Category: Covid-19

Page 28«..1020..27282930..4050..»

Marjorie Taylor Greene Refuses To Call Fauci A ‘Doctor’And Is Chided By Fellow RepublicanIn Explosive Hearing – Forbes

June 4, 2024

Topline

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., refused to address Dr. Anthony Fauci as doctor and called for him to be jailed during an, at times, explosive hearing before Congress on the origins of Covid-19as Republicans continue to demonize the federal governments former top infectious disease expert in their probe into the governments response to the pandemic.

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., holds up a picture of Anthony Fauci, former director of the ... [+] National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, with his mask down, while questioning him during the House Oversight and Accountability Subcommittee on Coronavirus Pandemic hearing titled "A Hearing with Dr. Anthony Fauci," in Rayburn building on Monday, June 3, 2024. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

Greene told Fauci youre not a doctor, youre Mr. Fauci in my few minutes, adding that his medical license should be revoked and he should be in prison for crimes against humanity, citing mask mandates.

Greene delivered the attacks as she accused Fauci and government agencies of making up guidelines, like six-feet distancing and masking of children, questioning whether the American people deserve to be abused like that?

Officials like Fauci, the former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, have recently acknowledged the six-foot social distancing recommendation was not based on medical data, with Fauci telling Congress in a closed-door interview in January the Centers for Disease Control made the recommendation as an empiric decision that wasnt based on data, according to a transcript of the interview released Friday.

Rep. Brad Wenstrup, R-Ohio, who is a podiatric doctor and chairs the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic, reprimanded Greene in response to the attack, instructing her to refer to Fauci as doctor and adhere by committee rules of decorum, to which she responded Im not addressing him as doctor.

Fauci voluntarily agreed to testify in the hearing, which marks his first public appearance on Capitol Hill since he left government in 2022.

Republicans have zeroed in on the notion that the virus causing Covid-19 originated from a lab leak in Wuhan, China, a theory Fauci and medical experts have said is unlikely, but not improbable. Republicans have accused Fauci of trying to downplay the lab leak theory because a nonprofit virus-hunting research organization, EcoHealth Alliance, received grants from the National Institute of Health and subcontracted with the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Covid-19 wasnt created by bats in a wet market . . . it was manufactured in a lab funded by Fauci. He tried to cover it up, Greene said last year. Some of the research methods ostensibly used at the lab in Wuhan are controversial and considered risky, but no direct evidence has emerged linking that research to the coronavirus, and federal officials say the viruses studied by EcoHealth Alliance were genetically distinct from the virus that causes Covid-19. Republicans have also questioned whether Fauci flouted public records laws by sending emails from his personal account, pointing to an email one of his senior advisers, Dr. David Morens, sent to other scientists explaining that Fauci was aware of including sensitive information in emails that could be leaked, writing I can either send stuff to Tony on his private gmail, or hand it to him at work or his house. Fauci denied the accusation in his opening statement Monday, stating that to the best of my knowledge I have never conducted official business via my personal email.

Fauci said it was absolutely false and simply preposterous to accuse him of attempting to cover up the lab leak theory in his opening statement, in which he read an email he sent to another scientist detailing his instructions for an investigation into the theory. It is inconceivable that anyone who reads this email could conclude that I was trying to cover up the possibility of a lab leak. I have always kept an open mind to the different possibilities, Fauci told the committee.

The federal government suspended funding to EcoHealth Alliance last month after the Department of Health and Human Services inspector general released an audit alleging the NIH failed to properly monitor how the grant money was facilitating research at the lab in Wuhan.

Fauci: Trumps Covid-19 Response Very Likely Did Cost Lives (Forbes)

Heres What Dr. Fauci Has Said About Covids Origins And The Lab Leak Theory (Forbes)

Thats Nonsense: Fauci Responds To GOP Backlash Over His Emails On Covid Origin (Forbes)

Read the original post:

Marjorie Taylor Greene Refuses To Call Fauci A 'Doctor'And Is Chided By Fellow RepublicanIn Explosive Hearing - Forbes

Fauci Defends His Covid-19 Response to the House Oversight and Accountability Committee – Esquire

June 4, 2024

Ive been dipping in and out of

Yes, dear friends, we are back with the LAB LEAK!!!!! And, of course, GAIN OF FUNCTION! Ranking member Dr. Raul Ruiz, Democrat of California, was quick to call bullshit, not that it mattered to the majority, which was cutting campaign commercials on the taxpayers dime.

