Search This Blog

Thursday, April 13, 2023

As COVID Tracking Wanes, Are We Letting Our Guard Down Too Soon?

 The 30-second commercial, part of the government's We Can Do This campaign, shows everyday people going about their lives, then reminds them that, "Because COVID is still out there and so are you," it might be time to update your vaccine.

But in real life, the message that COVID-19 is still a major concern is muffled if not absent for many. Many data tracking sources, both federal and others, are no longer reporting, as often, the number of COVID cases, hospitalizations, and deaths. 

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) in February stopped updating its public COVID data site, instead directing all queries to the CDC, which itself has been updating only weekly instead of daily since last year

Nongovernmental sources, such as John Hopkins University, stopped reporting pandemic data in March, The New York Times also ended its COVID data-gathering project last month, stating that "the comprehensive real-time reporting that The Times has prioritized is no longer possible." It will rely on reporting weekly CDC data moving forward. 

Along with the tracking sites, masking and social distancing mandates have mostly disappeared. President Joe Biden signed a bipartisan bill on Monday that ended the national emergency for COVID. While some programs will stay in place for now, such as free vaccines, treatments, and tests, that too will go away when the federal public health emergency  expires on May 11. The HHS already has issued its transition roadmap. 

Many Americans, meanwhile, are still on the fence about the pandemic. A Gallup poll from March shows that about half of the American public says it's over, and about half disagree. 

Are we closing up shop on COVID-19 too soon, or is it time? Not surprisingly, experts don't agree. Some say the pandemic is now endemic – which broadly means the virus and its patterns are predictable and steady in designated regions – and that it's critical to catch up on health needs neglected during the pandemic, such as screenings and other vaccinations

But others don't think it's reached that stage yet, saying that we are letting our guard down too soon and we can't be blind to the possibility of another strong variant – or pandemic – emerging. Surveillance must continue, not decline, and be improved.

Time to Move On?

In its transition roadmap released in February, the HHS notes that daily COVID reported cases are down over 90%, compared to the peak of the Omicron surge at the end of January 2022; deaths have declined by over 80%; and new hospitalizations due to COVID have dropped by nearly 80%.

It is time to move on, said Ali Mokdad, PhD, a professor and chief strategy officer of population health at the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington. 

"Many people were delaying a lot of medical care, because they were afraid" during COVID's height, he said, explaining that elective surgeries were postponed, prenatal care went down, as did screenings for blood pressure and diabetes.

His institute was tracking COVID projections every week but stopped in December.

As for emerging variants, "we haven't seen a variant that scares us since Omicron" in November 2021, said Mokdad, who agrees that COVID is endemic now. The subvariants that followed it are very similar, and the current vaccines are working. 

"We can move on, but we cannot drop the ball on keeping an eye on the genetic sequencing of the virus," he said. That will enable quick identification of new variants.

If a worrisome new variant does surface, Mokdad said, certain locations and resources will be able to gear up quickly, while others won't be as fast, but overall the U.S. is in a much better position now. 

Amesh Adalja, MD, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security in Baltimore, also believes the pandemic phase is behind us

"This can't be an emergency in perpetuity," he said "Just because something is not a pandemic [anymore] does not mean that all activities related to it cease."

COVID is highly unlikely to overwhelm hospitals again, and that was the main reason for the emergency declaration, he said. 

"It's not all or none — collapsing COVID-related [monitoring] activities into the routine monitoring that is done for other infectious disease should be seen as an achievement in taming the virus," he said.

Not Endemic Yet

Closing up shop too early could mean we are blindsided, said Rajendram Rajnarayanan, PhD, an assistant dean of research and associate professor at the New York Institute of Technology College of Osteopathic Medicine at Arkansas State University in Jonesboro. 

Already, he said, large labs have closed or scaled down as testing demand has declined, and many centers that offered community testing have also closed. Plus, home test results are often not reported.

Continued monitoring is key, he said. "You have to maintain a base level of sequencing for new variants," he said. "Right now, the variant that is 'top dog' in the world is XBB.1.16." 

