In the past few months, Americans have looked for eggs faced with empty shelves of their grocery stores. The escalating threat from bird flu has forced farmers to accomplish that Kill thousands and thousands of chickens To prevent its spread.

Almost 70 years ago, Maurice HillemanAn expert on influenza, also concerned to search out eggs. However, Hilleman didn’t need eggs for his breakfast, but to make the vaccines that were crucial to stop a possible influenza pandemic.

Hilleman was grasped and killed a 12 months after the notorious Influenza pandemic in 1918 20 to 100 million people. When Hilleman began to maintain egg supply in 1957, scientists had a way more sophisticated understanding of influenza than before. This knowledge was feared that a pandemic, much like the 1918 1918, was barely out and milled thousands and thousands.

As a Medicine historianI used to be at all times fascinated by the important thing moments that stop an epidemic. The study of those moments gives an insight into the way in which and why an outbreak can grow to be a fatal pandemic, while one other doesn’t accomplish that.

Anticipate a pandemic

Influenza is one of the vital unpredictable to diseases. Every 12 months the virus mutates easily in a process called an antigen drift. The greater the mutation, the less likely your immune system will recognize against the disease and defend itself against the disease.

From time to time the virus changes in a process that is known as Antigen shift. In this case, people grow to be even less immune, and the probability of an illness spreads dramatically. Hilleman knew that it was only a matter of time until the influenza virus shifted and caused a pandemic that resembled the 1918. The assumption was exactly when this shift would occur.

In April 1957, Hilleman opened his newspaper and saw one Article on patients with glassy eyes Overwhelming clinics in Hong Kong.

The article was only eight sentences long. But Hilleman only needed the 4 words of the heading to be alerted: “Hong Kong fights against influenza.”

Within a month Hilleman learned about Hong Kong's influenza epidemic in influenza epidemic and had requested, received and tested a sample of the virus of colleagues in Asia. By May, Hilleman and his colleagues knew that the Americans lacked immunity against this new edition of the virus. A possible pandemic threatened.

Get to know influenza

In the Nineteen Twenties and Thirties, the American government poured thousands and thousands of dollars into influenza research. Until 1944, scientists not only understood that influenza was attributable to a more formal virus-etwas that they Had didn't know in 1918 – But additionally they developed a vaccine.

Antigen drift made this vaccine Ineffective within the flu period of 1946. In contrast to the polio or smallpox vaccine, which could once be administered for lifelong protection, the influenza vaccine needed to be constantly updated to be able to be effective against a consistently changing virus.

However, the Americans weren’t used to the concept of ​​registering for an annual flu vaccination. In fact, they weren’t used to registering for a flu period. After officers had seen the devastating effects of the 1918 pandemic on the soldiers and seafarers of the nation Protection of the military From influenza. During and after the Second World War, the federal government used the influenza vaccine for the military, not most of the people.

Stop a pandemic

In the spring of 1957, the federal government asked vaccine manufacturers to speed up the production of A New influenza vaccine For all Americans.

Traditionally, farmers have often packed roosters and unwanted chickens to maintain their costs low. Hilleman asked the farmers to accomplish that Do not grab your roostersBecause vaccine manufacturers would wish enormous supply of eggs to supply the vaccine before the virus has fully reached the USA.

But firstly of June, the virus already circulated within the United States that the brand new virus was not the murderer who was his predecessor of 1918.

In the hope of making an “watchful but not alarmed public”, General Leroy Bury Bury and other experts in influenza and the necessity to vaccination in a widespread Television program. The government also created short announcements of the general public service And worked with local health organizations to advertise vaccination.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=19go1onoefi

However, the vaccination rates were only “moderate” – not since the Americans considered vaccination as problematic, but because they Influenza didn’t see as a threat. Had almost 40 years Wanted memories From the 1918 pandemic, while the event of antibiotics had reduced the specter of fatal pneumonia, which may accompany influenza.

