Category: Corona Virus

Then the demand wasnt so overwhelming anymore.

According to research company Statista, the global hand-sanitizer market boomed by 500% in 2020 to $6.3 billion in revenue from $1.03 billion in 2019. But as the pandemic subsided, so did sales: $3.5 billion in 2021, and hovering around $3 billion for the next couple of years.

So, what happened to all those startups? Heres a look at three of them.

Amy Welsman was inspired to rework sanitizer before the pandemic hitwhen she became a new mom in 2019. Welsman, who previously handled an array of jobs for womens intimates brand Knix, found the sanitizers on the market harsh and off-putting, and she didnt want it on her hands when she changed her baby. Her idea: sanitizer with a better scent and ingredients that nourished the skin, sold in more environmentally friendly packages.

By the time she launched her startup, Paume, in 2021, the pandemic was at its height. I was planning to make utilitarian handsanitizera luxurious beauty productsomethingtotally new," she says. As I was developing the product, the pandemic hit, and thesanitizercategory changed overnight."

With demand for sanitizer soaring, she decided to reach out to a wider base of customers than just new moms.

The company garnered some attention in the media and attracted a loyal following, Welsman says. But overall marketing to a broad market was tough in the early days," she says. There was a backlash in the hand-sanitizer industry, where people would say, I never want to see it again. "

So, Welsman decided to focus her efforts on the group that originally inspired Paumenew moms. They care about hand hygiene and minimizing the spread of germs in their families. They also want products to make you feel good," she says.

The strategy worked. Paumes revenue grew 40% in 2022 to $570,000as the company expanded beyond sanitizer into the hand-care category. Revenuereached over$1.5 millionin 2023 and is on track to double again this year,Welsman says, and the company has launched six new products, including a nail and cuticle cream. The company also secured retail partnerships with stores including Holt Renfrew and Bluemercury.

Despite what most people would assume, we have seen our most significant growth in the last year," she says.

Charles Robinson was a philosophy student at University College Londonand not enjoying it," he sayswhen the pandemic hit. The situation led him down an improbable new path: the sanitizer business.

It was primarily born out of a personal necessity to do something meaningful with my life in the first lockdown," says Robinson. Therewasnta business plan or any market research, nor am I passionate about hand sanitizer. I just loved the idea of doing something better, both for myself and the people who needed help."

His idea was inspired by products like scented cards designed to freshen up vehicles. He started asking himself, Could you put hand sanitizer in a card like this?Who would buy them? Couldyoucustom brand them?"

Robinson launchedGelcardin April 2020, using part of his student loan to get the company rolling. He says the products, which people can snap in half to release sanitizer, were profitable right away, netting $250,000 from summer 2020 to summer 2022, selling to businesses that could put their brands on the products.

Logistics was a problem at the start: Factories were closing in Europe during the pandemic, but Robinson found a manufacturer in Milan. I saw a similar technology on the marketand wanted to replicate it by putting handsanitizerinside, so I found the supplierand called them up," he says. It was as simple as a few Google searches and a phone call. Ididnteven fly as it was during Covid."

But as the pandemic wound down, he faced a more serious challenge: His market was drying up.

2022 was tough in Europelook around any public place, the social architecture is virtually identical to 2019 with no face masks, no hand-sanitizer stations, no social distancing," he says.

So Robinson looked beyond Europe to Japan and markets in the Middle East. Those cultures are much more conscious about self-hygieneeven before Covid, some people were wearing masks, and there were sanitizers in restaurants," he says. He opened an office in Tokyo in September 2022 and one in Kuwait the following year.

Robinson has signed renowned restaurants in Tokyo and Kuwait to providethecardsat the table as part of a place setting.Over 50% of revenue in the past 12 months has come from Japan and the Middle East, with 40% from the U.K. and 10% from the rest of Europe. The cardsalso sell to businesses that can put their logos on the product to give away to clients, for instance.

Robinson plans to launch Gelcard2made entirely of paperthis year. He says he makes a good butmodestliving," while reinvesting most of his profitback into Gelcard and his other business, a water-filter startup.

Dawn Andrews says she was making ends meet" with her cosmetics, bath and body business, garb2ART, in early 2020. But when the pandemic hit, the Columbus, Ind., companys sales representatives started asking if she could deliver a different kind of product that was heavily in demandsanitizer.

After the thirdconversation, I knew I needed to at least try," she says. I had made hand sanitizer before on a small level for a localhospital gift shop, so I was familiar with the process."

The decision meant investing the last $5,000 I had" in isopropyl alcohol, bottles, sprayers, labels and aloe water, Andrews says. But the prospects for her regular business didnt look good: The demand for her normal products was drying up quickly, and my business would have never survived without taking the chance I did. I had no investor, no cash other than thatzero."

Within days, Andrews says, things got crazy.I went from $400 of orders per day to $40,000 and two employees to 50," she says. We had people and businesses begging us for hand sanitizers."

The boom lasted from March to mid-May of 2020. By then, she says, demand for her sanitizer waned as store shelves started to fill up with competing products, and she was facing fees of $25,000 to formally register her business as a sanitizer manufacturer.

