Category: Covid-19 Vaccine

A memorial fund has been established by Worcester Firefighters IAFF Local 1009 in the name of Firefighter Christopher J. Roy's daughter, Ava Roy. Checks may be made payable to the AVA ROY FUND and mailed directly to the Worcester Fire Department Credit Union, 34 Glennie Street, Worcester, MA 01605.

Go here to see the original:

School vacation COVID-19 vaccination clinics to feature family activities, raffles, and gift card giveaways - worcesterma.gov

A little over a year ago, New Zealand and much of the world was waiting for a vaccine to spell the beginning of the end of the Covid-19 pandemic.

February 20 marks one year since Aotearoas vaccination programme began in earnest, rolling out first to border and managed isolation and quarantine (MIQ) workers though technically the first 25 doses, to vaccinators themselves, were given the day before.

Authorities were initially hesitant to put a target on vaccination, but in January 2021, Director-General of Health Dr Ashley Bloomfield said he hoped at least 70 per cent of Kiwis would be vaccinated.

In the year since, more than 10.1 million doses, including boosters, have been given, meaning 96 per cent of eligible people partially-immunised, and 95 per cent fully vaccinated.

ALDEN WILLIAMS/Stuff

Sunday marks a year since New Zealands Covid-19 vaccine roll-out began XX per cent of eligible Kiwis are now fully vaccinated.

READ MORE:* Covid-19: Repeated booster doses of the original vaccine unlikely to be appropriate, WHO says* Covid-19: Will the vaccine protect me from Omicron?* Omicron NZ modelling: Hundreds of thousands of cases with peak possible in mid-March

The roll-out for 5- to 11-year-olds has seen 47 per cent of eligible children vaccinated in little over a month, and 65 per cent of eligible New Zealanders have now been boosted.

However, inequities in access and coverage for minority groups, particularly Mori, have been seen in the adult and paediatric roll-outs; so too has a disparity in uptake in urban and rural parts of the country.

A lot has happened in the span of a year. But what about going forward? Will we need boosters forever?

Immunisation Advisory Centre director Dr Nikki Turner thinks the most likely situation will be that many people, particularly young people with healthy immune systems, may need no further boosters.

Just a handful of countries are giving a fourth dose, mainly to their most vulnerable populations, including Cambodia, Chile, Denmark, Israel and Sweden.

Preliminary data from Israel on people aged over 60 suggested a fourth dose at least four months after a third shot revived antibody levels, doubled resistance against Omicron infection and tripled protection against hospitalisations, compared with only three shots, Nature journal reported.

Auckland University

Auckland University director of the Immunisation Advisory Centre, Dr Nikki Turner.

However, that article raised concerns that as protection from boosters might be short-lived, rolling out endless doses, potentially at the expense of immunising unvaccinated people in low-income nations, was not a viable or long-term global strategy.

Vaccinologist Associate Professor Helen Petousis-Harris did not envisage a future of endless boosters.

As the world became increasingly resistant to Covid-19 and its variants, it was more likely going to become a matter of keeping people who were most at risk such as senior citizens boosted, or targeting the most common variants, she said.

Immunologist Professor Graham Le Gros agreed regular boosting with current vaccines was not the best long-term strategy, noting major efforts were under way to develop a vaccine to target all variants.

As the world developed more immunity to Covid-19 either from disease or vaccination, or both the need for ongoing boosters lessened, Turner said.

While there was evidence antibody immunity waned over time, people still had cellular memory and protection against severe disease if later exposed, she said.

However, if SARS-CoV-2 mutated in a way that evaded protection offered by current vaccines, people might need a further booster, or multiple further boosters.

If immunity needed to be boosted more often, we could be looking at a situation like with influenza, where an annual vaccination is given for different circulating strains, she said.

Current vaccines still appeared effective against severe disease from variants coming through, Turner said: Youd need a significant variant to see a lot of escape.

Hospitalisations, ICU admissions and death rates would be key measures of how well vaccines were working, Turner said.

If there was a rise in any of those in the coming months or even years, further boosters might be needed.

However, if the disease burden was looking mild, the argument for repeat boosters reduced.

Turner said it was important people understood there was a strategic plan to vaccination: getting vaccinated was not now about eliminating Covid-19, it was about protecting people against severe disease and minimising its impact.

Link:

Covid-19: We're a year into NZ's vaccine roll-out now what? - Stuff.co.nz

Counties with the highest COVID-19 vaccination rate in New York  msnNOW

Read more here:

Counties with the highest COVID-19 vaccination rate in New York - msnNOW

Implicit in the discussion and consternation around vaccine hesitancy has been a wish: If only there were a message that could break through skepticism and persuade unvaccinated people to get their shots. What a world that would be.

