Category: Covid-19

There has been a summer COVID-19 wave ever since the pandemic began and this season is no exception. Emergency room visits due to the coronavirus are up more than 18% compared to the previous week and hospitalizations are up more than 13%, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Before the summer surge, activity around the virus had been fairly quiet for months, and many Americans nearly 60%, according to one Gallup poll view the pandemic as over. So where does that leave you in terms of COVID-19 prevention? For the record, masks are still recommended to help lower your risk of getting COVID. And given the recent uptick in COVID-19 cases, masking questions are surfacing right now. Heres what doctors recommend keeping in mind.

Doctors agree that its tough to make blanket statements about this, given that everyones personal health situation and risk tolerance is different. But for most people, masking up in crowded indoor situations when COVID-19 levels are high in your area and youre concerned about getting sick is recommended, Dr. William Schaffner, an infectious disease specialist and professor at Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, tells Yahoo Life.

Its also a good idea to wear a mask if youre having upper respiratory symptoms like a cough, congestion and runny nose and need to be around others, Dr. Barbara Bawer, a family medicine physician at the Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, tells Yahoo Life. Whenever youre feeling unwell, just from an abundance of caution, you should mask, she says.

But if youre feeling OK, you may just want to mask up in places like your local grocery store or retail shops if COVID cases are high in your area and you want to stay healthy, Schaffner says. Its also a good idea to wear a face mask at the doctors office.

That said, Schaffner says masking outside usually isnt necessary. Even I, who am very cautious, dont put on a mask when Im outdoors, he says.

People who are at greater risk of a more serious outcome from COVID-19 infection the elderly, people who are pregnant, patients with a compromised immune system, or those with other underlying health conditions, such as heart disease or diabetes should consider masking, says Dr. Alan Lesse, associate professor of medicine and vice chair for education at the Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences at the University at Buffalo. The advantage of masking is that it will decrease the risk of transmission of many respiratory viruses and bacteria in addition to COVID-19, he tells Yahoo Life.

In general, if you want to wear a mask, doctors say you should do just that. I currently recommend a mask for anyone who feels more comfortable wearing one, says Lesse.

Its easy to toss a mask in your bag and then forget all about it, only to rediscover it months later. But in general, doctors arent fans of putting that mask over your face. Masks that have been sitting around are likely to be ragged and not performing optimally, Schaffner says.

Bawer points out that the mask has likely picked up all kinds of allergens and dirt from the bag. If youve already worn the mask, it may also have viruses and bacteria attached to it from when you wore it the first time, she says.

Something else to consider, per Lesse: If something in your bag has been damp or wet, like a water bottle, and has come into contact with your mask, you should replace the mask. Masks that are stored in moist environments will lose their protective capacity, he says.

If the mask is in an unopened package, hasnt been used and seems to be in good condition, Bawer says youre likely fine to go ahead and use it.

Masks are usually good for about three to five years after theyre manufactured, Bawer says. But even after this time, they are still more effective than no mask at all or a mask that is being reused, she says. Most masks that come in a package will have the expiration date on the label, she adds.

Lesse notes that N95 and KN95 masks used to be considered one-time-use devices when they were used by health care staff. But with the pandemic and mask shortages, people started reusing them. In the hospital, their use has returned to single-use, he says. But, he points out, most people outside medical settings use the masks more than once.

If you want to use masks the way medical staff do, technically you should get a new mask after every use. But even doctors say that really isnt necessary if your mask still fits well and looks like its in good condition.

If the mask becomes moist or damaged, or the fit becomes loose, the mask should be replaced, Lesse says. But if youve used a mask and it still looks OK, he says reusing it should be just fine.

Read the original:

The summer COVID wave is here. Should you mask up? - Yahoo Life

Even with the benefit of hindsight, it can still be difficult to fathom what the historical fulcrum February and March 2020 represented. A paradoxical time when normal life continued largely unbothered while mutterings of a new disease called coronavirus gradually crescendoed before turning into an overnight roar. When our biggest concerns were delayed NBA games and Tom Hanks inability to finish Elvis, it was unthinkable that humanity was on the brink of a pandemic that took seven million lives and shattered many of the social norms upholding the polite society that we had long taken for granted. Most of us had no idea what was coming, so we wore our masks on half-empty flights while the world quietly prepared to shut down around us.

