Category: Corona Virus

The average life expectancy for Americans fell in 2020 and 2021 to mark the biggest two-year decline in almost a century as the pandemic raged, according to a new government report.

The average American lost about three years of anticipated life span in the period to an average age of 76, compared with an average of 79 in 2019, according to the report from the National Center for Health Statistics.The last time life expectancy fell that much was in the early 1940s, during World War II.

The decline was worst for Native Americans and Alaska Natives. For that group, average life expectancy shrank by four years in 2020 alone, and it has fallen by more than six years to 65 over the course of the pandemic. Thats equal to the figure for all Americans in 1944, asthe New York Times reported.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said COVID was to blame for about half of the decline in 2021, which came as vaccinations became widely available but as new variants emerged that proved far more infectious than the original one. But drug overdoses, heart disease, suicide and chronic liver disease were also factors.

As expected, the Food and Drug Administration on Wednesday authorized an update to COVID booster doses that target the now-dominant omicron strain, the Associated Press reported. Targeted shots developed by Pfizer PFE, -1.35% with German partner BioNTech BNTX, -1.66% and by Moderna MRNA, -2.69% could be available in the coming days.

Youll see me at the front of the line, FDA vaccine chief Dr. Peter Marks told the Associated Press shortly before his agency cleared the new doses.

Read now:Dr. Faucis advice has always been simple and on the mark

Until now, COVID-19 vaccines have targeted the original coronavirus strain, even as wildly different mutants emerged. The new U.S. boosters are combination, or bivalent, shots. They contain half that original vaccine recipe and half protection against the omicron subvariants BA.4 and BA.5, which are considered the most contagious yet.

The news comes as U.S. known cases of COVID are continuing to ease, although the true tally is likely higher given how many people are testing at home, where the data are not being collected.

The daily average for new cases stood at 90,428 on Tuesday, according toa New York Times tracker, down 10% from two weeks ago. Cases are currently rising in 11 states, namely Rhode Island, Tennessee, Louisiana, Alabama, South Dakota, Maine, Arkansas, West Virginia, Oklahoma, Connecticut and Illinois, and are falling everywhere else.

The daily average for hospitalizations was down 10% at 37,770, while the daily average for deaths is up 1% to 473.

Coronavirus Update:MarketWatchs 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:

Goldman Sachs GS, +0.47% will lift all COVID protocols that have kept some workers away as it pushes all employees to return to the office five days a week after Labor Day, the New York Post reported. In a memo sent Tuesday obtained by the newspaper, Goldman Sachs told workers it will no longer require vaccines, COVID testing or masks a signal it wont accept excuses for employees who claimed COVID as a reason for working from home. There is significantly less risk of severe illness, the memo stated. In line with [the CDCs] updated protocols, if you have not been coming in to the office, please speak with your manager to ensure that you understand and adhere to your divisions current return to office expectations. The official memo comes just days beforethe bank expects all employeesto return to its offices five days a week, sources add.

French tourism has recovered and revenues are above pre-pandemic levels, the AP reported, citing government estimates released this week. Crowds packed Paris landmarks and Riviera beaches, thanks notably to an influx ofAmericans benefiting from the weak euro, but also British and other European visitors reveling in the end of pandemic restrictions. According to the governments preliminary estimates, tourism spending in France this summer was 10% higher than in 2019, based on data from bank-card use and lodging and restaurant revenues.

Chinas southern city of Guangzhou imposed fresh COVID curbs on Wednesday, joining the tech hub of Shenzhen, fueling uncertainty over commerce and daily life in two of the regions most economically vibrant metropolises, Reuters reported. Chinas so-called dynamic COVID-zero policy makes it an outlier as other countries gradually do away with curbs, despite the cost to the worlds second largest economy, which already faces slower growth. Capital Economics estimates 41 cities, responsible for 32% of Chinas GDP, are grappling with outbreaks the highest number since April.

See: China think tank argues zero COVID policy needs to change to extricate economy from peril

Cyprus has lifted its face-mask mandate in all indoor areas, the AP reported. The island nations top health official said epidemiological data amid the coronavirus pandemic have significantly improved. Health Minister Michalis Hadjipantela told reporters after a cabinet meeting that the mask rule still applies to hospitals, nursing homes, clinics, pharmacies and public transport. Its recommended that those with chronic ailments continue using face coverings.

Heres what the numbers say

The global tally of confirmed cases of COVID-19 topped 602.5 million on Monday, while the death toll rose above 6.49 million,according to data aggregated by Johns Hopkins University.

The U.S. leads the world with 94.4 million cases and 1,045,088 fatalities.

TheCenters for Disease Control and Preventions trackershows that 223.9 million people living in the U.S. are fully vaccinated, equal to 67.4% of the total population. But just 108.5 million have had a booster, equal to 48.5% of the vaccinated population, and just 21.8 million of the people 50 years old and over who are eligible for a second booster have had one, equal to 33.7% of those who had a first booster.

Read more:

U.S. life expectancy has seen its biggest two-year decline during COVID in almost a century, report finds - MarketWatch

The updated booster shots from Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna target the version of the virus that is currently circulating.

Anyone who has been fully vaccinated is eligible, whether or not they received booster shots, but their last shot must have been at least two months ago.

That means at least two doses of Pfizer, Moderna or Novavax, or one of Johnson & Johnson.

See the article here:

What to Know: Updated Covid Boosters - The New York Times

A vaccine recently created for monkeys offered equal protection against most COVID-19 variants, including Omicronin addition to the original SARS virus from the early 2000s.

The vaccine, developed by researchers at the Scripps Research Institute in California, is protein-based like traditional flu vaccines, as opposed to mRNA-based COVID vaccines like those from Pfizer and Moderna. It was administered in a two-dose series to rhesus macaquesa type of old world monkeyin hopes of immunizing them against COVID-19, according to an article published earlier this month in Science Translational Medicine.

The results surprised researchers, who found that the vaccine was equally effective against most COVID variants of concern and, in some cases, highly effective against Omicron subvariants. It also provided protection against SARS, a coronavirus that appeared in China in 2002 before spreading to four other countries. SARS infected more than 8,000, killing about 10% and devastating regional economies.

The robust immune response of the rhesus monkeys is fascinating, Raiees Andrabi, an investigator in the institutes department of immunology and microbiology, told Fortune. And it prompts the question of whether scientists can engineer a vaccine that elicits a similar response in humans.

The robust antibody response of the studys monkeys stands in contrast to how first-generation COVID vaccines have protected humans. The original COVID vaccines typically dont defend against Omicron subvariants until a first booster dose.

Even then, such protection is typically limited to severe disease and death. Those shortcomings have prompted Pfizer and Moderna to recently tweak their formulas in a bid to better protect against infection from now-dominant variants BA.4 and BA.5.

The results of the Scripps trial are great news for rhesus macaques, no doubt. The good news for humans is that the trial alerted scientists to a region on COVID-19s spike protein that, if targeted by a vaccine, is more likely to lead to the takedown of all SARS viruses a vaccinated person encounters.

Creating a vaccine that works similarly in humans would be a challenge owing to relatively small but important genetic differences, but this is not to say its impossible, Andrabi said.

While Andrabis team awaits the results of related studies, it will continue to work on a pan-betacoronavirus vaccine that would provide protection against a broader family of coronaviruses. The family includes SARS; COVID-19; viruses like OC43 that typically cause common colds; and MERS, or Middle East Respiratory Syndrome, which was first identified in Saudi Arabia in 2012. MERS spread to nearly 30 countries, infecting about 2,500 and killing more than a third.