But over the past year, this really did happen. While there are still too many holdouts, many people who were skeptical or hesitant changed their minds and got their Covid-19 shots.

A new study by Vincent Pons at the Harvard Business School and Vincenzo Galasso and Paola Profeta at Bocconi University in Milan may help explain why. They found that people can in fact be persuaded by the right message, offering new evidence about the best ways to reach skeptics. Separate analyses have identified other factors, such as seeing other people be safely vaccinated and hearing about the benefits of vaccines from doctors and loved ones.

This study assessed which messages were most effective in increasing peoples willingness to get vaccinated, lessons that could still help advance the goal of vaccinating more people against Covid-19. There is a range of vaccine skepticism from people who wanted to wait and see before getting their own shots, to the people uncertain about booster shots, to the vaccinated parents of unvaccinated but eligible children. Successful messaging could help in winning them over and may be instructive for future public health campaigns as well.

The researchers surveyed more than 6,000 people in the United States, United Kingdom, European Union, Australia, and New Zealand. They contacted them first in December 2020, to assess their intentions before the vaccines were widely available, and asked them to pick a number between 0 and 10 to represent their likelihood of getting vaccinated. Then they followed up in summer of 2021 to see how people actually behaved.

To me, their most interesting findings concerned the most ardent vaccine refusers. Six months later, one-third of the people who had rated themselves 0 in December had gotten vaccinated.

So what happened? What convinced them?

Some of it was circumstances. Among those who had put themselves between 0 and 3 on getting vaccinated, those who were older (and therefore at higher risk of serious illness) and concerned with their health risks were more likely to get vaccinated in spite of their skepticism. So did the people who anticipated indirect exposure to Covid-19 through their friends or relatives. People who consumed more traditional media and who had more trust in scientists were also more likely to come around.

Vaccine mandates were not in effect at the time of these surveys, but the study generally found a mixed response to compulsory vaccinations among the respondents.

The researchers experimented with four messages in December to see how they would move peoples intentions then and their actual behavior six months later:

A control group heard no messaging at all.

The self-protection message had a small positive effect in increasing peoples vaccine intentions, but it was the smallest effect of the four and was not considered statistically significant. The altruistic messages Protecting Others or Health or the Economy had a more meaningful impact on peoples intentions immediately afterward.

The same pattern bore out six months later in behavior, though there was some variation across countries. Protecting Health ended up most effective in the EU, while Protecting Others or the Economy proved more persuasive in the US and UK. The researchers argued that, because this line of questioning reflected peoples actual decisions, not only their intentions, it should be less susceptible to social desirability bias (i.e., people saying what they think they are supposed to say).

Those results were for the whole population, from the very pro-vax to the very anti-vax. But what worked best with the toughest people to win over?

Researchers found a positive and significant effect with the Protecting Health message in increasing the vaccination rate among anti-vax people in EU countries; there was also a positive but not statistically significant effect of the Protecting the Economy message on the vaccination rate of anti-vax people in the US and UK.

The latter point might sound discouraging, but the authors include a notable caveat. The people whom the study attempted to persuade and still refused to get vaccinated may be the most dedicated anti-vaxxers, even more resistant than anti-vaxxers in the control group who did not hear one of the tested messages.

The authors summarized their findings like this (emphasis mine):

Our most striking result is that informational treatments provided in the first wave affected not only vaccination intentions expressed in the same survey but also actual vaccination rates recorded six months later. Our messages even increased vaccination among individuals who had initially expressed anti-vax attitudes. Overall, altruistic messages had the largest effect. The important differences in the relative effectiveness of our different treatments across countries indicate that future information campaigns should be tailored to the context to be most impactful.

Translation: People could be persuaded to get vaccinated. It is not a lost cause. But we should be mindful that different messages work best with different people and construct our communications campaigns accordingly.

One wrinkle that bears further exploration: Among those who were least likely to change their minds were the people who are generally more risk-averse. The studys authors speculated that these individuals may be more concerned about possible negative side effects of vaccination than about the risk of getting Covid-19.

That theory would track with something I heard in my interviews with pediatricians who have been talking with parents about getting their children vaccinated. Parents would have misperceptions about the relative risks of vaccination versus contracting Covid. To give one example, they might be aware that the vaccines carry a small risk of heart inflammation but might not be aware that Covid-19 itself brings a much higher risk of the same condition. Figuring out ways to better communicate the comparative risks of vaccination (and other interventions) versus infections is one takeaway from the struggles to communicate with the public during the pandemic.

It is tempting to think of vaccination intentions as static. You will or you wont, for whatever reason: ideology, trust in institutions, personal assessment of your risk. And those variables have indeed been instrumental to peoples choices about getting the Covid-19 vaccines.

But people can be moved, too, according to these findings not necessarily by emphasizing their personal health, but by persuading them that they will do good for the people around them and the country at large.