We just werent getting the sales anymore to go to that level long term," Andrews says. We would have stayed if we were busy, but that wasnt the case."

All told, she says, the sales increase brought in about $150,000 in profit, and helped her business stay afloat until gift stores were ordering her old products again. So far, Andrews says, sales for her traditional products in 2024 are about $5,000 a day10 times what they were in January 2020thanks to an increase in wholesale orders. And she anticipates more growth in the year ahead.

Also important, she got a big boost in reputation. At the January 2020 gift trade shows, no one really knew who I was. I had been in business for seven years, but we werent a big player at all," Andrews says, adding, Stepping up and making hand sanitizer during a time of need just let everyone know we are here."

Barbara Haislip is a writer in Chatham, N.J. She can be reached at reports@wsj.com.

More here:

They started hand-sanitizer businesses during covid. How are they doing now? - Mint

Update to event: As of 6 p.m. East African Time (EAT) 5 April 2023, a total of 12,289,728 COVID-19 cases and 256,985 deaths (case fatality ratio[CFR]: 2.1%) were reported by the 55 African Union (AU) Member States (MS). This represents 2% of all cases and 4% of all deaths reported globally. Forty-two (76%) AU MS are reporting CFR higher than the global CFR (1%). Fifty-three MS have reported COVID-19 cases infected with the Alpha (50 MS), Beta (45), Delta (52), Gamma (3) and Omicron (51) variants of concern (VOC). Additionally, 32 MS have reported the presence of the Omicron BA.2 sub-variant, two MS reported the Omicronsublineage (XBB.1.5) and 11 Member States have reported the Omicron sublineage (BF.7 or BA.5.2.1.7). Fifty-four (98%) MS are currently providing COVID-19 vaccination to the general population. Cumulatively, 1.1 billion doses have been administered on the continent. Of these doses administered, 542.4 million people have been partially vaccinated, and 422.7 million have been fully vaccinated. Eritrea is the only AU MS yet to start the COVID-19 vaccination rollout. For Epi week 13 (27 March 2 April 2023), 2,466 new COVID-19 cases were reported, which is a 43% decrease in the number of new cases reported compared to the previous week (12). The Southern region accounted for 63% of the new COVID-19 cases reported this week, followed by the Eastern (13%), Northern (13%), Western (6%) and Central (5%) regions. Last week, 13 new COVID-19 deaths were reported in Africa, which is a 38% decrease in new deaths reported compared to the previous week (21 deaths). The Southern accounted for 77% of the new COVID-19 deaths reported this week, followed by Northern (23%). This week, no deaths were reported in the Central, Eastern and Western regions. More than 73 thousand tests were conducted during the past week, reflecting a 111% increase in the number of tests compared to the previous week. The weekly % test positivity decreased by 3% compared with the previous week (12%). Since February 2020, over 126.1 million COVID-19 tests have been conducted in Africa.

Original post:

Africa CDC Weekly Event Based Surveillance Report, May 2024 Africa CDC - africacdc.org

While life has gradually returned to normal almost a year since Japan downgraded COVID-19 to a lower-risk disease category, persistent waves of infections resulted in over 16,000 deaths between May and November last year, according to government data.

Health experts have stressed the need for a renewed understanding that lives are still being lost to the virus, even after the government reclassified COVID-19 as an infectious disease on par with the seasonal flu on May 8 last year, facilitating the normalization of social and economic activities.

A ninth wave of infections from last summer to fall resulted in Okinawa Prefecture's medical system being overwhelmed and difficulties in providing ambulance services. There was also a 10th wave across Japan last winter.

People walk in Tokyo's Shibuya area on May 7, 2024, almost a year after the government downgraded COVID-19 to a lower-risk disease category. (Kyodo)

With the government ending its subsidies for medical expenses for people infected with COVID-19 in April, there are concerns that individuals might be discouraged from visiting medical institutions.

"In order for the public to take appropriate infection prevention measures, the government should provide timely infection information, such as the proportion of severe cases and mortality rates after hospitalization," said Kiyosu Taniguchi, director of Mie National Hospital.

COVID-19 accounts for an overwhelmingly large proportion of annual deaths from infectious diseases in Japan, with 16,043 COVID-related deaths between May and November last year, according to the health ministry. Meanwhile, deaths from seasonal influenza totaled 3,575 in 2019.

Vaccinations for the coronavirus will now focus on the elderly and other groups at high risk of developing severe symptoms.

The government is also taking measures to prepare for future outbreaks, including drawing up agreements with prefectural governments and medical institutions to secure 51,000 beds for such a situation.

A revision to the local autonomy law, which includes expanding the central government's authority over local governments, has been submitted to the current Diet session.

In September 2023, the central government established the Cabinet Agency for Infectious Disease Crisis Management, a body responsible for coordinating government responses during pandemics.

Starting in April of next year, a new organization modeled after the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention will be established to advise the government on major outbreaks of infectious diseases.