That's an Omicron subvariant that the World Health Organization is currently keeping its eye on, according to a media briefing on March 29. There are about 800 sequences of it from 22 countries, mostly India, and it's been in circulation a few months. 

Rajnarayanan said he's not overly worried about this variant, but surveillance must continue. His own breakdown of XBB.1.16 found the subvariant in 27 countries, including the U.S., as of April 10.   

Ideally, Rajnarayanan would suggest four areas to keep focusing on, moving forward:

  • Active, random surveillance for new variants, especially in hot spots

  • Hospital surveillance and surveillance of long-term care, especially in congregate settings where people can more easily spread the virus

  • Travelers' surveillance, now at seven U.S. airports, according to the CDC

  • Surveillance of animals such as mink and deer, because these animals can not only pick up the virus, but the virus can mutate in the animals, which could then transmit it back to people 

With less testing, baseline surveillance for new variants has declined. The other three surveillance areas need improvement, too, he said, as the reporting is often delayed. 

Continued surveillance is crucial, agreed Katelyn Jetelina, PhD, an epidemiologist and data scientist who publishes a newsletter, Your Local Epidemiologist, updating developments in COVID and other pressing health issues. 

"It's a bit ironic to have a date for the end of a public health emergency; viruses don't care about calendars," said Jetelina, who is also director of population health analytics for the Meadows Mental Health Policy Institute.  "COVID-19 is still going to be here, it's still going to mutate," she said, and still cause grief for those affected. "I'm most concerned about our ability to track the virus. It's not clear what surveillance we will still have in the states and around the globe." 

For surveillance, she calls wastewater monitoring "the lowest-hanging fruit." That's because it "is not based on bias testing and has the potential to help with other outbreaks, too." Hospitalization data is also essential, she said, as that information is the basis for public health decisions on updated vaccines and other protective measures.

While Jetelina is hopeful that COVID will someday be universally viewed as endemic, with predictable seasonal patterns, "I don't think we are there yet. We still need to approach this virus with humility; that's at least what I will continue to do."

Rajnarayanan agreed that the pandemic has not yet reached endemic phase, though the situation is much improved.  "Our vaccines are still protecting us from severe disease and hospitalization, and [the antiviral drug] Paxlovid is a great tool that works."

Keeping Tabs

While some data tracking has been eliminated, not all has, or will be. The CDC, as mentioned, continues to post cases, deaths, and a daily average of new hospital admissions weekly. The World Health Organization's dashboard tracks deaths, cases, and vaccine doses globally. 

In March, the WHO updated its working definitions and tracking system for SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern and variants of interest, with goals of evaluating the sublineages independently and to classify new variants more clearly when that's needed. 

Still, WHO is considering ending its declaration of COVID as a public health emergency of international concern sometime this year.

Some public companies are staying vigilant. The drugstore chain Walgreens said it plans to maintain its COVID-19 Index, which launched in January 2022. 

"Data regarding spread of variants is important to our understanding of viral transmission and, as new variants emerge, it will be critical to continue to track this information quickly to predict which communities are most at risk," Anita Patel, PharmD, vice president of pharmacy services development for Walgreens, said in a statement.   

The data also reinforces the importance of vaccinations and testing in helping to stop the spread of COVID-19, she said.

Sources

Ali Mokdad, PhD, professor of health metrics sciences and chief strategy officer of population health, Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME), University of Washington, Seattle. 

Rajendram Rajnarayanan, PhD, assistant dean of research and associate professor, New York Institute of Technology College of Osteopathic Medicine, Arkansas State University, Jonesboro.

Anita Patel, PharmD, vice president, pharmacy services development, Walgreens. 

Katelyn Jetelina, PhD, epidemiologist and publisher, Your Local Epidemiologist newsletter.

Amesh Adalja, MD, senior scholar, Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, Baltimore.

Axios-Ipsos Coronavirus Index: "Most Americans not worrying about COVID going into 2022 Holidays."

HHS.gov: "Fact Sheet: COVID-19 Public Health Emergency Transition Roadmap."

World Health Organization: "Virtual press conference on COVID-19 and other global health issues transcript," "Statement on the update of WHO's working definitions and tracking system for SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern and variants of interest."