Go here to see the original:

Study: Which messages won over Covid-19 vaccine skeptics? - Vox.com

The uptake of COVID-19 vaccination follows patterns seen in the wider population, with significant disparities within and between countries, according to data presented at this weeks Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic infections (CROI 2022).

Presented by Evelynne Fulda from the Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, the study was conducted within a global study called REPRIEVE (Randomised Trial to Prevent Vascular Events in HIV). With almost 8000 participants in 12 countries, REPRIEVE is a randomised, placebo-controlled trial that investigates the efficacy of providing a statin to people with HIV as a prevention strategy against major cardiovascular events. To be included in REPRIEVE, participants must be aged 40-75, be on stable antiretroviral therapy, and have no known cardiovascular disease.

Countries are grouped in five global regions:

The global characteristic of REPRIEVE and the demographics of its participants (median age 50 years, 31% female, 43% Black or African American, and 13 years as median time since HIV diagnosis) represented a unique opportunity to collect information on COVID-19 vaccination among people living with HIV throughout the world.

Fulda and colleagues assessed the cumulative numbers of participants receiving at least one COVID-19 vaccination dose from January to December 2021 among 6951 active participants.

They compared these rates to region and country-specific vaccination data among the general population, determined from publicly available datasets such as the World Banks. Its worth noting that the general population data reflects a much wider age range and includes people less engaged with health care than REPRIEVE participants.

By the end of July 2021 the cumulative vaccination rate among study participants was 55%. Rates then increased, before starting to plateau around 74% in December 2021.

When looked at by global region, vaccination rates varied substantially. In December 2021, uptake was above 70% in all regions, with the notable exception of sub-Saharan Africa (48%). At the end of the year, they were highest in south-east Asia region (Thailand, 93%) which had surpassed the high-income region.

Drug used to lower cholesterol (blood fats).

A pill or liquid which looks and tastes exactly like a real drug, but contains no active substance.

An infection that occurs more frequently or is more severe in people with weakened immune systems, such as people with low CD4 counts, than in people with healthy immune systems. Opportunistic infections common in people with advanced HIV disease include Pneumocystis jiroveci pneumonia; Kaposi sarcoma; cryptosporidiosis; histoplasmosis; other parasitic, viral, and fungal infections; and some types of cancer.

Vaccination rates were broadly similar between people with HIV in REPRIEVE and the general population in each region. Uptake among people with HIV engaged in this clinical trial happened quicker and reached higher or similar levels to the general population by the end of the year.

Disparities seen within the cohort also reflect some of those seen in the wider population. Uptake was higher among White participants, including in analyses within the high-income and Latin America/Caribbean regions.

Vaccinated participants were more likely to be male, to be older, to have a higher body mass index and to have been taking antiretroviral therapy for longer.

Fulda concluded that the REPRIEVE data reveal significant disparities in vaccination against COVID-19 across different regions of the world, with sub-Saharan Africa still having the lowest rate at the end of the year. Also, by showing that vaccinated participants were more likely to be White and male, the study highlights a potential risk of higher COVID-19 morbidity among the most vulnerable subgroups of people living with HIV.

See the original post:

COVID-19 vaccine rates in people with HIV mirror those in the general population - aidsmap

Californias new pandemic plan continues to emphasize vaccination. Patricia Vargas held her daughter Rebeca Vargas, 5, as she waited for her to be vaccinated in Los Angeles in January.Credit...Allison Zaucha for The New York Times

California health authorities unveiled a next phase pandemic playbook for the most populous U.S. state on Thursday that will treat the coronavirus as a manageable risk that will remain with us for some time, if not forever, rather than an emergency.

The plan, which includes measures to promote vaccines, stockpile medical supplies and mount an aggressive assault on disinformation, will mark a new chapter in responding to the coronavirus, which has infected at least one in five Californians and claimed the lives of more than 83,000 state residents.

It is also an acknowledgment that were going to live with this, Gov. Gavin Newsom said in an interview preceding the announcement.

Were not in denial of the hell that has been the last two years, he said. But, he added, This is not like World War II, where we can have a ticker-tape parade and announce the end.

A towering spike in new coronavirus cases driven by the Omicron variant peaked in the state in mid-January and has since receded, leaving the daily average about where it was late last summer, at about 25,000 new cases a day. The fading of the surge has been taken as a signal to ease restrictions around the country.

400% of last winters peak

Earlier this week, Mr. Newsom loosened Californias indoor mask requirements for vaccinated people, and state health officials said they would reconsider school mask mandates at the end of February. Los Angeles County lifted its outdoor mask mandate, Disneyland and other businesses eased their mask rules for vaccinated people, and the Coachella and Stagecoach music festivals announced that they would not require attendees to wear masks, be vaccinated or take a test when the events take place this spring.

