Millions of people could lose health insurance coverage when the COVID-19 emergency ends USA TODAY
Continued here:
Millions of people could lose health insurance coverage when the COVID-19 emergency ends - USA TODAY
WASHINGTON, DC - MAY 19, 2021: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Dr. Rochelle ... [+] Walensky answers a question during a Senate Appropriations Subcommittee hearing to examine the FY 2022 budget request for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on May 19, 2021 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Greg Nash-Pool/Getty Images)
At a Congressional hearing on Wednesday, March 30th, House Democrats and Republicans criticized each other for political interference in Covid-19 policy. Theyre both right, but for totally different reasons. Public health has been hijacked by politics, and it has occurred throughout the Covid-19 pandemic, during both the Trump and Biden Administrations. At times, the Trump Administration blatantly disregarded science, even going so far as to undermine public health officials. The Biden Administration hasnt sabotaged public health measures. Yet, it has allowed politics to trump public health in pernicious ways.
In order to renew the publics trust in public health, its vital that agencies such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) be as independent and apolitical as possible.
Coinciding with the drop in Omicron cases, the White House announced last month that the CDC would ease federal mask-wearing guidelines. Furthermore, virtually all states (including ones run by Democratic governors) lifted mask mandates. Are these instances of following the science? Or, are public health officials and political leaders simply putting the pandemic in the rear-view mirror, a potential Omicron BA.2 wave, notwithstanding?
Whats clear is that theres enormous political pressure to return to normality, after two years of Covid-19 rules. Moving on - the Democratic Partys talking point suggests easing pandemic exhaustion - is an understandable human urge. But, that doesnt mean its science-based. And, this isnt the first instance of political behavior masquerading as science-based guidance.
When delivering statements on masking and vaccine efficacy against transmission of the coronavirus, the CDC has repeatedly used the phrase follow the science. Yet, the agency has changed course repeatedly on masks and moved the goalposts on vaccine efficacy. The end-result has been muddled messaging thats not necessarily rooted in science. As a consequence, this has contributed to public mistrust.
Experts have said that part of the resistance to masks, social distancing measures, and vaccines stems from confusing public messaging disseminated by public health officials throughout the pandemic.
The problem is exacerbated when multiple government agencies are involved in messaging and they contradict each other. An illustrative example of miscommunication, lack of coordination, and politicization was the first booster rollout in the autumn of 2021. In August 2021, President Biden said the Administration would begin offering boosters en masse on September 20th, pending Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and CDC authorization. A couple of weeks later, the FDA and CDC tried reining in the White House, saying that there wasnt enough data yet to make a blanket recommendation on boosters. And then, at the end of September 2021, the two government agencies themselves issued contradictory recommendations on boosters, which led to confusion. First, a panel of advisers to the FDA recommended booster shots for those over 65, at high risk of Covid-19 complications, or employed in sectors that put that at risk of severe Covid-19 teachers. Subsequently, about a week later, a different panel, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) - which is part of and advises CDC - stated that people employed in professions that may expose them to more risk of severe Covid-19, ought not to get boosters. A day later, the CDC director Walensky overruled ACIP.
This is merely one instance in which the FDA, CDC (and ACIP within CDC), and the White House clearly didnt communicate or coordinate optimally, and seemingly had different interpretations of follow the science.
To be fair, the CDC has been up against a vocal and influential anti-science movement, which makes messaging all that much more difficult. Bizarrely, for instance, in right-wing political circles, ivermectin became increasingly popular as an antidote to Covid-19. The drug has been embroiled in a Covid-19 culture war that pits unproven treatments, such as ivermectin, against proven measures, such as vaccines.
Also, many have called into question efforts to mitigate Covid-19 spread as well as vaccine mandates, asserting such public health measures intrude on individual rights. This has been a driving force behind the curbing of public health powers by state and local authorities. And, in the extreme, an anti-science mob has accused the worldwide public health movement of being fascist, likening vaccine mandates to the wearing of yellow stars of David, for instance.
But, its clear the problems of communication and messaging didnt help matters, and they began almost as soon as the pandemic struck.
Early in the pandemic, public health officials said masks were not necessary for anyone who was not showing symptoms. They in fact discouraged people from buying them.
The CDC then changed course in early April 2020, saying that new research showed asymptomatic carriers were common spreaders of the virus, though some experts say the evidence for proper mask usage had already been demonstrated.