Its against this backdrop of uncertainty that Kristofer (Egill lafsson), an aging Icelandic widower in Baltasar Kormkurs Touch, gets the news that nobody ever wants. While his dementia is still in the early stages, a doctor makes it abundantly clear that hes down to the last few grains of sand in his hourglass. With his mental faculties set to plummet in the coming months, hes advised to settle any unfinished business or looming presidential campaigns and find a way to make peace with the life that hes lived. Sensing that his world is about to shut down in more ways than one, Kristofer ignores his stepdaughters pleas to shelter in place and heads to London for a final trip down memory lane.

The rest of the film unfolds in a bifurcated fashion, cutting between the elderly Kristofers journey and flashbacks to his youth. The young Kristofer (Plmi Kormkur) was once a student at the London School of Economics, but gradually found that his radical Marxist views were incompatible with attending an elite business institution. While his leftist friends were content to complain about worker exploitation from the comfort of pubs and libraries ahead of lucrative careers, Kristofer makes the spontaneous decision to drop out of school and take a job as a dishwasher in a Japanese restaurant. He gradually immerses himself in Japanese culture and falls in love with the owners daughter, Miko (Kki Kimura), finding a kinship with his new chosen family that his old social circles never offered him. But when the family closes the restaurant and abandons him without warning, hes devastated beyond recovery.

The lack of closure leaves a void in Kristofers heart that his subsequent marriage in Iceland never quite fills, leading him to retrace his steps in a scavenger hunt to find the love of his life one last time. The Japanese restaurant has since turned into a tattoo parlor, but a search through the citys records eventually produces a forwarding address for Miko in Japan. As global society continues to constrict, he hops one of the last flights to Tokyo with the hope of scoring a final glance at the life that slipped through his fingers.

It isnt hard to see why there wasnt an immediate influx of great movies about the COVID-19 pandemic. An era defined by inactivity and staring at screens hardly lends itself to the art of moving images, and neither artists nor audiences are far enough removed to truly study it with detachment. But Kormkur beautifully uses the era to his advantage in Touch. Watching Kristofer wander through a rapidly emptying world adds to the sensation that his memories are disappearing in real time. The vacant streets of London and Tokyo could just as easily be the corners of his own mind that hes avoided visiting for decades. The dramatic irony that naturally comes from having lived through the pandemic makes it impossible not to root for this man to end his story on his own terms.

Much of the films beauty lies in the wholesomeness of Kristofer as a character. Even as a dying man whose life didnt go according to plan, hes driven not by bitterness or regret, but a simple desire to find the woman he never stopped loving. The cruelty of nature might have turned him into the ultimate unreliable narrator, but lafsson embodies the character with so much empathy and curiosity that its easy to get wrapped up in the narrative tapestry he weaves from the fragments of his own memories. The result is a film whose elegance is all the more staggering because it came from the man who directed 2 Guns and Beast.

Spanning 50 years and multiple continents without ever shifting its focus from the universal human urge to ponder what could have been, Touch is an ode to accepting your life story without losing sleep over the things you couldnt change. Even if Kristofer and Miko were victims of circumstances beyond their control, sometimes its all you can do to pick up a pen and write the last sentence yourself.

A Focus Features release, Touch opens in theaters on Friday, July

The rest is here:

Touch Review: An Icelandic Widower Searches for Lost Love in a Sensitive Portrait of the First Days of COVID-19 - IndieWire

The story states:

A variety of scientific evidence has also found that the pandemic seems to have affected some young children's early development. Boys were more affected than girls, studies have found.

I definitely think children born then have had developmental challenges compared to prior years," said Dr. Jaime Peterson, a pediatrician at Oregon Health and Science University, whose research is on kindergarten readiness. We asked them to wear masks, not see adults, not play with kids. We really severed those interactions, and you don't get that time back for kids."

Data from schools underscores what early childhood professionals have noticed.

Children who just finished second grade, who were as young as 3 or 4 when the pandemic began, remain behind children the same age prepandemic, particularly in math, according to the new Curriculum Associates data. Of particular concern, the students who are the furthest behind are making the least progress catching up.

The story is interesting and sparked a vigorous debate among the hundreds of comments, most of which address three themes. The first: If young children are arriving in pre-K not toilet trained, as some teachers told the Times, or unable to hold a pencil, parents failed at their job.