Californias new view of the virus, outlined in a briefing by the states top health official, Dr. Mark Ghaly, will continue to emphasize vaccines and boosters, with expansions in school-based vaccination, preparations to vaccinate children younger than 5 when they become eligible, and potential reassessment of vaccine requirements to account for the possibility of some natural immunity from a prior infection, among other targets. Scientists have cautioned that protection may wane over time, and future variants may be better able to sidestep defenses.

Mask requirements would be eased or tightened as required, depending on the severity and trajectory of infections, according to the new plan. Strategic stockpiles would be modernized and bolstered.

The plan would expand wastewater surveillance testing and genomic sequencing; expand access to Covid-19 treatments; and create a special office of community partnerships that would send hundreds of workers into immigrant, disadvantaged and other hard-to-reach communities to combat disinformation and offer access to care.

The governor said that for now, the state would continue to operate under emergency authorization, allowing health officials to move swiftly if there is a new surge. But he said his goal was to unwind the state of emergency as soon as possible.

Other priorities would include addressing worker shortages at hospitals and nursing homes, studying the viruss impact on communities, expanding the use of smartphone technology to alert people about possible virus exposure; and offering incentives for innovations in testing and air filtration.

Though 70 percent of the states residents have been fully vaccinated, that is a far cry from achieving herd immunity, a level where so few people remain vulnerable to the virus that it cannot readily spread. Most experts think herd immunity to the coronavirus is now likely out of reach.

Statewide surveys show Californians generally support the governors pandemic policies, which have limited Covid deaths to a per capita rate substantially lower than in Florida, Texas or the United States as a whole.

But public patience has frayed since Mr. Newsom announced the nations first stay-at-home order in 2020, starting a wave of restrictions. A local recall election, fueled by anger over pandemic rules and amplified by disinformation, put members of a far-right militia in apparent control of the board of supervisors in rural Shasta County. And a poll released this week by the University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Governmental Studies found that Mr. Newsoms overall approval rating had slipped from 64 percent in 2020 to 48 percent now.

Right now, were really anxious, said Mr. Newsom. A lot of us are distrustful. And its affecting us in profound ways across our entire existence, not just this pandemic.

The states updated approach, he added, is aimed at softening that anxiety with more permanent guidelines that will help policymakers better navigate the next surge.

Health experts who were given an early look at the new plan gave it high marks, although some urged the state to be bolder, particularly on vaccination. California is better than average, said Eric Topol, founder and director of the Scripps Research Translational Institute, but thats not saying much.

More:

Covid-19 Live Updates: Mask Mandates, Cases and More - The New York Times

February 17, 2022- (Tarrant County) Tarrant County Public Health hosts numerous pop-up COVID-19 clinics across Tarrant County each week in partnership with public and private organizations listed below. Each site has the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines and at times the Johnson & Johnson.Children five and older are eligible for the vaccination. Parents need to bring proof of the childs age and their own ID for the vaccination. Booster vaccinations are available at all of the vaccination locations.

TCPH would like to bring a COVID-19 vaccination clinic to businesses, churches and organizations in the community who are interested in hosting a pop-up clinic.Its easy and free to host a clinic.In addition to the vaccination opportunities below, the cities of Arlington, Fort Worth, Mansfield, North Richland Hills, Hurst, and TarrantCountyCollege have also added opportunities for vaccinations. To find a local vaccine site, the County created a vaccine finder page:VaxUpTC website.

Pop-Up COVID-19 locations:

Vaxmobile C.H. Wilemon Field at Sam Houston High SchoolThursday, Feb. 17: 9 a.m. to 4 p.m.2000 Sam Houston DriveArlington, TX 76014

Everman ISDThursday, Feb. 17: 5 p.m. to 7 p.m.1000 S. Race StreetEverman, TX 76140

Sundance SquareFriday, Feb. 18: 11 a.m. to 6 p.m.SE corner of the Plaza (formerly The Bird Caf)Fort Worth, TX 76102

Morningside United Methodist ChurchSaturday, Feb. 19: 1 p.m. to 3 p.m.2860 Evans AvenueFort Worth, TX 76104

Hurst Fire DepartmentTuesday, Feb. 22: 12 p.m. to 6 p.m.2100 Precint Line RoadHurst, TX 76054

Vaxmobile Goodwill North Central Texas Regional HeadquartersThursday, Feb. 24: 9 a.m. to 4 p.m.4005 Campus DriveFort Worth, TX 76119

Sundance SquareFriday, Feb. 25: 11 a.m. to 6 p.m.SE corner of the Plaza (formerly The Bird Caf)Fort Worth, TX 76102