One year later, CDC Director Walensky stated that vaccinated people do not carry the virus. On May 13th 2021, people were told they no longer needed to wear masks indoors or outdoors if they had been vaccinated. At the time, many scientists criticized the comments, saying it was too soon to know for certain what effect the vaccines may have on transmission. And, it turns out that vaccinated individuals infected with the Delta variant were found to be able to transmit the virus as easily as those who are unvaccinated.
Walensky soon announced a reversal in guidance on masking among people who are vaccinated. The new guidance reflected a strategic retreat. Walensky stated that even people who are vaccinated should wear masks indoors in communities with substantial viral spread.
But, this wasnt the only mask blunder made by the CDC Director. Last month, Walensky called the mask the scarlet letter of this pandemic. This was a bizarre reference for something that doesnt evoke shame. Moreover, it was an exceedingly poor analogy. In Hawthornes famous book, at first, the scarlet letter that Hester Prynne wore was a punitive emblem; a symbol of shame for a sin committed. Surely, masks arent that. Then, the letter evolved over time to become a source of rejuvenation for Prynne. Masks arent that, either.
Besides poor messaging and unfortunately chosen metaphors, the CDC has also been hiding key data the agency has collected on hospitalizations stratified by age, sex, race and vaccination status. Similarly, the CDC has not released comprehensive efficacy data on boosters. To illustrate, two months ago, when the CDC published the data on the effectiveness of boosters in adults younger than 65, it left out the numbers for the 18 to 49 year old group. This kind of information could help state and local health officials better target their efforts to bring the virus under control. Nonetheless, the CDC has been reluctant to release this data for fear it may be misinterpreted.
Candor, based on nuanced and detailed analyses, builds trust. For example, it would be better to openly acknowledge vaccines limitations - theyre much better at preventing hospitalization than decreasing transmission - than to gloss over the issue. Whats worse, concealing or selectively cherry-picking data leads to a breach of trust, which the anti-science crowd seizes upon as it rails against the medical establishment.
CDC could do its part by being as neutral an arbiter as possible while improving messaging. In turn, this would lessen the mistrust that exists.
Its important to not allow questions of science to become captives of partisan politics on either side of the aisle, as this will have negative implications for future public health policies. Public health authorities should be consistent, truthful, and transparent, and not change mid-course due to political pressure. Otherwise, the publics confidence in government decision-makers erodes over time.
Full coverage and live updates on the Coronavirus
See the rest here:
Shunda Williams was recovering from COVID-19 pneumonia at Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital Dallas last year, still requiring oxygen, when she realized she couldnt manage her fork.
My hand kept doing this, said Williams, 46, sitting recently in her Dallas apartment, holding up her right hand, then abruptly letting it drop. I had no control over it. It was just dangling, falling.
After several tests, including magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), a physician told Williams that she had experienced 10 mini-strokes, she recalled. While theres no way to know for sure, the physician believed the virus had contributed along with possibly her other medical conditions, including diabetes, Williams said.
More than two years after the emergence of SARS-CoV-2, researchers and physicians are still trying to sort out to what extent the infection boosts the risk of stroke, and for how long that risk lasts.
The likelihood of having a stroke around the time of infection is still relatively low 1.4% according to a meta-analysis of 61 studies but may require weeks to months of recovery. Williams finally returned home to her 12-year-old daughter, Zaniya, after six weeks of hospitalization, first to treat the virus and later for stroke-related rehabilitation.
Now a study, published online Feb. 7 in Nature Medicine, indicates that higher stroke vulnerability might extend through the first year after a bout with COVID-19.
The analysis, which compared 153,760 patients treated through the Veterans Affairs system to those who didnt contract the virus, found that the likelihood of a stroke within the first year was 52% higher, resulting in four additional strokes per 1,000 patients.
Although strokes were more likely in patients who were most severely ill, they also occurred in those who had mild symptoms and didnt need to be hospitalized, said Dr. Ziyad Al-Aly, the studys senior author and chief of research and development at the Veterans Affairs St. Louis Health Care System in Missouri.
Thats really important because thats really the majority of people with COVID-19, he said. One of the implications of the findings of this study is that now we need to start thinking about COVID-19 as a cardiovascular risk factor.