A commenter said: Is COVID-19 another better excuse for parents who dont engage with their children? A big statement I know but I heard a lot of excuses and the bottom line is that you signed on to be a parent. If a child isnt even having a conversation at a meal with you because they are staring at a screen, thats on you. Parents need to engage and try to solve problems instead of making excuses.

A Pennsylvania reader offered: There were lots of factors to consider, but not having trained an otherwise healthy 5-year-old to use the toilet is a massive parenting issue. It is an abdication of responsibility and refusal to assert any parental authority. It is an astounding weakness in our culture the adults arent leading.

The second point that many readers felt is significant: Many parents working at home resorted to screens to occupy their toddlers. These youngest students are arriving at school with many more hours of video watching than their older sisters and brothers.

A commenter noted: As the parent of youngish children (ages 7, 9 and 11), its not the pandemic. Its parents and childrens obsessions with screens. I see very young children every day in supermarkets, at parks, pushed in strollers on iPhones. I know a person who allows their child to stay home from school due to anxiety and what does the kid do all day? Play on the iPad. Enough with screens.

A New York teacher said: Im a high school teacher and its the screens. Even some parents in meetings about their child failing multiple classes are distracted by their smartphone screen. For little kids its also the screens. I go to a restaurant, three young kids and mom and dad are all on screens. We fight hard to keep our toddler off screens all the time. But she sees them everywhere and always wants to be on one. We have yet to relent but its hard and heartbreaking to see humanity so lost with this technology.

But others wondered if childrens brains were affected.

A reader said: Im sure there are many causes for this isolation, screen time, etc. But why no mention of what has been substantially demonstrated, the effect of repeated (or even one) COVID-19 infections on the brain? All you have to do is Google this and there are multiple articles from the National Institutes of Health, Harvard, Nature, etc. Are we really supposed to believe this has had no effect on children? Why are we ignoring what is so obviously a major health issue? And the result will be in the next pandemic kids being sent to school and perhaps dying.

Another said: Good article but not a word about the effects of COVID infections on brain development and health. How many of those children had COVID? Did they have repeated infections? Are some of the symptoms mentioned here due to Long COVID?

See more here:

Have we overlooked how pandemic lockdowns affected babies and toddlers? - The Atlanta Journal Constitution

The preparation for a good and holy death the reunion with the Almighty requires our hard work. Divine providence also counts on it, he added.

The Catholic doctor then referred to the defunct Pontifical Council for Health Care Workers (for Health Pastoral Care) of which he himself was a member which was later integrated into the current Dicastery for Integral Human Development.

Unfortunately very little has been done for health or health care in this department. The [Pontifical] Council for Health Care Workers has not even been established, as was required according to the statutes signed by Pope Francis. This void, on such an important issue, also spreads to episcopal conferences and other ecclesiastical organizations, the doctor noted.

Castellv pointed out that when another global event happens that forces us to take drastic preventive measures, as was the case with the COVID-19 pandemic, we cannot be caught off guard. Everything must be done to keep the churches open and operational.

The Catholic doctor conceded that hesitation during the first days is understandable but then you must be clear about the protection measures and you must act in science and in conscience, formed, informed, and refined by grace.

Read the original:

How can the Catholic Church better prepare for the next pandemic? - Catholic News Agency

The COVID-19 pandemic and related lockdowns harmed the mental health of Canadian and US youth, exacerbating depression, anxiety, and eating disorders among certain groups, according to a trio of new studies published in JAMA journals.

One of two studies from thePediatric Outcome Improvement through Coordination of Research Networks (POPCORN)published today found that the rate of hospitalizations for mood disorders and substance use declined among male and females aged 6 to 20 years from before to during the COVID-19 pandemic.

But admissions for eating disorders rose for both sexes, and admissions for anxiety, personality disorders, suicide, and self-harm increased significantly among females.

For the study, published in JAMA Network Open, the researchers analyzed public health administrative data on all Canadians aged 6 to 20 years and from April 2016 to March 2023.

Of 6.3 million Canadian youths, there were 218,101 hospitalizations for mental illness (ages 6 to 11 years, 5.8%; 12 to 17, 66.9%; and 18 to 20, 27.3%; 66.0% female). Overall, hospitalizations for mental disorders fell from 51.6 to 47.9 per 10,000 person-years from before the pandemic to the pandemic among both males and females.