So despite the clear evidence that Dr. Fauci and his agency did not fund gain of function research under the P3CO regulatory definition and that the virus studied under the federally funded grant EcoHealth Alliance Grant could not have been the progenitor virus for Sars-cov-2. Republicans have levied these unsubstantiated allegations knowing very well that they are not true. Theyve done so to push their extreme partisan narrative that Dr. Fauci and our nations public health officials caused the Covid-19 pandemic.

And Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Maryland) just couldnt resist.

See? That isnt hard. Hang all the blunders and stupidity around his neck, and never mention him without using the primary modifier Convicted Felon. And stick up for decent public servants into the bargain.

Charles P Pierce is the author of four books, most recently Idiot America, and has been a working journalist since 1976. He lives near Boston and has three children.

Follow this link:

Fauci Defends His Covid-19 Response to the House Oversight and Accountability Committee - Esquire

Top US Scientist Fauci Testifies On Origins Of Covid-19 Before House Panel – NDTV

June 4, 2024

Antony Fauci became the nation's most trusted expert in the chaotic early days of the 2020 outbreak.

Former US government scientist Anthony Fauci angrily denied covering up the origins of Covid-19 Monday in his first public congressional testimony since retiring as the face of the fight against the pandemic.

Fauci became the nation's most trusted expert in the chaotic early days of the 2020 outbreak, but his clashes with former president Donald Trump over the response sparked fury on the right, and he now lives with security protection following death threats against his family.

Republicans accuse the 83-year-old immunologist of helping to set off the worst pandemic in a century by approving funding passed on to Chinese scientists they accuse of manufacturing the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus that causes Covid-19.

He was pressed by Republicans on the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic on his knowledge of "gain of function" research, which seeks to enhance viruses as a way of finding ways to combat them.

The controversial technique is at the center of a theory that the pandemic originated in a lab leak.

But Fauci said it would be "molecularly impossible" for the bat viruses studied at the Wuhan Institute of Virology to be turned into the virus that caused the pandemic.

And he dismissed as "absolutely false and simply preposterous" Republican claims that he influenced the CIA's analysis of whether the pandemic started naturally or escaped from the lab.

The director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) for 38 years until he stepped down in December 2022, Fauci helped craft federal policy during an outbreak that killed 1.1 million Americans.

His regular TV appearances correcting Trump's misinformation about the pandemic earned him enemies among allies of the billionaire, who is bidding for a second term in November.

The panel has taken more than 100 hours of testimony and sifted through a mountain of documents in a 15-month investigation but has failed to turn up any evidence linking Fauci to potentially dangerous research in Wuhan.

The World Health Organization and scientists across the world have investigated the origins of the virus, most believing it to have spread from animals to humans in China.

A US intelligence analysis released last year said it was also possible that the virus was genetically engineered and escaped from the Wuhan lab.

Fauci told lawmakers it was "not a conspiracy theory" to discuss the merits of the lab leak theory.

"What is a conspiracy theory is the kind of distortions of that particular subject, like, it was a lab leak and I was parachuted into the CIA like Jason Bourne and told the CIA that they should really not be talking about a lab leak," he said.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

More here:

Top US Scientist Fauci Testifies On Origins Of Covid-19 Before House Panel - NDTV

Study shows N95 masks near-perfect at blocking escape of airborne COVID-19 | University of Maryland – University of Maryland | School of Public Health

June 4, 2024

The study,Relative efficacy of masks and respirators as source control for viral aerosol shedding from people infected with SARS-CoV-2, published May 29 in eBioMedicine, a Lancet journal.

The research shows that any mask is much better than no mask, and an N95 is significantly better than the other options. Thats the number one message, says the studys senior author,Dr. Donald Milton. Milton is a UMD SPH professor of environmental health and a global expert on how viruses spread through the air.