WHO Coronavirus (COVID-19) Dashboard.

CDC COVID data tracker.

Walgreens COVID-19 Index.

https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/990676

Misoprostol-Only for Abortion: Viable Option but Not 'the Best'

 With a federal judge's recent ruling clouding the future availability of mifepristone for terminating pregnancies, attention has shifted to the efficacy of another abortion drug, misoprostol.

Experts said a misoprostol-only regimen for medical abortions is as safe as but not as effective as the combination of mifepristone and misoprostol. A misoprostol-only approach also comes with more pronounced side effects.

"Misoprostol only is a good alternative; it's not the best alternative," said Beverly Gray, MD, an associate professor in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Duke University, in Durham, North Carolina, during a video conference Wednesday. "The best medication would be to use mifepristone and misoprostol together because they're efficacious with fewer side effects."

To medically terminate a pregnancy using the two-drug regimen, patients first take the progesterone blocker mifepristone, which ends the pregnancy. That is followed 24 to 48 hours later with misoprostol, which causes the uterus to expel the pregnancy tissue. Used in combination, the two drugs have an efficacy rate of 98% in terminating a pregnancy.

An alternative approach is a misoprostol-only regimen. Patients take multiple doses of the drug over the course of hours until the pregnancy passes. This method is considered effective and safe, although patients may experience more nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, bleeding, and cramping.

Dr Mitchell Creinin

"It's effective, but not as effective as the combination treatment," said Mitchell Creinin, MD, a professor in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at UC Davis Health. "It also requires much higher doses. To get misoprostol by itself to have relatively high efficacy, you have to use multiple doses. It causes significantly more side effects, and it's less effective."

Creinin was part of a team that earlier this year conducted a study of misoprostol-only medical abortions. In that study, which was published in the journal Contraception, the investigators found that the misoprostol-only regimen was 78% effective at aborting completely without a procedure or unplanned additional medications. The investigators concluded that prohibiting the use of mifepristone was "senseless" but that offering misoprostol-only abortions would be a "safe, effective and patient-centered approach."

Both drug regimens are intended to be used during the first trimester of pregnancy, and their effectiveness is influenced by the gestation period.

Medical abortions have grown in popularity. They now account for more than half of all abortions. Last year's US Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization overturned the court's 1973 ruling in Roe v. Wade, leaving it up to states to regulate abortion. Currently, nearly half of states have banned or are considering some sort of ban on the procedure, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a reproductive health advocacy group.

"Medication abortion is good for privacy in many ways," said Jolynn Dellinger, JD, a visiting lecturer at Duke Law School, during the conference call with Gray. "It's incredibly safe and effective and can be the very best choice for people."

On April 7, a federal judge in Texas suspended the US Food and Drug Administration approval of mifepristone. The drug has been on the market for 23 years. A federal judge in Washington State issued a competing ruling, and the Biden Administration has appealed the Texas decision.

The future of the use of mifepristone is now in the courts, but not that of misoprostol ― for now. The latter is used to prevent ulcers; its use in medical abortions is secondary. Creinin said that that will make it much more difficult for antiabortion advocates to challenge.

While courts, lawmakers, and regulators at the state and federal levels work through what is allowable for medical abortions, the medical community sits and waits.

"We're working out a variety of scenarios," Gray said. "I think right now we're just hoping that the legislative dust will settle enough so that we'll have a better understanding. In the meantime, we're creating protocols and trying to be as prepared as we can."

https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/990705

US Doesn't Expect Ukraine Peace Talks In 2023: Leaked Doc

 Among the more interesting content to come out of the trove of Pentagon document leaks is a Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) assessment which says the US doesn't expect there to be any peace talks between Russia and Ukraine until at least 2024.

The Washington Post reported on the document this week, quoting the classified briefing as follows: "Negotiations to end the conflict are unlikely during 2023 in all considered scenarios," the DIA report reads. The DIA document forecasts that even in a scenario of Ukraine regaining a "significant" amount of territory back and with "unsustainable losses on Russian forces," this would not lead to peace talks.