While the Nature Medicine findings are intriguing, they dont show whether the strokes occurred shortly after the infection or throughout the first year, said Dr. James de Lemos, a professor of cardiology at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas, who studies cardiovascular risk and the virus.
.This study raises the possibility that there could be effects that last longer than most of us would have predicted, de Lemos said. But much more study is needed before we can determine if this is true. And even if it is true, it looks like the risks for any one individual are very small.
Understanding infection and stroke
A short-term risk of stroke also has been identified in patients with other serious infections, including influenza and sepsis, said Dr. Mitchell Elkind, professor of neurology and epidemiology at New York Citys Columbia University, who studies stroke and infectious disease.
For instance, research has shown that stroke is more likely during the first several months after sepsis, he said. I think thats consistent with whats being seen here with regard to COVID.
The causes of stroke and other cardiovascular conditions are still being examined but appear in part to be related to the inflammatory impact of SARS-CoV-2 throughout the body, including the lining of the blood vessels, de Lemos said. By irritating the protective lining of those vessels, that inflammation might encourage the formation of clots, he said.
Another recent analysis, which looked at strokes in 37,379 adults ages 65 and older with COVID-19, found that the greatest likelihood was during the first three days after diagnosis when it was 10 times higher.
That risk quickly declined and was just 9% higher 15 to 28 days after diagnosis compared to the control period, according to the findings, published online Feb. 3 in the journal Neurology. Both the Neurology and the Nature Medicine studies stopped enrolling patients in early 2021, before the vaccine became widely available.
Dr. Gabriel de Erausquin, a neurologist who studies long-COVID and the brain at the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, said hes not surprised by the Nature Medicine findings, as hes seen unexpected strokes in relatively young or healthier individuals.
These adults are typically middle-aged and dont have obvious risk factors, such as diabetes or obesity, he said. De Erausquin, who doesnt treat patients hospitalized with the virus, said the strokes hes seen are usually during recovery, and by that, I mean in the months following the acute infection.
Clinicians also have recounted unusual stroke cases to Brian Abraham, a regional chief executive officer for the Albuquerque, N.M.-based rehabilitation chain ClearSky Health. His administrative oversight includes two Dallas-Fort Worth area hospitals..
At one of them, ClearSky Rehabilitation Hospital of Flower Mound, clinicians have treated at least three patients in the past nine months with similar stories, he said. They had mild cases of the viral infection and were quarantined at home when they collapsed with what turned out to be a stroke, he said. None of those patients were over the age of 47.
Stroke rehabilitation can take longer with these patients, if theyre still recovering from the virus, as they often require numerous rest breaks, Abraham said. Something as simple as sitting up on the edge of the bed can drop their oxygen saturation rates to the 50s and 60s percentiles, he said.
A tougher recovery
Following her mini-strokes, Shunda Williams completed three weeks of inpatient rehabilitation followed by two months of outpatient rehabilitation once she returned home.
During inpatient rehabilitation, Williams worked on improving the weakness in her right arm and leg, along with her balance, so she could shower and dress herself safely, said Jason Mathew, a Texas Health Dallas occupational therapist.
Mathew remembers Williams for her big smile and fierce determination to get better. She was concerned about just getting home to her daughter and being able to take care of her, he said.
Anyone who has had COVID-19 should alert their physician so they can be more proactive about other risk factors, such as controlling blood pressure, said Al-Aly, who authored the Nature Medicine study.
But Elkind disagreed that the virus at this point should be considered a long-term risk factor, as any heightened vulnerability is likely to be short-term, he said. Plus, Elkind said, for any one individual, its still a very unlikely event to occur.
People should focus instead on healthy eating habits, exercise and regular checkups, including blood pressure, said Elkind, also the immediate past president of the American Heart Association.
UT Southwestern researchers led a study, published earlier this year in the American Heart Journal, which found that the percentage of patients with uncontrolled high blood pressure increased from 15% to 19%, compared with pre-pandemic.
Williams road hasnt been the easiest, even after she went home last April.
She learned in late 2021 that she had suffered a silent heart attack at some point, and physicians implanted two stents to open clogged blood vessels. But Williams, who also has an adult son, doesnt report any lingering stroke effects, other than occasional memory lapses. She makes more lists these days.
She didnt return to her warehouse job and works a customer service position from home, relishing the time with her daughter. When she crossed her own threshold, Williams still needed oxygen and intravenous antibiotics. But she was home.
