Category: Corona Virus

Severe outcomes from COVID-19 infections are much less common in children than in older adults, and new research suggests that important differences in how the nasal cells of young and elderly people respond to the SARS-CoV-2 virus could explain why children typically experience milder COVID-19 symptoms.

"Despite effective vaccines, age remains the single greatest risk factor for COVID-19 mortality," the authors write. "Children infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) rarely develop severe disease, while the mortality in infected people over 85 years is currently as high as 1 in 10."

The cell-culture study is published in Nature Microbiology and is based on nasal epithelial cells (NECs) collected from healthy participants, including children (0 to 11 years), younger adults (30 to 50 years), and the elderly (over 70 years).

All study participant samples were collected from the Great Ormond Street Hospital, University College London Hospital, and the Royal Free Hospital, all in the United Kingdom.

The study was conducted by culturing the nasal cells of each age-group, which resulted in a dataset of 139,598 cells. The researchers identified 24 distinct epithelial cell types.

Healthy NECs had several age-related differences, including differences in cell-type proportions in healthy control cultures, with a higher abundance of basal or progenitor subtypes in adult versus pediatric cultures. In addition, NEC cultures from older adult donors were thicker than pediatric cultures.

To see how the cultured cells reacted to COVID-19 infections, researchers infected cultures with an early-lineage SARS-CoV-2 isolate.

Cells collected from children had high expression of interferon-stimulated genes and incomplete viral replication. Interferon is one of the first defenses fronted by the body when faced with an infection.

Our research reveals how the type of cells we have in our nose changes with age, and how this affects our ability to combat SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Dr Claire Smith of the Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health said in a press release from University College London, "Our research reveals how the type of cells we have in our nose changes with age, and how this affects our ability to combat SARS-CoV-2 infection. This could be crucial in developing effective anti-viral treatments tailored to different age groups, especially for the elderly who are at higher risk of severe COVID-19."

Read more:

Nasal cells offer clues about why COVID-19 is typically milder in children - University of Minnesota Twin Cities

A recent study led by researchers at the University College London (UCL) and the Wellcome Sanger Institute has unveiled significant differences in the way nasal cells from young and elderly individuals respond to the SARS-CoV-2 virus. This discovery provides new insights into why children generally exhibit milder COVID-19 symptoms compared to older adults.

The findings shed light on the initial interactions between the virus and human nasal epithelial cells (NECs), which are among the first cells targeted by the virus.

Children infected with SARS-CoV-2 rarely progress to respiratory failure. However, the risk of mortality in infected people over 85 years of age remains high, wrote the study authors.

Here we investigate differences in the cellular landscape and function of pediatric (<12years), adult (3050years) and older adult (>70years) ex vivo cultured nasal epithelial cells in response to infection with SARS-CoV-2.

The researchers analyzed nasal cells donated by healthy individuals across all three age groups to the Great Ormond Street Hospital (GOSH), University College London Hospital (UCLH), and the Royal Free Hospital.

The cells were cultured to regrow into the diverse cell types originally found in the nasal passages. Employing advanced single-cell RNA sequencing techniques, the researchers identified 24 distinct types of epithelial cells. Each age groups cultures were then exposed to SARS-CoV-2 in controlled experiments.

Three days post-infection, the results showed that childrens nasal cells mounted a rapid response by increasing the production of interferon, a critical component of the bodys initial antiviral defense, which effectively restricted viral replication. However, this robust antiviral response was found to diminish with age.

In elderly individuals, the NECs not only produced more infectious virus particles but also exhibited increased cellular shedding and damage. This could explain the higher severity of COVID-19 symptoms and complications seen in older adults.

Our research reveals how the type of cells we have in our nose changes with age, and how this affects our ability to combat SARS-CoV-2 infection. This could be crucial in developing effective antiviral treatments tailored to different age groups, especially for the elderly who are at higher risk of severe COVID-19, explained project leader Claire Smith, an associate professor in infection, immunity, and inflammation at UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health.