The study started in May 2020, shortly after the pandemic began, and compared breath samples from volunteers who had active COVID-19, testing the performance of four commonly-used masks. Even without giving participants fit tests or training on how to wear masks correctly, all masks significantly reduced the amount of virus escaping into the air. The study tested masks as a way to control the spread of the virus from the source, i.e. the infected person, and did not test masks as protection from COVID-19 in the surrounding air.

Because COVID-19 is airborne, we focused on the extent to which wearing a mask reduces contamination of the air around you, Milton says. This latest study is a continuation of investigations by UMDsPublic Health AeroBiology Lab(PHAB Lab) into how contagious respiratory viruses such as influenza contaminate the air.

Researchers asked volunteers with COVID-19 to breathe into a unique contraption known as the Gesundheit II Machine, developed by Milton and colleagues to measure viruses in exhaled breath. Participants, who breathed into the machine for 30 minutes at a time, were asked to do avariety of vocalizations such as repeating the alphabet, singing Happy Birthday, and evenhonoringUMDs mascotby repeatedly shouting Go Terps!

In each instance, researchers measured the amount of viral particles in the exhaled breath of volunteers, pairing each 30-minute session of breathing with a mask on with another 30-minute session with no mask.

Data from our study suggests that a mildly symptomatic person with COVID-19 who is not wearing a mask exhales a little over two infectious doses per hour, says first author Dr. Jianyu Lai, a postdoctoral researcher at the PHAB Lab. But when wearing an N95 mask, the risk goes down exponentially.

The duckbill N95 blocked 99% of large particles and 98% of small particles from escaping out of a persons mask. Milton says the designs tight seal, a powerful filter, and large air space for breath to move around all contribute to the duckbills success.

Surprisingly, KN95 masks the disposable masks used widely were no more effective than cloth or surgical masks. The study found that a common brand of KN95 masks leak more air than duckbills or other studied masks, because they dont conform to the face well. That flaw is compounded by a powerful filter with more flow resistance that pushes air out of the mask at the sides instead of through the filter, allowing more virus particles to escape into the surrounding air.

Cloth masks also outperformed both KN95 and surgical masks. Milton theorizes that cloth masks with greater coverage, wrap around the face and give a better seal than either KN95 or surgical masks. With cloth mask filters, flow resistance is also lower, allowing breath to pass through the filter and not leak out the sides of the mask.

Limiting the amount of viral particles in the air is a key way to control highly contagious respiratory viruses in general, Milton said. This is even more the case with the COVID-19 virus, given transmissibility has increased over time, with Omicron in particular breaking through the immunity people developed from vaccinations or prior infections.

Our research shows definitively why its so important to have non-pharmaceutical responses like wearing masks, and why we need studies like this to illuminate which masks are most effective, says Milton.

Both Milton and Lai hope that their findings will inform health policies going forward, including when combatting potential outbreaks like bird flu or even the common flu.

Duckbill N95 masks should be the standard of care in high-risk situations, such as nursing homes and health care settings, Lai says. Now, when the next outbreak of a severe respiratoryvirus occurs, we know exactly how to help control the spread, with this simple and inexpensivesolution.

In addition to researchers from the UMD School of Public Health, collaborators include authors from the UMD A. James Clark School of Engineering and the World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Control at the University of Hong Kong, China.

This research was supported by the Prometheus-UMD, sponsored by the Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency (agreement N66001-18-2-4015), the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Centers of Excellence for Influenza Research and Surveillance (contract 12-HHSN272201400008C), and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (contract 200-2020-09528); by a grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation; and by a gift from The Flu Lab.

## Media Contact - SPH Communications, sph-comm@umd.edu, 301-405-2438

Read the original:

Study shows N95 masks near-perfect at blocking escape of airborne COVID-19 | University of Maryland - University of Maryland | School of Public Health

Anthony Fauci testifies on origins of COVID-19 pandemic – WFAA.com

June 4, 2024

More Videos

Next up in 5

Example video title will go here for this video

Next up in 5

Example video title will go here for this video

Dr. Anthony Fauci, the top U.S. infectious disease expert until leaving the government in 2022, was back before Congress on Monday.

Author: wfaa.com

Published: 4:32 PM CDT June 3, 2024

Updated: 4:32 PM CDT June 3, 2024

Original post:

Anthony Fauci testifies on origins of COVID-19 pandemic - WFAA.com

North Bay infectious disease experts voice optimism and caution over new COVID-19 strains – The Santa Rosa Press Democrat

June 4, 2024

Most of the COVID-19 cases Dr. Gary Green is treating these days on an outpatient level are related to crowded events and travel the kinds of things Americans do in greater numbers as summer arrives.