When I was in there [the hospital] with COVID, I was like, `Oh, Lord, please dont take me. I have a 12-year-old to raise. Just let me make it out of here.
The rest is here:
Travel to Mexico during Covid-19: What you need to know before you go The Mercury News
See the original post here:
Travel to Mexico during Covid-19: What you need to know before you go - The Mercury News
The World Health Organization said Wednesday that it expects the severity of the Covid-19 pandemic to significantly reduce over the next 12 monthseven as the virus continues to evolveas populations develop sustained immunity against severe disease and death.
Outbreaks will likely become progressively less severe, the agency said, though periodic boosting may be required if immunity wanes significantly.
The...
See more here:
Covid-19 Will Likely Reduce in Severity This Year, WHO Says - Barron's
For much of the pandemic, these places were held up as Covid-19 success stories, as stringent border rules helped them avoid high cases and deaths -- even as the pandemic took hold around the world.
Now, they're among a number of places across Asia Pacific battling unprecedented outbreaks.
While the surge in cases can partly be explained by the highly contagious Omicron variant breaking through the region's defenses, that's not the whole story.
In some places, rising case numbers are a symptom of living with Covid as governments accept that trying to eradicate the virus is an unrealistic pursuit. In other places, skyrocketing cases are being blamed on a lack of planning by authorities caught off guard, despite two years of warning.
Asia's highest ever peak
Many of the places reporting the most cases per capita in the Asia-Pacific region -- which spans eastern and southern Asia and Oceania -- were previously seen as success stories.
Those include South Korea, New Zealand, Vietnam, Australia, Hong Kong and Singapore.
Of those, two countries that have both been easing restrictions are driving the Asian case numbers -- South Korea and Vietnam.
"(The Korean government) relaxed the current measures and social distancing even though the number of Covid cases were getting higher and higher," he said.
Abhishek Rimal, the regional emergency health coordinator for the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC), said Lunar New Year, which was celebrated at the start of the year in both countries, could have also contributed to the outbreaks.
Another factor, he said, was that both Vietnam and South Korea also have large testing capacities, which could also explain why they are finding more cases than other countries.
"They are testing, that is why they are getting it," he said.
The countries now experiencing large numbers of cases all closed their borders at the start of the pandemic, leaving them largely shut off from the world. When Covid broke through, they used tracing, tracking and social distancing measures to bring outbreaks under control.
In the past few months, most have begun to shift toward a new approach: living with the virus.
After years of banning most foreign nationals, all of the places -- apart from Hong Kong -- eased border restrictions and relaxed rules for citizens.
The reasons behind that differ from place to place.
"We are more than two years into the pandemic ... and people are really looking at going back to their normal life," Rimal said.
But people in Hong Kong and China are still waiting to move forward with their lives. In both places, governments have maintained strict border rules -- and people still live with social distancing measures and the threat of snap Covid lockdowns.
Vaccines are key
Even with soaring cases, some authorities across Asia Pacific don't seem rattled for a simple reason: vaccines.
Besides the tiny Pacific island countries Tonga and the Cook Islands, New Zealand and South Korea are reporting the highest cases per capita in the region -- but their death tolls remain relatively low.
South Korean authorities have pushed the same message.
"The number of confirmed cases continues to increase significantly, but the severity and fatality rate, and the medical system's responsiveness, are considered manageable," said health official Son Young-rae in a briefing on March 23. "(We) believe that once the peak of this Omicron wave passes, we'll be able to convert to a system that is closer to a normal life."
Both South Korea and New Zealand have high vaccine rates -- but crucially, they have vaccinated their elderly, who are most vulnerable to severe illness and death from the virus.
And so far, that's meant that while these countries have seen an increase in fatalities as their cases rise, they've still been able to keep death rates relatively low.
It's a similar situation in New Zealand -- while the country had one of the highest reported Covid cases per capita over the past week, when it comes to deaths per capita for the past week, it doesn't even make the top 20 worldwide.
Again, the region's outlier is Hong Kong.
The virus was able to rip through elderly homes, where vaccination rates were low.
The question over whether stringent measures are worth it is also playing out in mainland China, which is facing is biggest outbreak since the one recorded in Wuhan at the start of the pandemic.
And like Hong Kong, vaccinations among the elderly are lagging, raising concerns the city's deadly outbreak may foreshadow a deadly wave across the border.