Sign up for theFortune Features email list so you dont miss our biggest features, exclusive interviews, and investigations.

View post:

Monkeys could hold the key to a future vaccine for all COVID variants and the original SARS virus - Fortune

German Health Minister Karl Lauterbach speaks during a news conference, in Berlin, Germany, August 24, 2022. REUTERS/Michele Tantussi

Register

BERLIN, Aug 24 (Reuters) - German Health Minister Karl Lauterbach said on Wednesday he expects a wave of COVID-19 infections this autumn but ruled out further lockdowns or school closures.

He made the comments after a cabinet meeting during which the government approved stricter mask rules on trains and planes from October.

Register

Writing by Rachel More; editing by Matthias Williams

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Visit link:

German health minister expects renewed coronavirus wave in autumn - Reuters

Good evening. Im Karen Kaplan, and its Tuesday, Aug. 23. Heres the latest on whats happening with the coronavirus in California and beyond.

Newsletter

Get our free Coronavirus Today newsletter

Sign up for the latest news, best stories and what they mean for you, plus answers to your questions.

Enter email address

Sign Me Up

You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.

Perhaps there have been points during the pandemic when youve felt let down by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Maybe it was back in the early days of the outbreak when the CDC used a faulty reagent in its initial batch of coronavirus test kits, leaving the country in the dark about how widely the virus had spread.

Maybe it was when the agency did a 180 on face masks, suddenly recommending them after insisting for weeks they were only necessary in healthcare settings.

Maybe it was when the CDC finally acknowledged that the coronavirus spreads mainly through the air but declined to pair that update with any new guidance on how to stay safe.

Or maybe it was when you learned that being fully vaccinated against COVID-19 didnt necessarily mean you were up to date with your shots.

Sadly, there are many options to choose from. And theyre not limited to COVID-19 the early response to the monkeypox outbreak hasnt exactly vindicated the agency.

You might have some harsh words for the CDC. So does its director, Dr. Rochelle Walensky.

To be frank, we are responsible for some pretty dramatic, pretty public mistakes, Walensky said in a video circulated last week to the CDCs 11,000 employees.

Those mistakes cant be written off as reasonable reactions to a never-before-seen threat, she added. Nor can they be blamed on political interference from either the Trump or Biden White House.

Walenskys sobering assessment followed a fact-finding mission that included interviews with more than 100 public health experts from both inside and outside the CDC, my colleague Melissa Healy reports.

An honest and unbiased read of our recent history will yield the same conclusion, Walensky said. It is time for CDC to change.

Dr. Rochelle Walensky, director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, at the agencys headquarters in Atlanta.

(Brynn Anderson / Associated Press)

At the top of her list is improving its ability to explain a health threat to the public and doing so early, often and authoritatively.

To succeed, CDC researchers will need to streamline the way they gather data from state and county public health agencies and large healthcare organizations. Then theyll need to digest that data in short order so they can explain it to the public and use it to justify any guidance they have to offer.

The faster the CDCs public health pronouncements are issued and the easier they are to understand, the more compliance it can expect, Walensky said. The agency will also do a better job of communicating with other government agencies so they dont contradict one another and call everyones credibility into question.

All this hinges on better cooperation with local health agencies, which arent required to share data with the CDC if they dont want to. At times during the pandemic, Florida, Texas and a variety of other states have declined to let the CDC know how many of their residents were getting vaccinated, how many were infected, and how many had died of COVID-19. Their omissions forced the agency to make assumptions about the missing data and proceed with potentially significant blind spots.

A bill introduced in Congress last month the Improving DATA in Public Health Act could help the CDC overcome those obstacles. Congress could also help by giving the CDC more authority to shift its budgets around during a health emergency, and by making up for years of reduced funding that left public health agencies ill-equipped to respond to COVID-19.

Health departments could have gotten an earlier jump on monitoring the coronavirus shenanigans if they had already established strong wastewater surveillance systems and set up labs to conduct routine genetic sequencing of viral specimens. Now theyre in place, but the CDC needs extra money to maintain and improve them.

An agency-wide reboot of its capabilities and culture sure sounds like a tall order. But the CDC has done difficult things in the past. In its first decade alone it eliminated three major threats to Americans health: smallpox, malaria and polio.

Sure they can reform themselves, said Lorien Abroms, who teaches public health communications strategy at George Washington University. They came from a place of greatness. We used to lead the world on epidemiological intelligence. I definitely think we can go back to that.

California cases and deaths as of 3:28 p.m. on Tuesday:

Track Californias coronavirus spread and vaccination efforts including the latest numbers and how they break down with our graphics.

After the initial Omicron surge this winter pushed the number of coronavirus infections to record heights, the CDC made a practical decision about contact tracing: It was no longer a feasible way to keep case numbers in check.

Universal case investigation and contact tracing are not recommended for COVID-19, the agency said on its website. Instead, it advised local health departments to prioritize high-risk settings, such as nursing homes and prisons.

The track record of contact tracers in Los Angeles County shows why this advice came about. In January, there were weeks when fewer than 10% of the people who were supposed to be interviewed actually were.

Theyve done a little better during the second Omicron wave this spring and summer, reaching close to 30% of the people assigned to them. But even when they got through, their interviews rarely led to follow-up calls to notify others that they might have been exposed, my colleague Emily Alpert Reyes reports.

The contact tracers low success rate wasnt necessarily their fault. In July, there were only about 100 staffers available to reach the thousands of residents who became newly infected each day. Earlier in the pandemic, that work was spread among roughly 2,800 people.

Low staffing wasnt the only hindrance. Omicron and its subvariants have shorter incubation times than their predecessors, so the window for reaching exposed people before they become spreaders is smaller.

Thanks to general pandemic burnout, many residents arent inclined to respond to the calls, emails and text messages they get from contact tracers. (The L.A. County Department of Public Health is trying to overcome this apathy by offering gift cards to those who get in touch.)

And lets not forget that a large proportion of infections are never reported to the county in the first place.

When you put it all together, it becomes clear that the odds of making a significant dent in the spread of COVID-19 are stacked against contact tracers.

Thats certainly the view of Adriane Casalotti, chief of government and public affairs with the National Assn. of County and City Health Officials.

Contact tracing is not really making the impact that it did at one point, Casalotti told Alpert Reyes. With communities broadly reopened, its very difficult to say how many contacts you had, and even if you can say that, you may have 20 or 30 or 40 contacts. ... The logistics of actually contacting those people is very difficult. Theres not enough time in the day.

Things were different in March 2020, when the number of infections due to the novel coronavirus was still small enough for epidemiologists to aim for containment. After the outbreak became too big to control, contact tracers were still able to slow things down and buy people time until COVID-19 vaccines became available, said Andrew Noymer, an epidemiologist and demographer at UC Irvine who studies infectious diseases.

But at this stage of the pandemic, when so many people are taking so few precautions to avoid the coronavirus, I just dont see that were going to contact trace our way out of this, he said.

Other localities including New York City and Washington, D.C. have recognized this and wound down their contact-tracing efforts. The CDC reiterated its stance that contact tracing is only worthwhile in high-risk settings when it streamlined its COVID-19 guidance this month.

The L.A. County Department of Public Health has a team dedicated to contact tracing in nursing homes and correctional facilities. But its not ready to end contact tracing for the general public, especially when it comes to cases involving elderly residents and people in neighborhoods where transmission levels are particularly high.

Maureen Calderon, a contact tracer for the L.A. County Department of Public Health, works from home in Glendora.