For the highly infectious SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus, that can translate to spreading infections.

Green, a Sutter Health infectious disease expert, says hes seeing a steady flow of cases but not a lot, and severe symptoms requiring hospitalization are uncommon.

Increasing herd immunity, greater outdoor activity spurred by warmer weather and an elderly population that has dialed in protective measures are all contributing to a lull in cases, Green said.

But new COVID-19 subvariants are threatening to ramp up viral transmission this summer and especially in the fall and winter.

KP. 2, the most prolific of the so-called FLiRT subvariants, and currently the most dominant subvariant in the U.S., is a fourth or fifth generation strain of the omicron variant. Its a descendant of omicrons JN.1 strain.

In less than two months, between late March and early May, KP. 2 infections went from 4% to about 28% in the United States, according to the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Green said as with previous subvariants of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19 illness, KP. 2 has mutated spike proteins that allow it to more efficiently attach to respiratory epithelium, which protect against inhaled pathogens and irritants.

Unfortunately, thats part of the natural evolution of these subvariants, he said.

We expect these viruses to be a little bit more efficient in their contagiousness and their transmission and their attachment, Green said.

But the good news is this is mainly in the upper respiratory tract, where you feel like (you have) the head cold, and not as much in the lower respiratory tract where you feel like you have pneumonia, he said.

These don't make the virus any more dangerous, Green added. So we don't expect more severe cases. But it might be just slightly more contagious.

Green said the current vaccine does appear to offer some protection against the new variants.

Dr. Tanya Phares, Sonoma Countys health officer, echoed Greens comments regarding the subvariants. Despite increased transmissibility, these mutations dont appear to result in more severe disease, she said in an email.

Phares said that between late March and early May, eight cases of FLiRT subvariants have been genetically sequenced. The FLiRT subvariants are descended from the JN.1 subvariant, which is still the dominant strain in Sonoma County and the state, health officials said.

In Napa County, the most prevalent subvariants since April have been KP. 2 at 7%, KP. 3 at 4% and KP. 1.1 at 3%, according to county health officials.

Dr. Michael Vollmer, regional hospital epidemiologist for Kaiser Permanente, said the most recent FLiRT mutations are not unexpected and follow a pattern of viral evolution that takes place every three to six months as the virus circulates globally.

The virus is still constantly looking for pathways to replicate itself, Vollmer said, adding that todays mutations, though related, look very different than what was circulating a year ago or two years ago.

But what were not seeing at this juncture is any increase in severe illness, he said. Unlike in 2021, we don't think we're going to see some big jump in emergency room or hospital admissions through the summer.

Vollmer said predicting what will happen in the fall and winter is more difficult.

Its important for people to understand that COVID-19 is not going anywhere and while the overall impact is not as severe as it once was, the virus still poses danger to those over 65 or people who are severely immunosuppressed, he said.

Those that keep up to date with vaccinations are going to do better, Vollmer said. People, particularly those who are in those vulnerable categories, should make sure that they're getting up-to-date vaccinations, they could consider getting repeat doses.

Vollmer said he expects vaccine makers and federal regulators will be convening this month to discuss another update to the COVID-19 vaccine for the fall and winter seasons.

The next two to four weeks this summer could see an increase in COVID-19 cases, but its not likely to have a big impact on the health care system, he said.

Dr. John Swartzberg, an infectious disease expert at UC Berkeley, said omicrons JN.1 strain had been dominant in the United States up until about two months ago, when JN.1 subvariants such as KP. 2 began gaining ground.

The current vaccine which became available last October targets an omicron subvariant known as XBB. 1, Swartzberg said, adding that KP. 2 was more transmissible than JN. 1, which itself was more transmissible than XBB. 1.

SARS-CoV-2 continues to evolve, just as it has throughout the pandemic, by discovering new ways to evade the host immunity, he said.

But Swartzberg pointed out there is little evidence that KP. 2 and the latest JN.1 subvariants cause more severe disease.