Northwest Public Health CenterMonday to Friday:8 a.m. to 12 p.m.and1 to 5 p.m.3800 Adam Grubb RoadLake Worth, TX 76135

Bagsby-Williams Health CenterMonday to Friday:8 a.m. to 12 p.m.and1 to 5 p.m.3212 Miller Ave.Fort Worth, TX 76119

Southeast Public Health CenterMonday to Friday:9 a.m. to 12 p.m.and1 to6p.m.536 W Randol MillArlington TX, 76011

Main Public Health CenterMonday to Friday:8 a.m. to 12 p.m.and1 to 6 p.m.1101 S. Main StreetFort Worth, TX 76104

Southwest Public Health CenterMonday to Friday:8 a.m. to 12 p.m.and1 to 5 p.m.6551 Granbury RoadFort Worth, TX 76133

Watauga Public Health CenterMonday to Friday:8 a.m. to 12 p.m.and1 to 5 p.m.6601 Watauga RoadWatauga, TX 76148

See the original post:

COVID-19 Vaccine Clinics for the Week of Feb. 19 - tarrantcounty.com

CLAIM

In 2021, cases of pregnancy and fertility issues, cancer, neurological issues, and heart disease spiked after COVID-19 vaccination

DETAILS

Inaccurate: Due to an error, the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database greatly underreported the number of medical conditions between 2016 and 2020. Claims that several medical conditions among the military greatly increased after COVID-19 vaccination were therefore based on erroneous data and are incorrect.Unsupported: Data from safety monitoring and multiple studies dont support the claim that COVID-19 vaccines have caused a significant increase in the incidence of medical conditions.

KEY TAKE AWAY

COVID-19 vaccines are proven to be very safe and effective at preventing COVID-19 hospitalizations and deaths. Although certain COVID-19 vaccines are associated with a slightly increased risk of blood clotting or heart inflammation, COVID-19 itself is associated with a higher rate of these and other conditions. Overall, scientific evidence indicates that the benefits of vaccines largely outweigh their risks.

REVIEW As of 15 February 2022, more than 4.8 billion peoplealmost 62% of the global population have received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. Safety monitoring data clearly show that the benefits of COVID-19 vaccines outweigh their risks. Yet, claims that call into question the vaccines safety continue to circulate on social media.

One example is a meme published on Facebook on 13 February 2022, claiming an alleged spike in fertility and pregnancy issues, cancer, neurological issues, and heart disease. Exactly what the figures in the meme related to was left unsaid, but the same figures can also be seen in this Instagram post equating COVID-19 vaccination with genocide. Taken together, the message sent by these posts is that COVID-19 vaccines are the cause of this alleged spike in health problems. Combined, posts sharing the same figures received more than 5,000 interactions on Facebook and Instagram, according to the social media analytics tool CrowdTangle.

One Instagram meme attributed the claim to attorney Thomas Renz, who presented the exact figures during a COVID-19 panel discussion hosted by U.S. Senator Ron Johnson on 24 January 2022. Citing data from the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED), Renz claimed that a long list of medical conditions skyrocketed among the military personnel in 2021, after COVID-19 vaccination, compared to the previous five-year average.

According to Renz, the data were provided by military physicians Theresa Long, Peter Chambers, and Samuel Sigoloff, whom he represented. Long made false claims about COVID-19 vaccines in the past, including that they contain antifreeze, as part of a lawsuit against the Pentagon to stop its vaccine mandates. The lawsuit was filed by Americas Frontline Doctors, an organization known for spreading misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines and promoting unproven COVID-19 treatments, with which Renz also has connections.

However, the data used to make these comparisons are wrong, making Renzs figures inaccurate, as we will explain below. In addition, data from safety monitoring and scientific studies show no evidence of an increase in these conditions, contradicting Renzs claim.

The DMED is a database that provides remote access to a subset of data on diseases and medical events contained within the Defense Medical Surveillance System (DMSS). When comparing DMED data with the data source on the DMSS, officials found that there was an error in the number of medical diagnoses from the previous five years.

Peter Graves, spokesperson for the Defense Health Agencys Armed Forces Surveillance Division, explained to the fact-checking organization PolitiFact that the data was incorrect for the years 2016-2020 due to an error in the database that led to a large underreporting of conditions for that period. In other words, the figures that established a baseline for the incidence of these medical conditions were much lower than they actually were.

In contrast, the figures for 2021 were correct, giving the appearance of significant increased occurrence of all medical diagnoses in 2021 because of the underreported data for 2016-2020. Graves said that the database was later taken down to identify and correct the root-cause of the data corruption.

Besides being inaccurate, a closer look at the figures provided by Renz show that such huge increases are implausible and inconsistent with the current scientific evidence.