By carrying out SARS-CoV-2 infections of epithelial cells in vitro and studying the responses with single-cell sequencing, we get a much more detailed understanding of the viral infection kinetics and see big differences in the innate immune response between cell types, added co-senior author Kerstin Meyer, an expert in cellular genetics at the Wellcome Sanger Institute.

Despite the advancements in vaccination and treatment options, the mortality risk remains high for those over 85 who contract the virus. This research emphasizes the importance of age as a critical factor in both the study and treatment of infectious diseases.

Despite effective vaccines, age remains the single greatest risk factor for COVID-19 mortality. Children infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) rarely develop severe disease, while the mortality in infected people over 85years is currently as high as 1 in 10, noted the researchers.

It is fascinating that when we take away immune cells from nasal samples, and are only left with nasal epithelial cells grown in a dish, we are still able to identify age-specific differences in our bodys response to the SARS-CoV-2 between the young and elderly to explain why children are generally protected from severe COVID-19, said co-senior author Marko Nikolic, a clinical scientist the UCL Division of Medicine.

Understanding the cellular differences at the initiation of infection is just the beginning. We now hope to investigate the long-term implications of these cellular changes and test therapeutic interventions using our unique cell culture model. This gold-standard system is only possible with the support of our funders and the willingness of participants to provide their samples, Smith concluded.

The researchers suggest that future studies should explore how aging affects the bodys response to other viral infections, potentially leading to more age-specific medical strategies.

The study is published in the journal Nature Microbiology.

Like what you read? Subscribe to our newsletter for engaging articles, exclusive content, and the latest updates.

Check us out on EarthSnap, a free app brought to you by Eric Ralls and Earth.com.

See the original post here:

Nasal cells protect children against severe COVID-19 - Earth.com

Long ago Oscar Wilde cautioned, The truth is rarely pure and never simple.The COVID-19 pandemic is winding down, but the truth about the original source of the virus remains as contentious and elusive as ever.

Experts positions have hardened, but at least the facts about the two competing theories are clear enough today for the public to understand, even if the correct theory for the origin of COVID-19 remains uncertain.

The initial and for a time most popular explanation is known as the zoonotic source or more commonly, the animal spillover theory. This postulates that the virus originated in bats, then spread to an intermediary mammal and then leaped to infect humans. The main support for this theory is that the first cases of COVID-19 were believed to be from a wet food market in Wuhan, China, where many exotic mammals are caged in cramped, unsanitary conditions, conducive to pathogen spread. This aligns with the fact that the majority of pandemics occur due to transmission from animals. Specifically, the other two 21st century pandemics involving related coronaviruses SARS CoV-1 in 2003 and MERS in 2012 involved animal to human transmission.

Many virologists and epidemiologists are on record supporting this theory, including Dr. Paul Offit, the noted pediatrician and vaccine expert, who is this countrys leading authority on the history of vaccines. Offits opinion carries significant weight, but he has still not backed his opinion with dispositive evidence. The major weakness of the animal spillover theory is that for nearly five years researchers have been testing extensively for the virus in exotic animals such as civets, pangolins and raccoon dogs but to date they have found no evidence of COVID-19 in any of them. Until the virus is isolated in an intermediate host, the animal spillover theory is merely speculative.

The countertheory is that the virus emerged from a laboratory where work on viral transmission was being performed: the lab leak theory. The main support for this theory is that Wuhan, where the virus emerged, is the most important site in Asia for gain-of-function research (viral manipulation that can enhance transmission). The Wuhan virus laboratory is only several miles from the wet market, where the first cases appeared. Also concerning is that genetic analysis shows that the COVID-19 virus contains a binding region, known as a furin cleavage site, with a pattern that rarely occurs in nature.

Historically, lab leaks are occasionally responsible for dangerous pathogen outbreaks: in 1979, anthrax escaped from a Soviet laboratory and in a separate incident, smallpox leaked from a laboratory in Great Britain. Among those favoring the lab leak theory are members of the U.S. intelligence community, including officials in the FBI and Department of Energy, which is especially well-versed in laboratory procedure and biological research. Experienced science journalists such as Matt Ridley and Nicholas Wade, who have studied the question, also favor the lab leak theory. Unfortunately no specific leak site has been identified and nothing has been proven; the lab leak theory remains inferential, and it has gained considerable traction since it was dismissed early on as a conspiracy theory by public health officials.