The other good news, he said, is that the current vaccine does offer some protection.

Swartzberg said last month the World Health Organization recommended the fall vaccine be directed against JN.1. He said he expects the U.S. Food and Drug Administration will at least take that step in recommendations.

Theyll either follow the WHO and recommend the vaccine (target) JN.1 or they recommend it against KP. 2, the most prominent of the FLiRT variants, Swartzberg said.

The good news is it only takes a couple of months to really produce enough vaccine to vaccinate everybody, he said.

You can reach Staff Writer Martin Espinoza at 707-521-5213 or martin.espinoza@pressdemocrat.com. On Twitter @pressreno.

See more here:

North Bay infectious disease experts voice optimism and caution over new COVID-19 strains - The Santa Rosa Press Democrat

Ex-medical adviser Anthony Fauci grilled by Republicans over COVID-19 handling – WION

June 4, 2024

Former chief medical adviser to President Joe Biden and as the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Dr Anthony Fauci was grilled Monday (Jun 3) as he testified before a Republican-led House panel investigating the origins of COVID-19 and the government's pandemic response. During the testimony, an intense bipartisan divide was on display as Republicans on the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic committee hounded him while Democrats came to his rescue.

The hearing comes as several Republicans have alleged that he had been communicating about official work using his private accounts.

It was Fauci's first public appearance on Capitol Hill since leaving government in 2022.

The committee chairman, Rep. Brad Wenstrup of Ohio, started off with a thanking note, lauding Fauci's "willing cooperation," for his voluntary appearance in the hearing.

But he was quick to give Fauci a tough time with his questions as he claimed he allowed his office to be "unaccountable to the American people."

"We have seen officials from your office, in their own writing, discussing breaking federal law, deleting official records, and sharing private government information with grant recipients. The office you directed and those serving under your leadership chose to flout the law and bragged about it," Wenstrup said.

Wenstrup was here referring to Dr David Morens, a senior adviser to Fauci, who had appeared before the panel last week and faced accusations that he had been circumventing federal Freedom of Information Act rules by using a "secret back channel" with Fauci.

Fauci on Monday distanced himself from Morens, saying the latter was not an adviser to him on "institute policy or other substantive issues."

"Let me state for the record, to the best of my knowledge, I have never conducted official business using my personal email," Fauci told the committee.

Fauci also touched upon the claims that he was trying to shield the EcoHealth Alliance, whose funding from the government came to light because of its close links to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Notably, Morens quoted an email to the EcoHealth Alliance to level this allegation against Fauci.

"I don't know where he got that, but that's not true," said Fauci.

Fauci stressed the allegation that he influenced scientists working to determine whether the virus had originated in a lab by bribing them with grant money "is absolutely false and simply preposterous." He also disputed the claim that he made efforts to hide that the virus originated in the lab, saying he has "always kept an open mind to the different possibilities."

(With inputs from agencies)

Geopolitical writer at WION, follows Indian foreign policy and world politics, a truth seeker.

Read more from the original source:

Ex-medical adviser Anthony Fauci grilled by Republicans over COVID-19 handling - WION

First 3 years of COVID-19 had 3M excess deaths in the West: study – Global News

June 4, 2024

WATCH: Health Matters: Life expectancy has dropped 1.6 years, analysis finds Mar 12, 2024

The first three years of the COVID-19 pandemic had more than three million excess deaths in Western countries, a new study says, raising serious concerns.

Story continues below advertisement

The research published in the BMJ Public Health journal Monday showed that between January 1, 2020 and December 31, 2022, a total of 3,089,465 excess deaths were reported in 47 countries in the West, including Canada.

Excess mortality reflects data about the number of deaths that exceed what is expected or considered normal during a given period.

The first full year of the pandemic had more than 1.03 million excess deaths in 2020, the BMJ study said.

Story continues below advertisement

In 2021, when the first COVID-19 vaccines were rolled out, there were roughly 1.25 million excess deaths.

Then, in 2022, when countries lifted most COVID-19 related measures, more than 808,000 excess deaths were reported, according to preliminary estimates.

Excess mortality has remained high in the Western world for three consecutive years, despite the implementation of containment measures and COVID-19 vaccines, the study authors in Netherlands concluded.