But hospitalizations rose among both sexes for anxiety (11%), personality disorders (21%), suicide or self-harm (10%), and eating disorders in females (66%) and males (47%). For both sexes, hospitalizations declined for mood disorders (-16%), substance use (-17%), and other mental disorders (-22%).

The proportion of hospitalizations for mental conditions climbed in the 12- to 17-years-old age-group, from 65.8% before the pandemic to 68.4% during the pandemic. During the same periods, hospitalizations decreased from 6.2% to 5.3% for participants aged 6 to 11 years and 18 to 20 (28.0% to 26.3%).

These findings suggest that services geared to females, specifically screening for eating disorders, anxiety, personality disorders, and suicidality, will be important to maintain in future pandemics.

Females made up 63.8% of hospitalizations for mental disorders before COVID-19, increasing to 69.0% during the pandemic. Prepandemic, hospitalizations of patients in the most materially deprived quintile accounted for a larger share of hospitalizations (24.4%) than the least deprived (16.9%). During the pandemic, this difference narrowed to 21.9% and 18.6%, respectively.

Residence in a rural area was linked to a higher rate of mental disorder hospitalizations for all conditions but eating disorders.

There were 881,765 emergency department (ED) visits for mental health conditions during the study period. Females made up a greater proportion of available ED visits during the pandemic (65.8%) than before (60.0%), along with participants aged 12 to 17 (52.7% vs 46.0%).

"Understanding how the pandemic affected children, adolescents, and young adults in Canada is crucial to inform public health policy, and these findings suggest that services geared to females, specifically screening for eating disorders, anxiety, personality disorders, and suicidality, will be important to maintain in future pandemics," the authors wrote.

In JAMA Pediatrics, POPCORN researchers conducting a separate study of 8,726 hospitalizations for eating disorders among Canadian youths of the same age over the same period found that, among girls 12 to 17 years old, a 10% jump in pandemic-lockdown stringency was tied to significant rises in hospitalizations for eating disorders that varied by region.

To measure lockdown stringency, the researchers used 12 indicators, such as office and school closures, public-event cancellations, travel restrictions, and stay-at-home orders.

During the study period, there were 11,289 eating-disorder hospitalizations in Canada, 90.4% of them among girls, of which 77% were for 12- to 17-year-olds. A 10% increase in lockdown stringency was linked to a significant climb in hospitalization rates in Quebec and Ontario (5%), the Prairie provinces (Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba; 8%), and British Columbia (11%).

Excess hospitalizations were highest at the 1-year pandemic mark, with increases in Quebec (117%), Ontario (144%), the Prairies (139%), and British Columbia (102%).

A total of 58.6% of hospitalizations before and during the pandemic were for youths without a history of an eating-disorder hospitalizations.

The increase in such hospitalizations likely had multiple causes, including more social isolation, loss of routines and extracurricular activities, more disordered eating, and increased compensatory physical exercise, the researchers said.

The importance of social connectedness for youths (including support networks and parental education) should be promoted to help ensure that children, when experiencing restrictions, such as school closures, are as minimally socially isolated as possible.

"Given that most patients with eating disorders are treated as outpatients, the lack of outpatient services during the pandemic may have led to disease progression that, when left untreated or unacknowledged, was associated with a higher likelihood of hospital admission compared with other mental health disorders given the immediate medical health risk," they wrote.

In future pandemics, they said pediatric healthcare providers should find ways to stay connected with patients for ongoing clinical assessment and psychosocial support at the hospital visits or via telehealth.

"Health care practitioners should also be screening youths for new eating disorders regardless of weight, gender, or socioeconomic status," the authors wrote. "The importance of social connectedness for youths (including support networks and parental education) should be promoted to help ensure that children, when experiencing restrictions, such as school closures, are as minimally socially isolated as possible."

Late last week in JAMA Network Open,researchers from Children's Hospital Los Angeles who hypothesized that COVID-19 lockdown-related mental health would be worse among US youth living in lower-income households instead found that children from wealthier families reported more depression and anxiety.

The research team used the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL), the Family Environmental Scale (FES), and the income-to-needs ratio (INR) to assess mental health before and during the pandemic among 10,399 children aged 10 to 12 years participating in the multisite, 10-year Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study.

The prepandemic group had a 2-year follow-up visit before COVID-19 lockdowns (before March 2020), and the pandemic group had a 2-year follow-up visit after that date. The final sample was made up of 10,171 youths with 1-year-follow-up data (prepandemic, 7,343 youth; pandemic, 2,828) and 10,399 with 2-year follow-up data (prepandemic, 7,493; pandemic, 2,906.