(Madeleine Hordinski/Los Angeles Times)

That decision makes sense to some experts.

Dismantling the infrastructure for being able to effectively do contact tracing does not serve public health at all, said Dr. George Rutherford, an epidemiologist at UC San Francisco.

Preventing infections is only one benefit of contact tracing, he noted. Learning that youve been exposed could result in earlier testing and if warranted quicker treatment with Paxlovid, a drug that works best when started early.

Dr. John Swartzberg, a clinical professor emeritus at UC Berkeley School of Public Health, is also a fan.

Any contact tracing is good contact tracing as long as the resources are not being taken from other things that are more effective, he said.

Its value will rise when case numbers fall and contact tracers wont be so overwhelmed, he added. The easiest way to make sure theyll be in place at that point is to not get rid of them in the first place.

See the latest on Californias vaccination progress with our tracker.

America, Id like to introduce you to the Omicron subvariant called BA.4.6. Its not causing much mischief in the U.S. at least not yet but scientists are watching it closely to see if it stays that way.

The CDC estimates that BA.4.6 accounts for 6.3% of the coronavirus specimens now in circulation in the U.S. Thats up slightly from 5.6% last week and 5% the week before. (BA.5 still dominates, with 89% of the coronavirus market share.)

BA.4.6 is less prevalent in California and other Western states, making up just 2.4% of samples sequenced in the two federal regions that encompass the Pacific coast. Its even less common in Los Angeles County, accounting for about 1.5% of cases here.

But it has a much bigger footprint in the region that includes Iowa, Kansas, Missouri and Nebraska, making up nearly 16% of cases in those states last week. That suggests BA.4.6 may have the potential to overtake BA.5 and perhaps spark a new wave of infections, experts said.

Past outbreaks in California have hit public transit employees harder than other workers, a new study shows. From the start of the pandemic up through May of this year, there were 24.7 coronavirus outbreaks for every 1,000 workplaces throughout the state. But the odds of an outbreak were much higher for public transportation industries 3.5 times higher for workers in air transportation and five times higher for workers in bus service and other forms of urban transit.

The study, which was conducted by researchers at the California Department of Public Health, identified 340 outbreaks in public transportation industries that resulted in 5,641 coronavirus infections and 537 COVID-19 deaths. The risk of death due to COVID-19 was twice as high for bus and rail service workers as it was for California workers as a whole.

The findings offer some justification for L.A. Countys mask mandate in public transportation settings. The study authors noted that essential workers in these industries should get priority access to COVID-19 vaccines and other prevention tools.

In other California news, a church in San Jose that faced a huge fine for disregarding state and county rules about indoor gatherings will not have to pay up, a state appeals court ruled.

Calvary Chapel San Jose, along with its pastors, were held in contempt of court for holding large religious services in defiance of health orders aimed at preventing coronavirus spread. The Supreme Court ruled in 2020 that those restrictions were justified. A year later, after the composition of the court changed, the high court said limits on indoor worship infringed on the constitutional right to exercise ones religion freely.

That ruling prompted the California appellate court to toss the roughly $200,000 fine last week. But Santa Clara County officials said they would still go after the church for $2.3 million worth of penalties it racked up for violating other public health rules, including ones requiring face masks.

Theres been some action on the COVID-19 vaccine front. Pfizer said Tuesday that the vaccine it developed with BioNTech for children under 5 was 73% effective. The data behind that figure was gathered between March and June as part of a trial that tested three shots of the low-dose vaccine against three shots of a placebo.

The company said there were 13 cases of COVID-19 among the 794 children all between the ages of 6 months and 4 years who were randomly selected to get the vaccine. Another 351 children got the placebo, and 21 of them came down with COVID-19.

A similar vaccine from Moderna is also available for infants, toddlers and preschool-age kids. However, only about 6% of children between the ages of 6 months and 4 years have received a COVID-19 vaccine since they became available in June, according to the American Academy of Pediatrics.

Teens now have a new option for their primary COVID-19 vaccination series. The Food and Drug Administration authorized Novavaxs COVID-19 vaccine for emergency use in adolescents ages 12 to 17 on Friday, and the CDC recommended it on Monday. The two-shot series uses harmless coronavirus proteins to prime a recipients immune system, an old-school technology meant to appeal to those who arent comfortable with the new-fangled mRNA vaccines.

Pfizer and BioNTech have asked the FDA to authorize their new COVID-19 shots that have been tweaked to target the BA.4 and BA.5 strains as well as the original version of the virus. If the FDA gives its blessing, and then the CDC follows suit, the new shots could be available for a fall booster campaign in a matter of weeks.

The federal government has already struck a deal to buy 105 million doses of the targeted booster shot. It also has a contract to buy 66 million doses of a targeted vaccine from Moderna, which is expected to go before the FDA soon.

Dr. Ashish Jha, the White House COVID-19 response coordinator, is eager to see the updated vaccines go into Americans arms.

Its going to be really important that people this fall and winter get the new shots, he said. Its designed for the virus thats out there.

And finally, Dr. Anthony Fauci has set a date for his retirement December 2022.

The nations top infectious diseases expert had already said he would leave the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases before the end of President Bidens current term. Now, after 54 years at NIAID, there are only a few months left.

During his tenure, the country has weathered outbreaks of HIV/AIDS, SARS, H1N1 flu and Ebola. But it was the COVID-19 pandemic that made him a household name. His institute was instrumental in the speedy development of COVID-19 vaccines, and his straight-talking style endeared him to many Americans though not all of them.

If ever there was a situation where you wanted a unified approach and everybody pulling together for the common good, it would be when youre in the middle of a public health crisis, Fauci said.

Todays question comes from readers who want to know: Is there any reason to keep my cloth masks?

This question comes from a reader who came upon her little-used cloth masks while doing some back-to-school cleaning and wondered whether they served any purpose in a world where disposable surgical masks and higher-quality N95, KN94 and KN95s are readily available.

Its true that some masks are better than others, but its also true that any mask is better than no mask at all, said Dr. Bruce Y. Lee, a professor at the City University of New York Graduate School of Public Health and Health Policy who has studied the value of masks.

Anything in front of your mouth will be able to block at least to some degree the respiratory droplets that come out of your mouth, and maybe it will block droplets in the air that come into your nose or mouth, he said.

A cloth mask might not prevent all viral particles from entering your airways, but reducing the amount of virus that makes it through may mean the difference between a mild and a severe case of COVID-19, he added: Its not just about breathing in the virus, its how much virus you breathe in.

Lee offered one more use for a cloth mask: It can extend the life of an N95 respirator. Although N95s were designed to be single-use face coverings, research during the pandemic has shown that they remain effective through several wearings, and a cloth mask can help protect it from being damaged.

If you have a choice of wearing an N95, you should go for the N95, Lee said.

We want to hear from you. Email us your coronavirus questions, and well do our best to answer them. Wondering if your questions already been answered? Check out our archive here.

(Aaron Favila / Associated Press)

The photo above shows students in the Philippines as they lined up Monday for the first day of school.

Its more than the first day of a new academic year its their first time heading back into classrooms since pandemic lockdowns sent millions of pupils home back in 2020.

In the U.S., some schools shut down for just a few months. Even those that remained closed for most of the 2020-2021 school year welcomed students back to campus last fall, and they kept their doors open even as Delta and Omicron swept through their communities.

Not so in the Philippines. Former President Rodrigo Duterte was afraid that having millions of children gather in person would spark new outbreaks. He stuck with that stance until his term ended on June 30.