This is unprecedented and raises serious concerns, they said, adding that governments and policymakers need to thoroughly investigate underlying causes of persistent excess mortality and evaluate their health crises policies.

Researchers looked at all-cause mortality reports for Western countries using the Our World in Data statistics.

Story continues below advertisement

In Canada, thousands of excess deaths have been reported since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic.

In 2020, five per cent or 13,798 more deaths than expected were reported had there been no pandemic, according to provisional data from Statistics Canada.

Meanwhile, provisional StatCan data from March 2020 through December 2021 showed an estimated 30,146 excess deaths or nearly six per cent more deaths than expected.

Story continues below advertisement

In addition to deaths directly caused by COVID-19, the pandemic could also have indirect consequences that increase or decrease the occurrences of death, StatCan said in its report from May 2022.

Trending Now

The agency says it is important to measure excess mortality to better understand the direct and indirect consequences of the COVID19 pandemic.

While the BMJ study did not specifically examine the causes of the persistently high excess deaths in the West during the pandemic, the authors said non-pharmaceutical interventions to curb COVID-19 spread had adverse indirect effects, such as limited access to healthcare, disrupted health programmes and mental health challenges that increased morbidity and mortality from other causes.

Story continues below advertisement

Vulnerable populations in need of acute or complex medical treatment, such as patients with cardiovascular disease, cerebrovascular conditions, diabetes and cancer, were hurt by these interventions due to the limited access to and delivery of medical services, the authors wrote in the study.

They also blamed staff shortages, postponed surgeries, limited availability of medicines, and delayed diagnostics for worsening the conditions of patients.

After more than three years, the World Health Organization declared in May 2023 that the COVID-19 was no longer a global health emergency.

Story continues below advertisement

However, COVID-19 cases and deaths continue to be reported in Canada and other countries.

As of May 28, a total of more than 4.96 million COVID-19 cases and 59,382 deaths have been reported in Canada, according to government data.

Subscribe to updates from GlobalNews

Unsubscribe from GlobalNewsupdates

2024 Global News, a division of Corus Entertainment Inc.

More here:

First 3 years of COVID-19 had 3M excess deaths in the West: study - Global News

In the pandemic, we were told to keep 6 feet apart. There’s no science to support that. – The Washington Post

June 4, 2024

The nations top mental health official had spent months asking for evidence behind the Centers for Disease Control and Preventions social distancing guidelines, warning that keeping Americans physically apart during the coronavirus pandemic would harm patients, businesses, and overall health and wellness.

Now, Elinore McCance-Katz, the Trump administrations assistant secretary for mental health and substance use, was urging the CDC to justify its recommendation that Americans stay six feet apart to avoid contracting covid-19 or get rid of it.

I very much hope that CDC will revisit this decision or at least tell us that there is more and stronger data to support this rule than what I have been able to find online, McCance-Katz wrote in a June 2020 memo submitted to the CDC and other health agency leaders and obtained by The Washington Post. If not, they should pull it back.

The CDC would keep its six-foot social distance recommendation in place until August 2022, with some modifications as Americans got vaccinated against the virus and officials pushed to reopen schools. Now, congressional investigators are set Monday to press Anthony S. Fauci, the infectious-disease doctor who served as a key coronavirus adviser during the Trump and Biden administrations, on why the CDCs recommendation was allowed to shape so much of American life for so long, particularly given Fauci and other officials recent acknowledgments that there was little science behind the six-foot rule after all.

It sort of just appeared, that six feet is going to be the distance, Fauci testified to Congress in a January closed-door hearing, according to a transcribed interview released Friday. Fauci characterized the recommendation as an empiric decision that wasnt based on data.

Francis S. Collins, former director of the National Institutes of Health, also privately testified to Congress in January that he was not aware of evidence behind the social distancing recommendation, according to a transcript released in May.

Four years later, visible reminders of the six-foot rule remain with us, particularly in cities that rushed to adopt the CDCs guidelines hoping to protect residents and keep businesses open. D.C. is dotted with signs in stores and schools even on sidewalks or in government buildings urging people to stand six feet apart.