Learn from a blissful creation

When death and devastation defined the 1918 pandemic, happiness defined the 1957 pandemic.

It was lucky that Hilleman saw an article about rising influenza rates in Asia in the favored press. It was lucky that Hilleman made an early call to extend the production of fertilized eggs. And it was lucky that the 1957 virus didn’t kill the relative of 1918.

In the belief that they’d a ball in 1957, the general public health experts increased their monitoring of the influenza virus within the Nineteen Sixties. They also worked to enhance influenza vaccines and promote annual vaccination. Several aspects akin to the event of the polio vaccine and a growing detection of the roll vaccines that were played within the control of diseases Immunization -oriented bureaucracy within the federal government within the Nineteen Sixties.

In the past 60 years, the influenza virus has continued to drift and altered. 1968A shift caused a pandemic again. 1976 and 2009Consideration that the virus had shifted led to fears that a brand new pandemic was. But the Americans were lucky again.

Today, only just a few Americans remember the 1957 pandemic – of those that were expelled from real damage. However, this event left a everlasting legacy in the way in which during which experts in public health take into consideration future outbreaks and plan them. Assuming that the United States uses the medical and public health available to it, the Americans at the moment are more prepared for influenza pandemic than our ancestors in 1918 and 1957.

But the unpredictability of the virus still makes it unimaginable to know the way it can mutate and when a pandemic will arise.

Thanh Duy Nguyen previously pleaded guilty to 2 counts of wire fraud, the U.S. Attorney's Office said in a news release.

Nguyen ran and was the only manager of T&A Distribution, an unlicensed interstate marijuana trafficking scheme with grow houses within the Bay Area, prosecutors said.

Prosecutors said Nguyen used the deal to secure two economic injury and disaster loans from the U.S. Small Business Administration. The Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act authorized the SBA to supply EIDL loans to small businesses experiencing significant financial hardship as a consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Nguyen submitted the primary loan application in April 2020 and the second in June 2020. In each cases, he testified that he was not involved in any criminal activity, despite the fact that he knew his marijuana distribution business was illegal under federal law, prosecutors said. He also allegedly lied about T&A Distribution's gross revenues, operating costs and variety of employees.

In the primary application, Nguyen claimed that T&A Distribution was an “antiques/collectibles” nonprofit, and within the second application, he misrepresented T&A Distribution as a “miscellaneous services” nonprofit, prosecutors said.

According to prosecutors, Nguyen ultimately received roughly $300,000 in EIDL funds, most of which he used for his marijuana distribution business and gambling.

In addition to a 37-month prison sentence, Nguyen was sentenced to a few years of supervised release and $300,000 in restitution, prosecutors said. Nguyen will begin his sentence on February 28.

Originally published: December 21, 2024 at 7:30am PST

Nonprofit social service organizations experienced high staff turnover and struggled to fill vacancies in 2022 because the COVID-19 pandemic got here to an end.

This was primarily on account of low salaries, inadequate social advantages, worker burnout and a scarcity of qualified applicants. The staffing problems were so severe that among the leaders of those organizations feared they may must close their doors.

That is what our research teamcomposed of eight Social work scientistfound once we surveyed 27 social service managers in a metropolitan region within the southeast.

These nonprofit organizations provided a spread of services, including look after individuals with substance use disorders and mental illness, in addition to housing assistance, other kinds of health care, and free food distribution.

Regardless of their specific focus, these nonprofit managers told us that they’ve seen increased demand for services because the start of the pandemic.

For example, you observed one Increase within the number of individuals using opioids and other substances during and after the pandemic. This led to greater demand for substance use disorder treatment.

More people also struggled with it Food insecurity and ask for help getting food. Staffing issues made it tougher to satisfy this need. Some nonprofits have had to maintain people on waiting lists or turn people away — even when their needs were urgent.

A substance use disorder treatment facility said several potential patients suffered fatal overdoses while on the waiting list for its services. This agency was in a rural area and the people searching for their help had nowhere else to go.

Some of the nonprofits could retain their employees in the event that they offered perks like flexible hours and the liberty to make money working from home. Still, many social service providers are meeting critical needs that can’t be adapted to virtual employment.

Some nonprofit leaders told us they’re striving to enhance their workplace culture to retain employees. However, this was not all the time enough to retain employees when salaries were very low during a period historically rapid inflation.

Why it matters

U.S. nonprofit social service agencies provide many essential services, including support for older adults and folks with disabilities.

Many of those agencies depend on Medicare and Medicaid fundingThis may be difficult because reimbursement rates for therapy sessions, nursing care, and other healthcare service categories are very low.

The nonprofit executives we interviewed said it's difficult for his or her agencies to cover the total cost of worker salaries and advantages with the cash they receive from Medicare and Medicaid. Some of them said their organizations couldn’t afford to pay their employees enough money to cover living expenses.

Lack of addiction and mental health counselors within the US are terrible. About 123 million Americans – multiple in three – live in places where there aren’t enough mental health providers to see any patient searching for help.

Access to treatment is further limited as some mental health providers are reported to be limited Choose to stop accepting insurance payments in any respect due to low reimbursement rates and the burdensome paperwork. This means many individuals with mental health problems struggle to get treatment without paying high fees – making therapy a luxury.

Therapy can cost $150 or more per session without payments from an insurance company, in comparison with a Copay, which is able to likely be within the range of $20 to $50 per session if care is roofed.

What's next?

Our team has trained recent specialists within the last 11 years. To date we’ve got trained 297 mental health professionals. We plan to renew the federal grants we received for this work so we will proceed to assist close this critical gap more quickly.

The Research Brief is a brief version of interesting scientific work.

When the Grand Princess — a cruise ship carrying 1000’s of passengers sure for Mexico — as an alternative pulled right into a port in Oakland, California, in early 2020, the ship quickly became a logo of the COVID-19 pandemic. The ship's passengers were among the many first documented coronavirus cases within the U.S. And as they waited — quarantined of their onboard cabins — the image of a floating city-state adrift in a sea of ​​uncertainty became a defining image of the era.

Journalists, politician And Experts in infectious diseases have described cruises as “petri dishes.”

But despite initial skepticism and pandemic-related challenges, the cruise industry has not only survived, but thrived. In fact, demand for cruises is now even higher than before the pandemic.

Cruises are making a comeback

According to a 2024 report by the Mastercard Economics Institute, the variety of cruise transactions worldwide in the primary quarter of 2024, including bookings and onboard purchases, was roughly 16% higher than in the identical period in 2019.

More money can also be flowing into cruises. Mastercard found that nine of the last ten days with the best spending on cruises occurred in 2024 (as of May 2024).

Cruise spending was not only on the rise before the pandemic, but in addition last 12 months. According to May 2024 credit and debit card data from Bank of America, cruise spending was up 12% 12 months over 12 months.

Why are cruises so popular in 2024?

There are several aspects that indicate why cruises are on the rise:

Need to catch up: Cruises are benefiting partly from the overall wave of pent-up travel demand. People who avoided cruising (or travel normally) through the early years of the pandemic may now be ready to participate again.

Addressing older population groups: There are actually great Cruises for families or cruises for young couples, cruises are particularly attractive to older people. According to internal Bank of America data from January to May 2024, baby boomers (which the corporate defines as people born between 1946 and 1964) account for about half of total cruise spending.

Unique offers: Cruises are actually also attractive to younger population groups.

Disney Wish, the latest product in The Fleet is capitalizing on the “Frozen” fan base with a singular “Frozen”-themed restaurant that features an Olaf doll, live music (featuring songs from the movie, in fact) and technology like invisible fiber optic cables within the ceiling designed to appear to be Elsa’s magic.

This will not be the one example of unique experiences that may only be had at sea.

The Sun Princess of Princess Cruises offers a cruise version of the Magic Castle, an exclusive Los Angeles club that’s notoriously difficult to get into. The cruise version, called Spellbound by Magic Castle, takes guests through magically themed rooms and serves them sophisticated cocktails. The biggest difference between the Los Angeles version and the cruise version is that the latter is fairly easy to access. All you’ve gotten to do is book a cruise on the Sun Princess and reserve your spot, which implies paying a further $149 for admission.

Other unique Bars on cruise ships include the Skyy Vodka Ice Bar on board certain Norwegian Cruise Line Ships. The entire bar (including seats and glasses) is made entirely of ice.

Further cruises planned

With a lot of the most important cruise lines expanding their fleets, cruise guests now have much more selections. Disney's current fleet of 5 ships is an example of an organization within the midst of massive growth.

New ships joining Disney's fleet include a cruise ship launching in Japan that is predicted to enter service in early 2029. Then, in August 2024, Disney announced 4 more ships that will likely be operational between 2027 and 2031. This means Disney's fleet of 5 ships will grow to 13 by 2031.

The first of those recent ships, Disney Treasure, will make its maiden voyage in December 2024. One of the ship's most highly anticipated features is the Haunted Mansion Parlor, a bar themed after the long-lasting theme park attraction.

Carnival Corporation, the world's largest cruise company, also made waves this 12 months when it announced it will be launching a brand new ship under its namesake Carnival Cruise Line brand. The ship, expected to be accomplished by 2027, is Carnival's first newbuilding order in five years – suggesting the corporate is prepared to speculate again after a lull through the pandemic.

Sure, the pandemic has forged an extended shadow over the cruise industry. But for the long run, the industry appears to be moving forward at full steam.

Originally published: September 18, 2024 at 12:45 p.m.

Nineteen-year-old US Army Pvt. David Lewis set out along with his unit from Fort Dix on a 50-mile hike on February 5, 1976. On that bitterly cold day, he collapsed and died. Autopsy samples unexpectedly returned a positive result for a H1N1 swine flu virus.

Viral disease surveillance at Fort Dix identified an extra 13 cases amongst recruits hospitalized for respiratory illnesses. Additional serum antibody testing revealed that over 200 recruits were infected but not hospitalized with the virus. latest swine strain H1N1.

Alarm bells immediately rang within the epidemiological community: Could Pvt. Lewis' death from H1N1 swine flu be a harbinger of one other global pandemic, just like the terrible H1N1 swine flu pandemic of 1918, by which a an estimated 50 million people worldwide?

The US government reacted quickly. On March 24, 1976, President Gerald Ford announced a plan to “vaccinate every man, woman and child in the United States.” On October 1, 1976 Mass vaccination campaign began.

Meanwhile, the initial small outbreak at Fort Dix had quickly subsided, and there had been no latest cases on the bottom since February. Army Col. Frank Top, who led the investigation into the virus at Fort Dix, later told me, “We had shown pretty conclusively that (the virus) had not crossed over anywhere else but Fort Dix… it disappeared.”

Nevertheless, biomedical scientists world wide are concerned about this outbreak and the huge crash vaccination program within the United States. began research and development programs for H1N1 swine flu vaccines in their very own countries. At the start of the 1976/77 winter season, the world was waiting for – and preparing for – an H1N1 swine flu pandemic that never got here.

But that wasn't the tip of the story. an experienced infectious disease epidemiologistI claim that it unintended consequences of this seemingly prudent but ultimately unnecessary preparations.

What was strange concerning the Russian H1N1 flu pandemic?

In an epidemiological twist, a brand new pandemic influenza virus emerged, nevertheless it was not the expected H1N1 swine virus.

In November 1977, Russian health officials reported that a human, not a swine, strain of H1N1 flu had been discovered in Moscow. By the tip of the month, the disease had been reported throughout the USSR and soon all around the world.