It has become fashionable to use the term conspiracy theory to discredit anyone or any idea that is contrary to a mainstream belief or political view. Where once the term was reserved for such confections as faked moon landings or multiple shooters firing at former President John F. Kennedy from a grassy knoll, now it is a fashionable ad hominem way to discredit people without confronting and refuting their arguments through discourse.

Ironically, in the search for the source of COVID-19, there have been at least two documented actual not theoretical conspiracies: one by leading U.S. public health officials to debunk the lab leak theory and another by the Chinese government, which destroyed evidence in a probable attempt to hinder investigation of the source. When real conspiracies are in the air, scientists should consider retiring their use of the term conspiracy theory and stick to explaining facts. The best way to debunk the lab leak theory is to discover the animal that serves as the intermediary. Name calling is not a becoming feature of science, and does nothing to discredit the lab leak theory.

This lingering uncertainty prompts some researchers to mutter, What difference, at this point, does it make? Regardless of whether the virus turns out to have come from animal spillover, we still have to pay more attention to laboratory security. Similarly, confirmation of a lab leak would also still demand heightened scrutiny of wet markets. But there is another important principle at stake in the search for the origin of COVID-19: our faith in science. The theory that turns out to be correct will tell us what was true and what was not, whom we should have trusted and who was speaking out of ignorance no matter how well-intentioned and whether anyone was attempting to deceive the public. In an open society, these are not trivial issues, especially when trust in science has taken the beating it took during COIVD-19.

Two millennia ago, the Roman Stoic philosopher Seneca said that time discovers truth and that many discoveries are reserved for ages still to come. Perhaps Seneca was too optimistic for this inquiry, but this should not deter the pursuit of one of the most important scientific questions of the 21st century, Where did COVID-19 come from?

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

Continue reading here:

Op-ed: The correct theory for the origin of COVID-19 remains uncertain - Chicago Tribune

The airways leading to our lungs culminate in myriad alveoli, minuscule one-cell-thick air sacs, whichare abutted by abundant capillaries. This interface, called the interstitium, is where oxygen in the air we breathe enters the bloodstream and is then distributed to the rest of the body by thecirculatory system.

The two kinds of SARS-CoV-2-susceptible lung-associated macrophages are positioned in two different places. So-called alveolar macrophages hang out in the air spaces within the alveoli.Once infected, these cells smolder, producing and dribbling out some viral progeny at a casual pace but more or less keeping a stiff upper lip and maintaining their normal function. This behavior may allow them to feed SARS-CoV-2s progression by incubating and generating a steady supply of new viral particles that escape by stealth and penetrate the layer of cells enclosing the alveoli.

Interstitial macrophages, the other cell type revealed to be easily and profoundly infected by SARS-CoV-2, patrol the far side of the alveoli, where the rubber of oxygen meets the road of red blood cells. If an invading viral particle or other microbe manages to evade alveolar macrophages vigilance, infect and punch through the layer of cells enclosing the alveoli, jeopardizing not only the lungs but the rest of the body,interstitial macrophages are ready to jump in and protect the neighborhood.

At least, usually.But when an interstitial macrophage meets SARS-CoV-2, its a different story. Rather than get eaten by the omnivorous immune cell, the virus infects it.

And an infected interstitial macrophage doesnt just smolder; it catches on fire. All hell breaks looseas the virusliterally seizes the controls and takes over, hijacking a cells protein- and nucleic-acid-making machinery.In the course of producingmassive numbers of copies of itself,SARS-CoV-2 destroys the boundaries separating the cell nucleus from the rest of the cell like a spatula shattering and scattering the yolk of a raw egg.The viral progeny exitthe spent macrophage and move on to infect other cells.