Related coverage:

Golden Week wraps as post-COVID tourism boom overcrowds stations

Japan left to rethink COVID grants as telework facilities empty out

JAL's annual net profit grows 2.8-fold on travel demand rebound

Read more from the original source:

Japan saw over 16,000 deaths from COVID-19 in May-Nov. 2023 - Kyodo News Plus

COVID-19 cases and deaths internationally have fallen to their lowest levels in four years. The data now permits a comparison between the controversial laissez faire strategy of Sweden and the more restrictive approach of the United States, which emphasized lockdowns, a strategy also adopted by most of Western Europe.

The Swedish tack relied on personal responsibility and voluntary measuresrather than government coercion and restrictions.This attitude, ultimately vindicated, was attacked at the time by health officials and the press in Western Europe and North America.

How did America and Sweden fare comparatively?

COVID-19-related cases: COVID-19 outcomes were similar. According to the statistics site Worldometer, in terms of officially reported cases since the beginning of the pandemic, Sweden had roughly 27 cases out of 100 people, the U.S. had 34 cases out of 100. This was only reported cases, and the best estimate is that considering all cases, whether reported or not, both countries had between 80 and 90 cases per 100, so the difference in infection rates disappears. Neither a lockdown-intensive nor a permissive strategy minimized the ultimate number of COVID-19 cases.

COVID-19-related mortality: The numbers once again lean slightly toward Sweden, but it is likely the health of Swedish citizens versus that of the U.S. was responsible, instead of the superiority of the Swedish strategy. In the U.S. overall, there were 3.7 COVID-19 deaths per 1,000 people; in Sweden, 2.7 COVID-19 deaths per 1,000. Based on this, no one can claim the U.S. did better than Sweden, but it is not a ringing endorsement of the Swedish approach. Neither country protected high-mortality nursing home patients, especially early in the pandemic. Many countries, including their Scandinavian neighbors, had fewer COVID-19 deaths per population than Sweden. Norway, Denmark and Finland all quickly closed their national borders; Finland erected internal borders.

The lesson is that COVID-19 cases and outcomes are probably not primarily determined by national strategy. After four years, no major country avoided high COVID-19 infection rates. While approaches to protect high-risk patients may limit morbidity and mortality at the margins, COVID-19 deaths are related more to national health, age and demographic breakdown, and population immunity. Assessing lockdown strategies by measuring COVID-19 cases and deaths is fraught with error; counterexamples abound.

Non-COVID-19 outcomes: Public health experts use the term excess deaths to describe deaths from all causes in a given interval when comparing with the number of expected deaths based on historic patterns. From 2020 to 2023, excess deaths were elevated in every developed country but were up only 5% in Sweden compared with between 10% and 15% in the U.S. The 5% figure is the lowest figure in any industrialized Western country, including the Scandinavian countries with lower COVID-19 mortality. Many excess U.S. deaths can be attributed to lockdowns and include deaths of despair suicides, drug overdoses and alcoholism and deaths resulting from delayed health care. Sweden almost certainly avoided many of the deaths associated with lockdowns in the U.S.

The economic figures during the pandemic tell a similar story. According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the U.S. economy, although fairly resilient, shrank by 1.2% after 2021 against what was forecast. (The Eurozones fell by 2.1%.) The Swedish economy grew by 0.4% against what was forecast. Inflationary pressures post-pandemic are not as severe in Sweden as in the U.S., where the government employed a greater, potentially inflationary fiscal stimulus.

The most important outcome difference between the U.S. and Sweden was in childrens education. Prolonged U.S. school closures caused educational damage to students not seen in Sweden. Beginning in March 2020, public schools in the U.S. closed, sending 50 million students home. Some private and religious schools, as well as some schools in Florida, opened up in the second half of 2020, but as many as half of all American public school students stayed out of school until the second half of 2021.

Several researchers from American universities found that by the spring of 2022, the average U.S. student lagged by approximately one-half year in math and one-third of a year in reading.

The Public Health Agency of Sweden recommended that secondary schools and universities switch to remote education for the final three months of the 2020 spring term, but schools opened in autumn. There was another two-month in-school hiatus in December 2020 and January 2021 during a variant outbreak, but almost all preschools and elementary schools remained open. Swedish researchers concluded there was no evidence of a learning loss in early reading skills in Swedish primary school students, and the decision to keep schools open benefited Swedish primary school students.

Taking into account all aspects of the pandemic excess deaths, economic health and childrens education the long view suggests that while not ideal, the Swedish strategy was superior. The coronavirus was so contagious and mutated so quickly that tight lockdowns were unsuccessful in controlling spread. And the longer the lockdowns, the greater harm to the populace from factors other than COVID-19.

The effectiveness of lockdowns during COVID-19 is an important question, scientifically and historically but not a definitive blueprint for the future. The next contagion may spread differently and require different measures.

The most important takeaway from the Swedish COVID-19 experience is not that Sweden controlled COVID-19 better, but that any national strategy must account for the effects on the countrys economic, social, educational and mental health.

Dr. Cory Franklin is a retired intensive care physician and co-author of the new book The COVID Diaries 2020-2024: Anatomy of a Contagion As It Happened.

Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email letters@chicagotribune.com.

See more here:

Op-ed: Did Sweden do better than the US in COVID-19 approach? - Chicago Tribune

(Precision Vaccinations News)

Unlike conventional vaccines that include a single antigen to train the immune system to target a specific virus, scientists say they have created a vaccine that protects against various coronaviruses, including potential future variants.