The extended school closures didnt help the Asian nation improve its alarmingly low literacy rates. A study last year by the World Bank reported that about 90% of Filipino children under 10 couldnt read and understand a simply story, a condition it called learning poverty.

Resources

Need a vaccine? Heres where to go: City of Los Angeles | Los Angeles County | Kern County | Orange County | Riverside County | San Bernardino County | San Diego County | San Luis Obispo County | Santa Barbara County | Ventura County

Practice social distancing using these tips, and wear a mask or two.

Watch for symptoms such as fever, cough, shortness of breath, chills, shaking with chills, muscle pain, headache, sore throat and loss of taste or smell. Heres what to look for and when.

Need to get a test? Testing in California is free, and you can find a site online or call (833) 422-4255.

Americans are hurting in various ways. We have advice for helping kids cope, as well as resources for people experiencing domestic abuse.

Weve answered hundreds of readers questions. Explore them in our archive here.

For our most up-to-date coverage, visit our homepage and our Health section, get our breaking news alerts, and follow us on Twitter and Instagram.

Read the original post:

Coronavirus Today: What's wrong with the CDC? - Los Angeles Times

These assaults on our nations public health institutions undermined the nations coronavirus response, he added.

Much of these pressure campaigns were reported in early 2020 by POLITICO and other outlets and President Donald Trump publicly called out the FDA and its commissioner on multiple occasions. But the committee report offers new color, through emails, texts and official testimony from Hahn about just how persistent some of these efforts inside the White House were throughout the summer and fall of 2020.

A substantial portion of the report focuses on Peter Navarro, a former trade adviser under Trump, who worked on the administrations coronavirus response. Navarro collaborated frequently with Steven Hatfill, an adjunct virology professor at George Washington University, who was one of Navarros advisers and worked on the federal coronavirus response.

Pushing for hydroxychloroquine: According to emails collected over the course of the subcommittees investigation, Navarro and Hatfill rallied other White House officials to pressure Hahn to reinstate the emergency use authorization for hydroxychloroquine after the agency revoked it in June 2020. At one point, Hatfill characterized the disagreement between White House officials and the FDA as a forthcoming knife fight to an unnamed, outside ally over email.

The report also found that Navarro tasked Hatfill with coming up with a presentation to get the FDA to reauthorize the drug. At one point, Hatfill wrote to William ONeill, a cardiologist at the Henry Ford Health System in Detroit, and suggested conducting a prophylactic study of the medication in a correctional facility experiencing a coronavirus outbreak. (The report doesnt say how ONeill responded to the request.)

Hatfill and Navarro sought to discredit other prominent health officials who spoke out against the use of hydroxychloroquine, including Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. The two discussed plans to get the Department of Justice and the Health and Human Services Departments inspector general to conduct an investigation into Fauci and his email use. Hatfill, according to the report, pushed for Faucis removal throughout the fall, telling Navarro in September, You really need to consider what is likely to happen over the next 2 months if this little idiot and his Covid treatment panel is not fired. Two weeks later, Hatfill wrote that [t]here will be a house cleaning after elections. [A] really good cleaning.

In a statement to POLITICO, Navarro maintained that he believed hydroxychloroquine was a valuable treatment for Covid-19, and that he was justified in carrying out Trumps orders to apply pressure to the FDA to make sure the drug was widely accessible. The partisan House Select Subcommittee report wrongly perpetuates one of the most deadly lies of the pandemic, namely that the safe and powerful therapeutic to treat COVID, hydroxychloroquine, was somehow dangerous, he said. I would lose that battle with the FDA and hundreds of thousands of Americans would needlessly die because of Stephen Hahn, Janet Woodcock, Rick Bright, Tony Fauci, and the broader FDA bureaucracy. The result will forever be a stain on the FDA and shame on the House Subcommittee for perpetuating the lie.

Political pressure: In multiple instances, the subcommittee said it found evidence of senior Trump officials planning to take actions that could benefit the administration politically.

Officials tried to pressure the FDA into authorizing convalescent plasma around the time of the Republican National Convention, emails reveal. The proposed investigation into Fauci would take place around the time of the 2020 presidential election in an attempt to sway voters in favor of Trump, the report says.

The Trump administration also tried to pressure the FDA to authorize the first Covid-19 vaccines ahead of the presidential election. When Hahn testified to the subcommittee in January 2022, he said that White House officials said they would not sign off on emergency use authorization language that required a 60-day safety follow up for late-stage clinical trials. Ultimately, the FDA went ahead with the 60-day follow-up plan without an explicit blessing from the White House, though the White House later cleared it.

And their emails: The report also found evidence that Navarro and Hatfill had used a private email server for federal communications. The Department of Justice has sued Navarro get him to turn over other emails sent from his personal email account related to presidential matters, first revealed by a separate report from the the subcommittee.

All my White House records are digitally preserved pending the resolution of a civil suit filed by the National Archives, which increasingly appears to have been unlawfully weaponized by the Department of Justice against both me and President Trump, Navarro said.

Hatfill could not be reached for comment.

This is the second report in a series of investigations into the way Trump administration officials managed the coronavirus. The first found that the administration leaned heavily on the herd immunity theory around the virus spread to delay federal action. The committee is still investigating other aspects of the federal response to the pandemic.

Go here to see the original:

Trump White House exerted pressure on FDA for Covid-19 emergency use authorizations, House report finds - POLITICO

Gov. Phil Murphy on Tuesday reiterated his long-standing promise that New Jersey will conduct a review of the states response to COVID-19, including how it handled the crisis in long-term care facilities yet he still does not have a timeframe for when that will happen.

I dont have a date for you, but were committed to it, Murphy told reporters when asked about a coronavirus post-mortem something he promised in the early days of the pandemic after an unrelated event in Passaic City.

He stressed New Jersey is still not out of the woods 2 1/2 years after the state reported its first case.

Murphys comments come after the state agreed last week to pay a second round of settlements totaling $15.9 million to 71 families of residents who died in New Jerseys three state-run veterans homes in the early days of the virus.

An earlier agreement in December to resolve wrongful death claims paid out nearly $53 million to the families of 119 residents who died from COVID-19 in the veterans homes between March and May of 2020.

The state admitted no wrongdoing as part of either settlement.

At the same time, employees at the veterans home at Menlo Park have filed lawsuits alleging the state, the state Department of Military and Veterans Affairs, the governors office, and administrators of the nursing home put them in harms way as the virus struck. The complaints accuse the state of being grossly negligent, knowingly careless, and reckless.

MORE: Lies about deaths, orders not to wear masks: Lawsuits by staff allege chaos in N.J. veterans homes as COVID soared.

Murphy was asked Tuesday about the states response to the settlements and lawsuits.

Not a lot to say, other than God bless our veterans and the lives of those that were lost and the families, the governor said. Hopefully the settlement that was announced on Friday which is the second of its kind in some small way allows the families to move on as compared to something that would have been drawn out. These things settle for different reasons unique to each situation.

Asked if that means there wont be a post-mortem on the states response to the pandemic, Murphy said: There absolutely will be a post-mortem.

The governor noted the state hired a firm to do a no-holds barred assessment of long-term care procedures, policies, laws as a general matter.

In 2020, the Murphy administration hired healthcare consultant Manatt Health to investigate how New Jersey nursing homes responded to the pandemic as the death toll spiraled out of control. New Jersey was forced to seek emergency assistance from the Veterans Administration and the National Guard moves that were criticized as being too little and too late.