But thats not all. In contrast to alveolar macrophages, infected interstitial macrophages pump out substances that signal other immune cells elsewhere in the body to head for the lungs. In a patient, Krasnow suggested, this would trigger an inflammatory influx of such cells. As the lungs fill with cells and fluid that comes with them, oxygen exchange becomes impossible. The barrier maintaining alveolar integrity growsprogressively damaged.Leakage of infected fluids from damaged alveoli propels viral progeny into the bloodstream, blasting the infection and inflammation todistant organs.

Yet other substances released by SARS-CoV-2-infected interstitial macrophages stimulate the production of fibrous material in connective tissue, resulting in scarring of the lungs. In a living patient, the replacement of oxygen-permeable cells with scar tissue would further render the lungs incapable of executing oxygen exchange.

We cant say that a lung cell sitting in a dish is going to get COVID, Blish said. But we suspect this may be the point where, in an actual patient,the infection transitions from manageable to severe.

Compounding this unexpected findingis the discovery that SARS-CoV-2 uses a different route to infect interstitial macrophagesthan the one it uses to infect the other types.

Unlike alveolar type 2 cells and alveolar macrophages, to which the virus gains access by clinging to ACE2 on their surfaces, SARS-CoV-2 breaks into interstitial macrophages using a different receptor these cells display. In the study, blocking SARS-CoV-2s binding to ACE2 protected the former cells but failed to dent the latter cells susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection.

SARS-CoV-2 was not using ACE2 to get into interstitial macrophages, Krasnow said.It enters via another receptor called CD209.

That would seem to explain why monoclonal antibodies developed specifically to block SARS-CoV-2/ACE2 interaction failed to mitigate or prevent severe COVID-19 cases.

Its time to find a whole new set of drugs that can impede SARS-CoV-2/CD209 binding.Now, Krasnow said.

The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health (grants K08AI163369, T32AI007502 and T32DK007217), the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Chan Zuckerberg Biohub, the Burroughs WellcomeFund, Stanford Chem-H, the Stanford Innovative Medicine Accelerator, and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute.

Read more from the original source:

Stanford Medicine study flags unexpected cells in lung as suspected source of severe COVID - Stanford Medical Center Report

For the 13th consecutive week, the number of reported coronavirus cases has decreased statewide.

And, in the 10 communities covered by The Sun Chronicle in the week ending April 6, reported cases increased by four, from 16 to 20. Thats an increase of 25%.

The local communities covered are: Attleboro, Foxboro, Mansfield, Norfolk, North Attleboro, Norton, Plainville, Rehoboth, Seekonk and Wrentham.

Statewide, the number of reported cases fell to 629, from 676 a decrease of 47 cases. Thats a drop of 6.95%.

Thats the fifth consecutive week the number of reported cases has been under 1,000.

Overall reported cases have dropped 10 consecutive weeks statewide from 4,999 to 629 cases, which is a decrease of 87.41%.

In Norfolk, North Attleboro, Seekonk and Wrentham there was only one reported case in each community.

There were 417 coronavirus tests administered in the 10 communities covered by The Sun Chronicle, with 20 positives, a percentage of 4.79% which is 1.14 points higher than last week. Thats a decrease of 21 tests, which equals 4.79%.

The number of actual COVID-19 cases in the area and state, however, is likely higher than the reported number because of the prevalence of home-testing kits. Not all the positive cases found through home-testing are reported to health officials.

Also, many people who become ill with COVID-like symptoms fever, congestion, sneezing, fatigue, body aches, and headaches dont bother testing anymore as the virus has weakened and the symptoms caused by the virus are less severe.

For context, the highest number of new cases statewide for one week was recorded on Jan. 14, 2022, at 132,557. The highest number locally for one week was 3,463, recorded on Jan. 13, 2022.

All told, since the beginning of the pandemic in March 2020, the area has recorded 50,758 cases. Thats 25.27% of the 200,793 population in the 10 communities covered by The Sun Chronicle.