Experts agree that social distancing saved lives, particularly early in the pandemic when Americans had no protections against a novel virus sickening millions of people. One recent paper published by the Brookings Institution, a nonpartisan think tank, concludes that behavior changes to avoid developing covid-19, followed later by vaccinations, prevented about 800,000 deaths. But that achievement came at enormous cost, the authors added, with inflexible strategies that werent driven by evidence.

We never did the study about what works, said Andrew Atkeson, a UCLA economist and co-author of the paper, lamenting the lack of evidence around the six-foot rule. He warned that persistent frustrations over social distancing and other measures might lead Americans to ignore public health advice during the next crisis.

The U.S. distancing measure was particularly stringent, as other countries adopted shorter distances; the World Health Organization set a distance of one meter, or slightly more than three feet, which experts concluded was roughly as effective as the six-foot mark at deterring infections, and would have allowed schools to reopen more rapidly.

The six-foot rule was probably the single most costly intervention the CDC recommended that was consistently applied throughout the pandemic, Scott Gottlieb, former Food and Drug Administration commissioner, wrote in his book about the pandemic, Uncontrolled Spread.

Its still not clear who at the CDC settled on the six-foot distance; the agency has repeatedly declined to specify the authors of the guidance, which resembled its recommendations on how to avoid contracting the flu. A CDC spokesperson credited a team of experts, who drew from research such as a 1955 study on respiratory droplets. In his book, Gottlieb wrote that the Trump White House pushed back on the CDCs initial recommendation of 10 feet of social distance, saying it would be too difficult to implement.

Perhaps the rules biggest impact was on children, despite ample evidence they were at relatively low risk of covid-related complications. Many schools were unable to accommodate six feet of space between students desks and forced to rely on virtual education for more than a year, said Joseph Allen, a Harvard University expert in environmental health, who called in 2020 for schools to adopt three feet of social distance.

The six-foot rule was really an error that had been propagated for several decades, based on a misunderstanding of how particles traveled through indoor spaces, Allen said, adding that health experts often wrongly focused on avoiding droplets from infected people rather than improving ventilation and filtration inside buildings.

Social distancing had champions before the pandemic. Bush administration officials, working on plans to fight bioterrorism, concluded that social distancing could save lives in a health crisis and renewed their calls as the coronavirus approached. The idea also took hold when public health experts initially believed that the coronavirus was often transmitted by droplets expelled by infected people, which could land several feet away; the CDC later acknowledged the virus was airborne and people could be exposed just by sharing the same air in a room, even if they were farther than six feet apart.

There was no magic around six feet, Robert R. Redfield, who served as CDC director during the Trump administration, told a congressional committee in March 2022. Its just historically thats what was used for other respiratory pathogens. So that really became the first piece of a strategy to protect Americans in the early days of the virus, he said.

It also became the standard that states and businesses adopted, with swift pressure on holdouts. Lawmakers and workers urged meat processing plants, delivery companies and other essential businesses to adopt the CDCs social distancing recommendations as their employees continued reporting to work during the pandemic.

Some business leaders werent sure the measures made sense. Jeff Bezos, founder of online retail giant Amazon, petitioned the White House in March 2020 to consider revising the six-foot recommendation, said Adam Boehler, then a senior Trump administration official helping with the coronavirus response. At the time, Amazon was facing questions about a rising number of infections in its warehouses, and Democratic senators were urging the company to adopt social distancing.

Bezos called me and asked, is there any real science behind this rule? Boehler said, adding that Bezos pushed on whether Amazon could adopt an alternative distance if workers were masked, physically separated by dividers or other precautions were taken. He said its the backbone of trying to keep America running here, and when you separate somebody five feet versus six feet, its a big difference, Boehler recalled. Bezos owns The Washington Post.

Kelly Nantel, an Amazon spokesperson, confirmed that Bezos called Boehler and said the Amazon founders focus was the discrepancy between the U.S. recommendation and the WHOs shorter distance. The company soon said it would follow the CDCs six-foot social distancing guidelines in its warehouses and later developed technologies to try to enforce those guidelines. We did it globally everywhere because it was the right thing to do, Nantel said.

Boehler said he spoke with Redfield and Fauci about testing alternatives to the six-foot recommendation but that he was not aware of what happened to those tests or what they found. Fauci declined to comment. Redfield did not respond to requests for comment.

But challenging the six-foot recommendation, particularly in the pandemics early days, was seen as politically difficult. Rochelle Walensky, then chief of infectious disease at Massachusetts General Hospital, argued in a July 2020 email that if people are masked it is quite safe and much more practical to be at 3 feet in many school settings.

Five months later, incoming president Joe Biden would tap Walensky as his CDC director. Walensky swiftly endorsed the six-foot distance before working to loosen it, announcing in March 2021 that elementary school students could sit three feet apart if they were masked. Walensky declined to comment.

The most persistent government critic of the social distancing guidelines may have been McCance-Katz, who did not respond to requests for comment for this article. Trumps mental health chief had spent several years clashing with other Department of Health and Human Services officials on various matters and had few internal defenders by the time the pandemic arrived, hampering her message. But while her pleas failed to move the CDC, her warnings about the risks to mental health found an audience with Trump and his allies, who blamed federal bureaucrats for the six-foot rule and other measures.

What is this nonsense that somehow its unsafe to return to school? McCance-Katz said in September 2020 on an HHS podcast, lamenting the broader shutdown of American life. I do think that Americans are smart people, and I think that they need to start asking questions about why is it this way.

Read more:

In the pandemic, we were told to keep 6 feet apart. There's no science to support that. - The Washington Post

Study reveals persistent risk of death, symptoms in COVID survivors at 3 years – University of Minnesota Twin Cities

June 4, 2024

COVID-19 patients hospitalized with the wild-type virus in 2020 were at a 29% higher risk for death than their nonhospitalized counterparts 3 years later, and even those with mild illness still reported new-onset health consequences, concludes areport on long COVID published today in Nature Medicine.

Researchers from the Veterans Affairs (VA) St. Louis Health Care System and Scripps Research followed up on 135,161 COVID-19 survivors and 5,206,835 controls in the VA system for 3 years to estimate the risks of long COVID and death. At the time that the survivors were infected, COVID vaccines and antivirals hadn't been developed.

There were 114,864 participants (12.0% women) in the non-hospitalized group and 20,297 in the hospitalized group (5.8% women). In the control group, 9.7% were women.

The risk of death among patients hospitalized within 30 days of infection decreased over time but was still significantly elevated 3 years post-infection (incidence rate ratio, 1.29). Although the risk of long COVID declined over that time, substantial residual risk persisted, leading to 90.0 disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) per 1,000 people.

Among non-hospitalized patients, there was no increased risk of death after the first year, and the risk of long COVID declined over 3years but still led to 9.6 DALYs per 1,000 people in the third year.

Three years post-infection, hospitalized COVID-19 patients had a 34% higher risk of symptoms across all organ systems than controls, down from an 182% increased risk 1 year post-infection and 57% at 2 years.

Over 3 years, 378.7 long-COVID symptoms were reported per 1,000 people, including 212.3, 125.0, and 41.2 in the first, second, and third year post-infection, respectively. This corresponded to 56.1%, 33.0%, and 10.9%, respectively, of the total 3-year long-COVID burden.

The 3-year burden of DALYs attributed to long COVID-19 was 91.2 per 1,000 people, including 54.3, 27.3, and 9.6 in the first, second, and third year, respectively. This corresponded to 59.6%, 29.9%, and 10.5%, respectively, of the total 3-year DALYs.

Total DALYs of hospitalized COVID-19 patients at 3years (766.2 per 1,000 people) were 8.4 times higher than those of non-hospitalized participants (91.2 per 1,000 people).

There was a 5% increased risk of long-COVID symptoms at 3 years among non-hospitalized patients, which translates into 41 more health problems per 1,000 people. In comparison, the risk was 23% higher 1 year post-infection, rising 16% by 2 years. Persistent health effects in the third year mainly affected the gastrointestinal, lung, and neurologic systems.

"While risk declined over time in both people who were non-hospitalized and hospitalized for COVID during the initial phase of the infection, residual risk remains even in those who had mild COVID; that risk is much higher in the hospitalized," study authorZiyad Al-Aly, MD, chief of research and development at the VA St. Louis Health Care System, told CIDRAP News.

Visit link:

Study reveals persistent risk of death, symptoms in COVID survivors at 3 years - University of Minnesota Twin Cities

Page 28«..1020..27282930..4050..»