CNN's Yoonjung Seo and Simone McCarthy contributed to this report.
Read the original here:
Maine reported 206 new cases of COVID-19 on Thursday and one additional death.
Since the pandemic began, Maine has recorded 235,790 cases of COVID-19, and 2,202 deaths.
Meanwhile, more people are now eligible for boosters, as federal regulators this week approved a second booster for anyone 50 and older. People who received the one-shot Johnson & Johnson vaccine and have gotten their first booster are now eligible for a second booster.
Dr. Nirav Shah, Maine CDC director, said in a tweet Wednesday that if you are eligible for a second booster, you should get one. They are available, free of charge to you, and resoundingly safe. Data from one large population study showed a significant mortality benefit among those who received a second booster versus one.
The Maine CDC has compiled a list ofvaccination providers on its website.
The number of hospitalized COVID patients in Maine has not yet been updated, but stood at 98 on Wednesday, with 18 in critical care and five on a ventilator. The hospitalization number has hovered just below 100 patients for 11 days after plummeting 78 percent from a peak of 436 on Jan. 13.
While Maines case numbers and hospitalizations have stabilized after steep declines, there are no definitive signs that the new omicron BA.2 subvariant is causing a rise in infections here. Wastewater monitoring, the pace of positive tests and the positive test rate have not indicated a resurgence of the virus.
This story will be updated.
Invalid username/password.
Please check your email to confirm and complete your registration.
Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.
Previous
Latest Articles
Nation & World
Schools and Education
Nation & World
Local & State
Business
See the original post here:
Maine reports 206 new cases of COVID-19 - Portland Press Herald - Press Herald
Overview
More than two years since the first SARS-CoV-2 infections were reported, the COVID-19 pandemic remains an acute global emergency. In this Strategic Preparedness, Readiness and Response plan for 2022, WHO sets out a number of key strategic adjustments that, if implemented rapidly and consistently at national, regional, and global levels, will enable the world to end the acute phase of the pandemic.
Read the original:
Good morning, Mission, and welcome to Virus Village, your (somewhat regular) Covid-19 data dump.
Hospitalizations have declined, but there is a notable increase in recorded infections and positivity rates. R Number estimates put San Francisco well over 1.
Are we witnessing the take off of the omicron BA.2 surge? Seems likely, but who knows what that might mean. You will be glad to know theSan Francisco Department of Public Healthis not worried. Meanwhile, heresan overview of the situation in much of Asia. Though DPH gives us nothing but raw numbers, this isa closer look at the situation with UCSFwhich handles most covid cases in the City.
This week, we non-STEM students got an important lesson in the scientific method. When the defacto Covid Czar orders a second booster round, the Biden White House authorizes the shot for adults over 50 and anyone immunocompromised. Without even the pretense of reviewing the (minimal) data, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration then approves and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says you can get it if you really want it. Works every time.
The case for the 4th shot is laid out in this piece in the New York Times, which published a piece less than a month ago that laid out the case against it. And if youre looking for a more contemporary doubt on the need for the 4th shot, check out here and here.
Keep in mind, a 4th shot implies a 5th shot, as a new vaccine will be ready this fall.
Why should the White House wait for the CDC, which may employ the last scientists on earth who disregard evidence that aerosol transmission is the primary source of covid spread.
Does anyone seriously doubt that putting health care in the hands of private equity firms will result in greater inequities? Between 2010 and 2019, private equity deals in health care nearly tripled in value, especially in nursing homes where most covid-related deaths took place.
To make sure the inequities in health care remain the same or worsen, the U.S. government has ended free covid testing for the uninsured.
Too bad the Covid Czar forgot to order global vaccination.
Thanks to the efforts of the National Institutes of Health, we still know very little about long covid.
Remember herd Immunity? We dont hear much about it these days. Seems the virus had different ideas, or maybe, we arent the herd some thought we were.
Scroll down for todays covid numbers.
As of March 29, DPH reports 782,552 San Franciscans have received at least on vaccine dose, 89 percent of all San Francisco residents. 83 percenthave received two. For residents 5 and older, those with one dose remain above 90 percent and those with two rose to 87 percent while for those 65 and older over 90 percent have received two doses. The number of San Franciscans who have received boosters is virtually unchanged from last week. As of March 29, approximately 472,943 SF residents (65 percent of all residents, 83 percent of residents 65 and older) have received a COVID-19 booster dose, an increase of less than .2 percent over the past week.