The figures presented by Renz and shared on social media claimed significant increases in the incidence of several types of cancer, including breast cancer (487%), testicular cancer (369%), and malignant neoplasms (664%).

As Health Feedback explained in an earlier review, there is no scientific evidence suggesting that the COVID-19 vaccines increase the risk of cancer. Furthermore, such a large increase would have been observed worldwide. However, public health authorities and cancer associations havent reported a sudden surge in cancer cases since the beginning of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign.

David Gorski, a professor of surgical oncology at Wayne State University and an editor at Science-Based Medicine, pointed out on his blog that the cancer numbers alone already indicate a problem in the data. First, cancer rates never show incredibly rapid and dramatic changes and such an increase can only be accounted for by reporting issues.

Second, cancer is a process that generally takes years to develop following exposure to a carcinogen. Even if the increase were real, it would be biologically implausible to attribute it to the COVID-19 vaccines administered less than a year before. Gorski explained:

To believe that COVID-19 vaccines were responsible for this increase in cancer incidence among military personnel, one would be obligated to believe that COVID-19 vaccines are far more carcinogenic than ionizing radiation from atomic bombs.

In short, while the cancer statistics for 2021 arent yet available, such a dramatic increase in cancer rates hasnt been observed in the general population. This is unusual if the vaccines are as carcinogenic as Renz and the others claimed. Therefore, the foremost explanation for the apparently massive and sudden rise in cancer in the military, that is also consistent with the current evidence and the known mechanism of cancer, is an error in the data.

The meme alleged increases in miscarriages (279%), birth defects (155%), ovarian dysfunction (437%), and infertility in men (350%) and women (471%). However, these figures contradict current evidence from clinical research and safety monitoring, which doesnt suggest that COVID-19 vaccines negatively impact fertility or pregnancy, as Health Feedback explained in this review.

In contrast, pregnant women are at a higher risk of severe COVID-19 compared to non-pregnant women, particularly in the second and third trimesters. This in turn increases the risk of preterm birth and stillbirth.

Initial COVID-19 vaccine trials didnt include pregnant women, leading to a lack of clinical data for this group in the early stages of the vaccination campaign. In April 2021, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) began recommending vaccines for expectant mothers, after preliminary research found no obvious safety issues[1]. Later studies involving thousands of pregnancies showed no sign of an increased risk of miscarriages[2-4], preterm births[5] or other safety concerns for the mothers or the babies following COVID-19 vaccination[6].

Research also found that COVID-19 vaccines had no impact on fertility, in both men and women. Two different research groups in the U.S. showed that vaccination didnt affect sperm quality or embryo implantation[7,8].

In contrast, Ranjith Ramasamy, a urologist at the University of Miami and an author of the study on sperm quality, explained in an article for The Conversation that SARS-CoV-2 infection of testes tissue could lead to erectile dysfunction and male infertility. In fact, another study evaluating the chances of conception in more than 2,000 couples found that SARS-CoV-2 infection in the male partner slightly decreased the likelihood of conception, probably due to a temporary reduction in male fertility after the disease[9]. Conversely, vaccination of either partner made no difference to the chances of conception.

The meme also alleged an increase of 1,048% in neurological issues, including Guillain-Barr syndrome (551%), Bells palsy (291%), and multiple sclerosis (680%).

Adenoviral vector vaccines (Johnson & Johnson and Oxford-AstraZeneca) have been associated with a small increased risk of some neurological conditions, including GuillainBarr syndrome and Bells palsy. Such cases are very infrequent[10], and most people who are treated fully recover[11].

Also, it is important to note that COVID-19 itself is more likely to cause these neurological conditions than the COVID-19 vaccines. A study from the Universities of Oxford and Edinburgh evaluated the rate of neurological adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination and SARS-CoV-2 infection using records of 32 million adults from the U.K. National Health Service[10]. The results, published in Nature Medicine, showed an increased risk of Guillain-Barr syndrome and Bells palsy after vaccination with the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine and an increased risk of hemorrhagic stroke after vaccination with the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine.

However, the overall risk was still minimal. When compared to the baseline risk of developing Guillain-Barr syndrome, researchers observed 145 more cases per 10 million people among those who were infected, as compared to 38 more cases per 10 million people among those who were vaccinated, more than a four-fold difference.

The results from these studies demonstrate that even though certain COVID-19 vaccines are associated with an increased risk of certain neurological problems, such problems are more likely to occur following SARS-CoV-2 infection. This means that the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks. The benefit is even higher when we go beyond just Guillain-Barr syndrome and consider the other risks associated with COVID-19, including long-term effects and even death.

The meme claimed increases in hypertension (2,181%), pulmonary embolism (468%), tachycardia (302%), and myocardial infarction (269%).