A total of 52.3% of participants were boys, 66.0% were White, 20.3% were Hispanic, 14.5% were Black, 12.2% were multiracial, 44.2% reported caregiver education levels below a 4-year college degree, and 26.2% had INR either below 100% (poverty) or 100% to less than 200% (near poverty).

There were no significant differences in average number of total problems on the CBCL between participants in the prepandemic and pandemic groups over time, and an increase of one unit in the INR corresponded to a reduction in the average rate of change in total problems.

Our research group previously published data demonstrating that families with more socioeconomic disadvantage may have taken more action to alleviate emotional distress related to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Of youth who differed by one unit in INR between the prepandemic and pandemic cohorts from 1- to 2-year follow-up, the expected difference in total problems was 0.79, with sex, age, caregiver education, and interstudy interval held constant, which the researchers said suggests that total problems tend to be lower among youths with lower INR in the pandemic group than those in the prepandemic group who had a follow-up visit before COVID-19.

For every one-unit difference in INR, the expected differences between the pandemic and prepandemic groups from 1- to 2-year follow-up were 0.19 for anxiety or depression, 0.17 for aggression, 0.09 for inattention; 0.08 for social problems; 0.06 for rule breaking, 0.12 for cognition problems, 0.27 for internalization issues, and 0.23 for externalization difficulties.

The researchers noted that a previous study's findings suggested that children in lower-income families may have better adapted to pandemic stressors. "Indeed, our research group previously published data demonstrating that families with more socioeconomic disadvantage may have taken more action to alleviate emotional distress related to the COVID-19 pandemic," they said.

"These results suggest that socioeconomic status may matter when considering the youth mental health outcomes of the COVID-19 lockdown, which may be important for targeted treatment approaches," they concluded.

They cautioned, however, that the study didn't provide insight into what drove the differences between the pandemic and prepandemic groups.

Link:

Young people's mental health suffered amid COVID pandemic, 3 new studies suggest - University of Minnesota Twin Cities

CLAIM

SPIKE PROTEINS FROM COVID SHOTS COULD PROMOTE CANCER GROWTH

DETAILS

Inadequate support: The claim relies on a study that used cells grown in the laboratory to produce the spike protein from the SARS-CoV-2 virus. These experimental conditions dont reflect what happens with the COVID-19 vaccine in the human body. Therefore, the results from this study cant be extrapolated to people who received a COVID-19 vaccine.

KEY TAKE AWAY

COVID-19 vaccination reduces the risk of COVID-19 hospitalization and death and is particularly important for people who are at a higher risk for severe COVID-19 complications. These include people with cancer and other conditions that can weaken the immune system. There is currently no evidence suggesting that COVID-19 vaccines increase the risk of cancer, make it more aggressive, or make cancer therapy less effective.

Americas Frontline Doctors became widely known in 2020 for promoting the antimalarial drug hydroxychloroquine to prevent and cure COVID-19, despite a lack of evidence for its efficacy. The group continued to spread COVID-19 misinformation throughout the pandemic. In 2022, its founder Simone Gold was sentenced to 60 days in prison for entering the U.S. Capitol during the 6 January 2021 riot.

Claims linking vaccination with cancer have thrived on social media since the COVID-19 vaccines became available. However, such claims are unsubstantiated, often based on anecdotal accounts and misinterpreted data. The Facebook reel is yet another example of such a claim.

The reels claim is based on a study by Shengliang Zhang and Wafik S. El-Deiry, oncology researchers at Brown University, published in Oncotarget in June 2024. El-Deiry previously amplified unfounded claims that COVID-19 vaccines cause turbo cancer. Science Feedback debunked similar claims in earlier reviews.

Zhang and El-Deiry found that cancer cells modified to produce the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein showed changes in p53, a tumor suppressor protein. However, the study was done in cancer cells growing in the lab, not in humans. Moreover, the experiments involved the spike protein from the virus, not from the vaccine. Therefore, these results dont provide evidence of what happens in people who received a COVID-19 vaccine, which makes the reels claim unsupported.

Science Feedback reached out to El-Deiry for comment regarding the reels claim. In an email, he stated that all the limitations of the study were acknowledged in the publication. Below, we discuss these limitations in greater detail.