This 'Proactive Vaccinology' may protect people against a diverse range of existing coronaviruses or newly emerging pathogens.

A new study published by the journal Nature Nanotechnologyon May 6, 2024, says quartet nanocages are a nanomedicine approach with the potential to confer heterotypic protection against emergent zoonotic pathogens and facilitate proactive pandemic protection.

In animals primed with the SARS-CoV-2 Spike, boosting immunizations with Quartet Nanocages increases the strength and breadth of an otherwise narrow immune response.

Quartet Nanocage, including the Omicron XBB.'.5 'Kr'ken' RBD, induced antibodies binding to a broad range of sarbecoviruses and neutralizing activity against this variant of concern.

Defending against future pandemics requires vaccine platforms that protect against various related pathogens. Nanoscale patterning can address this issue.

In a press release, Professor Mark Howarth, senior author of the report at the University Cambridge's Department of Pharmacology, said, "We don't have to wait for new coronaviruses to emerge."

"We know enough about coronaviruses and their different immune responses to build protective vaccines .... quartets of linked receptor-binding domains (RBDs) from a panel of SARS-like betacoronaviruses arecoupled with a computationally designed nanocage through SpyTag/SpyCatcher links."

These Quartet Nanocages, which possess a branched morphology, induce a high level of neutralizing antibodies against several different coronaviruses, including viruses not represented in the vaccine.

Equivalent antibody responses are raised to RBDs near the nanocage or at the tips of the nanoparticle's branches.

These scientists wrote that the underlying technology they have developed has the potential to be used in vaccine development to protect against many other health challenges.

The work involved a collaboration between scientists at the University of Cambridge, the University of Oxford, and Caltech. It improves on previous work by the Oxford and Caltech groups to develop a novel all-in-one vaccine against coronavirus threats.

The vaccine developed by Oxford and Caltech should enter Phase 1 clinical trials in early 2025, but its complex nature makes it challenging to manufacture, which could limit large-scale production.

The research was funded by the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council.

See original here:

Proactive Vaccinology Builds Vaccines Before Pathogens Emerge Precision Vaccinations News - Precision Vaccinations

Following the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, which was caused by the emergence of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), many survivors have experienced long-term symptoms collectively referred to as long COVID or post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 (PASC). Long COVID symptoms may include but are not limited to, fatigue, neurological symptoms, alterations in the sense of smell and taste, as well as new-onset diabetes or autoimmune disease.

Study:The long-term effect of COVID-19 infection on body composition. Image Credit: New Africa / Shutterstock.com

A new report published in the journal Nutrients reveals that COVID-19 may also affect body composition, even in those who did not acquire the infection. Moreover, public health restrictions on movement outside the home, with compensatory shifts in lifestyle, may have indirectly led to alterations in weight, body fat mass, and lean body mass (LBM).

The primary factors related to changes in body composition include COVID-19 with related muscle inflammation and damage, restriction of movement, a poor-quality diet, increased drinking, and less physical activity.

Previous studies have shown that body weight and fat mass increased after the first pandemic-related lockdown, whereas bone mineral density, hand grip strength, and fat mass all showed adverse trends in women. In COVID-19 survivors, sarcopenia, as well as increased weight and fat mass, have been reported, particularly in those with long COVID.

To date, the long-term effects of COVID-19 on body composition have not been reported. The current study is a pioneering exploration of this area in COVID-19, with examined parameters including lean body mass (LBM), bone mineral density (BMD), trunk fat, and total fat.

The current study utilized a prospective design to compare body composition using two whole-body DXA scans (DXA#1 and DXA#2, respectively). DXA#1 was obtained before the start of the pandemic, whereas DXA#2 was obtained thereafter. Inflammatory markers and fasting lipid levels were also measured.

For all study participants with a history of COVID-19, the DXA#2 was obtained a year or more later. The study included 160 adults with a mean age of 43 years. About 50% of the study cohort tested positive for COVID-19 before the second scan.

Over 50% of uninfected individuals were smokers, as compared to 30% in the survivor group. Moreover, 55% of survivors were diagnosed with PASC, with about 60% experiencing tiredness, 50% reporting brain fog, and 40% experiencing breathlessness and anxiety, depression, or low mood.

Only one survivor was hospitalized due to COVID-19; however, this patient did not require admission to the intensive care unit.

Inflammatory markers were increased in COVID-19 patients, with higher vascular cell adhesion molecule 1 (VCAM-1) and oxidized low-density lipoprotein (LDL) levels. Conversely, tumor necrosis factor-receptor II (TNF-RII) levels declined in uninfected individuals.

Body fat increased in uninfected individuals by approximately 900 and 160 grams, respectively, compared to those diagnosed with COVID-19. Similarly, total fat increased by 1,500 and 200 grams, respectively. These differences persisted after adjusting for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and COVID-19 status.

High-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) levels were associated with total and trunk fat. LBM also increased by nearly 1,000 grams among uninfected individuals and declined by 65 grams in COVID-19-survivors.

Among COVID-19 survivors, PASC did not differentiate between individuals who exhibited similar annualized trunk fat, total fat mass, or LBM measurements.

Notably, all COVID-19 survivors witnessed a decline in their lean body mass and an increase in several inflammatory biomarkers over the same period, suggesting a direct impact of COVID-19 on muscle.

The study findings demonstrate that the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in increased total fat, trunk fat, and body weight, but markedly so in uninfected individuals. Thus, these effects can be attributed to pandemic-related changes, including a sedentary lifestyle, increased snacking and processed food consumption, and lockdown restrictions, rather than to the infection itself.

Although LBM increased during the study period in uninfected individuals, this characteristic marginally decreased in COVID-19-positive individuals. This could be directly related to SARS-CoV-2 infection, mainly as very few treated patients were prescribed steroids. Prior research has also reported muscle fiber atrophy and severe inflammatory damage to muscle cells with COVID-19, thus indicating that this tissue is a target of SARS-CoV-2.

Interestingly, only a few inflammatory markers were raised in COVID-19 survivors, none of which were correlated with the body composition parameters except hsCRP, which was associated with total and trunk fat.

Understanding the relationship between COVID-19 infection and alterations in body composition can help in implementing early strategies to help prevent these long-term changes as well as developing personalized exercise and nutrition plans to reduce the risk of metabolic complications.

Journal reference:

Follow this link:

Long-term impact of COVID-19 on body composition explored - News-Medical.Net

Taipei, May 7 (CNA) The existing tests and medical treatments remain effective for a new COVID-19 variant known as KP.2 or FLiRT, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) said on Tuesday.

The current rapid screening and PCR testing tools can still detect the virus, while the XBB.1.5 vaccine and medications such as Paxlovid continue to be effective, CDC spokesperson Tseng Shu-hui () said at a press briefing.

The World Health Organization (WHO) on May 3 listed KP.2 as a variant under monitoring due to its rising prevalence.

Currently, KP.2 accounts for approximately 11.4 percent of global COVID-19 cases, Tseng said.

According to the CDC, the predominant variant detected both domestically and from abroad over the past four weeks in Taiwan remained JN.1, which accounted for over 95 percent of cases. It was followed by the BA.2.86 variant.

The transmissibility (ability to infect) of KP.2 is 1.2 times that of the JN.1 variant, while the pathogenicity, or ability to cause disease, is slightly lower, Tseng said, adding that its impact remains to be evaluated.

CDC data showed that the first imported KP.2 case in Taiwan was detected at the end of March. Since then, the number of imported cases has risen to six, while four domestic cases have also been recorded since early April.

Meanwhile, from April 30 to May 6, there were 229 new confirmed local cases of COVID-19 and 31 deaths, both of which were higher compared to the previous week, according to the CDC.

(By Tseng Yi-ning and Lee Hsin-Yin)

Enditem/cs

See the original post here:

Existing tests, treatments effective for new COVID-19 variant KP.2: CDC - Focus Taiwan

WASHINGTON The Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic held a hearing titled A Hearing with the President of EcoHealth Alliance, Dr. Peter Daszak to examine EcoHealth Alliances (EcoHealth) use of U.S. taxpayer dollars to fund dangerous gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV). This hearing also served to hold Dr. Daszak publicly accountable for discrepancies between his closed-door transcribed interview and available evidence. Prior to the hearing, the Select Subcommittee released a new, interim report which revealed that Dr. Daszak repeatedly violated the terms of the NIH grant awarded to EcoHealth. The report recommended the formal debarment of and a criminal investigation into EcoHealth and Dr. Daszak. During the hearing, members questioned Dr. Daszak about the findings of this report, pressed him to explain EcoHealths relationship with the WIV, and scrutinized his abuse of U.S. taxpayer dollars to fund dangerous, potentially pandemic-causing research. Staff from both the majority and the minority grilled Daszak on his less than forthcoming testimony to Congress and described evidence showing EcoHealth absolutely facilitated gain-of-function research at the WIV on the American taxpayers dime.

Read the Select Subcommittees interim staff report titled An Evaluation of the Evidence Surrounding EcoHealth Alliance, Inc.s Research Activities here.

Key Hearing Takeaways

Dr. Daszak is not a faithful steward of U.S. taxpayer dollars and should never again receive funding from the federal government.

Dr. Daszak failed to defend his public position that EcoHealth has never facilitated gain-of-function research at the WIV.

Dr. Daszak admitted that of course the WIV could have hidden coronavirus samples and that he does not know if the WIV has the ability to genetically modify viruses without leaving a trace.

Dr. Daszak was unable to reconcile major discrepancies between his closed-door testimony and evidence reviewed by the Select Subcommittee.

Dr. Daszaks testimony confirmed he repeatedly misled the U.S. government by downplaying his relationship with the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

The Select Subcommittee will take further steps to address Dr. Daszaks contempt for the American people.

Member Highlights

Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic Chairman Brad Wenstrup (R-Ohio), D.P.M, pressed Dr. Daszak on why he repeatedly downplayed EcoHealths relationship with the WIV in order to secure a federal grant.

Chairman Wenstrup: Third comment is up on the screen and this time it was written by Dr. Baric and says In the U.S., these recombinant SARS coronaviruses are studied under BSL-3, not BSL-2, and China might be growing these viruses under BSL-2. U.S. researchers will likely freak out. Were you proposing to do the work, in DEFUSE, at BSL-2?

Dr. Daszak: No.

Chairman Wenstrup: In fact, you write in the proposal that the choice of BSL-2 is more cost effective. Dr. Baric testified that he does this work at BSL-3 and in fact encouraged you to do the same. Whats more important to you, biosafety or cost?

Dr. Daszak: Well, EcoHealth Alliance maintains the appropriate biosafety levels for our researchThis is simply a draft proposal where one group is suggesting one thing, another is suggesting another. The final proposal is what matters. And I want to remind the Committee that this proposal was not funded. The work was never done. It is utterly irrelevant to the origins of COVID.

Chairman Wenstrup: Well, its not irrelevant, Dr. Daszak. Its very relevant. And, you know, you just stated that China, those are Chinas standards. So youre okay with Chinas standards as opposed to the U.S. standards. And it does matter whether its a two BSL-2 or BSL-3 as Dr. Baric pointed out. And it also is important to understand that you intentionally downplayed the role of China. Between your actions to DARPA and those with NIH, you have failed to be a good steward of taxpayer dollars. And so our recommendation that you do not receive any more.

Committee on Oversight and Accountability Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) grilled Dr. Daszak on his relationship with the intelligence community specifically pressing him on his communications about EcoHealths ties to the WIV and the Chinese Communist Party.

Chairman Comer: Dr. Daszak, the U.S. intelligence community has been investigating the origins of COVID 19. During that investigation, were you ever contacted by any intelligence agencies?

Dr. Daszak: Yes.

Chairman Comer: Which ones?

Dr. Daszak: The CIA, the FBI and the Defense Intelligence Agency.

Chairman Comer: Have you ever been an informant for any U.S. intelligence agency?

Dr. Daszak: Not to my knowledge. Certainly, when theyve asked me questions, Ive provided answers as any citizen of the U.S. would.

Chairman Comer: What types of questions would theydid they ask you questions before the COVID outbreak?

Dr. Daszak: Ive spoken with the FBI before the COVID outbreak, of course.

Chairman Comer: So you had communications with the intelligence community before the outbreak of COVID.

Dr. Daszak: The FBI was a member of the Forum on Microbial Threats, which Im the chair of. So, yes, only in that context.

Chairman Comer: What types of conversations did you talk about prior to the outbreak of COVID?

Dr. Daszak: Talk about emerging disease threats and what information we have about where on the planet the next virus is likely to emerge, certainly talked about China and the threats of coronaviruses.

Chairman Comer: So the U.S. intelligence agency was interested because you had conversations with them prior to COVID and what type of activity was taking place in the Wuhan lab.

Dr. Daszak: Yeah and I believe theyve asked many other scientists too.

Chairman Comer: Do you find it troubling that, by all accounts from your testimony, the intelligence community suspected something fishy was going on at the Wuhan lab? Despite that, they still funded research with American taxpayer dollars at the Wuhan lab.

Dr. Daszak: Well, I dont know that the intelligence community funded research there.

Chairman Comer: The government did. And the intelligence community is part of the government.

Committee on Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chairman Morgan Griffith (R-Va.) revealed disturbing discrepancies between Dr. Daszaks transcribed interview in November of 2023, the evidence uncovered by the Select Subcommittee during its years-long investigation, and his public testimony this week.

Rep. Griffith: And if that were true, if that were true, Dr. Daszak, why didnt you tell me that in November of last year. Its been less than six months. I gave you the opportunity to say that there was a change in your initial drafts and later draftsYou didnt say, well, we did some additional research and we made a change on the number of times that a bat virus might spill over into the population in Southeast Asia or South China. You didnt give me that. I gave you the chance. I didnt ask it as I was looking for facts. I wasnt trying to cross-examine you at that time, and yet you didnt tell me the truth. And today you come up with a new theory as to why that might have happened. But thats not what you gave me in November. Isnt that true? You didnt give me that in November. Isnt that true? Yes or no?

Dr. Daszak: My theory is that

Rep. Griffith: Yes or no, that you told me something wrong.

Dr. Daszak: My theory has a substantial advantage over yours in that its

Rep. Griffith: No, my theory is you didnt tell me the truth. Youre now coming up with a theory as to why your reports in the leaked 2020 report and your later 2021 report are different. Im asserting and Im asking you, you told me something wrong in NovemberIsnt that true?

Dr. Daszak: I believe Im seeing this for the first time. You never showed this to me on the record.

Rep. Griffith: I asked you specifically if there would be any substantial or significant changes from what you would have had. You said you tried to send the report in earlier ,that there was something wrong with the site and so forth. And I said, but that report that was due in September, when you tried to send it in September of 2019, were there any substantial differences? You said that there werent, that they would be substantially the same

Dr. Daszak: And that is still correct.

Rep. Griffith: And you dont think this is a significant change?

Dr. Daszak: No.

Rep. Griffith: Wow. You know what? I practiced in the criminal courts for many, many years. And I will just tell you, if you were my client. I would tell you that that dog wont hunt. And the Judge aint going to believe that. I yield back.

Rep. Debbie Lesko (R-Ariz.) elicited a concession from Dr. Daszak that the U.S. State Department is responsible for allowing EcoHealth to conduct gain-of-function research at labs tied to the Chinese Community Party including the WIV.

Rep. Lesko: I think you said earlier is that you still dont know that there is Chinese military presence or collaboration with the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Is that what you said?

Dr. Daszak: No, what I said was that I have no knowledge of any military activity in the Wuhan lab.

Rep. Lesko: And how do you know that? Because the State Department, this is what the U.S. State Department said in 2021 in a fact sheet. It says secrecy and nondisclosure are standard practice for Beijing. For many years, the United States has publicly raised concerns about Chinas past biological weapons work, which Beijing has neither documented nor demonstrably eliminated despite its clear obligation under the Biological Weapons Convention. Despite the WIV presenting itself as a civilian institution, the United States has determined that the WIV has collaborated on publications and secret projects with the Chinese military. And this was in 2021. So you just deny what the State Department says, that this is not happening.

Dr. Daszak: Something doesnt add up. I completely agree because its the same State Department that reviews our proposals to NIH and allows us to work with that lab. If the State Department considers that to be a military lab, surely they would have said no the WIV is not appropriate for doing this research. However, they reviewed it and said yes. It is appropriate and allowed. I dont have access to what the State Department reviews and knows. But something doesnt add up there because it is them that gave us the go ahead to work with WIV.

Rep. Michael Cloud (R-Texas) pushed Dr. Daszak to explain why he funds research in adversarial countries including China that have repeatedly conducted highly-dangerous experiments at inadequate biosafety levels and have faced accusations of deleting sequences and samples that may have been paid for by the U.S. government.

Rep. Cloud: Knowing what you know now, do you regret working with the lab in Wuhan?

Dr. Daszak: Look, our mission is to prevent pandemics.

Rep. Cloud: Knowing what you know now, do you regret working with them? Not debating what you knew then.

Dr. Daszak: We dont do this because we want to go and work in foreign countries and risk our lives. Pandemics emerge there. If we can stop them there, we stop them getting here. Thats what we do. Its written into our mission.

Rep. Cloud: But we have evidence that the Wuhan lab destroyed data. Does that concern you at all?

Dr. Daszak: Yes. Any lab that destroys data concerns me.

Rep. Cloud: Knowing what you know now, do you regret working with the Wuhan lab? Do you think working with labs that destroy data is sound?

Dr. Daszak: I have no choice. We work in countries where diseases emerge, whether theyre our allies or our competitors.

Rep. Cloud: One of the troubling things for us, when we go home, because were representing the taxpayers, who you know, most of them are not virologists or scientists, but theyre going were paying money to fund research in a country thats in unrestricted warfare against us, that destroys evidence. And then you still are like no we should continue working with them.

Rep. Rich McCormick (R-Ga.), M.D., exposed Dr. Daszaks inaccurate testimony that he only communicated with Dr. Faucis senior advisor Dr. David Morens for personal reasons via Dr. Morenss personal Gmail. The Select Subcommittee is in possession of emails proving Dr. Daszak and Dr. Morens discussed both EcoHealth and NIH official business on Gmail in violation of federal record transparency and retention laws.

Rep. McCormick: Did you have any conversations about your grant reinstatement with Dr. David Morens, the senior advisor to Dr. Fauci?

Dr. Daszak: I dont know.

Rep. McCormick: You dont know if you had a discussion?

Dr. Daszak: I dont know. Probably. I dont know. Id have to check my records.

Rep. McCormick: Did Dr. Morens ever give you any advice on how to reinstate your federal funding?

Dr. Daszak: Oh, yeah. I mean, I asked everybody who had any knowledge about the way NIH works on any possible strategy.

Rep. McCormick: Were you aware that Dr. David Morens was communicating with you on his personal Gmail account to avoid FOIA and public accountability?

Dr. Daszak: I was aware that he was communicating with me on his personal Gmail account. Sometimes, yes, for personal matters.

Rep. McCormick: Personal matter about reinstating a public grant?

Dr. Daszak: Well, its not his job to reinstate it. This is me asking his advice as a friend and colleague.

Rep. McCormick: Do you find it problematic a senior adviser of Dr. Fauci, the head of NIAID, was communicating with you on Gmail rather than in official capacity about an official grant?

Dr. Daszak: Well, when I talk to him by email about personal and security issues and political security issues.

Rep. McCormick: When your grant was officially terminated in April of 2020, do you think that Dr. Morens undermined NIAIDs decision by advising you on how to get it reinstated?

Dr. Daszak: Well, if that were true, then everybody else at NIH who advised me on how to get it reinstated, including the official reinstatement procedure, would also have undermined.

###

Read more:

Hearing Wrap Up: EcoHealth Alliance Should be Criminally Investigated, Formally Debarred - United States House ... - House Committee on Oversight and...

While Wednesday marks one year since Japan downgraded COVID-19 to a lower-risk infectious disease category that includes seasonal influenza, the country has faced a larger-than-usual number of unseasonal outbreaks of other infectious diseases over the past year.