Thus it appears the US intelligence community is taking Putin's resolve very seriously. At the same time, policy-makers in the Biden administration have really done nothing to push for negotiations between the warring sides. In fact, they've been accused of doing the opposite: sabotaging the possibility of talks anytime soon while encouraging a military solution (along with the UK), despite massive losses to the Ukrainian side.

According to the WaPo report:

"Negotiations to end the conflict are unlikely during 2023 in all considered scenarios," says the document, which has not been disclosed previously.

The assessment, based on close U.S. scrutiny of each side’s troop counts, weaponry and equipment, could galvanize the war’s critics who have called on major powers such as the United States and China to push for Kyiv and Moscow to reach a settlement rather than allow to drag on a conflict that has displaced millions and left hundreds of thousands dead or wounded.

The DIA analysis further suggests things will get bleaker, with heavier casualties, before there is a possibility of peace. The Washington Post continues to comment on the doc as follows:

A stalemate also will result in Ukraine enacting the "full mobilization" of its remaining eligible population, the document predicts, sending more young men to the front lines. At the same time, Ukraine probably will intensify its reliance on strikes in Russian territory, the document says, a dynamic that has disquieted some U.S. officials fearful that such attacks could compel President Vladimir Putin to escalate the conflict or give China cause to begin providing lethal support to Russia.

So far there's no evidence to suggest that China has actually provided Russia with defense aid since the start of the invasion. President Xi's '12-point peace plan' has also not gotten anywhere, despite Zelensky having initially shown some degree of openness to work with China in paving a path toward negotiations.

Meanwhile, The Hill and many other outlets have continued to publish on the Pentagon leaks, despite NSC spokesman John Kirby this weak urging the media not to. For example, The Hill has what it calls "7 Big Revelations So Far" from the leaked classified reports. More revelations have continued to hit global headlines on a daily basis this week.

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/us-doesnt-expect-ukraine-peace-talks-2023-leaked-doc

NY women line up to pay $25,000 to have Brazilian butt lift sucked out

 New York women are ready to put butts behind them, it seems.

The Brazilian butt lift — a procedure in which fat is sucked out of well-padded parts of the patient’s body and injected into the butt area to add size and shape — has been the must-have ass-essory for the past few years.

But we hear that the, er, Rear De Janeiro is starting to sound a bum note in fashionable circles.

And with wealthy New Yorkers booking their pre-summer tune ups, we’re told that women are lining up to have them reversed — for around $25,000 a butt.

Fifth Avenue plastic surgeon Dr. Ryan Neinstein tells Page Six, “Interestingly a lot of [the calls we’re getting] are for patients looking to reverse surgery done elsewhere. While clothing and hairstyles are easy to experiment with new styles, in my opinion, surgery should aim for timeless beauty.”


Enlarge Image

Dr. Ryan Feinstein
Dr. Neinstein says that his most in-demand procedure right now removes “overfilled” BBLs.
Dr. Ryan Neinstein

He says his most common procedure right now is reversing “over filled” BBLs.

“These women can’t walk down the street comfortable in their own skin while looking like a cartoon character,” said Dr. Neinstein, “I commonly have to shrink and tighten the buttock along with sculpting adjacent areas to give a more proportionate and elegant look.”

He says the procedures “are typically being done in South Florida and Colombia.”

He says that his surgery typically charges approximately $25,000 for “a reconstructive reverse BBL.”

Surgery fan Blac Chyna recently got hers removed, apparently as part of some kind of spiritual journey.

According to Fox News, more than 520,000 got some type of buttock augmentation, including BBLs, in 2021.

“That’s an astounding 40.5% increase over 2017, according to the International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery,” wrote the site.

The butt lift surgery is said to be unusually dangerous.

https://pagesix.com/2023/04/13/slew-of-new-york-women-pay-25000-to-lose-brazilian-butt-lift/

Mass. Air National Guardsman at center of ‘digileaks’ scandal revealed as Jack Teixeira

 The head of a Discord group where a trove of sensitive US intelligence documents were posted online has been identified as a Massachusetts Air National Guardsman named Jack Teixeira, according to a new report.

The New York Times first reported Teixeira’s identity Thursday, adding that investigators want to talk to him about the leak and say that he may have information relevant to the investigation.

Separately, the Wall Street Journal reported that an arrest in the case could happen as soon as Thursday.

The head of a Discord group where a trove of sensitive US intelligence documents were posted online has been identified as a Massachusetts Air National Guardsman named Jack Teixeira, according to a new report.

The fast-moving developments followed a report by the Washington Post late Wednesday that the classified files were shared to a Discord channel called “Thug Shaker Central.”

The Times reported Thursday that Teixeira’s online gaming profile links him to other members of the channel. The paper also reported that details of the interior of Teixeira’s childhood home from pictures posted to social media match items on the margins of some of the photographs of the secret documents. 

On Feb. 28, some of the documents were reposted by a member of the Discord channel “wow_mao.” 

A member of that channel in turn posted some of them on March 4 to the even larger channel “Minecraft Earth Map.”

On Thursday morning, President Biden told reporters in Ireland that federal investigators were “close” to uncovering the leaker’s identity.

https://nypost.com/2023/04/13/person-who-leaked-classified-us-intelligence-documents-works-on-a-military-base-report/

China out of UN's wildlife survey for pandemic controls

 China is not participating in a United Nations project to survey Asian wet markets and other facilities at high risk of spreading infectious diseases from wild animals to humans, despite long-running talks with Beijing, a UN official told Reuters.

China's hesitancy to join the UN project involving other Asian nations may compound frustration by global researchers who have been pressing Beijing to share information about the origins of COVID-19, as they seek to prevent future pandemics due to zoonotic, or animal-to-human, disease transmission.

Four Asian countries - China, Thailand, Vietnam and Laos - were initially selected for the survey by the scientific advisory committee of the project, called the Safety across Asia For the global Environment (SAFE), because they host multiple facilities presenting risks of animal-to-human disease transmission, the UN official said.

The selection for the project, launched in July 2021, was also made after major wildlife trafficking cases were detected, investigated and prosecuted in those countries, which increased zoonotic risks, the official said.

"China was initially in discussions to be part of the project," the official said, declining to be named as the information was deemed sensitive.

The official said discussions with China are still ongoing, but did not clarify with which state institution the UN project is holding talks.

China's foreign ministry and the country's National Forestry and Grasslands Administration (NFGA), which oversees the management of wildlife and was involved in initial talks with the project organisers, did not respond to requests for comment.

The official said NFGA initially showed interest in the project but eventually declined to join, saying it was not under its remit. The agency did not indicate which government agencies would be responsible for the matter, the official said.

The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), which monitors illegal wildlife trafficking and coordinates the SAFE project, had no immediate comment.

Biden seeks expanded health insurance access for DACA participants

 The Biden administration is seeking to allow immigrants illegally brought to the United States as children greater access to health insurance through federal programs, the White House said on Thursday.

The proposal would allow participants in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or DACA, to access to health insurance under Medicaid and Affordable Care Act (ACA) exchanges, it said.

"Health care should be a right. I've worked hard to get more Americans health insurance than ever before," President Joe Biden said on Twitter, adding the move would give "Dreamers the same opportunities."

The proposed rule comes as efforts to further protect the so-called "Dreamer" immigrants stalls in Congress and faces legal challenges. About 580,000 people were enrolled as of last year in the Obama-era 2012 DACA program, which grants protection from deportation and work permits.

An expansion would allow DACA recipients to enroll in coverage under the joint federal-state Medicaid program or through private insurers participating in the exchanges established by the 2010 ACA law also passed under Democratic then-President Barack Obama and Biden, his vice president.

Eight U.S. states have already expanded state insurance access to health coverage regardless of immigration status, according to data from the healthcare policy organization Kaiser Family Foundation.

Biden promised during his 2020 presidential campaign to protect "Dreamers" and their families after Republican then-President Donald Trump tried to end DACA. Biden this week said he plans to seek a second four-year term but has not formally announced his reelection bid.

The president, in a video, reiterated his call for Congress to establish a pathway to citizenship for DACA recipients, adding: "While we work toward that goal ... we need to give Dreamers the opportunities and the support they deserve."