The study aimed to investigate the effect of the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 on the p53 protein.

To do this, the researchers modified human lung, breast, colorectal, and sarcoma cancer cells grown in the lab to produce the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein.

p53 is a well-known tumor suppressor protein, meaning it helps protect the body from uncontrolled cell growth. Specifically, p53 is commonly dubbed the guardian of the genome due to its essential role in regulating DNA repair, cell division, and programmed cell death (apoptosis).

p53 is generally inactive until something damages the cell DNA, such as a toxic chemical or ultraviolet rays from sunlight. This damage activates p53, which then instructs the cell to repair the damage, or if this isnt possible, to stop dividing and self-destruct. In short, p53 prevents damaged cells from accumulating, dividing uncontrollably, and potentially developing into tumors.

The study found that spike protein-producing cells showed changes in p53 function compared to cells that didnt produce the protein. When the researchers exposed these cells to the chemotherapy drug cisplatin, they observed that the drug caused damage but the cells were less responsive to it compared to cells that didnt produce the spike protein. This was also associated with slightly increased survival of cancer cells, suggesting the drug was killing fewer cells than expected.

Based on these results, the authors speculated that SARS-CoV-2 might reduce the natural barriers that prevent the cell from developing into a tumor, particularly after repeated SARS-CoV-2 infections. They added that this potential mechanism might be relevant in the context of viral infection and mRNA vaccines in general but also for patients with cancer who may be receiving cytotoxic or other cancer treatments.

Finally, the authors called for further investigating the impact of viral proteins like SARS-CoV-2 spike on cell DNA repair mechanisms. This, they argued, would help minimize the risk of interfering with this process when developing therapeutic strategies like vaccines.

While more than half of all cancers have mutations in TP53[1], research suggests that p53 malfunction in itself isnt sufficient to cause cancer. Instead, cancer is likely the result of multiple, progressive genetic changes.

Referring to the research published in Oncotarget, El-Deiry, one of the studys authors, talked about the complex role of p53 in cancer in an X/Twitter thread:

Complete loss or mutation of p53 doesnt cause cancer immediately either in mice or humans. Similarly HPV E6 takes years to cause cervical or head and neck cancer (and theres an effective vaccine for HPV). These things are well known. But clearly loss of p53 is associated with cancer over time. It is a difficult area when one discusses causes. Its like cause of death. Theres an immediate cause but there can be many contributing factors.

Results in spike protein-producing cells cant be directly extrapolated to people who received a COVID-19 vaccine

The study suggests a potential mechanism by which the virus SARS-CoV-2 might interfere with DNA repair in the cell. However, these results are preliminary and only apply to the laboratory conditions used in this study.

First, all the experiments were done in cell cultures, which are very different from a whole organism like the human body. Cell cultures are a valuable initial model for studying biological mechanisms in a controlled and reproducible environment. However, they cant simulate the complexity of a human body, which comprises multiple tissues and organs connected to each other. For this reason, the results obtained in cell cultures cannot demonstrate that the same phenomenon occurs in people.

Furthermore, the study only evaluated the effects of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein in cancer cells. These cells might have a different susceptibility to changes in p53 function compared to healthy cells. The authors acknowledged these limitations in the Discussion:

We have not conducted in vivo experiments and some of our experiments lack additional controls such as in flow analysis or by looking at kinetics of cell cycle checkpoint regulation. We have not evaluated normal cells such as airway, muscle, immune, brain or intestinal cells. [emphasis added]

Second, the study evaluated the effects of the spike protein from the virus, not from the vaccine. From the Discussion:

In the current manuscript we show preliminary evidence limited to viral protein spike from SARS-CoV-2 impacting on p53 function by inhibiting its transcriptional activation of key genes that mediate its functions in tumor suppression. [emphasis added]

The spike protein from the virus and that induced by COVID-19 vaccination are very similar but not identical. Specifically, the vaccine-spike protein contains a mutation that stabilizes the protein and prevents it from fusing within the cell membrane as the viral protein does. Since the spike proteins from the virus and the vaccine are different, the results obtained with one might not hold true for the other.

To produce the spike protein, the researchers inserted the genetic material encoding this protein into a plasmid (a circular DNA molecule) that they transferred into the cells. This is an artificial process that results in high amounts of protein (overexpression) that can interfere with its normal function and even be toxic for the cells. This can cause effects that arent specific to the protein investigated but simply result from producing any protein in high amounts. However, the study didnt control for this effect by assessing p53 function in cells overexpressing a protein unrelated to SARS-CoV-2.