The Johnson & Johnson and Oxford-AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccines have been linked to very rare cases of a blood clotting disorder called thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome. To minimize this risk, many countries like the U.K. recommend mRNA COVID-19 vaccines for individuals under 40, who are at higher risk of this rare adverse event.

On the other hand, the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines from Moderna, and Pfizer and BioNTech have been associated with a slightly increased risk of heart inflammation (myocarditis and pericarditis), particularly in young male individuals. However, the benefits of vaccination outweigh this small potential risk.

Its important to keep in mind that viral infections, including COVID-19, can also cause heart inflammation. Estimates indicate that the risk of heart inflammation and cardiac complications is about five times higher after COVID-19 than after vaccination[12]. Furthermore, cases of heart inflammation following vaccination are generally milder and have better clinical outcomes than those caused by infections, as Health Feedback explained in an earlier review.

The figures shown by Renz and others linking COVID-19 vaccines with an increase in medical conditions such as cancer, pregnancy and fertility issues, neurological conditions, and heart problems among the military personnel are based on incorrect data due to an error in the databases.

There is no evidence whatsoever suggesting that COVID-19 vaccines increase the risk of cancer or the likelihood of pregnancy complications. While vaccination has been associated with a slight increase in the risk of Guillain-Barr syndrome and rare cases of blood clotting and heart inflammation, such cases are infrequent and less likely to occur following vaccination than due to COVID-19 itself.

COVID-19 vaccines have proven to be very safe and effective. Data from clinical trials and safety monitoring indicate that the benefits of COVID-19 vaccines in preventing COVID-19 and its associated risks outweigh the known and potential risks. For this reason, public health authorities like the CDC recommend that everyone ages five years and older get a COVID-19 vaccine.

Go here to see the original:

Alleged spikes in medical conditions among the military after COVID-19 vaccine rollout are based on faulty data due to a database glitch - Health...

The Postal Service is laying the groundwork to track the vaccination and testing status of its workforce amid the COVID-19 pandemic, or any future public health emergency.

USPS, however, says its only giving notice as it prepares for potential future contingencies, and is not, at this time, updating its COVID-19 vaccine or testing requirements, nor is it seeking to collect data on the vaccination status of its workforce.

A Supreme Court ruling last month struck down the Biden administrations mandate for large employers, including USPS, to ensure their workers are fully vaccinated against COVID-19, or require non-vaccinated employees to wear face masks and be subject to weekly COVID-19 tests.

USPS, however, appears unwilling to rule out the possibility that it could eventually face vaccination or testing requirements.

Federal Register notice published Wednesday, said its looking to modify its system of records to track and record vaccination status or employee attestation in lieu of acceptable proof of vaccination status as applicable, related to an ongoing pathogenic public health crisis, including the COVID-19 pandemic.

USPS said in the notice that its looking to revise its emergency management records to facilitate effective preparedness and response to potential emerging public health crises and other emergency events that may impact Postal Service employees and operations in the working environment.

USPS, in its rationale for the proposed change, said the emergence of COVID-19 in early 2020 identified the need for [a] robust set of policies and practices to ensure operational continuity and employee safety amidst an emergency event, while also protecting individual privacy.

USPS spokeswoman Darlene Casey told Federal News Network on Wednesday that the Postal Service is not updating its COVID-19 vaccine or testing requirements as part of this notice, nor are we seeking to collect information on the vaccination status of our employees.

We have taken steps to update our systems of records to prepare for potential future contingencies and we continue to review and evaluate OSHAs ongoing rulemaking process, Casey said.

The USPS notice is an interesting development for the agency, which was subject to the Occupational Safety and Health Administrations now-defunct Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS), and warned that meeting those requirements could potentially result in a dramatic loss of employees.

The Supreme Court last month struck down OSHAS vaccination-and-testing requirements for large companies with more than 100 employees. The court, however, allowed the Biden administration to proceed with a vaccine mandate for most health care workers in the U.S.

USPS isnt covered under the Biden administrations vaccine mandate for the federal workforce, which has also run into some legal challenges. A Texas-based federal judge on Jan. 21. blocked the administration from enforcing that mandate.

More recently, a federal appeals court last week declined, for now, to overturn the federal courts injunction on the vaccine mandate for the federal workforce.

The Biden administration, however, through its Safer Federal Workforce Task Force, has interpreted that the Texas federal courts ruling does not prevent agencies from gathering information on the vaccination status of their employees even if those agencies are currently unable to enforce the mandate.

The Safer Federal Workforce Task Force, in updated guidance on Jan. 24, said agencies covered under President Joe Bidens executive order signed last September can continue to require and receive the submission of vaccination information and documentation from federal employees and prospective employees who have received a job offer.

Despite these recent developments, USPS appears to be preparing to be able to collect COVID-19-related information from its employees, on the off chance that it could eventually face vaccination or testing requirements.

The Labor Department, following the Supreme Courts ruling, withdrew OSHAs vaccine-and-testing mandate for large employers as an enforceable emergency temporary standard.

But as GovExec first reported last month, Labor specified that the ETS still remains on the table as a proposed rule thats still active as part of the rule-making process.

Although OSHA is withdrawing the Vaccination and Testing ETS as an enforceable emergency temporary standard, OSHA is not withdrawing the ETS to the extent that it serves as a proposed rule under the 1970 Occupational Safety and Health Act, the agency wrote in a Jan. 26. Federal Register notice.

Beyond COVID-19 and pathogenic public health crises, USPS is also looking to expand its definition of emergency events, as it pertains to its system of records, to include natural disasters, human-caused disasters, acts of terrorism and cybersecurity incidents.

USPS said these changes to its system of records will give the agency greater flexibility to prepare for and respond to a wide array of emergencies.

But among the categories of individuals affected by this proposed change, USPS said its system of records will cover Postal Service employees who provide the Postal Service with acceptable proof of COVID-19 vaccination status or, in the alternative, weekly COVID-19 testing results (or test results prior to return to physical postal facilities or workplaces).

USPS, in its notice, also proposes gathering, via a software application, information from its employees, including employee identification numbers, vaccination status, vaccine date, images showing proof of vaccine, vaccine exemption status, vaccine exemption reason and the status of COVID-19 test results.

The proposed changes to the USPS system of records would allow an employee to record their COVID-19 vaccination status and COVID-19 testing status through mobile and web-based applications.

USPS is also proposing to disclose COVID-19 vaccine documentation, any test results, or any work-related COVID-19 fatalities and hospitalizations to OSHA.

USPS said it sent the proposed changes to its system of records to Congress and the Office of Management and Budget for their evaluation, adding that it does not expect its amended system of records will have any adverse effect on individual privacy rights.

The 1974 Privacy Act requires agencies to very clearly define any routine use they intend to make with the information in their record-keeping systems about specific individuals. The Privacy Act also requires agencies to give public notice of these changes through the FederalRegister.

Prior to the Supreme Courts ruling on OSHAs vaccination-and-testing requirements for large employers,USPS asked the agency for a 120-day temporary exemption from its vaccine-and-testing requirements.

USPS, in its letter, told OSHA it would be nearly impossible, to meet the deadlines outlined in its ETS under normal circumstances, but found them especially taxing to meet during its peak season, which runs from mid-October through January.

USPS said that complying with the OSHA mandate is likely to result in the loss of many employees, either through workers leaving the agency or facing discipline for non-compliance.

The agency predicted the biggest drop-off in staffing would occur among temporary employees brought on to handle a surge in mail and packages during its peak season.

While the impact to our service could be devastating any time of year, requiring the Postal Service to absorb what could inevitably be a dramatic loss of employees at a time when the labor market is extremely tight and in the middle of the Postal Services peak season would have a potentially catastrophic impact on our ability to provide service to the American public when demand is at its highest, USPS wrote.

View post:

USPS seeks ability to gather COVID-19 vaccination, testing data from workforce - Federal News Network

King County will stop requiring restaurants and bars to verify customers vaccination statuses for indoor dining starting March 1, officials announced Wednesday, as case counts and hospitalizations decline and the county removes broader restrictions that have been in place since last fall. Gyms, theaters, and outdoor events with over 500 people that have also been required to check for proof of vaccination or a negative COVID-19 test since October 2021 will no longer have to do so starting at the beginning of next month.

Our public health experts believe that now is the appropriate time to lift vaccine verification, based on high rates of vaccine coverage and the decrease in new cases and hospitalizations across the county, King County Executive Dow Constantine said in a news release. We are moving in the right direction, and can continue taking additional steps toward recovery.

Starting March 1, it will be up to individual bars and restaurants whether they want to enforce the mandate. Seattle-area restaurant owners differed in their opinions on the October 2021 vaccine verification mandate, some seeing it as an important measure to keep staff safe and others viewing it as an added burden to businesses already struggling from labor shortages and pandemic-related supply shortages. Previously, enforcement of the practice was erratic at Seattle-area restaurants, with many smaller businesses neglecting to check for proof of vaccination even though it was required by the mandate.

Before checking for proof of vaccination for indoor dining was mandated in King County, over 140 Seattle-area restaurants and bars chose to require guests to be vaccinated anyway. In a September 2021 Eater Seattle survey, more than 87 percent of respondents said they wanted Seattle to require vaccine proof for indoor dining. Its likely many bars and restaurants will keep requiring guests to be vaccinated, even after March 1.

Sign up for our newsletter.

Read the original post:

Seattle and King County will drop vaccine requirements for restaurants - Eater Seattle