The consultants concluded that long-term care facilities overall were underprepared and under-staffed to deal with the pandemic, and called for tougher state scrutiny. But the study did not scrutinize the states performance.

A lot of things have come out of that, Murphy said Tuesday. Laws that Ive signed, executive orders, changes in practices and policies. None of that is in lieu of what will be a complete post-mortem, not just for veterans homes or long-term care but for the entirety of the pandemic.

Unfortunately, we still have just under 1,000 people still in the hospital as I sit here today, he added. It is clearly something were living with, but were also clearly not out of the woods.

Murphy first promised a post-mortem on the states handling of COVID-19 in April 2020, when New Jersey an early coronavirus epicenter was still dealing with the initial spread of the illness, a frantic period of time when the states case and death numbers and death rose rapidly.

Were going to do our own post-mortem in terms of where were we prepared, where were we not prepared? he said during one of his then-daily coronavirus briefings in Trenton. I dont know how thats going to take shape, but I promise you that we can do that.

The Democratic governor has faced repeated criticism from Republicans over how the state responded to the crisis in long-term care facilities. Notably, one Democratic lawmaker, state Sen. Nia Gill of Essex County has publicly called for a bipartisan committee to investigate.

New Jersey, a state of 9.2 million residents, has reported more than 34,000 COVID-19 deaths since the state reported its first case in March 2020. More than 9,500 of those deaths have been among residents and staff members at nursing homes and other long-term care facilities, according to state data.

The state on Monday reported another 604 confirmed COVID-19 cases and three deaths as its seven-day average for confirmed positive tests fell to 1,774 a 17% drop from a week ago and a 39% drop from a month ago. Murphy and other officials have repeatedly said the pandemic is not over, but residents should protect themselves by getting vaccinated and learn how to live with the virus.

NJ Advance Media staff writers Susan K. Livio and Ted Sherman contributed to this report.

Our journalism needs your support. Please subscribe today to NJ.com.

Brent Johnson may be reached at bjohnson@njadvancemedia.com. Follow him at @johnsb01.

Read the original here:

N.J. will assess its response to COVID, Murphy says, but still no timeframe for review - NJ.com

The Department of Health today published a report on antibody data from the COVID-19 Infection Survey (CIS). The findings set out in this report relate to estimates for NI for the week beginning 18 July 2022.

This report is part of the series of Northern Ireland publications from the COVID-19 Infection Survey. Further information can be found on the Department of Health website.

Key Findings

In this bulletin, we report percentages of the population that are estimated to have antibodies against SARS-CoV-2, the specific virus that causes coronavirus (COVID-19). Two levels are reported; a 179 ng/ml level, which is consistent with previous publications, and an 800 ng/ml level.

Please note that the results in this bulletin are based on data collected from study worker home visits up until 24 July 2022. We have now moved to a more flexible remote data collection method. Participants can complete the survey online or by telephone, and swab and blood samples are returned through the post (or by courier for some participants). As a result of this change, there will be a pause to the publication of our antibodies bulletin on Wednesday 7 September 2022. This is to enable final checks to be carried out before the results from this new method are released for the first time in our antibodies bulletin on Wednesday 21 September 2022. For more information about this change, please see the recent ONSblog post.

Share this page

More here:

Coronavirus (Covid-19) Infection Survey Antibody Data For Northern Ireland - Department of Health

Aim

This study aimed to evaluate the immune response and vertical transmission of anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) antibodies in vaccinated, expectant mothers infected with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and to study the sequelae.

This was a retrospective study of pregnant women conducted at Bahrain Defense Force Hospital from March 2021 to September 2021. The study population was divided into two groups: group 1 was vaccinated with Sinopharm or Pfizer/BioNTech during pregnancy and never infected with COVID-19. Group 2 was unvaccinated and had been infected with COVID-19. Immune responses such as anti-nucleocapsid (anti-N) and anti-spike (anti-S) from paired samples of maternal and umbilical cord blood were measured with Elecsys immunoassay (Roche Holding AG: Basel, Switzerland) at the time of delivery. Obstetric complications such as preterm labor, preeclampsia, and stillbirth were assessed. Analysis was performed using SPSS version 26.0 (IBM Corp: Armonk, NY)and Minitab version 18 (Minitab, LLC: State College, PA). A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

The study included 90 vaccinated and 90 COVID-19-recovered pregnant women. Matched samples were available for 80 vaccinated and 74 COVID-19-recovered women. Group 1 had significantly higher levels of anti-S for both the mother and the cord blood and a significantly higher transfer ratio of anti-S. Group 2 had higher levels of anti-N. In group 1, the paired sample titer of anti-S had a weak negative correlation with maternal age whereas, in group 2, the mothers anti-N had a weak positive correlation with age. Antibodies of COVID-19-recovered mothers and cord blood had a moderate negative correlation with gestational age, except for the mothers anti-N. In group 1, the transfer ratio of anti-N and anti-S had a statistically significant association with gestational age. Preterm delivery had a high prevalence of anti-transfer ratios of <1, and delivery at >37 weeks had a high prevalence of 1. In group 2, 90% of preterm deliveries had transfer ratios of anti-S <1. The latency period of the COVID-19 group had a statistically significant association with the antibody transfer ratio. An interval of less than 100 days had a high prevalence in the ratio of <1.An interval of more than 100 days had a high prevalence in the ratio of 1. There was no significant latency period in group 1. Group 1 had a 75% prevalence of an anti-S transfer ratio 1 with a birth weight of >3500 g; group 2 had no significance in birth weight. We did not find significance in the sequelae of morbidities in either group.

The production of the antibody N in the COVID-19-infected and antibody S in the vaccinated pregnant women as well as the vertical transmission of antibodies was efficacious. Significant variation was found regarding maternal age in both groups. The transfer ratio of the antibodies in the vaccinated and COVID-19-recovered women was significantly higher in terms of babies of the vaccinated and the infected population. The transfer ratios were distinct according to the latency period and birth weight of the infants.

The severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) increases during pregnancy, and the virus has been associated with maternal and fetal morbidities such as critical care admission during COVID-19 infection, venous thromboembolism, preeclampsia, and preterm labor [1-3]. The COVID-19 vaccine is a promising protective approach to reducing the incidence of morbidities during pregnancy. Currently, the COVID-19 vaccines are recommended for pregnant women worldwide; the benefits are greater than the risks. The UKs Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunization recommends vaccination for all pregnant women before 27 weeks because disease severity increases after this period [4]. The approved vaccines are not live, so they cannot cause actual disease in the women or the fetuses [5]. Quantifying the immune response of the vaccinated vs. the infected pregnant women as well as vertical transmission is important in understanding how to protect against infection. Comparing the immune response of the COVID-19-infected and vaccinating pregnant women is crucial for future recommendations for the pregnant population.

The study was conducted in our tertiary center, Bahrain Defense Force Hospital, from March to September 2021. It began with receiving informed consent and included 180 pregnant women. The study design was approved by our research centers ethical committee and the national COVID-19 clinical research team. The cohort was divided into group 1, which included 80 vaccinated, and non-infected pregnant women, and group 2, which included 74 non-vaccinated, and COVID-19-recovered pregnant women. Infection was excluded by nasopharyngeal samples using the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) or SARS-CoV-2 GeneXpert before checking antibody levels. Twenty-five people were not included in our analysis of immune responses because matched sera were not available. Demographic data were assessed in detail. Evaluation of computerized records was done confidentially. All data were rendered anonymous. The cohort was interviewed about the types of vaccines they had received, their gestational ages at their first and second doses, and their COVID-19 diagnoses. The gestational age at delivery and interval of immunoassay were calculated. Antibodies from both groups in response to the spike protein (S) and nucleocapsid protein (N) and their vertical transmission were assessed using the mothers serum at the time of delivery. Interval frequencies of antibodies from the second vaccine dose and from COVID-19 infection were calculated. The association of immune response with maternal factors, including maternal age, BMI, gestational period, gestational age at delivery, latency period, and transfer ratio, was calculated and compared between the groups. The transfer ratio level was divided; and the association with maternal age, BMI, gestational age at delivery, gender of the baby, birth weight of the baby, and latency period was checked in both groups. Cohorts were continuously assessed for sequelae following vaccination and COVID-19 infection. Both populations were assessed throughout pregnancy to identify complications.