Infectious disease experts are urging people to implement basic infection prevention measures, such as hand washing, as their immunity to pathogens other than the coronavirus is believed to have weakened during the COVID-19 pandemic.

In line with the COVID-19 downgrade in May 2023, Japan stopped counting all COVID-19 cases nationwide and began receiving COVID-19 case reports from about 5,000 designated medical institutions.

See the original post here:

Anti-infection measures still needed, one year after COVID-19 downgrade - The Japan Times

In a recent study published in Nature Mental Health, researchers investigated the effects of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on young individuals' alcohol usage and difficulties.

They also assessed disruptions and theoretical reasons for these alterations, particularly those related to excessive drinking and drinking behaviors.

Study:Changes in alcohol consumption and alcohol problems before and after the COVID-19 pandemic: a prospective study in heavy drinking young adults. Image Credit:Lomb/Shutterstock.com

COVID-19 has profoundly influenced people's daily lives, especially children and adolescents. There is a rising interest in COVID-19-related alterations in alcohol intake. However, most research has been cross-sectional, depending on retrospective accounts of pre-pandemic alcohol use.

Longitudinal studies have used retrospective reports, but limited previous longitudinal research has incorporated numerous evaluations before and after the epidemic began.

Understanding the reasons why a few individuals drank more or less during the epidemic is critical for developing effective alcohol interventions.

In the present prospective study, researchers compared alcohol use and trends before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. They used individual growth models to analyze the trajectories of changes in drinking habits following COVID-19 onset.

The researchers investigated theoretically informed processes, such as increases in drinking to cope, negative affectivity, and lonely drinking, to understand pandemic-related changes in alcohol intake and issues. They conducted the study between February 2018 and March 2022 using the 'pre-post' model to compare growth models.

The study comprised 234 young individuals aged 2129 years recruited from the Pittsburgh metropolitan area using local fliers, internet ads, and the University of Pittsburgh's Clinical Translational Science Institute (CTSI) Research Participant Registry.

The team generated several correlated slopes and parallel process models to determine whether changes in negative affectivity, coping drinking motivations, and lonely drinking were associated with changes in alcohol consumption patterns and issues.

To further understand the probable processes behind changes in alcohol intake, patterns, and difficulties from pre- to post-pandemic start, the researchers examined changes in negative affectivity, drinking to cope with motivations, and lonely drinking.

They also assessed sex differences in the amount of pre- and post-pandemic onset changes in alcohol consumption, alcohol issues, and mechanism factors.

The team used the Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test (AUDIT) and the Brief Young Adult Alcohol Consequences Questionnaire (B-YAACQ) to assess alcohol-related problems.

They used the Drinking Motivations Questionnaire-Revised (DMQ-R) to examine drinking motivations and the Personality Inventory for the DSM-5 (PID-5) to assess negative affectivity.

They used multilevel structural equation modeling (MSEM) for analysis. Observations before March 16, 2020, were designated pre-pandemic, while those made on or after March 16, 2020, were classified as post-pandemic.

The study discovered significant decreases in alcohol consumption amount and frequency from pre- to post-pandemic start, primarily due to reduced weekend alcohol intake frequency and quantity.

Negative affectivity reduced as solo drinking rose, with no significant change in coping drinking motivations. Total drinking frequency and amount fell by 0.6 days and 12.8 drinks, respectively.

Weekend drinking behaviors were significantly responsible for these reductions, with weekend frequency and quantity falling by 0.5 days and 7.9 drinks compared to 0.1 days and 4.9 drinks during the week. In addition, the participants reduced their drinks per day by 1.1 drinks.

Alcohol-related difficulties also decreased, with AUDIT and B-YAACQ scores down by 2.1 and 1.9 points, respectively. Solitary drinking rose by 3.8 percent points from before to after the epidemic began.

Negative affectivity and coping drinking reasons were the same before and after COVID-19, and the amplitude of COVID-19 onset effects decreased marginally.

However, there was considerable between-individual heterogeneity in the level of changes from before to after COVID-19 commencement, indicating that people experienced different magnitudes of change during COVID-19.

Gender did not influence the degree of COVID-19-related changes for the study variables in gender moderation models. Females showed a lower before-after COVID-19 slope in alcohol intake per day than men, indicating a slower fall in the daily intake after COVID-19 initiation.

Alterations in alcohol intake and difficulties were not associated with changes in reasons for drinking to cope, lonely drinking, or altered negative affectivity.

The researchers discovered no significant variations in alcohol usage between males and females, except a smaller decrease in drinks per day for females before and after the pandemic began.

However, both genders had considerable reductions in alcohol consumption, negative affectivity, and increases in solitary drinking.

The study findings revealed that young individuals who drink significantly reduced their alcohol use and had fewer issues once the pandemic began. Negative affectivity reduced, lonely drinking rose, whereas coping drinking motivations remained the same.

The team noted significant variation in alcohol intake, drinking behaviors, and issues between pre- and post-pandemic starts, although this was unaffected by gender.

Future research should follow a 28-day timeline and take an individual-centered approach to improve understanding of the pandemic's impact on diverse groups.

View post:

Study reveals decrease in alcohol use among young adults during COVID-19 - News-Medical.Net