

More here:

Covid Variant JN.1: What to Know About Reinfection and Vaccines - The New York Times

Nearly half of those who had long covid had to take time off of work or school (about 138,000 people), and another third of them had to take reduced hours at work (more than 102,000 people), said Lindsey Whittington, the institutes data and analysis manager, and co-principal investigator.

The results come from the 2023 Colorado Health Access Survey, with questions asked in 2023 of 10,000 households, a robust sample of Coloradans.

Around one in 20 (nearly 20,000) had to leave their jobs, and a similar figure applied for disability benefits (around 24,000).

This further highlights the financial struggles of those who tested positive for COVID and experienced symptoms that made it difficult for them to work, Whittington said.

Nearly a quarter (62,000) suffered some other impact.

The survey said that Colorados labor market lost tens of thousands of workers due to long COVID.

The lingering effects of long COVID are estimated to have hit more than 300,000 Coloradans, though that figure is likely an undercount, according to the survey.

Nearly half of Coloradans 16 and older said theyve gotten a positive coronavirus test at some point since the beginning of the pandemic in 2020. That equates to more than 2.2 million people, but the report notes the number is likely much higher because many either never took a COVID-19 test or got a false negative.

The survey gave participants an option to describe lingering, life-changing symptoms. Many said they had to cope with body fatigue and brain fog, which interfered with activities and hobbies. Many still reported problems breathing, a cough, or a need for oxygen or an inhaler.

The results really didn't surprise me much, said Clarence Troutman of Denver. He had a 37-year career as a broadband technician derailed by the virus. He caught it early in the pandemic, was hospitalized and on a ventilator for a time, and ended up staying two months. His symptoms, particularly fatigue, have improved some but also persisted.

I can relate to some things on the list, mainly the career impact of it all, he said. It's truly been a life-changer.

The data mirror what researchers at CU Anschutz have seen.

I think they demonstrate what we have heard individually from patients in the clinic of the last four years and highlight the larger societal impact for long COVID, said Dr. Sarah Jolley, a researcher with CU Anshutz and medical director of the UCHealth Post-COVID Clinic.

They are part of the large national observational RECOVER studies, which include 90,000 adults and children and more than 300 clinical research sites around the U.S., Jolley said.

The one in seven figure from the Colorado Health Institutes survey seems low to Dan Stoot, a physical therapist at High Definition Physical Therapy in Englewood, who works with long COVID patients.

The impact on lives, school, and jobs is very real, said Stoot.

He added that often forgotten is the fact that these individuals no longer have active COVID and most lab tests come back as normal.

But they have very significant functional deficits that prevent them from being able to participate in their lives as they did prior to having COVID, Stoot said.

At times schools and employers write them off as if nothing is wrong, we see the same pattern in brain injury patients, he said.

See original here:

More than 300000 Coloradans hit with long COVID, creating waves in work and school, according to new survey - Colorado Public Radio

Lai, C.-C., Shih, T.-P., Ko, W.-C., Tang, H.-J. & Hsueh, P.-R. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19): The epidemic and the challenges. Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents 55, 105924 (2020).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Hu, B., Guo, H., Zhou, P. & Shi, Z.-L. Characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 19, 141154 (2021).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Pfortmueller, C. A., Spinetti, T., Urman, R. D., Luedi, M. M. & Schefold, J. C. COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome (CARDS): Current knowledge on pathophysiology and ICU treatmentA narrative review. Best Pract. Res. Clin. Anaesthesiol. 35, 351368 (2021).

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Lin, L., Lu, L., Cao, W. & Li, T. Hypothesis for potential pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2 infectiona review of immune changes in patients with viral pneumonia. Emerg. Microbes Infect. 9, 727732 (2020).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Edalat, F. et al. Delving into revolutionary SARS-CoV-2 vaccine approaches: Molecular and virological examinations; principles of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine platform. Vacunas https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vacun.2023.08.002 (2023).

Article Google Scholar

Baruah, C., Devi, P. & Sharma, D. K. Sequence analysis and structure prediction of SARS-CoV-2 accessory proteins 9b and ORF14: Evolutionary analysis indicates close relatedness to bat coronavirus. Biomed. Res. Int. 2020, 7234961 (2020).