Finally, the results suggested that cancer cells responded less to DNA damage and survived slightly better when they produced the spike protein. However, the study couldnt establish Whether these changes are a consequence from the suppressive effect of SARS-CoV-2 spike on p53 signaling. In other words, the study didnt show that the changes were actually caused by the spike protein interfering with p53.

The U.S. National Cancer Institute and the American Cancer Society state there is currently no evidence suggesting that COVID-19 vaccines cause cancer or make it more aggressive or recurrent. As we explained in earlier reviews, there is also no plausible scientific mechanism that could explain how COVID-19 vaccines cause cancer.

While this study suggested that SARS-CoV-2 spike protein could influence the activity of one tumor suppressor protein in cancer cells, it didnt demonstrate that effect in people infected with SARS-CoV-2, let alone people who received a COVID-19 vaccine.

Read more here:

No research shows that COVID-19 vaccines promote cancer in people; study cited as evidence tested the spike protein from the virus in laboratory cells...

iStock

A new meta-analysis of 48 observational studies that included8,664,026 people reveals that pre-existing sleep disturbances are tied to an increased risk of COVID-19 infection and worse outcomes if infected. The study is published in eClinicalMedicine.

Previous studies have shown that up to 50% of COVID-19 patients experience sleep disturbances, and sleep disturbances are linked to "daytime drowsiness, work burnout, and low spirits but also induce immune deficiency and systematic inflammation," the authors note.

For the purposes of this study, sleep disturbances included obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), insomnia, abnormal sleep duration (less than 6 hours or more than 9), night-shift work, and restless legs syndrome already documented before infection with COVID-19

The studies analyzed had sample sizes ranging from 118 to 4.9 million and were conducted in 15 countries, including 19 studies based on US patients.

Pre-existing sleep disturbances were tied to an increased risk of COVID-19 infection of 12% (odds ratio [OR],1.12; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07 to 1.18), hospitalization of 25% (OR,1.25; 95% CI, 1.15 to 1.36), death of 45% (OR,1.45; 95% CI, 1.19 to 1.78), and long COVID of 36% (OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.17 to 1.57).

Age and gender played a role in the findings, with men with sleep disturbances more likely to die from COVID than women with sleep disturbances.

Young individuals with pre-existing sleep disturbances had a higher susceptibility and hospitalization for COVID-19 than those without.

"Young individuals with pre-existing sleep disturbances had a higher susceptibility and hospitalization for COVID-19 than those without. This finding further confirmed the compromised immune function induced by sleep disturbances," the authors wrote. "In old individuals, those with pre-existing sleep disturbances elevated the hospitalization and mortality of COVID-19 but did not increase the susceptibility compared with those without."

Read more from the original source:

Sleep disturbances linked to worse COVID-19 outcomes - University of Minnesota Twin Cities

usatoday.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 usatoday.com

Read more from the original source:

Masks are key tool against COVID-19. Should they be banned for war protesters? - USA TODAY

By Doug Donovan

Lauren Gardner, the Johns Hopkins University professor who pioneered infectious disease tracking during the COVID-19 pandemic, won the Future Insight Prize from Merck, the global life sciences conglomerate based in Germany.

Merck awarded the 500,000 prize (approximately $541,160) to Gardner today for her contributions to the development of artificial intelligence systems capable of discovering and tracking future pandemics.

Image caption: Lauren Gardner

"Receiving the Future Insight Prize will further support our mission at Johns Hopkins to refine predictive modeling and enhance decision making tools that are crucial for effectively managing public health emergencies," Gardner said at the Curious2024Future Insight Conference. "This recognition fuels our commitment to developing new AI-enabled solutions to anticipate and mitigate future threats from any known virus or other biological source."

Gardner has been at the forefront of epidemiological modeling well before the COVID-19 pandemic emerged in December 2019. Earlier that year she created a predictive map that determined the 25 U.S. counties where measles outbreaks were most likely to occur due to multiple variables. She has also previously developed predictive models for Zika, Dengue, MERS-CoV among other infectious diseases. In January 2020, as COVID-19 was still primarily contained to Asia, Gardner and her team in the Department of Civil and Systems Engineering created the Johns Hopkins web-based COVID-19 dashboard, an essential global resource that earned her the Lasker-Bloomberg Public Service Award, America's top biomedical research prize.

"The exemplary work of Dr. Gardner and her Johns Hopkins team made a significant public health contribution during the COVID-19 pandemic," Merck CEO Beln Garijo said. "With the Future Insight Prize, we hope she can accelerate ongoing efforts to create a world that is better prepared to predict and prevent future pandemics."

Gardner's current projects include enhancing epidemiological tools for early outbreak detection, creating a centralized open data repository, and advancing public health policy integration through training and capacity-building efforts. Her work aims to set new standards in using AI for public health and foster robust global responses to emerging infectious diseases.

See more here:

Lauren Gardner wins Merck prize to advance pandemic tracking with artificial intelligence - The Hub at Johns Hopkins

The onset of summer has triggered fears of the resurgence of Covid-19 as SARS-CoV-2, the coronavirus that causes Covid-19, has continued to mutate. There have been concerns around a group of variants called FLiRT, named after the technical names for their mutations, and the LB.1 variant, which has an additional mutation on FLiRT.

The FLiRT strains are sub-variants of Omicron, which was dominant in the third wave of infections in India in January 2022. FLiRT strains together account for over 60% of Covid-19 cases in the United States, with a variant known as KP.3 accounting alone for 33.1% of infections by early June, according to data from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

What impact could these mutations have and what precautions should be taken? We explain.

FLiRT is a group of variants which include KP.2, JN.1.7, and any other variants starting with KP or JN. They are descendants of the JN.1 variant, which dominated infections in the US during late 2023 and early 2024.

Its symptoms resemble those of earlier variants, including fever, cough, fatigue and digestive issues with a heightened transmission rate. Of concern is its ability to evade immunity, gained from vaccines and previous infections.

The LB.1 strain, a mutation of the FLiRT group, was responsible for 17.5% of Covid-19 cases in the US this year as summer began. Both FLiRT and LB.1 are highly transmissible.

Preliminary research data from the Infectious Diseases Society of America shows most common FLiRT variants are mutations which can infect people who are vaccinated. They spread more easily than JN.1, while LB.1 is poised to be more infectious and transmissible than its predecessors.

The uptick in cases has been chiefly reported from the US, the United Kingdom and Singapore, with an increased rate of hospitalisation. CDC data for June 16 to 22 showed that the number of emergency room visits had increased to over 23%, while Covid-19 deaths had also risen by 14.3% in recent weeks. However, the share of Covid-19 deaths as a part of all deaths remains low, at 0.8%.

The Singapore Ministry of Health reported that the number of Covid-19 cases had risen to 25,900 cases between May 5 to 11 over the previous weeks 13,700 cases, while the number hospitalised increased from 181 to 250 over the same period.

The Indian Express in May reported that 290 cases of the KP.2 variant and 34 cases of the KP.1 variant had been detected in India.

Ever since Covid-19 began circulation in late 2019, the virus has continued to exist in and around humans. What has changed is how humans gradually acquired immunity to it compared to when it first appeared.

The US removed its mask mandates in early 2022, while the CDC stopped reporting daily case numbers on its data tracker by May 2023, viewing the situation as no longer being a public health emergency. There are also fewer tests being done for it, resulting in lower reporting of numbers.

However, Covid-19 strains continue to mutate and evolve. Over time, the immunity against the virus, developed through infections and vaccines, starts wearing off. Paul Hunter, a professor of medicine at the University of East Anglia in the UK, told Deutsche Welle: Sterilizing immunity following an infection or vaccination only lasts four to six months on average, so immunity gained from infections during winter or the autumn vaccination campaign will have already been lost for the most part.

This results in the need for continued booster doses of the vaccine. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has appealed to drug manufacturers to target the new variant as well. In particular, the elderly and those with comorbidities are more vulnerable to the infection.

Preventative measures prescribed since the beginning of the pandemic in 2020 should be adhered to, including maintaining social distancing, using well-fitted respiratory masks like N95 or KN95 indoors to protect against all variants, and increasing ventilation while indoors.

People vulnerable to the infection on account of their comorbidities, as well as those in areas where the spread of the infection has been reported, are advised to take extra precautions. Booster doses against the vaccine can help provide immunity against the current strain.

See more here:

Explained: New Covid-19 variants FLiRT and LB.1, driving surge in US, UK - The Indian Express