Percentages of the disease in each community range from 23% to 29% and the average is 24.65%

In the week ending April 6, the reported case counts in each of the 10 communities was:

Statewide, the number of reported cases was 629 confirmed with 206 probable for a total statewide of 2,150,135 confirmed and probable cases since the beginning of the pandemic in March 2020.

The number of confirmed deaths statewide was eight and the number of probable deaths was one.

The number of confirmed deaths statewide since the beginning of the pandemic in March 2020 is 23,439, and the number of confirmed and probable deaths is 29,945.

A poll for the 10 communities covered by The Sun Chronicle was taken recently and the total number of deaths from COVID-19 for the area was 520. Thats a death rate of 1.02%.

Death totals per community covered by The Sun Chronicle are:

Most of the deaths were suffered by the elderly. According to the states Department of Public Health, most deaths occur in people at or over the age of 65, with the majority being people over 80.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the rate of positive tests for coronavirus nationwide is 3.5% as of March 30. In the Attleboro area its 4.79%.

Nationwide, emergency room visits sparked by the virus were down 14.5% as of March 30.

Hospital admissions for coronavirus are down 15.3% nationwide as of March 30.

And deaths caused by the virus nationwide are down 20% as of March 30. The percentage rate for all deaths nationwide is 1.2%.

In the 10 communities covered by The Sun Chronicle, its 1.02%

George W. Rhodes can be reached at 508-236-0432.

View original post here:

Reported coronavirus cases rise slightly in Attleboro area - The Sun Chronicle

Four years after the start of the COVID pandemic, the age and race of its victims in California have dramatically shifted: Now, a Bay Area News Group analysis finds, those who are dying from the virus are much older, and more often White than Latino, a notable switch.

While COVID deaths in California have plunged across all race and age groups, a comparison of deaths from the first six months of the pandemic to the most recent six months of data compiled by the California Department of Public Health shows 70% of those dying nowadays are 75 or older up from just over half in early 2020.

And while Latinos made up nearly half of all Californians killed by COVID in the first six months of the pandemic, White residents now account for nearly 60% of all deaths.

The changing demographics and plummeting overall death toll exhibit how Californians built up immunity to the virus, experts say, through exposures and vaccines, and which groups are now the most vulnerable to the worst outcomes.

After four years of living with the virus, life is largely back to pre-pandemic normal. But when the virus first shut down our lives in 2020, face masks and working from home were foreign concepts to most. And while the speed of developing the first COVD vaccines was unprecedented in science, it took until early 2021 the heart of the pandemics deadliest wave for the public to get immunized. While COVIDs risk has certainly diminished, how much has its deadly wake actually changed in that time?

Wow, we are doing so much better than we were, said Dr. John Swartzberg, clinical professor emeritus at the UC Berkeley School of Public Health, his first reaction when looking at the data.

The total number of people dying has dropped across the board in nearly every category. More people over 85 died in the first six months of the pandemic, 4,209, than the number of deaths across all age groups in the past six months.

Second, your age is a factor. While older people have always been more vulnerable, they account for an even higher proportion of COVID deaths now.

The proportion of all COVID deaths among those 85 and older has grown from 29% to 42%. But that doesnt mean the virus is deadlier for our elders: In the first six months of the pandemic, there were three times more deaths from the virus in that 85-and-older age group than there were in the most recent six-month period.

However small the number, there is one statistical peculiarity: The two youngest age groups are the only ones that saw more deaths in the past six months than early in the pandemic.

No deaths were reported among children younger than 14 in the Golden State through Aug. 31, 2020, but three young children have died from COVID, including two children under 5, in the last six months.

While deaths have become more concentrated among older Californians, another factor has changed dramatically: the racial breakdown of the people dying.

Early in the pandemic, Blacks and Latinos struggled much more in terms of mortality rates than any other population, primarily compared to Asian and White populations, Swartzberg noted. But that has flipped.

The percentage of Californians who died who are White has nearly doubled, from 30% to 60% of all COVID deaths, from 4,332 deaths through August 2020, to 2,065 deaths in the most recent period. White people make up 37% of the states residents.