For information on where to get vaccinated in and around the Mission, visit ourVaccination Page.
Over the past week, hospitalizations have dropped 44 percent. On March 26, DPH reports there were 24 covid hospitalizations,or about2.7 covid hospitalizations per 100,000 residents (based on an 874,000 population). ICU patients have been in single digits since March 2. Today, the California Department of Public Health reports 28 covid patients in SF hospitals and 4 ICU patients.
The latest report from the federal Department of Health and Human Services shows Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital with 3 covid patients and 13 ICU beds available, while across the Mission, CPMC had 1 covid patient and 4 ICU beds available. Of 41 reported covid patients,20 were at either SFGH or UCSF, with at least 80 ICU beds available among reporting hospitals (which does not include the Veterans Administration). The California DPH currently reports 97 ICU beds available in San Francisco.
Between Jan. 24 and March 25, DPH recorded 893 new infections among Mission residents or 152 new infections per 10,000 residents. During that period, Mission Bay had the highest rate at 223 new infections per 10,000 residents. Of 38 neighborhoods, 37 had rates above 100 per 10,000 residents, while 3 (Mission Bay, Bayview Hunters Point and Portola) had rates above 200 per 10,000 residents. Presidio had the lowest rate at 88 per 10,000 residents.
DPH reports on March 22, the 7-day average of daily new infections recorded in the City rose to 95 or approximately 10.8 new infections per day per 100,000 residents (based on an 874,000 population), representing a 14.4 percent rise from last week. According to DPH, the 7-day average infection rate among vaccinated residents was 10.2 per 100,000 fully vaccinated residents and 19.3 per 100,000 unvaccinated residents. It is unclear whether fully vaccinated means 2, 3 or 4 doses. According to the New York Times, the 7-day average number was 114 on March 29, a 237 percent increase over the past two weeks. For those interested in wastewater monitoring, the poop is rising. see here.
As of March 25, DPH reports Whites accounted for 31.7 percent of the months total, Asians 26.3 percent, Latinxs 9.3 percent, Blacks 2.6 percent, Multi-racials 1.3 percent, Pacific Islanders .6 percent, and Native Americans had .2 percent of the months total so far.
As of March 25, the March positivity rate in the Mission was 2.8 percent. In comparison, the positivity rate in Bayview Hunters Point was 1.9 percent, Bernal Heights 1.9 percent, Castro 2.8 percent, Glen Park 2.6 percent, Noe Valley 2.7 percent, Seacliff 1.3 percent, and in Lakeshore, the only neighborhood in the City with less than 50 percent vaccinated, the positivity rate so far in March was 1.9 percent.
Nine new covid-related deaths have been reported, bringing the total since the beginning of the year to 150. DPH wont say how many were vaccinated and how many unvaccinated. Nor does it provide information on the race/ethnicity or socio-economic status of those who have recently died. The omicron death toll seems higher than delta. During and after the delta surge, July-October, the number was 105. According to DPH COVID-19 deaths are suspected to be associated with COVID-19. This means COVID-19 is listed as a cause of death or significant condition on the death certificate. Using a phrase like suspected to be associated with indicates the difficulty in determining a covid death. The ambiguity is heightened when currently DPH continues to report only 21 of the 844 deaths are known to have had no underlying conditions, or comorbidities.
Covid R Estimation on March 4, estimated the San Francisco R Number at a very high 1.74 while currently estimating the California R Number estimate at .66. The ensemble, as of March 25, estimates the San Francisco R Number at 1.22 while estimating the California R Number at .85.
As of March 25, DPH reports 77 recorded infections among San Franciscans aged 0-4, or 3.4 percent of the recorded infections so far this month, 5-11 100 infections or 4.4 percent, 12-17 67 infections or 2.9 percent, 18-20 38 infections or 1.7 percent, 21-24 172 infections or 7.6 percent, 25-29 378 infections or 16.6 percent, 30-39 599 infections or 26.3 percent, 40-49 335 infections or 14.7 percent, 50-59 205 infections or 9 percent, 60-69 165 infections or 7.2 percent, 70-79 77 infections or 3.4 percent, and those 80 and above have had 65 recorded infections so far this month or 2.9 percent of the total.
See more here:
