Category: Covid-19

China, the last major country to stick with a zero-tolerance approach to Covid-19, is now actively exploring ways to loosen controls.

In preparation for a potential opening, Chinese officials are looking into the use of travel bubbles modeled on measures taken during the Winter Olympics, collecting data on new antiviral drugs and scouting sites abroad for future production of homegrown Chinese mRNA vaccines, according to people familiar with the matter.

See the rest here:

China Weighs Methods for Relaxing Zero-Covid-19 Grip: Bubbles, Drugs and New Messaging - The Wall Street Journal

In the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, global prevalence of anxiety and depression increased by a massive 25%, according to a scientific brief released by the World Health Organization (WHO) today. The brief also highlights who has been most affected and summarizes the effect of the pandemic on the availability of mental health services and how this has changed during the pandemic.

Concerns about potential increases in mental health conditions had already prompted 90% of countries surveyed to include mental health and psychosocial support in their COVID-19 response plans, but major gaps and concerns remain.

The information we have now about the impact of COVID-19 on the worlds mental health is just the tip of the iceberg, said Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, WHO Director-General. This is a wake-up call to all countries to pay more attention to mental health and do a better job of supporting their populations mental health.

Multiple stress factors

One major explanation for the increase is the unprecedented stress caused by the social isolation resulting from the pandemic. Linked to this were constraints on peoples ability to work, seek support from loved ones and engage in their communities.

Loneliness, fear of infection, suffering and death for oneself and for loved ones, grief after bereavement and financial worries have also all been cited as stressors leading to anxiety and depression. Among health workers, exhaustion has been a major trigger for suicidal thinking.

Young people and women worst hit

The brief, which is informed by a comprehensive review of existing evidence about the impact of COVID-19 on mental health and mental health services, and includes estimates from the latest Global Burden of Disease study, shows that the pandemic has affected the mental health of young people and that they are disproportionally at risk of suicidal and self-harming behaviours. It also indicates that women have been more severely impacted than men and that people with pre-existing physical health conditions, such as asthma, cancer and heart disease, were more likely to develop symptoms of mental disorders.

Data suggests that people with pre-existing mental disorders do not appear to be disproportionately vulnerable to COVID-19 infection. Yet, when these people do become infected, they are more likely to suffer hospitalization, severe illness and death compared with people without mental disorders. People with more severe mental disorders, such as psychoses, and young people with mental disorders, are particularly at risk.

Gaps in care

This increase in the prevalence of mental health problems has coincided with severe disruptions to mental health services, leaving huge gaps in care for those who need it most. For much of the pandemic, services for mental, neurological and substance use conditions were the most disrupted among all essential health services reported by WHO Member States. Many countries also reported major disruptions in life-saving services for mental health, including for suicide prevention.

By the end of 2021 the situation had somewhat improved but today too many people remain unable to get the care and support they need for both pre-existing and newly developed mental health conditions.

Unable to access face-to-face care, many people have sought support online, signaling an urgent need to make reliable and effective digital tools available and easily accessible. However, developing and deploying digital interventions remains a major challenge in resource-limited countries and settings.

WHO and country action

Since the early days of the pandemic, WHO and partners have worked to develop and disseminate resources in multiple languages and formats to help different groups cope with and respond to the mental health impacts of COVID-19. For example, WHO produced a story book for 6-11-year-olds, My Hero is You, now available in 142 languages and 61 multimedia adaptations, as well as a toolkit for supporting older adults available in 16 languages.

At the same time, the Organization has worked with partners, including other United Nations agencies, international nongovernmental organizations and the Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, to lead an interagency mental health and psychosocial response to COVID-19. Throughout the pandemic, WHO has also worked to promote the integration of mental health and psychosocial support across and within all aspects of the global response.

WHO Member States have recognized the impact of COVID-19 on mental health and are taking action. WHOs most recent pulse survey on continuity of essential health services indicated that 90% of countries are working to provide mental health and psychosocial support to COVID-19 patients and responders alike. Moreover, at last years World Health Assembly, countries emphasized the need to develop and strengthen mental health and psychosocial support services as part of strengthening preparedness, response and resilience to COVID-19 and future public health emergencies. They adopted the updated Comprehensive Mental Health Action Plan 2013-2030, which includes an indicator on preparedness for mental health and psychosocial support in public health emergencies.

Step up investment

However, this commitment to mental health needs to be accompanied by a global step up in investment. Unfortunately, the situation underscores a chronic global shortage of mental health resources that continues today. WHOs most recent Mental Health Atlas showed that in 2020, governments worldwide spent on average just over 2% of their health budgets on mental health and many low-income countries reported having fewer than 1 mental health worker per 100 000 people.

Dvora Kestel, Director of the Department of Mental Health and Substance Use at WHO, sums up the situation: While the pandemic has generated interest in and concern for mental health, it has also revealed historical under-investment in mental health services. Countries must act urgently to ensure that mental health support is available to all.

Read the rest here:

COVID-19 pandemic triggers 25% increase in prevalence of anxiety and depression worldwide - World Health Organization

Covid-19 case counts are falling in the United States and many parts of the country are starting to relax.

Cities like Washington, DC, and New York are lifting vaccine mandates for many public indoor spaces. National public health officials are easing up, too. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention now advises that communities with low levels of transmission can forgo universal masking.

As spring draws near, is it finally time to feel hopeful? Is it possible the worst of the pandemic is behind us?

The US public seems to think so. A March 1 poll from the Kaiser Family Foundation found that majorities across the political spectrum think the darkest days of Covid-19 are over.

However, weve been fooled before. Over the past two years, wishful thinking has proved nave time and time again. Initial hopes that the vaccines would be a ticket to freedom were dashed by waning immunity and the emergence of more contagious variants. How much further the virus will evolve from here is impossible to predict.

Many of us just dont know what to think about the future. How will we know when things are really getting better? Is there still the chance that things will get worse?

In our search for clarity, we turned to eight experts in public health, virology, infectious disease ecology, medical anthropology, and medical history with a simple question: Is the worst of the pandemic over, and if not, how will we know when it is?

We heard a lot of measured optimism, but also uncertainty. While the pandemic situation might be easing in the United States and other countries, much of the world still remains unvaccinated and highly vulnerable. And the unpredictability of both viral evolution and human behavior means we need a healthy dose of humility as we move into the future, the experts told us. Brighter days are likely ahead, but the unknowns continue to cloud a clear view of the future.

Overall, most of the experts said, with some reservations, that in the US and much of Europe, the most destructive waves of Covid-19 are in the rearview mirror.

I am hopeful that the worst of the pandemic is now behind us, said Dr. Megan Ranney, an epidemiologist and physician at Brown Universitys School of Public Health.

Her optimism stems from a variety of factors, chief among them the widespread immunity in the US, whether acquired through vaccination or infection.

In addition to immunity, there are new, effective Covid-19 treatments available like monoclonal antibodies and antiviral drugs which can help infected people avoid hospitalizations and death. Also, the broader availability of high-quality masks and air filters and a better understanding of ventilation, social distancing, and other mitigation strategies puts us in a better position to reduce transmission than we were earlier in the pandemic.

And even though immunity wanes over time, protection against the most severe disease and death will remain for quite a long time, Dr. A. Marm Kilpatrick, an infectious disease researcher at the University of California Santa Cruz, writes in an email, citing CDC data. So people may continue to get infected with SARS-CoV-2, but the worst outcomes might be largely behind us.

Everyone we spoke with even the optimists said the threat of new variants is still very real. Just as the infectiousness of delta and omicron caught researchers by surprise, new variants may evolve and cause us to reset our expectations for the future.

I just dont like to underestimate the virus, Dr. Kari Debbink, a virologist and immunologist at Johns Hopkins, said.

Theres been some hopeful speculation that perhaps, in the future, the virus will evolve to become less deadly. However, thats not a rule: It is not an iron law of virology that newer variants are necessarily weaker or less virulent than a prior variant, said Dr. Nirav Shah, Maines chief epidemiologist and president of the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials. It can absolutely go the opposite direction.

Variants are more likely to emerge in parts of the world where vaccination rates are lowest; the more infections that occur, the more chances the virus has to replicate and change. Thats why its so important to vaccinate as many people as possible against the virus.

But momentum might be stalling. Shah said that while raising vaccination rates in India and sub-Saharan Africa would reduce the risk that a new variant of concern would emerge, the appetite for vaccines in these regions varies. There are also supply chain hurdles and personnel shortages hampering the effort to reach the most remote and most vulnerable people.

The best we can do to prepare for new variants is to be on the lookout for them.

The most concrete way to identify variants of concern is through genomic surveillance, regularly scanning virus samples from infected people for mutations. But the US still has a patchwork system for finding variants, according to Dr. Shweta Bansal, an infectious disease ecologist at Georgetown University. As a consequence, new variants arising in the US may not be found right away.

However, other trends can signal that a concerning new variant is taking hold. If scores of previously vaccinated or infected people start to get sick, it could suggest a variant has developed that can evade the immune response. Scientists will be closely monitoring changes in case numbers, hospitalizations, or excess deaths in the US or in other countries.

Public responses to policy are another important determinant in the future of the pandemic. Weve learned a ton in terms of behavior, and how people tend to kind of react to policies of controlling viruses, said Bansal.

But its unclear that the institutions responsible for crafting policy and messaging are equipped to overcome social divisions that have hampered widespread preventive efforts. Were obviously not having a great discussion about civic values and responsibility, and I thought we would by this point, said Dr. Sarah Cobey, a University of Chicago infectious disease researcher and modeler.

On the other hand, the Covid-19 pandemic created dozens of natural social science experiments as states and cities deployed different tactics. Thats given researchers real-world feedback on what kinds of messages and policies motivate people to use preventive measures like social distancing and mask-wearing, pointing the way toward more effective public health strategies.

With transmission now receding throughout the US, policymakers are now taking off-ramps from intense preventive measures, loosening mask requirements, vaccination mandates, and restrictions on gatherings. But weve seen that movie before, said Bansal, and the virus has a way of roaring back.

We really should be taking advantage of this hiatus to build up our preparedness capacity, she said.

Others agreed that the best way to avoid another disastrous transmission surge is to get ready for it but theyre not convinced were doing that effectively: Im fearful that the country wants to be done with Covid-19 and thus, many of the things that we need to do to prepare for the next wave are not being done, said Shah. He would like to see broader use of wastewater testing as an early warning system, and assurance that our rapid test and PPE supply chains are robust and responsive to transmission surges.

Ranney agreed that improving preparedness was critical to ensuring the worst is behind us, and that ensuring good systems for early outbreak detection are key. Improving global and local vaccination rates, developing and scaling up access to Covid-19 treatments, and getting community buy-in around preventive measures are also important, she said.

When we asked experts is the worst over? some responded with a question of their own: For whom?

Even as the peak of the pandemic crisis fades into the rearview mirror for some, others generally those already marginalized by poor access to healthcare and other vulnerabilities will still be living with its worst effects.

The pandemic being mostly over for me might not mean that its over for somebody else, said Debbink. She worries that declaring the worst is over kind of allows people to disregard those who are still at great risk. That includes immunocompromised people and those living in parts of the world with limited vaccine access. There are millions and millions of people that dont even have access to a vaccine yet, she said and the worst might still be to come for them.

Plus, she said, we dont really know the long-term toll that long Covid symptoms will continue to take on people. With each person that gets infected, you still have this huge group of people that may suffer long-term impacts, she said. For them, the worst might not be over, but just beginning. At this point, we have no idea if long Covid symptoms are going to be permanent.

The global view is particularly sobering. The US has high levels of infections and vaccinations, but are probably yet to see their most damaging waves, or would require ongoing harsh restrictions to delay surges of transmission, Dr. Adam Kucharski, an infectious disease epidemiologist at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, wrote in an email.

The SARS-CoV-2 virus will likely cause human disease well into the future, and in that sense, it may yet do more damage than it has already done. But because those effects will be distributed over a longer period of time, we may not perceive them to be as severe as the waves of hospitalization and death we have experienced over the past two years. I think were going to be living with it for a very, very long time so in that sense, the worst isnt behind us, Cobey said.

The worst of the pandemic is probably behind us in the US. But the virus is still infecting, hospitalizing, and killing people. How much longer that will continue has to do with variables that are hard to predict right now: the duration of immunity over the course of years, and risks even further afield, like the chances of a new variant emerging from wildlife like deer.

Because sanguine pandemic predictions have so often been proved terribly wrong, few of our experts were willing to forecast sunny skies without qualification. Historically, though, we know that all pandemics eventually end, and this one will as well, said Dr. J. Alexander Navarro, assistant director of the Center for the History of Medicine at the University of Michigan. That day is likely sooner rather than later, but we will have to see what the future has in store for us.

And we may not even recognize the end of the pandemic as we pass it. Instead, it may require some historical distance before we can look back and find a point that may have been an exit. There will not be a particular day or week or month when we wake up and say Im sure glad thats over, said Dr. Maureen Miller, a medical anthropologist at Columbia University. Even the pandemic end date, like everything else Covid-19, will likely be the subject of heated debate.

Link:

Why the worst of the Covid-19 pandemic may be over for some - Vox.com

SIOUX FALLS, S.D. (KELO) The South Dakota Department of Health reported six COVID-19 deaths on Wednesday.

The COVID-19 death toll is now at 2,814 up from Tuesday (2,808). The deaths were three men and three women in the following age ranges: 40-49 (1); 60-69 (2); 70-79 (1) and 80+ (2). The deaths were reported in the following counties: Brown, Minnehaha (2), Turner, Tripp and Union Counties.

Active cases are now at 4,166, down from Tuesday (4,419).

For the week of Feb. 28, 50 of South Dakotas 66 counties are listed as having high or substantial community spread. High community spread is 100 cases or greater per 100,000 or a 10% or greater PCR test positivity rate.

There are now 148 people hospitalized due to COVID-19, up from Tuesday (147). Throughout the pandemic, there have been 10,569 total people who have been hospitalized.

There were 78 confirmed and probable COVID-19 cases reported.

The states total case count is now at 236,132, up from Tuesday (236,056). That total does not include at-home positive results as those are not required to be reported to the state.

The latest seven-day PCR test positivity rate for the state is 10.4% for Feb. 21 27.

The number of recovered cases is at 229,152.

There have been 1,494 Delta variant cases (B.1.617.2 and AY lineages) detected in South Dakota through sentinel monitoring. There have been 176 cases of the B.1.1.7 (Alpha variant), four cases of P.1. (Gamma variant) and two cases of the B.1.351 (Beta variant).

The number of Omicron cases is now at 705.

For COVID-19 vaccines, 71.23% the population 5-years-old and above has received at least one dose while 58.34% have completed the vaccination series. For booster doses, 32.05% of those eligible have completed their booster dose.

There have been 668,698 doses of the Pfizer vaccine administered, 466,791 of the Moderna vaccine and 37,479 doses of the Janssen vaccine.

There have been 173,924 persons who have completed two doses of Moderna. There have been 256,683 persons who have received two doses of Pfizer.

As for booster doses, 115,957 people have received a 3rd Pfizer shot, 89,050 people have received a 3rd Moderna dose and 2,647 have received a Janssen booster.

Excerpt from:

COVID-19 in South Dakota: 78 new cases; 6 new deaths; Active cases at 4,166 - KELOLAND.com

Dive Brief:

All the affected tests appear to be products originally destined for the European market. The packaging of the Acontest carries a CE mark, while the packaging of the SD Biosensor test includes a statement about how long it takes to deliver results that is translated into English, Spanish, French and Portuguese. Celltrion's recall notice confirms its problem relates to the importation of the European version of its test.

After discovering what was happening, Celltrion"sent cease and desist letter to distributors who were illegally distributing non-EUA product in the U.S."and "demanded return of all EU product from distributors'inventory and demanded removal of all EU DiaTrust Tests from the U.S."The company has also written to "all EU distributors warning against diversion and obtaining confirmation that distributors understand limitations on distribution only within the EU."

The importation of European tests into the U.S. potentially reflects an imbalance in the availability of rapid antigen kits. While the U.K. faced a short period in which government-provided rapid antigen tests were in and out of stock, access to the kits has generally been less constrained in Europe than in the U.S., creating incentives for distributors to divert them to the place where demand exceeded supply.

Those diversions have brought tests that lack FDA authorization into the U.S. FDA warned that the tests carry a risk of false negatives and false positives and advised healthcare providers who have used the kits in the past two weeks to consider retesting their patients with an authorized or cleared alternative if they suspect an inaccurate result.

The agency has not received reports of injuries, adverse health consequences or death associated with any of the tests, and categorized the Celltrion recall as a Class II event. FDA is yet to publish details of the recalls by Acon and SD Biosensor.

Since late January, FDA has issued a flurry of notices about rapid COVID-19 tests with public warnings about unauthorized tests including E25Bioand Empowered Diagnostics. The agency classified Empowered Diagnostics' recall as a Class I event, although at the time FDA said there were no reports of adverse health consequences or death from use of the tests.

Read the original here:

FDA warns about unauthorized versions of rapid COVID-19 tests - MedTech Dive

Since COVID-19 hit our state two years ago, more than 10,000 residents have died, but what if there was a scientific way to predict who would live and who would die?

A team of researchers at Yale think they may be able to do that with 83 percent accuracy.

This all started when researchers ended up with a lot of data from patients at Yale New Haven Hospital who were admitted with severe cases of COVID-19.

"They had such a massive amount of the data, something like a total of 54 million cells on 168 or so patients," said Yale computer science professor Smita Krishnaswamy.

Researchers needed to find a way to analyze all of those cells so they teamed up with another group to use something called the multi-scale phate tool. It's a machine learning tool that is being developed at Yale.

It allowed them to see very intricate details of the data that other systems cannot and what they found was pretty big.

"What Smita's team found is that there are certain cell types that are more associated with mortality, and other cell types are protective of mortality," Yale School of Medicine professor of immunobiology Akiko Iwasaki said.

"So those cells that the team found to be most protective, were the so called lymphocytes, which are a subset of white blood cells that are geared towards fighting against infection," Iwasaki added. "The other extreme is that the team found that there were these granulocytes, which are this larger cells that are also white blood cells."

"What's actually seen in COVID patients is that these granulocytes secrete factors that can clog the blood vessels and, you know, damage the tissue itself and these granulocytes were found to be most associated with mortality," according to Iwasaki.

"I hadn't expected to find that one level one group of cells being protective. And then if you zoom in, there's some bad apples inside that are actually destroying the body so that was surprising for me," Krishnaswamy added.

Now that they know which cells protect and which cells hurt, doctors might be able to improve upon COVID-19 treatments, vaccines and mores.

"So from this particular study, we already can see what cells types are associated with mortality, and we can separate the patients based on that alone. And that can sort of help the doctors, you know, learn about the patients earlier, to kind of give them treatments that are, you know, more aggressive, perhaps to help them," Akiko said.

Researchers think that this strategy can be used to predict outcomes for other types of infectious diseases, autoimmune diseases or even cancer. They're even studying this process for neurodegenerative diseases.

Original post:

Researchers at Yale Find Scientific Way to Predict Outcomes of COVID-19 in Patients - NBC Connecticut

Here it is, the end of February and Im writing my first travel column of 2022. I was excited to give you lots of new and positive travel updates, especially concerning COVID-19. But now the world of travel is sadly shaken up again, this time due to the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

So before I get into all of my COVID-19-related news, here is whats happening today in the world of cruise travel.

As a whole, the travel industry is on a watch-and-wait directive while actively monitoring the situation. Ocean and river cruise lines are prepared to alter any Baltic, Russian and Eastern Europe itineraries (the same holds true for land-tour operators). With that said, NCL, Oceania Cruises, Regent Seven Seas, Viking and Windstar Cruises have removed St. Petersburg, Russia, from all 2022 sailings due to the ongoing war. New ports-of-calls will be announced soon.

A new start-up cruise line (adventure luxury), Atlas Ocean Voyages, announced they are adjusting two late summer Baltic itineraries and will replace them with trips to Kotka and Marrehamn, in Finland. Guests already booked for this spring and summer should expect changes and keep in contact with their travel agent. Thus far, consumer cancellations appear to be few.

Viking River Cruises have cancelled all 2022 departures from Kyiv, Ukraine, the Black Sea and Bucharest, Romania. Guests are being contacted directly with alternative river cruise options and rescheduling venues available.

Meanwhile, with new COVID-19 cases going down daily, combined with restrictions easing or being eliminated, people are ready to travel again -- and in a big way. Premium and luxury travel appear to be the most popular -- and consumers are spending big money on luxurious hotel rooms, cruise suites, fine wining and dining experiences, and longer stays.

Is it spring fever or pandemic fatigue?

High-end hotels and resorts, plus both river and cruise lines are not just selling out, some are already at pre-pandemic capacity.

Will the demand and the money continue? No one knows for sure, but for now, thats the reality.

For example, Florida tourism demand is at an all-time high and the Walt Disney Company theme parks are filled with their guests spending more money per person than they were in 2019.

Viking River Cruises will be launching their brand new Viking Mississippi river ship this August and according to Vikings Senior Vice President Michele Saegesser, sailings for 2022 and 2023 are mostly sold out. She recommends booking for 2024, or if you are flexible, tell your travel agent to keep you on a cancellation/wait list for this year and next. (Another option would be to look into American Cruise Lines Mississippi sailings, but know this will be a completely different style.)

Regent Seven Seas Cruises Director of Business Development for North America Eric Schmit said their luxury travelers are not just booking back-to-back and longer cruises, they are booking their next cruises while onboard, with the most luxurious suites selling out first. Space is tight going into this summer and fall -- and 2023 is filling quickly.

On Feb. 18, most of the cruise industry opted into the updated (and voluntary) CDC & Preventions COVID-19 program, which asks cruise lines to report vaccinated status of crew and passengers on each ship so results can be tracked. The CDC also downgraded their cruise line health warning from Level 4 to Level 3. Beginning March 1 most cruise ships will install a masks onboard recommended, but not required policy that in itself is a dealmaker for many potential travelers.

Cruise lines moving forward are committed to adjust health & safety protocols to ensure all onboard guests, crew and port destinations are protected. All officers and crew will still be masked, and all adult guests plus some children ages 10 and up will need to be fully vaccinated, and some will require boosters -- be sure to get expert advice from a travel agent before committing.

So what else is new for this spring?

Without a doubt, drive-to vacation getaways and road trips continue to soar in popularity. Were lucky to have so many wonderful destinations here in Pennsylvania. As Michael Chapaloney, Pa. Tourism Executive Director, always says, Pennsylvania has an embarrassment of riches. Go to VisitPA.com for all information on what to see, do, where to eat and where to sleep. You can easily discover your own backyard on a budget that works.

Direct, nonstop flights from Harrisburg International Airport offer many desirable vacations to Florida, Myrtle Beach and Nashville. Travelers want to keep their vacations uncomplicated with less time in airports and more time to experience new places, explore and unplug.

The three Is -- Iceland, Italy and Ireland -- are open and ready to welcome Americans back. Beginning this summer Icelandair will fly from Baltimore to Reykjavik, Iceland, and new stops in Europe and Greenland have just been added.

Many domestic and international airlines are offering spring savings for popular and off-the-beaten-path destinations now and throughout the summer.

Every day more countries are lifting certain COVID-19 restrictions. Just this week, Israel, the Bahamas, the Dominican Republic, the Cayman Islands, Jamaica and Australia have all altered their coronavirus restrictions. The list will continue to grow, so do some research before you travel.

In closing, many of us are starting to see COVID-19 not as a travel deterrent, but rather a do it now motivator, because who knows what may be lurking just around the bend. A professional and experienced travel agent should be your new best friend when planning your long-awaited vacation.

If you are planning to travel out of the country, be sure you renew your passport six months prior to the expiration date and verify that your passport is valid for at least six months after your return to the United States. Keep updated with international travel news, particularly in regards to Baltic and Eastern European ocean, river and land tour information.

Be informed, be prepared and travel well.

Lets Talk Travel hosted by Sandy Fenton is broadcast Saturdays 11am to noon on iHeartRadios WHP580. For more information, go to whp580.com and click on the link to Lets Talk Travel.

See more here:

COVID-19 restrictions ease, but Ukraine war is ramping up. Whats that mean for travelers? | Sandy Fenton - PennLive

Posted on March 1st, 2022 by Lawrence Tabak, D.D.S., Ph.D.

More than 215 million people in the United States are now fully vaccinated against the SARS-CoV-2 virus responsible for COVID-19 [1]. More than 40 percentmore than 94 million peoplealso have rolled up their sleeves for an additional, booster dose. Now, an NIH-funded study exploring how mRNA vaccines are performing over time comes as a reminder of just how important it will be to keep those COVID-19 vaccines up to date as coronavirus variants continue to circulate.

The results, published in the journal Science Translational Medicine, show that people who received two doses of either the Pfizer or Moderna COVID-19 mRNA vaccines did generate needed virus-neutralizing antibodies [2]. But levels of those antibodies dropped considerably after six months, suggesting declining immunity over time.

The data also reveal that study participants had much reduced protection against newer SARS-CoV-2 variants, including Delta and Omicron. While antibody protection remained stronger in people whod also had a breakthrough infection, even that didnt appear to offer much protection against infection by the Omicron variant.

The new study comes from a team led by Shan-Lu Liu at The Ohio State University, Columbus. They wanted to explore how well vaccine-acquired immune protection holds up over time, especially in light of newly arising SARS-CoV-2 variants.

This is an important issue going forward because mRNA vaccines train the immune system to produce antibodies against the spike proteins that crown the surface of the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus. These new variants often have mutated, or slightly changed, spike proteins compared to the original one the immune system has been trained to detect, potentially dampening the immune response.

In the study, the team collected serum samples from 48 fully vaccinated health care workers at four key time points: 1) before vaccination, 2) three weeks after the first dose, 3) one month after the second dose, and 4) six months after the second dose.

They then tested the ability of antibodies in those samples to neutralize spike proteins as a correlate for how well a vaccine works to prevent infection. The spike proteins represented five major SARS-CoV-2 variants. The variants included D614G, which arose very soon after the coronavirus first was identified in Wuhan and quickly took over, as well as Alpha (B.1.1.7), Beta (B.1.351), Delta (B.1.617.2), and Omicron (B.1.1.529).

The researchers explored in the lab how neutralizing antibodies within those serum samples reacted to SARS-CoV-2 pseudoviruses representing each of the five variants. SARS-CoV-2 pseudoviruses are harmless viruses engineered, in this case, to bear coronavirus spike proteins on their surfaces. Because they dont replicate, they are safe to study without specially designed biosafety facilities.

At any of the four time points, antibodies showed a minimal ability to neutralize the Omicron spike protein, which harbors about 30 mutations. These findings are consistent with an earlier study showing a significant decline in neutralizing antibodies against Omicron in people whove received the initial series of two shots, with improved neutralizing ability following an additional booster dose.

The neutralizing ability of antibodies against all other spike variants showed a dramatic decline from 1 to 6 months after the second dose. While there was a marked decline over time after both vaccines, samples from health care workers whod received the Moderna vaccine showed about twice the neutralizing ability of those whod received the Pfizer vaccine. The data also suggests greater immune protection in fully vaccinated healthcare workers whod had a breakthrough infection with SARS-CoV-2.

In addition to recommending full vaccination for all eligible individuals, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) now recommends everyone 12 years and up should get a booster dose of either the Pfizer or Moderna vaccines at least five months after completing the primary series of two shots [3]. Those whove received the Johnson & Johnson vaccine should get a booster at least two months after receiving the initial dose.

While plenty of questions about the durability of COVID-19 immunity over time remain, its clear that the rapid deployment of multiple vaccines over the course of this pandemic already has saved many lives and kept many more people out of the hospital. As the Omicron threat subsides and we start to look forward to better days ahead, it will remain critical for researchers and policymakers to continually evaluate and revise vaccination strategies and recommendations, to keep our defenses up as this virus continues to evolve.

References:

[1] COVID-19 vaccinations in the United States. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. February 27, 2022.

[2] Neutralizing antibody responses elicited by SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination wane over time and are boosted by breakthrough infection. Evans JP, Zeng C, Carlin C, Lozanski G, Saif LJ, Oltz EM, Gumina RJ, Liu SL. Sci Transl Med. 2022 Feb 15:eabn8057.

[3] COVID-19 vaccine booster shots. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Feb 2, 2022.

Links:

COVID-19 Research (NIH)

Shan-Lu Liu (The Ohio State University, Columbus)

NIH Support: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; National Cancer Institute; National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development

Related

Posted In: News

Tags: antibodies, booster shot, CDC, coronavirus, COVID-19, COVID-19 vaccine, Delta variant, immunity, Moderna, Moderna vaccine, mRNA vaccines, neutralizing antibodies, Omicron variant, pandemic, Pfizer, Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine, pseudovirus, SARS-CoV-2, vaccines, variants

Original post:

How COVID-19 Immunity Holds Up Over Time - National Institutes of Health (.gov)

The Omicron variant is the current dominant circulating strain of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which is the causal agent of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The World Health Organization has classified the Omicron variant as a variant of concern (VOC) as a result of its higher virulence and transmissibility as compared to the original SARS-CoV-2 strain.

Study: Effectiveness of COVID-19 Vaccination Against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variant in Two Outbreaks in Indoor Entertainment Settings in Australia. Image Credit: View Apart / Shutterstock.com

In Australia, the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant was first detected among passengers who arrived on an inbound international flight in November 2021. Subsequently, a rapid surge in COVID-19 cases was reported, particularly in the most populous state of New South Wales (NSW).

Prior to the introduction of the Omicron variant in Australia, low and stable COVID-19 cases of five for every 100,000 due to the Delta variant were reported. An impressive COVID-19 vaccination was reported in Australia.

The first large outbreaks of the Omicron variant in Australia occurred in NSW, in the city of Newcastle. During this time, entertainment venues required attendees to provide evidence of completed primary COVID-19 vaccination; however, compulsory wearing of face masks or restrictions on the number of individuals were not implemented. Later, healthcare officials found that two of the four outbreaks were related to entertainment venues.

One outbreak occurred on December 8, 2021, wherein an individual with the Omicron infection attended a nightclub that was then open to the public. The nightclub consisted of several interlinked rooms with few windows, with common areas of an average size of 1000 square meters with approximately one person per 2.5 square meters at peak occupancy.

A second outbreak occurred due to the ball organized on December 10, 2021, for recently graduated medical students and medical school faculty at the Exhibition Centre. The exhibition hall was 1,195 square meters and was exclusively ventilated using air-conditioning.

A new study posted toPreprints with The Lancet / SSRNs First Look*estimates vaccine effectiveness against the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant in the aforementioned outbreaks in indoor entertainment settings in Australia. In this study, the scientists obtained the SARS-CoV-2 testing status of all individuals who attended each event and matched it to the Australian Immunization Register.

The authors classified these individuals based on having two or three valid doses of a COVID-19 vaccine. Furthermore, the researchers compared infection rates between the unvaccinated and vaccinated, in addition to estimating infection rate ratios and vaccine effectiveness.

A high force of infection was observed among mostly young adults with two doses of a COVID-19 vaccine. In the nightclub environment, two doses of widely administered vaccines, such as the Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, and Astra Zeneca vaccines, had poor effectiveness against the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron infection. These vaccines were administered at least two months prior to the event date.

In the medical graduation ball, two doses of COVID-19 vaccines were moderately effective, with higher vaccine effectiveness for more recent vaccine receipts. The number of booster recipients was small and scientists did not observe any incremental effect of the booster over two doses of the vaccine.

The current study analyzed unique outbreaks and vaccine effectiveness in crowded indoor environments where social restrictions were absent. The results suggest that public health measures are needed in such settings, in addition to requiring that attendees have received at least two doses of available COVID-19 vaccines.

Other recent studies from the United Kingdom, Denmark, and Canada showed poor effectiveness of two doses of current COVID-19 vaccines against the Omicron variant. Some studies have also shown that the booster dose restores some protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection, which has prompted many countries, including Australia, to reduce the time interval for booster doses following primary vaccination.

The findings in this study are in line with previous research; however, researchers did not identify a significant incremental contribution of the booster dose in reducing the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection, which was an unexpected result. Owing to the young demographic, the researchers were not able to estimate vaccine effectiveness against hospitalization or severe disease. About 2-3% of infected individuals were presented to a hospital emergency in the two weeks following the outbreaks.

One limitation of the current study is the small number of individuals with no vaccination, which made it difficult to base the estimates of absolute vaccine effectiveness and generalize the results to all social contexts. Furthermore, the scientists had access to limited data on potential confounders, including reasons for receipt of booster doses.

Not all SARS-CoV-2 isolates in the current study were confirmed as the Omicron VOC. About 70% of those in each setting had either whole-genome sequencing (WGS) or the indicative spike gene target failure (SGTF) reported.

Preprints with The Lancet / SSRN First Look publishes preliminary scientific reports that are not peer-reviewed and, therefore, should not be regarded as conclusive, guide clinical practice/health-related behavior, or treated as established information.

Journal reference:

See original here:

Study determines effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination against Omicron variant in high-risk indoor settings - News-Medical.Net

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which is the virus responsible for the coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19), continues to spread across Africa, thus impacting mortality and morbidity rates on this continent. In fact, all 55 African Union (AU) Member States (MS) have reported COVID-19 cases, along with cases due to new SARS-CoV-2 variants, which have limited the efficacy of efforts to contain the pandemic.

However, since the majority of SARS-CoV-2 infections are either asymptomatic or mild, the true number of infections, along with age and sex distribution of infections, have not been fully determined yet in the context of Africa.

Study: Population-Based Serosurveys for SARS-CoV-2: Key Findings From Five African Countries: November 2020 to June 2021. Image Credit: Mukurukuru Media / Shutterstock.com

The number of confirmed COVID-19 cases that were detected and reported in each AU MS have been influenced by several factors such as the capacity for COVID-19 testing, case definition, access to and utilization of healthcare services, the manifestation of symptomatic illness among infected individuals, and community health-seeking behaviors.

National estimates of seroprevalence are considered to be important in understanding current or prior exposure to SARS-CoV-2 across populations, as well as to provide country-specific information for the development of guidelines for current and future control of epidemics. These estimates also help elucidate the true extent of the pandemic and provide insight into the factors that might have influenced transmission. Although previous seroprevalence studies have been carried out in Africa, they mostly focused on high-risk groups.

A new Preprints with The Lancet / SSRNFirst study Look* used the Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (Africa CDC) generic protocol for obtaining COVID-19 seroprevalence data from Ethiopia, Uganda, Togo, Sierra Leone, and Zimbabwe to understand the spread and epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2 to help in response activities and guiding policies.

The current study recruited participants who filled out a questionnaire on pre-existing conditions, COVID-19 symptomology, basic demographics, pregnancy status, household information, hospitalization information, missed work or school, vaccination status, and treatments received. The survey varied in different countries and was conducted for varying durations from two weeks to two months between November 2020 and June 2021.

Blood samples were collected from the recruited participants and assessed for the presence of both immunoglobulin M (IgM) and IgG SARS-CoV-2 specific antibodies. Participants who showed the presence of either IgM, IgG, or both IgM and IgG were considered to be seropositive.

Out of the 31,707 individuals surveyed across the five AU MSs, the majority were female. The participants from Sierra Leone, Togo, and Uganda were five years and older, whereas the cohort in Zimbabwe consisted of participants who were one year and older, and in Ethiopia, study participants were ten years and older. The majority of participants were reported to be between 20 to 39 years old.

Most participants in Ethiopia and Sierra Leone lived in large households, while in Uganda and Zimbabwe the majority of participants lived in smaller households. Taken together, most of the participants resided in rural areas.

The highest overall weighted seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was observed in Uganda, followed by Togo, while the lowest was observed in Sierra Leone. The risk of seropositivity also appeared to increase with age.

Seroprevalence was also found to be affected by several factors such as sex, occupation, and demographics, while symptoms, pre-existing medical conditions, and household size were not found to influence seroprevalence.

The current study determined that seroprevalence studies were important in providing public health leaders with important information for action against SARS-CoV-2. Variations in results from these five AU MSs suggest the need to regularly conduct serosurveys for better monitoring of the pandemic.

Some of the limitations of the current study included issues regarding inconsistent response options, missing data, and different sampling designs. Furthermore, the results were limited to the comparable variables, rather than the entire population. The observed levels of infection were also affected, as each MS implemented its survey according to local logistic factors.

Preprints with The Lancet / SSRN First Look publishes preliminary scientific reports that are not peer-reviewed and, therefore, should not be regarded as conclusive, guide clinical practice/health-related behavior, or treated as established information.

See the original post here:

The epidemiology of COVID-19 in Africa - News-Medical.Net