Moving in the other direction, the proportion of Latino deaths among those who died from COVID has shrunk from 49% of the first six months to just 20% of recent deaths. Latino people make up 39% of the states residents.

Californias Latino population is younger and therefore less at risk, Swartzberg said.

And he has some more educated guesses as to why the early pandemic death trends among racial groups have flipped so dramatically: In the first years of the pandemic, many Black and Latino communities were not getting vaccinated as quickly as their White counterparts, a combination of lack of access and insufficient outreach, but that has changed as the pandemic has evolved.

A November 2023 poll by KFF, a nonprofit health care research foundation, found a slightly higher percentage of Black and Hispanic adults reported getting an updated vaccine, compared to 19% of White adults. And the gap grew when adding those who planned on getting the new vaccine but hadnt yet, 59% of Black and Hispanic adults and just 42% of White adults. The poll also found White adults were less likely to take precautions against catching and spreading the virus during this past holiday season.

Dr. Peter Chin-Hong, a UCSF professor of medicine who specializes in infectious diseases, also points to political influence on vaccine uptake as one of the most compelling trends.

The KFF poll found Democrats were twice as likely as Republicans to say they had already gotten the updated vaccine, while 55% of Republicans said they would definitely not get the new vaccine compared to 12% of Democrats and 40% of independents.

In the beginning, none of this was political we were all in this together, said Chin-Hong. The differential in mortality was based on structural racism and lack of access, underlying medical problems. But then it became a very polarizing issue, like everything regarding COVID.

Go here to read the rest:

Whos dying now? Heres how recent COVID deaths compare to the early months of the pandemic in California - The Mercury News

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

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

Read the original post:

'Newport: In This Together' documents city's COVID-19 experience - newportri.com

Infection

In a study from the PHOSP-COVID and ISARIC-4C consortia in the UK, researchers have discovered inflammatory processes taking place during what is termed long COVID. Long COVID is defined by the World Health Organization (WHO) as the continuation or development of new symptoms for 3 or more months after the initial SARS-CoV-2 infection. It is estimated that 1 in 10 SARS-CoV-2 infections results in long COVID, thus affecting about 65 million people worldwide.

Read more:

Researchers find similarities, but also differences, in long COVID subtypes - BioWorld Online

By Kwasi Gyamfi Asiedu, PolitiFact

From spring break parties to Mardi Gras, many people remember the last major normal thing they did before the novel coronavirus pandemic dawned, forcing governments worldwide to issue stay-at-home advisories and shutdowns.

Even before the first case of covid-19 was detected in the U.S., fears and uncertainties helped spur misinformations rapid spread. In March 2020, schools closed, employers sent staff to work from home, and grocery stores called for physical distancing to keep people safe. But little halted the flow of misleading claims that sent fact-checkers and public health officials into overdrive.Some peoplefalselyasserted covids symptoms were associated with 5G wireless technology. Faux cures anduntested treatmentspopulated social media and political discourse. Amid uncertainty about the viruss origins, some people proclaimedcovid didnt exist at all. PolitiFact named downplay and denial about the virus its2020 Lie of the Year.

Four years later, peoples lives are largely free of the extreme public health measures that restricted them early in the pandemic. But covid misinformation persists, although its now centered mostly on vaccines and vaccine-related conspiracy theories.

PolitiFact has publishedmore than 2,000 fact checksrelated to covid vaccines alone.

From a misinformation researcher perspective, [there has been] shifting levels of trust, said Tara Kirk Sell, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security. Early on in the pandemic, there was a lot of: This isnt real, fake cures, and then later on, we see more vaccine-focused mis- and disinformation and a more partisan type of disinformation and misinformation.

Here are some of the most persistent covid misinformation narratives we see today:

A Loss of Trust in the Vaccines

Covid vaccines were quickly developed, with U.S. patients receiving the first shots in December 2020, 11 months after the first domestic case was detected.