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Kakavandi, S. et al. Structural and non-structural proteins in SARS-CoV-2: Potential aspects to COVID-19 treatment or prevention of progression of related diseases. Cell Commun. Signal. 21, 110 (2023).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Jawad, B., Adhikari, P., Podgornik, R. & Ching, W.-Y. Key interacting residues between RBD of SARS-CoV-2 and ACE2 receptor: Combination of molecular dynamics simulation and density functional calculation. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 61, 44254441 (2021).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Bai, Z., Cao, Y., Liu, W. & Li, J. The SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein and its role in viral structure, biological functions, and a potential target for drug or vaccine mitigation. Viruses 13, 1115 (2021).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Pan, P. et al. SARS-CoV-2 N protein promotes NLRP3 inflammasome activation to induce hyperinflammation. Nat. Commun. 12, 4664 (2021).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central ADS Google Scholar

Chen, K. et al. SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein interacts with RIG-I and represses RIG-mediated IFN- production. Viruses 13, 47 (2020).

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Luo, L. et al. SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein phase separates with G3BPs to disassemble stress granules and facilitate viral production. Sci. Bull. 66, 11941204 (2021).

Article CAS Google Scholar

Wang, S. et al. Targeting liquidliquid phase separation of SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein promotes innate antiviral immunity by elevating MAVS activity. Nat. Cell Biol. 23, 718732 (2021).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Li, C., He, Q., Qian, H. & Liu, J. Overview of the pathogenesis of COVID-19. Exp. Ther. Med. 22, 110 (2021).

Google Scholar

Singh, R., Letai, A. & Sarosiek, K. Regulation of apoptosis in health and disease: the balancing act of BCL-2 family proteins. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 20, 175193 (2019).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Thompson, M. R., Kaminski, J. J., Kurt-Jones, E. A. & Fitzgerald, K. A. Pattern recognition receptors and the innate immune response to viral infection. Viruses 3, 920940 (2011).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Loo, Y.-M. & Gale, M. Immune signaling by RIG-I-like receptors. Immunity 34, 680692 (2011).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Znaidia, M., Demeret, C., van der Werf, S. & Komarova, A. V. Characterization of SARS-CoV-2 evasion: Interferon pathway and therapeutic options. Viruses 14, 1247 (2022).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Kim, Y.-M. & Shin, E.-C. Type I and III interferon responses in SARS-CoV-2 infection. Exp. Mol. Med. 53, 750760 (2021).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Wang, Y. C. et al. SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein, rather than spike protein, triggers a cytokine storm originating from lung epithelial cells in patients with COVID-19. Infection https://doi.org/10.1007/s15010-023-02142-4 (2023).

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Shuaib, M. et al. Impact of the SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid 203K/204R mutations on the inflammatory immune response in COVID-19 severity. Genome Med. 15, 54 (2023).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Apte, A. & Singh, S. AlleleID: A pathogen detection and identification system. Methods Mol. Biol. 402, 329346 (2007).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Kumar, S., Stecher, G., Li, M., Knyaz, C. & Tamura, K. MEGA X: Molecular evolutionary genetics analysis across computing platforms. Mol. Biol. Evol. 35, 1547 (2018).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Ivanisenko, N. V., Seyrek, K., Kolchanov, N. A., Ivanisenko, V. A. & Lavrik, I. N. The role of death domain proteins in host response upon SARS-CoV-2 infection: Modulation of programmed cell death and translational applications. Cell Death Discov. 6, 101 (2020).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Wang, W., Chen, J., Yu, X. & Lan, H.-Y. Signaling mechanisms of SARS-CoV-2 Nucleocapsid protein in viral infection, cell death and inflammation. Int. J. Biol. Sci. 18, 4704 (2022).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Mu, J. et al. SARS-CoV-2 N protein antagonizes type I interferon signaling by suppressing phosphorylation and nuclear translocation of STAT1 and STAT2. Cell Discov. 6, 65 (2020).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Mogensen, T. H. & Paludan, S. R. Molecular pathways in virus-induced cytokine production. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 65, 131150 (2001).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Pan, P. et al. SARS-CoV-2 N protein enhances the anti-apoptotic activity of MCL-1 to promote viral replication. Signal Transduct. Target. Ther. 8, 115 (2023).

CAS Google Scholar

Liang, C., Oh, B.-H. & Jung, J. U. Novel functions of viral anti-apoptotic factors. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 13, 712 (2015).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Park, M. H. & Hong, J. T. Roles of NF-B in cancer and inflammatory diseases and their therapeutic approaches. Cells 5, 15 (2016).

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Ren, Y. et al. SARS-CoV-2 membrane glycoprotein M triggers apoptosis with the assistance of nucleocapsid protein N in cells. Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol. 11, 706252 (2021).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Wang, W. et al. SARS-CoV-2 N protein induces acute kidney injury via Smad3-dependent G1 cell cycle arrest mechanism. Adv. Sci. 9, 2103248 (2022).

Article MathSciNet CAS Google Scholar

Yuen, C.-K. et al. SARS-CoV-2 nsp13, nsp14, nsp15 and orf6 function as potent interferon antagonists. Emerg. Microbes Infect. 9, 14181428 (2020).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Neufeldt, C. J. et al. SARS-CoV-2 infection induces a pro-inflammatory cytokine response through cGAS-STING and NF-B. Commun. Biol. 5, 45 (2022).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Freitas, R. S., Crum, T. F. & Parvatiyar, K. SARS-CoV-2 spike antagonizes innate antiviral immunity by targeting interferon regulatory factor 3. Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol. 11, 1350 (2022).

Article Google Scholar

Banerjee, A. et al. Experimental and natural evidence of SARS-CoV-2-infection-induced activation of type I interferon responses. IScience 24, 102477 (2021).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central ADS Google Scholar

Shemesh, M. et al. SARS-CoV-2 suppresses IFN production mediated by NSP1, 5, 6, 15, ORF6 and ORF7b but does not suppress the effects of added interferon. PLoS Pathog. 17, e1009800 (2021).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Kasuga, Y., Zhu, B., Jang, K.-J. & Yoo, J.-S. Innate immune sensing of coronavirus and viral evasion strategies. Exp. Mol. Med. 53, 723736 (2021).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Oh, S. J. & Shin, O. S. SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein targets RIG-I-like receptor pathways to inhibit the induction of interferon response. Cells 10, 530 (2021).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Gori Savellini, G., Anichini, G., Gandolfo, C. & Cusi, M. G. SARS-CoV-2 N protein targets TRIM25-mediated RIG-I activation to suppress innate immunity. Viruses 13, 1439 (2021).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Feng, K. et al. SARS-CoV-2 NSP13 interacts with host IRF3, blocking antiviral immune responses. J. Med. Virol. 95, e28881 (2023).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Yoo, J.-S. et al. SARS-CoV-2 inhibits induction of the MHC class I pathway by targeting the STAT1-IRF1-NLRC5 axis. Nat. Commun. 12, 6602 (2021).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central ADS Google Scholar

Liu, Y., Olagnier, D. & Lin, R. Host and viral modulation of RIG-I-mediated antiviral immunity. Front. Immunol. 7, 662 (2017).

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Hasan, A. et al. Enhancement of IL-6 production induced by SARS-CoV-2 Nucleocapsid protein and Bangladeshi COVID-19 patients sera. Viruses 15, 2018 (2023).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Stepanenko, A. A. & Heng, H. H. Transient and stable vector transfection: Pitfalls, off-target effects, artifacts. Mutat. Res. Rev. Mutat. Res. 773, 91103 (2017).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Read this article:

Immunological mechanisms of the nucleocapsid protein in COVID-19 | Scientific Reports - Nature.com

The specter of COVID has haunted the globe for four years nowthe disease has killed at least seven million people worldwide. Yet the pandemics long-term effects are still hazybecause when it comes to a novel virus such as SARS-CoV-2, which causes COVID, scientists still have a lot to learn.

What we do know is that COVID is here to stayand that catching it doesnt give people permanent immunity. Four years into the pandemic, researchers and clinicians know that people are racking up multiple infections, but the long-term consequences of repeatedly getting the virus arent yet clear. Fortunately, both individuals and governments have strategies to avoid some infectionsif they use them.

However you slice it, whatever long-term health effect you look at, the risk [from reinfection] is not zero, says Ziyad Al-Aly, a clinical epidemiologist at Washington University in St. Louis. The truth is that, yes, were sick and tired of the virus, were sick and tired of the pandemicbut its still here. Its still hurting people.

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

In the U.S. alone, more than 1.1 million people have died of COVID since the pandemic began, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The agency is no longer tracking infections at the community level, but in mid-January it reported that nearly four percent of deaths nationwide were caused by COVID.

And while the winter wave of infections appears to be waning, the world missed its chance to make COVID disappear. This ugly guest isnt going to leave us any time soon, Al-Aly says. Its going to be here probably for decades.

Early on in the pandemic, scientists hoped that COVID would be the sort of disease for which vaccination or infection creates immunity that lasts for years or a lifetime. But the SARS-CoV-2 virus had other plans. Vaccination and, to a lesser degree, infection make you less vulnerable to catching the virus and having a severe case, but that protection wanes over time.

One infection does protect you against future infections but not completely, says Jamie Rylance, a physician on the World Health Organizations clinical management team. The SARS-CoV-2 virus mutates rapidly, so a persons immune system cant necessarily fully fight off a new infection, even if its been primed by a recent bout with a different strain. The same holds true for vaccinations: although initial shots and boosters help a persons immune system respond more effectively to an infection and reduce the odds of a serious COVID case, current COVID vaccines cant prevent infection completely.

Complicating things further, COVID often triggers asymptomatic infections, which helped the virus continue to spread early in the pandemic even in places where governments established relatively strict containment protocols. And four years into the pandemic, many people are testing for COVID less often and tests miss many asymptomatic cases, making them even harder to identify. So people have likely been infected more times than they know.

We dont know how often were getting reinfected because we have some protection from vaccination or even past infection, says Maria Van Kerkhove, interim director of the WHOs department of Epidemic and Pandemic Preparedness and Prevention. She doesnt think thats something to be complacent about, however. We know that when the virus enters our body, it affects multiple organ systems, she says.

The combination of evidence on COVID and the long-term impacts of other viruses paints a grim picture of what it might mean to experience regular COVID infections.

Every time you get infected [with COVID], it does harm to the body in some way, says Avindra Nath, a neurologist at the National Institutes of Health who has led research on long COVID and other postviral conditions. For example, a pulmonary infection can leave scars in the lungs or trigger blood clots. COVID may also interfere with the immune system itself, he says. Nath notes that the protective sheaths of many viruses include regions that can interfere with the immune system. Separately, one study that followed up with participants after a flu infection found that in about 30 percent of people, the immune system remained somewhat impaired two months later.

And because COVID is still relatively new, scientists realistically have no idea what happens 10, 20 or even 30 years after an infection, much less multiple bouts. What we need to be able to track is the complications of pulmonary function [and] cardiac function five years from now, 10 years from now, Van Kerkhove says.

Frustratingly, we may never have a clear sense of the damage COVID reinfections are causing, says Sunil Ahuja, an infectious disease specialist at University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio. To ascribe cause and effect is very challenging, he says of potential long-term consequences of repeated bouts with COVID. During the span of time between infections, theyve also had many other things happen to them, too.

Some viruses can hide out in the body and emerge decades after the initial infection to cause new problems. The virus that causes chicken pox, for example, can trigger shingles many years later. And scientists have recently learned that infection with the common Epstein-Barr virus seriously increases the risk of a person developing the autoimmune disorder multiple sclerosis. I dont think weve seen the end of this movie yet, Al-Aly says of SARS-CoV-2s long-term impacts.

Moreover, COVID has already shown its potential to cause lasting harm in the form of long COVID, which can include debilitating fatigue, breathing problems, difficulty thinking, digestive issues and a wide variety of other symptoms. As of mid-2023 long COVID impacted 11 percent of Americans reporting a previous infectiona notable decline from the previous year. Scientists are still working to determine what triggers long COVID, but its clear that people can develop the condition after several infections, not just their first encounter with COVID.

Each time that you have COVID, you have a chance of having post-COVID condition afterwards, Rylance says, though he adds that its still fairly unpredictable at an individual level.

While scientists desperately want more data to better understand the ways COVID could shape a persons health for years to come, the hints available now are worrying, experts say. Theres a major concern here that people who are getting repeated infections [could] have long-term consequences, Nath says. And the data that is coming out suggests that possibility.

Although COVID is now endemic and widely circulating, people and societies can both work to minimize the odds of infection, Van Kerkhove and Al-Aly say. For individuals, getting vaccinated and masking in public and crowded spaces remain the most effective strategies for avoiding COVID or reducing the severity of an infection. Unfortunately, just one in five adults in the U.S. had gotten the updated 2023-2024 COVID vaccine as of mid-January, according to the CDCeven though initial analysis of the vaccines shows that they are about 50 percent effective against infections, including by the latest subvariant, known as JN.1. Testing for COVID when feeling unwell and using antiviral medications such as Paxlovid also remain vital tools for reducing disease risk.

WHOs Van Kerkhove says that government action is key, including ensuring that masks, vaccines, tests and treatments are available and affordable. But she also called on governments to take bolder steps such as strengthening ventilation requirements in buildings and supporting the development of better vaccines, including an oral or nasal vaccine that could more effectively prevent against COVID in the respiratory tract, where the virus enters a persons body. In addition, Al-Aly says, we need a longer-lasting vaccine that would offer meaningful protection for several years, so people would not need to get vaccinated every year.

Its not beyond the might of U.S. medicine to really develop the technology and to deliver those solutions, Al-Aly says of such next-generation vaccines. He says the investment is particularly important now that we understand that COVID is not a problem we will dispense with quicklyand now that concerns are mounting about the damage of repeated infections.

Those are going to be the long-term, sustainable solutions, Al-Aly says. It isnt sustainable to ask people to mask for the next 100 years.

See the original post here:

How Risky Are Repeat COVID Infections? What We Know So Far - Scientific American

California and Oregonrecently became the first states to break with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on how long a person infected with COVID-19 should isolate, saying that people who test positive are no longer expected to isolate for at least five days and those without symptoms don't have to isolate at all.The CDC is considering a shift in its COVID-19 isolation guidance to say that people no longer need to isolate once they have been fever-free for 24 hours and their symptoms are mild or improving, according to theWashington Post.In a statement Tuesday, the agency told CNN that there were no changes to announce at this time."We will continue to make decisions based on the best evidence and science to keep communities healthy and safe," spokesperson Dave Daigle said.Wastewater surveillancedatapublished by the CDC suggests that COVID-19 is still circulating at high levels across the U.S., and experts emphasize that until any new recommendations are announced, most people should continue to follow the CDC's current guidance: isolating for at least five days after you test positive for COVID-19 then wearing a mask until at least 10 days after a positive test. If you're not fever-free for 24-hours without taking fever-reducing medications at day five, you should isolate longer.Some states shift isolation guidelinesEven if the CDC changes its guidance,statehealth departments can still implement their own.People who test positive for COVID-19 in California and Oregon are no longer expected to isolate for a set period of time. Those without symptoms don't have to isolate at all, and those with symptoms can return to school or work once their symptoms are improving and they've been fever-free for at least 24 hours, according to the state policies."Most school systems and most places of employment will go along with whatever the state is recommending," said Dr. Peter Hotez, who co-directs the Center for Vaccine Development at Texas Children's Hospital. "You're more or less obligated for to follow that guideline."Health officials in those states say the changes to their isolation guidelines reflect policy that's evolving along with the pandemic. Both California and Oregon still encourage people who test positive to wear a mask around others for at least 10 days.Dr. Carlos del Rio, a professor of medicine in the Division of Infectious Diseases at the Emory University School of Medicine, said the CDC may take a similar step as evidence shows infections becoming milder.The CDC notes that "infections arecausing severe disease less frequentlythan earlier in the pandemic."Changes to CDC's guidance could bring COVID-19 in line with other respiratory viruses, such as flu and RSV."We need to start ending COVID exceptionalism and incorporate COVID into our respiratory viruses," del Rio said. "At the end of the day, there's going to be a similar approach to all these viruses."Some infectious disease experts also believe that a change would better align with how many Americans are already treating the virus."Currently, many of our citizens are no longer testing for COVID-19 and are not actively isolating," said Dr. Clay Marsh, West Virginia's COVID-19 czar. "With the caveat of the risk of long COVID and the potential for mortality in the elderly and immunocompromised, the future guidance by CDC meets the standard we are seeing."West Virginia currently recommends that people who've tested positive for COVID isolate for at least five days, according to the state's Department of Health.Hotez isn't a fan of ending isolation for people who don't have symptoms, particularly because COVID-19 is generally more severe than the flu and because asymptomatic COVID-19 cases are more common.He says he would like to see the CDC recommend using a home test after you have gone 24 hours without a fever."If you have an antigen test and if you're negative, then you can leave isolation," he proposed. If you test positive, you would keep isolating until you got a negative test."Home antigen tests give you an idea of how much virus you're actually shedding," he said. "That's the kind of thing the CDC needs to look at."But in order to make a proper recommendation, Hotez says, the CDC would need to gather data on how many people test positive for COVID-19 after a 24-hour period with no fever.Experts say COVID-19 vaccinations which are helpful in preventing the spread of the virus as well as severe illness or death could also lessen the need for isolation if they were utilized more."You're isolating because you're worried that you're shedding virus," Hotez said. "People forget that vaccinations can have a big effect on reducing the amount of virus shedding."The latest COVID-19 shot was rolled out in September. It's a monovalent vaccine formulated to target newer variants of the virus that are currently circulating.But not enough Americans are getting the updated vaccine, Hotez and del Rio say, exposing older adults and people with weakened immune systems to severe infection."I think we really need to focus on what we can do to prevent cases and what we can do to prevent severe disease," del Rio said.What's the CDC's current guidance?For now, the agency continues torecommendisolating for at least five days after you test positive for COVID-19, while keeping a distance from other people in your household. This means staying home from school and work for about a week.If your symptoms are improving and you are fever-free for 24 hours without taking any fever-reducing medications like acetaminophen, you can end isolation on day five, the CDC says. If your symptoms are not improving by day five, continue to isolate until you feel better, and your fever is gone.After ending isolation, you should continue to wear a high-quality mask around other people until at least 10 days after the positive test, according to the agency. You may stop wearing a mask earlier if you have two negative tests 48 hours apart.If you had shortness of breath or trouble breathing,isolate for at least 10 days, the CDC says. The same applies to people who were hospitalized or who have a weakened immune system; these patients should talk to their doctor before ending isolation.CNN's Jamie Gumbrecht, Brenda Goodman, Deidre McPhillips and Meg Tirrell contributed to this report.

California and Oregonrecently became the first states to break with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on how long a person infected with COVID-19 should isolate, saying that people who test positive are no longer expected to isolate for at least five days and those without symptoms don't have to isolate at all.

The CDC is considering a shift in its COVID-19 isolation guidance to say that people no longer need to isolate once they have been fever-free for 24 hours and their symptoms are mild or improving, according to theWashington Post.

In a statement Tuesday, the agency told CNN that there were no changes to announce at this time.

"We will continue to make decisions based on the best evidence and science to keep communities healthy and safe," spokesperson Dave Daigle said.

Wastewater surveillancedatapublished by the CDC suggests that COVID-19 is still circulating at high levels across the U.S., and experts emphasize that until any new recommendations are announced, most people should continue to follow the CDC's current guidance: isolating for at least five days after you test positive for COVID-19 then wearing a mask until at least 10 days after a positive test. If you're not fever-free for 24-hours without taking fever-reducing medications at day five, you should isolate longer.

Even if the CDC changes its guidance,statehealth departments can still implement their own.

People who test positive for COVID-19 in California and Oregon are no longer expected to isolate for a set period of time. Those without symptoms don't have to isolate at all, and those with symptoms can return to school or work once their symptoms are improving and they've been fever-free for at least 24 hours, according to the state policies.

"Most school systems and most places of employment will go along with whatever the state is recommending," said Dr. Peter Hotez, who co-directs the Center for Vaccine Development at Texas Children's Hospital. "You're more or less obligated for to follow that guideline."

Health officials in those states say the changes to their isolation guidelines reflect policy that's evolving along with the pandemic. Both California and Oregon still encourage people who test positive to wear a mask around others for at least 10 days.

Dr. Carlos del Rio, a professor of medicine in the Division of Infectious Diseases at the Emory University School of Medicine, said the CDC may take a similar step as evidence shows infections becoming milder.

The CDC notes that "infections arecausing severe disease less frequentlythan earlier in the pandemic."

Changes to CDC's guidance could bring COVID-19 in line with other respiratory viruses, such as flu and RSV.

"We need to start ending COVID exceptionalism and incorporate COVID into our respiratory viruses," del Rio said. "At the end of the day, there's going to be a similar approach to all these viruses."

Some infectious disease experts also believe that a change would better align with how many Americans are already treating the virus.

"Currently, many of our citizens are no longer testing for COVID-19 and are not actively isolating," said Dr. Clay Marsh, West Virginia's COVID-19 czar. "With the caveat of the risk of long COVID and the potential for mortality in the elderly and immunocompromised, the future guidance by CDC meets the standard we are seeing."

West Virginia currently recommends that people who've tested positive for COVID isolate for at least five days, according to the state's Department of Health.

Hotez isn't a fan of ending isolation for people who don't have symptoms, particularly because COVID-19 is generally more severe than the flu and because asymptomatic COVID-19 cases are more common.

He says he would like to see the CDC recommend using a home test after you have gone 24 hours without a fever.

"If you have an antigen test and if you're negative, then you can leave isolation," he proposed. If you test positive, you would keep isolating until you got a negative test.

"Home antigen tests give you an idea of how much virus you're actually shedding," he said. "That's the kind of thing the CDC needs to look at."

But in order to make a proper recommendation, Hotez says, the CDC would need to gather data on how many people test positive for COVID-19 after a 24-hour period with no fever.

Experts say COVID-19 vaccinations which are helpful in preventing the spread of the virus as well as severe illness or death could also lessen the need for isolation if they were utilized more.

"You're isolating because you're worried that you're shedding virus," Hotez said. "People forget that vaccinations can have a big effect on reducing the amount of virus shedding."

The latest COVID-19 shot was rolled out in September. It's a monovalent vaccine formulated to target newer variants of the virus that are currently circulating.

But not enough Americans are getting the updated vaccine, Hotez and del Rio say, exposing older adults and people with weakened immune systems to severe infection.

"I think we really need to focus on what we can do to prevent cases and what we can do to prevent severe disease," del Rio said.

For now, the agency continues torecommendisolating for at least five days after you test positive for COVID-19, while keeping a distance from other people in your household. This means staying home from school and work for about a week.

If your symptoms are improving and you are fever-free for 24 hours without taking any fever-reducing medications like acetaminophen, you can end isolation on day five, the CDC says. If your symptoms are not improving by day five, continue to isolate until you feel better, and your fever is gone.

After ending isolation, you should continue to wear a high-quality mask around other people until at least 10 days after the positive test, according to the agency. You may stop wearing a mask earlier if you have two negative tests 48 hours apart.

If you had shortness of breath or trouble breathing,isolate for at least 10 days, the CDC says. The same applies to people who were hospitalized or who have a weakened immune system; these patients should talk to their doctor before ending isolation.

CNN's Jamie Gumbrecht, Brenda Goodman, Deidre McPhillips and Meg Tirrell contributed to this report.

See more here:

CDC isolation guidelines for COVID-19 haven't changed yet. Here's what you need to know - WAPT Jackson

A single-centerstudy conducted at a free community testing site in Maryland suggests that patient-administered BinaxNow COVID-19 rapid antigen tests (RATs) have similar accuracy as those performed by a clinician, although the results can be misinterpreted or falsely negative.

Researchers from the Baltimore Convention Center Field Hospital and Johns Hopkins University and their collaborators compared the sensitivity and specificity of Abbott's BinaxNOW home RAT with those administered by a healthcare provider and reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from February to July 2022, a period of Omicron variant predominance.

The median age of the 953 participants was 34 years, 60.6% were women, 58.6% were White, 98.2% were English-speaking, and 34.1% had at least one COVID-19 symptom. Hospital staff administered both a RAT and an RT-PCR test to participants, who then self-tested with a RAT, the results of which were both self-reported and reviewed by the researchers.

"The public and clinicians continue to use the results from self-tests, assuming their accuracy is comparable to that of clinician-performed tests," the study authors noted. "However, self-tests might exhibit a higher rate of false negatives due to inadequate sampling or false positives due to inadvertent sample contamination by untrained individuals or from misinterpretation of visual results."

The findings were published yesterday in Microbiology Spectrum.

RT-PCR determined that 14.9% of the 953 participants had COVID-19. The sensitivity and specificity of the self- and clinician-administered RATs were similar (83.9% vs 88.2% and 99.8% vs 99.6%, respectively). For reference, the World Health Organization's minimum test sensitivity benchmark for people with symptoms is 80%. Age-, race-, and symptom-based subgroup comparisons produced comparable results.

Sensitivity is the probability that a test correctly identifies all positive cases; the higher the sensitivity, the lower the likelihood of false-negative results. Specificity, on the other hand, is the ability to identify those who don't have a condition; the higher the specificity, the lower the risk of false-positive results.

Of the 177 positive COVID-19 tests, participants and staff accurately identified 145 (81.9%) as positive on RAT. Nine infections (5.1%) were missed by participants (false-negatives) but correctly identified by staff. Twenty-two cases (12.4%) were missed by both participants and staff. In one case (0.5%), staff incorrectly interpreted the result as negative after the participant correctly interpreted it as positive.

Interpretations of RT-PCRpositive results showed 94.4% interrater agreement between participants and staff. A total of 776 participants tested negative on RT-PCR. Interpretations of RT-PCRnegative results demonstrated 99.4% interrater agreement.

Previous studies of RATs, including BinaxNow, by different research groups have had a range of results,leading to concerns about their limitations and the false reassurance they can provide.For example, a 2021 study by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention concluded that, compared with RT-PCR, BinaxNOW had a sensitivity of 64.2% for samples from people with symptoms and 35.8% for asymptomatic people, with a specificity of nearly 100%.

Another study, published in 2022 by Naval Medical Research Center researchers, found a sensitivity and specificity of BinaxNOW of 69.7% and 71.0%, respectively.

"Given that PCR-positive patients, who were missed by self-interpretation but caught by staff re-reads, had higher CT counts [an indication of lower viral load] than those identified as positive by both, and lower than those missed by both, it is even more critical to perform self-tests immediately at symptom onset or as early as possible," the study authors wrote.

The researchers said that the results have significant implications for clinicians prescribing COVID-19 treatment based on patient-reported findings. They added that home RATs enable more timely testing after virus exposure or symptom onset, which may promote early detection and therefore aid in disease control.

View post:

Researchers report COVID home tests as accurate as the same tests given by a clinician - University of Minnesota Twin Cities

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is considering dropping the COVID-19 isolation recommendations for the first time since 2021, which may shorten the isolation period guidance for all Americans.

Under the new guidelines, those who test positive for COVID-19 would use clinical symptoms to decide when to end isolation rather than staying home for five days, per a report fromThe Washington Post.Those infected would no longer need to stay home if they have been fever-free for at least 24 hours without the help of medication and their symptoms are mild and improving.

The report was based on agency officials who agreed to speak on the condition of anonymity, but other experts seem to agree with the shift in direction, which aligns with guidance on avoiding the spread of flu and RSV.

Last month, Californiashortened its five-day isolation recommendation, andOregon did the samelast May. California continues to recommend that people with COVID-19 wear masks indoors when around others for 10 days after they test positive, even if they dont have symptoms.

The updated CDC guidance like that issued by Oregon and California reflects a harm reduction approach to a virus that is endemic and for which there are more tools than any other respiratory virus, saysinfectious disease physicianAmesh A. Adalja, MD, a Senior Scholar at Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security. Increasingly, it has been clear that COVID guidance would need to be integrated with other respiratory viruses and not singled out in perpetuity.

However, if youre immunocompromised, you may be particularly concerned about the risk of exposure and the potential for subsequent long COVID.I need resources and support for staying COVID-free, patient Tracey R. told the Global Healthy Living Foundation recently. Everyone should avoid getting repeatedly infected.

People with underlying health conditions like autoimmune disease and those who have experienced severe COVID-19 are among the groups at higher risk for long COVID, per theNational Institutes of Health.

Long COVID has completely upended my life, another patient, Shivuan M., told the Global Healthy Living Foundation. Most resources and support groups are more generalized and dont address the specific ways autoimmune diseases and inflammatory arthritis complicate the situation.

Currently, about 20,000 people are still hospitalized with COVID-19 every week in the United States and over 2,000 are dying weekly, per aCDC report.

Although the new guidelines havent officially been released by the CDC yet, they dont appear to have provisions for those with compromised immune systems.For the severely immunocompromised, it will remain important for them to stay up to date with vaccines, have a low threshold to obtain antivirals, and wear masks in high-risk indoor situations, says Dr. Adalja.

However, in terms of the general spread of COVID-19, experts like Dr. Adalja are not concerned about the potential impact.I dont think this guidance change will have a major impact on COVIDs impact, as many countries have already adopted it, as have California and Oregon, adds Dr. Adalja.

The CDC is expected to release the guidance in April for public feedback, which the White House will have yet to sign off on.

Join GHLFs free COVID-19 Support Program for chronic illness patients and their families. We will be providing updated information, community support, and other resources tailored specifically to your health and safety. Join now.

Read the original here:

New CDC Guidelines May Lower COVID-19 Isolation Period to Just One Day - CreakyJoints

More Videos

Next up in 5

Example video title will go here for this video

Next up in 5

Example video title will go here for this video

Multnomah County held a free catch-up clinic for children still needing their immunizations at David Douglas High School.

Author: kgw.com

Published: 6:17 PM PST February 17, 2024

Updated: 6:17 PM PST February 17, 2024

View original post here:

Oregon Health Authority stresses though COVID-19 cases are 'coming down,' there's still need for vaccinations - KGW.com