Group 1 included vaccinated pregnant women who received two doses during pregnancy and had matched paired samples of umbilical cord blood. Group 2 included women who were infected with COVID-19 and had paired samples. In both groups, participants with and without matched samples were included in the analysis of sequelae.

To ensure uniformity, individuals in group 1 who received single dose or booster doses of vaccination were excluded. To reduce bias, anyone who was infected with COVID-19 at any point during or before pregnancy or got vaccinated before pregnancy was also excluded. Group 2 excluded women vaccinated before and during pregnancy. The population without matched sera was excluded from antibody analysis.

Continuous variables were represented asmeanstandard deviation, or median (first quartile, third quartile), whereas categorical variables were represented as frequencies and percentages. Depending on the data requirements, independent t-test and Mann-Whitney U test were used to compare the characteristics of the vaccinated group and the COVID-19 infection group. Pearson and Spearman correlations were used to assess the relationship between maternal factors, mother's antibodies, cord blood antibodies, and antibody transfer ratio. To assess associations between categorical variables, chi-square and Fisher's exact tests were used. SPSS version 26.0 (IBM Corp: Armonk, NY)and Minitab version 18 (Minitab, LLC: State College, PA) software were used to conduct all analyses. A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

The analysis included a total of 154 women, 80 of whom were vaccinated while pregnant and the other 74 were infected with COVID-19 while pregnant. The patients' ageranged from 18 to 42 years, with four vaccinated mothers and 21 COVID-19 patients havingcomorbidities. Characteristics of the vaccinated and the infected groups are summarized in Table 1.

The median gestational age for vaccination was 29 weeks. The gestational age for COVID-19 infection was 26 weeks on average. The antibodies N and S of mothers and babies differed statistically between vaccinated and COVID-19-infected patients, with the vaccinated group having significantly higher levels of antibody S for both mothers and babies and the COVID-19-infected group having higher levels of antibody N. Transfer ratio of antibody S had a significant difference.

Maternal factors correlation with mothers and cord blood antibodies of vaccinated group and COVID-19-infected group are presented in Table 2. In vaccinated group, mothers and cord blood antibody S had a weak negative correlation with age. Mothers antibody N from COVID-19 infected group had a weak positive correlation with age, all antibodies of COVID-19-infected mothers and cord blood had a moderate negative correlation with gestational age except mothers antibody N.

Correlation between maternal factors and antibodies transfer ratio of the vaccinated and COVID-19-infected groups is represented in Table 3. Transfer ratio of antibodies N and S from COVID-19-recovered patients had a strong negative correlation with gestational age and a positive correlation with the interval, whereas antibody N transfer ratio from the COVID-19 group and anti-S and N of vaccinated group had a significant correlation with gestational age at delivery (Table 3).

The transfer ratio was divided into the following two categories: < 1 and 1. In the vaccinated group, 64.5% had anti-nucleocapsid (anti-N) transfer ratios 1, and 60.5% had anti-spike (anti-S) transfer ratios 1. In the COVID-19-infected group, 50% had an anti-N transfer ratio < 1, and 60.8 % had an anti-Stransfer ratio < 1. Frequencies of transfer ratios < 1 and 1, stratified by maternal factors are shown in Table 4 for the vaccinated group andCOVID-19-infected group.

From vaccinated patients, gestational age at delivery had a statistically significant association with anti-N and anti-S transfer ratios with preterm delivery having a high prevalence with anti-transfer ratios of < 1 and delivery at > 37 weeks having a high prevalence with anti-transfer ratios of 1 (Table 4). Gestational age at delivery from COVID-19-infected patients had a statistically significant association with anti-S transfer ratio with 90% of the preterm delivery having an anti-S transfer ratio < 1. Interval at COVID-19 infection had a statistically significant association with anti-N and anti-S transfer ratios as interval of < 100 days had a high prevalence in anti-transfer ratios of < 1 and interval of > 100 had a high prevalence in anti-transfer ratios of 1 (Table 4).

Difference in the sequelae of both vaccinated and COVID-19-infected preterm, still-born, and preeclampsia babies are represented in Table 5. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups' sequelae.

Antibody intervals frequency of the vaccinated group from the second dose was highest within 34-44 days and 54-64 days, whereas intervals from COVID-19 infection were highest within 67-97 days (Figures 1, panels A and B).

Mother's and cord blood antibodies N levels peaked 21 days after the second dose and then gradually decreases over time. Both mother's and cord blood antibodies N were at their lowest level starting from 105 days after the second dose (Figure 2, panel A). After 37 days from the second dose, the mother's and cord blood antibodies-S levels were both at their highest level (25000 U/mL). Antibodies S levels were < 1000 U/mL at 56-73 days following the second dose.Except for one vaccinated mother who had an antibody S of (16907 U/mL) after 95 days, both mothers and cord blood antibodies S were at their lowest levels (Figure 2, panel B).

From 46 to 171 days following COVID-19 infection, mothers' and cord blood antibodies N levels varied between 100 and 250 COIlevels (Figure 3, panel A). Antibodies S levels in mothers and cord blood rise to levels above 400 U/mL, starting from 101 days after COVID-19 infection. One mother and cord blood antibodies S were above 700 U/mL, 59 days after the infection (Figure 3, panel B).

Figure 4, panel A, illustrates how the transfer ratios for both mothers and cord blood rise as the number of days since COVID-19 infection increases. The transfer ratios of mothers and cord blood rise as the number of days following the second dose increases, with two patients having high transfer ratios of 10.75 after 21 days and 13.76 after 60 days (Figure 4, panel B).

The COVID-19 pandemic raised several questions about pregnant women, including the impact of infection during pregnancy and transmission of the disease to the newborn. Protection of pregnant women and fetuses against the worst of the disease remains an enormous concern for obstetricians. Immune responses to the infection and vertical transmission of antibodies are accounted for when giving the vaccination during pregnancy. Immunization is optimized for maternal and infant protection. Elements that affect vaccine acceptance are public awareness of infection risk, vaccine safety, and the method of public communication regarding the vaccine and its safety [6]. Our populations were encouraged to get Sinophram and Pfizer.

Group 1 patients' age range was 19-42 years, and group 2patients' age range was 18-42 years. The populations were of reproductive age, and titers varied along with maternal age. Immunity decreased as age increased [7]. Antibody S had a weak negative correlation with maternal age while, surprisingly, antibody N had a positive correlation with age. Individual variations in response to immunization and immunological reactions to COVID-19 infection occurred at the reproductive ages. A similar study by Yang et al. (2021) showed differences in the immune response in different age categories of the general population [8]. Collier et al. found a better response in vaccinated younger people than in older people of the general population [9]. Obesity is a risk factor for COVID-19 and could cause a stronger immune response. Our study grouped titers of antibodies and the transfer ratio and did not find any association with BMI. By contrast, Soffer et al. (2021) identified a relationship between COVID-19 antibodies and obesity in the general population [10]. In our study, four vaccinated mothers and 21 COVID-19 patients hadcomorbidities such as hypothyroidism, gestational diabetes, and bronchial asthma.

A study by Prabhu et al. (2021) found that pregnant women who received mRNA vaccines produced maternal antibodies as early as five days after their first vaccination dose. Notably, passive immunity via the placenta to the neonate occurred as early as 16 days after the first vaccination dose [11]. In our study, the first dose received was at the gestational age of 26 weeks, and the second dose was at 29 weeks. The reported average gestational age at the onset of COVID-19 infection was 26 weeks. An analysis of antibodies was conducted at the time of delivery. The frequency of antibody intervals in the vaccinated group from the second dose was highest from 34 to 44 days and 54 to 64 days whereas intervals from COVID-19 infection were highest between 67 and 97 days. Comparison of antibody titers between the groups showed statistically significant, higher levels of anti-S and vertical transmission in the vaccinated population and anti-N in the infected population. This denotes the higher immunogenic response to the spike protein that occurred in the vaccinated group and the higher immunogenic response to the nucleocapsid protein that occurred in the COVID-19-infected group. Supporting our study, immune responses in the mother and transmission to the fetus of the mRNA vaccines were more elevated in the vaccinated mothers than in the COVID-19-recoveredmothers [12]. A study by Polack et al. (2020)showed that two doses of the BioNTech/Pfizer BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine gave 95% protection against COVID-19 in the non-pregnant age group of 16years or more [13]. In our study, the mean gestational age at vaccination was 29 weeks, and all of the vaccinated population included in our study received two doses of the vaccine. They had protection until the early postpartum period, which supports the use of the vaccine to protect pregnant women from the virus during the pregnancy, which is a more critical period. However, the vaccines long-term protection requires further study. The levels of protection of the COVID-19 group and the vaccinated group remain inconclusive. Nevertheless, vaccinating the pregnant population is important because it reduces the severity and transmission of the disease [14,15]. Vitiello (2021) reported that there was decreased transmission of the virus among the vaccinated population. The level of protection varies after each dose of the vaccine and according to the variant [16]. Supporting this view, our study showed statistically significant levels of anti-S and a higher transfer ratio in the vaccinated population compared with the COVID-19-infected, non-vaccinated population. Vaccination could reduce the rate of COVID-19 infection in pregnant women as well as in neonates.

In our study, the latency period was calculated either from the second dose of the vaccine or from the diagnosis of COVID-19 infection to delivery. The latency period showed statistical significance for both anti-N and anti-S titers and transfer ratios for the COVID-19-infected population. Higher transfer ratios occurred when the interval was greater than 100 days. A study by Mithal et al. demonstrated that vaccinated women had higher transfer ratios of antibodies according to their latency period [17]. Yang et al. showed that the level of vertical transmission of antibodies was elevated at the time of delivery in vaccinated women, regardless of the timing of vaccination [18]. Edlow et al.s study compared the vertical transmission of different types of viral antibodies and reported decreased transfer of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies; thus, COVID-19 infection in neonates and infants from infected mothers was predicted [19]. A study by Flannery et al. showed that an immunological response and vertical transfer of antibodies predicted potential protection against infection in pregnant women and neonates [20]. However, higher maternal levels of anti-S and transfers through placentae following vaccination could provide more protection against the virus. In our study, the transfer ratio of anti-S was calculated at 1.23 (0.68, 1.6) in the vaccinated group and 0.88 (0.68,1.08) in the COVID-19-recovered group. In an exploratory, descriptive, and prospective cohort study, Collier et al. concluded that the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine was immunogenic and evoked antibodies that were transferred to cord blood and breast milk [21]. This is consistent with our study with regard to cord blood transfer. Vaccination (mRNA) during the antenatal period induces a humoral response in the mother, which is transferred to the fetus. This reinforces the advantage of vaccination during pregnancy, a conclusion reached by Beharier et al. [22].

A prospective cohort study by Nir et al. involving 64 parturient, vaccinated women and 11 parturient women who contracted COVID-19 during pregnancy was conducted to identify the transfer ratio of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies from mother to neonate. They found that transferof SARS-CoV-2 antibodies across the placenta occurred more frequently in pregnant women vaccinated with the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine. This was confirmed by the positive level of antibodies in both maternal serum and cord blood. The vaccine proved to have a double advantage - maternal protection and neonatal humoral immunity [23].

Our study showed potent immune responses and antibody transfer to the fetus in both group 1 and group 2. The antibody transfer ratio showed significant correlation between gestational age and delivery in group 1 whereas group 2 showed a correlation between gestational age and the latency period. The transfer ratio was divided into subcategories according to the levels, either more than one or less than one. Both group 1 and group 2 showed that the level of transfer ratios was higher at a gestational age of more than 37 weeks. Comparable antibody transfer ratios in both groups increased according to the maturity of the fetus. Mithal et al. showed that the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine given during the third trimester generated similar antibody levels between mother and fetus, which were greater in the case of COVID-19 infection [17]. Beharier et al. reported a similar immune response to vaccination and COVID-19 disease and showed that the IgG transfer ratio was higher during the second trimester than the third [22]. The level of transfer ratios was influenced by the birth weight of the infant. In group 1, as the baby's weight decreased, the anti-S transfer ratio decreased as well (a weight of < 2500 g had 75% prevalence of an anti-S transfer ratio < 1).As the baby's weight increased, the anti-S transfer ratio also increased (a weight of > 3500 g had 75% prevalence of an anti-S transfer ratio 1).There was no significant correlation between transfer ratio and the gender of the infant.

Additionally, we compared the incidence of obstetric complications such as fetal growth restriction, preeclampsia, stillbirth, and preterm delivery in the vaccinated group to that of the COVID-19-infected group. Although the frequency of complications was higher in the COVID-19-infected group than in the vaccinated group, no statistical significance was found. The direct relationship between the complications anddisease could not be confirmed. Clinical trials have proven the safety of the vaccine in general; however, trials and data regarding pregnant women are limited [4,24]. Principi et al. reported the safety outline of the vaccine [15]. Shimabukuro et al. revealed that the vaccines side effects are mainly fever, headache, body pain, and chills and recommended more studies focused on perinatal outcomes [25]. Beharier et al. reported the rate of preterm delivery, stillbirth, and preeclampsia in infected pregnant women [12]. No concerning issues were observed by Trostle et al. in pregnant women who received the mRNA COVID-19 vaccine [26]. Peretz et al. deduced that no preterm deliveries occurred among the 57 vaccinated women who delivered [27]. In our study, compared with the vaccinated group, the COVID-19-infected group had a higher rate of preterm delivery (eight vs. 15), stillbirth (zero vs. one), and preeclampsia (two vs. four). Our study illustrated immune responses to vaccination and COVID-19 infection as well as placental transfer of the antibodies. We also included the sequelae of group 1 and group 2 in our study to reassure our pregnant population.

The study of immune responses, vertical transmission, and effects of the COVID-19 infection and vaccination is needed to reduce the impact of COVID-19-related morbidities and mortalities in pregnant women.

During pregnancy, although vaccination and COVID-19 disease produced the immune responses along with the vertical transmission, there was a significant antibody transfer to neonates. A higher response of anti-S and transfer ratio of anti-S occurred in the vaccinated group, which is likely protective for the mother and newborn. Antibody titers varied according to maternal and gestational age. Latency period was significant in the COVID-19-infected population whereas birth weight of the infant was significant in the vaccinated population.

All of our study population developed a reasonable immune response and had vertical transmission. The safety of the vaccine is reassuring and promising for pregnant women.Additionally, vaccinated pregnant women were effectively protected from COVID-19 infection during pregnancy and transferred their antibodies to neonates. Antibody titers varied in different age groups. The transfer ratio was higher in term fetuses. The maternal BMI has no correlation with antibody titers or transfer ratios. The infants gender had no association with transfer ratios.

The reassurance of vaccination without major side effects during pregnancy and protection from COVID-19 helped our pregnant women cope with current modifications in their lifestyles resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. Even though immunity is helpful in overcoming the current pandemic, further studies of waningantibody levels, reoccurrence of the disease, and duration of protection will support recommendation or refutation of booster vaccine doses.

In our study, vaccinated participants were not infected with COVID-19, and the virus was excluded using nasopharyngeal samples using the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) or SARS-CoV-2 GeneXpert before checking antibody levels. The infected population was not vaccinated either before or during pregnancy. These criteria added clarity to the immune response of the groups. The correlation of antibodies to transfer ratios was calculated in the infected and vaccinated groups in relation to maternal demographic variables such as maternal age, BMI and gestational age, gestational age at delivery, gender of the infant, and birth weight of the infant. Transfer ratios were divided into different ranges, and correlation was calculated considering maternal and clinical factors. Latency period was divided into different ranges, and correlation was calculated considering transfer ratios.

The sample size is small in both the COVID-19-infected and vaccinated groups. Our study did not analyze the post-delivery sequences for the mother and newborn. The waning of antibody levels was not analyzed and requires further study. Categorization of IgG and IgM was not completed in our analysis.

The pregnant women generated anti-N and S in response to COVID-19 infection and vaccination and efficiently transferred these to neonates. The immune response to COVID-19 infection and vaccination was individualized, and titers of anti-N were higher in COVID-19-recovered women. Levels of anti-S and transfer ratios of anti-S were higher in the vaccinated pregnant women. Antibody variations occurred based on maternal age in both groups. BMI showed no association with antibody titers or transfer ratios. Transfer ratios were higher in term babies in both groups and showed no significant relation to the babys gender. A prolonged latency period had a higher transfer ratio in the COVID-19-infected group whereas the birth weight of the infants was significant in the vaccinated pregnant population. However, the level of immunity and duration of protection remain inconclusive. Both COVID-19-recovered and vaccinated women showed an immune response as well as a transfer of antibodies at different rates to neonates. Further studies could include the risk of COVID-19 severity during pregnancy vs. the benefit of vaccination and which group gives more protection to neonates against COVID-19 and future possible variants.

Go here to see the original:

Maternal COVID-19 Disease and COVID-19 Immunization - Cureus

In a recent study posted to the bioRxiv* preprint server, researchers assessed the impact of a syntenin inhibitor on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) entry.

Viruses depend on interactions with host factors to effectively cause infection and subsequently replicate. Therapeutic approaches that target such interactions enable the development of novel and effective antiviral drugs. Syntenic is an important protein that regulates the architecture of essential cellular membranes due to its role in protein trafficking. Due to this function, syntenin is also shown to have a useful impact against the human papillomavirus (HPV).

In the present study, researchers the usefulness of syntenin inhibitor KSL-128114 as a broad spectrum inhibitor against viral infections, including coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

The team collected synthetic fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC)-labeled peptides that corresponded to the C-termini of the viral envelope (E) protein, open reading frame (ORF)-3, and nonstructural protein 11 (NSP11) from SARS-CoV-2. These peptides helped estimate the affinities towards recombinantly expressed and purified PDZ1-PDZ2, SNX27 PDZ, and MPP5 PDZ, respectively.

Additionally, the team investigated the consequences of viral infection and replication via the inhibition of syntenin interactions. This was achieved by penetrating the cells with a peptide-based inhibitor KSL-128114 to estimate the level of SARS-CoV-2 infection as per the concentration of the inhibitor present in Vero E6 cells. Furthermore, the antiviral mechanism of the inhibitor was analyzed by experimenting wherein the time of inhibition addition was assessed. The effect of adding the inhibitor two hours before and one or three hours after the infection was subsequently calculated.

Furthermore, the impact of the inhibitor on the binding of the virus to the host cell or the entry of the virus into the host cell was investigated by treating the host cells with the inhibitor two hours before infection. The team then estimated the level of viral ribonucleic acid (RNA) with quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) after one hour on ice or two hours of infection. Additionally, infected Vero E6 and Calu-3 cells were treated with chloroquine, and the infection was monitored.

The study findings showed that syntenin PDZ1-2 bound with the highest affinity to the putative PDZ binding motif at the SARS-CoV-2 NSP11 C-terminus. Syntenin PDZ1-2 also showed low binding affinity to the peptide in the viral E protein. The affinities observed were low but similar to those found in endogenous syntenin interactions. The interaction noted with oligomeric E protein could be improved via avidity effects within a cellular setting. Moreover, when MPP5 PDZ was added as a control, it bound preferentially to the viral E protein. On the other hand, SNX27 was bound to all three peptides with comparatively lower affinity.

The peptide-based inhibitor KSL-128114 effectively blocked viral infection with no to minor effects on the viability of the cells. Treatment of the cells with 30 M of the inhibitor showed that viral infection, as well as the number of new viral particles released, reduced significantly. Although treatment with the inhibitor before infection had a remarkable impact on the level of infection, the team observed that post-infected treatment did not result in any effect, which indicated that the inhibitor inhibited the initial steps of viral infection, which take place before the incidence of any interactions between the viral proteins and syntenin.

Interestingly, the antiviral effect of the syntenin inhibitor could not be elicited by inhibiting the interactions between viral PDZ binding motifs and the intracellular PDZ proteins. This was because these interactions occur in the later stages of viral infection. The results indicated that the inhibitor blocked essential endogenous interactions crucial in the initial phases of the viral life cycle, such as the interaction between PDZ and angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) proteins during ACE2 endocytosis and recycling. Testing the affinity of the inhibitor to SNX27 showed that the inhibitor bound with 15 times lower affinity to SNX27 than to syntenin.

The team hypothesized that syntenin PDZ1-2 was likely to bind to the ACE2 terminus and have a direct role in its trafficking. However, syntenin did not display any binding toward ACE2, while treatment of the ACE2 cells with the syntenin inhibitor did not impact the ACE2 expression on the cell surface. Instead, the team observed that inhibitor treatment reduced the expression of syntenin cargo syndecan-1, which suggested that the inhibitor induced the inhibition of syntenin-dependent endocytic trafficking.

The inhibitor did not cause any alteration in SARS-CoV-2 binding in the cells. Furthermore, the concentrations of both negative and positive-stranded single-strand (ss) RNA were reduced, suggesting that viral entry was inhibited. Moreover, viral infection was significantly inhibited in chloroquine-treated infected cells since chloroquine blocked endosomal entry in Vero E6 cells lacking transmembrane serine protease 2 (TMPRSS2) expression.

Overall, the study findings showed that the syntenin inhibitor KSL-128114 inhibited different viral infections, including COVID-19.

bioRxiv publishes preliminary scientific reports that are not peer-reviewed and, therefore, should not be regarded as conclusive, guide clinical practice/health-related behavior, or treated as established information.

Read more:

What is the impact of a syntenin inhibitor in COVID-19 treatment? - News-Medical.Net