Experts credit the speedy development with helping tosave millions of livesand preventing hospitalizations. Researchers at the University of Southern California and Brown University calculated thatvaccines saved 2.4 million livesin 141 countries starting from the vaccines rollout through August 2021 alone. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data shows there were 1,164 U.S. deaths provisionallyattributed to covidthe week of March 2, down from nearly 26,000 at the pandemics height in January 2021, as vaccines were just rolling out.

But on social media and in some public officials remarks, misinformation about covid vaccine efficacy and safety is common.U.S. presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has built his 2024 campaign on a movement that seeks to legitimize conspiracy theories about the vaccines. PolitiFact made that its 2023 Lie of the Year.

PolitiFact has seen claims that spike proteins from vaccines arereplacing spermin vaccinated males. (Thatsfalse.) Weve researched the assertion that vaccines can change your DNA. (Thatsmisleading and ignores evidence). Social media posts poked fun at Kansas City Chiefs tight end Travis Kelce for encouraging people to get vaccinated, asserting that the vaccine actually shuts off recipients hearts. (No, it doesnt.)And some people pointed to an American Red Cross blood donation questionnaire as evidence that shots are unsafe.(PolitiFact rated that False.)

Experts say this misinformation has real-world effects.

A September 2023 survey byKFF found that 57% of Americanssay they are very or somewhat confident in covid vaccines. And those who distrust them are more likely to identify as politically conservative: Thirty-six percent of Republicans compared with 84% of Democrats say they are very or somewhat confident in the vaccine.

Immunization rates for routine vaccines for other conditions have also taken a hit. Measles had been eradicated for more than 20 years in the U.S. but there have been recent outbreaks instates including Florida,Maryland, and Ohio. Floridas surgeon general has expressedskepticismabout vaccines andrejectedguidancefrom the CDC about how to contain potentially deadly disease spread.

The vaccination rate among kindergartners has declined from 95% in the 2019-20 school year to 93% in 2022-23, according to theCDC. Public health officials have set a 95% vaccination rate target to prevent and reduce the risk of disease outbreaks. The CDC also foundexemptions had risen to 3%, the highest rate ever recordedin the U.S.

Unsubstantiated Claims That Vaccines Cause Deaths or Other Illness

PolitiFact has seen repeated and unsubstantiatedclaims that covid vaccines have caused mass numbers of deaths.

A recent widely shared post claimed17 million people had diedbecause of the vaccine, despite contrary evidence from multiple studies and institutions such as the World Health Organization and CDC that the vaccines are safe and help to prevent severe illness and death.

Another online post claimed the booster vaccine hadeight strains of HIVand would kill 23% of the population. Vaccine manufacturers publish theingredient lists; they do not include HIV. People living with HIV were among the peoplegiven priority accessduring early vaccine rollout to protect them from severe illness.

Covid vaccines also have been blamed forcausing Alzheimersandcancer. Experts have found no evidence the vaccines cause either conditions.

You had this remarkable scientific or medical accomplishment contrasted with this remarkable rejection of that technology by a significant portion of the American public, said Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center at the Childrens Hospital of Philadelphia.

More than three years after vaccines became available, about 70% of Americans have completed a primary series of covid vaccination,according to CDC figures. About 17% have gotten the most recentbivalent booster.

False claimsoften pullfrom and misuse datafrom theVaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. The database, run by the CDC and the FDA, allows anybody to report reactions after any vaccine. The reports themselves are unverified, but the database is designed to help researchers find patterns for further investigation.

AnOctober 2023 surveypublished in November by the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania found 63% of Americans think it is safer to get the covid-19 vaccine than the covid-19 disease that was down from 75% in April 2021.

Celebrity Deaths Falsely Attributed to Vaccines

Betty White, Bob Saget,Matthew Perry, andDMXare just a few of the many celebrities whose deaths were falsely linked to the vaccine. The anti-vaccine filmDied Suddenly tried to give credence to false claims that the vaccine causes people to die shortly after receiving it.

Cline Gounder, editor-at-large for public health at KFF Health News and an infectious disease specialist, said these claims proliferate because of two things:cognitive bias and more insidious motivated reasoning.

Its like saying I had an ice cream cone and then I died the next day; the ice cream must have killed me, she said. And those with preexisting beliefs about the vaccine seek to attach sudden deaths to the vaccine.

Gounder experienced thispersonally when her husband, the celebrated sports journalist Grant Wahl, died while covering the 2022 World Cup in Qatar. Wahl died of a ruptured aortic aneurysm but anti-vaccine accounts falsely linked his death to a covid vaccine, forcing Gounder topubliclyset the record straight.

It is very clear that this is about harming other people, said Gounder, who was aguestat United Facts of America in 2023. And in this case, trying to harm me and my family at a point where we were grieving my husbands loss. What was important in that moment was to really stand up for my husband, his legacy, and to do what I know he would have wanted me to do, which is to speak the truth and to do so very publicly.

Out-of-Control Claims About Government Control

False claims that thepandemic was plannedby government leaders and those in power abound.

At any given moment, Microsoft Corp. co-founder and philanthropist Bill Gates, World Economic Forum head Klaus Schwab, or Anthony Fauci, former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, are blamed for orchestrating pandemic-related threats.In November, Rep. Matt Rosendale (R-Mont.) falsely claimed Fauci brought the virus to his state ayear before the pandemic.There isno evidenceof that. Gates, according to the narratives, is using dangerous vaccines to push a depopulation agenda. Thatsfalse. And Schwab has not said he has an agenda to establish a totalitarian global regime using the coronavirus to depopulate the Earth and reorganize society. Thats part of aconspiracy theorythats come to be calledThe Great Resetthat has beendebunkedmanytimes.

The United Nations World Health Organization is frequently painted as a global force for evil, too, with detractors saying it is using vaccination to control or harm people. But the WHO has not declared thata new pandemicis happening, as some have claimed. Its current pandemic preparedness treaty is in no way positioned to remove human rights protections or restrict freedoms, asone post said. And the organization has not announced plans to deploy troops to corral people andforcibly vaccinate them. The WHO is, however, working on a new treaty to help countries improve coordination in response to future pandemics.

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFFan independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

This story can be republished for free (details).

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFFan independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

Subscribe to KFF Health News free Morning Briefing.

Previously Published on kffhealthnews.org

***

All Premium Members get to view The Good Men Project with NO ADS. A $50 annual membership gives you an all access pass. You can be a part of every call, group, class and community. A $25 annual membership gives you access to one class, one Social Interest group and our online communities. A $12 annual membership gives you access to our Friday calls with the publisher, our online community.

Photo credit: unsplash

See original here:

Four Years After Shelter-in-Place, COVID-19 Misinformation Persists - The Good Men Project

The former chief executive of a biotechnology company who, during the early days of the pandemic, falsely claimed that he had invented a blood test that could detect Covid-19 in 15 seconds was sentenced on Friday to seven years in prison for securities fraud, federal prosecutors said.

From February 2020 to December 2020, the former executive, Keith Berman, 70, of Westlake Village, Calif., engaged in a scheme to defraud people into investing in his company, Decision Diagnostics Corporation, by claiming the test could detect Covid using a finger prick sample of blood, prosecutors said.

In March and April 2020, Mr. Berman issued 12 false and misleading news releases describing the rapid Covid test, which his company called GenViro, prosecutors wrote. Decision Diagnostics stock price jumped by more than 1,500 percent during the period, prosecutors said.

In reality, prosecutors said, Mr. Berman had privately confided in a friend the test could not actually detect Covid-19.

Prosecutors accused Mr. Berman, the sole director of the publicly traded medical device company, of capitalizing on peoples fears about the pandemic in an effort to resuscitate the companys fortunes.

Mr. Bermans scheme resulted in about $28 million in investor losses, prosecutors said. Mr. Berman was indicted in December 2020, and he pleaded guilty in December 2023 to securities fraud, wire fraud and obstruction of an official proceeding.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

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

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?Log in.

Want all of The Times?Subscribe.

Read the original post:

Biotech Exec Gets 7 Years in Prison for False Claims About Rapid Covid-19 Test - The New York Times