Compared to other varieties of flu this pandemic was strangeFirst, the fatality rate was low, about one-third that of most flu viruses. Second, it repeatedly infected only people under the age of 26. Finally, unlike other newly emerged pandemic flu viruses prior to now, the virus didn’t displace the already dominant H3N2 subtype that caused the seasonal flu this yr. Instead, the 2 flu viruses – the brand new H1N1 and the long-standing H3N2 – circulated alongside one another.

Here the story takes one other turn. Microbiologist Peter Palese applied, which at the moment was a latest technique called RNA oligonucleotide mapping to check the genetic makeup of the brand new Russian flu virus, H1N1. He and his colleagues grew the virus within the lab after which used RNA-cutting enzymes to cut the viral genome into a whole lot of pieces. By distributing the chopped RNA in two dimensions based on size and electrical charge, the RNA fragments created a singular, fingerprint-like patch map.

To Palese's great surprise, it turned out that this “new” virus was essentially similar to older human influenza H1N1 strains which became extinct within the early Nineteen Fifties.

So the 1977 Russian flu virus was actually a strain that had disappeared from the planet 1 / 4 century earlier after which someway got here back into circulation. This explained why it only affected younger people—older people had already been infected and turn out to be immune when the virus was circulating in its earlier form a long time ago.

But how could the older variety turn out to be extinct again?

Refining the timeline of a resurrected virus

Despite its name, the Russian flu probably didn’t begin in Russia. The first published reports of the virus got here from Russia, but later reports from China provided evidence that it had first been detected months earlier, in May and June 1977. within the Chinese port city of Tientsin.

In 2010, scientists used detailed genetic studies on several samples of the 1977 virus to determine the date of their earliest common ancestorThese “molecular clock” data suggest that the virus first infected humans a full yr earlier, in April or May 1976.

So the most effective evidence is that the Russian flu of 1977 actually occurred – or slightly “reoccurred” – in or near Tientsin, China, within the spring of 1976.

A frozen laboratory virus

Was it only a coincidence that inside a couple of months of Private Lewis' death from swine flu H1N1, a previously extinct strain of influenza H1N1 suddenly reappeared within the population?

For years, influenza virologists world wide used freezers to store flu viruses, including people who had turn out to be extinct within the wild. Fear of a brand new H1N1 swine flu pandemic within the United States in 1976 had sparked a world Increase in research into H1N1 viruses and vaccinesThe accidental release of certainly one of these stockpiled viruses would have been entirely possible in any country conducting H1N1 research, including China, Russia, the United States, the United Kingdom, and doubtless other countries.

Years after the disease re-emerged, microbiologist Palese recalled personal conversations he had had with Chi-Ming Chu, the leading Chinese flu expert. Palese wrote in 2004 that “the introduction of the H1N1 virus in 1977 is now considered Result of vaccine trials in the Far East “Several thousand military recruits will be infected with the live H1N1 virus.”

Although it is just not known exactly how such an accidental release could have occurred during a vaccine trial, there are two possibilities. First, scientists could have used the resurrected H1N1 virus as a starting material for the event of a live, subdued H1N1 vaccine. If the virus had not been sufficiently weakened within the vaccine, it might have been transmissible from individual to individual. Another possibility is that researchers used the live, resurrected virus to check the immunity provided by conventional H1N1 vaccines and it unintentionally escaped from the research setting.

Whatever the precise mechanism of release, the mix of the precise location and timing of the pandemic's origin and the status of Chu and Palese as highly credible sources strongly suggests that the Russian flu virus originated from an accidental release in China.

A sobering history lesson

The resurgence of an extinct but dangerous human-adapted H1N1 virus occurred because the world scrambled to stop what was regarded as an imminent outbreak of a swine flu pandemic. People were so anxious about the opportunity of a brand new pandemic that they inadvertently triggered one. It was a pandemic that could be a self-fulfilling prophecy.

I’m not attempting to assign blame here. Rather, my most important argument is that within the epidemiological fog of 1976, when fear of an impending pandemic was growing worldwide, a research unit in any country could have unintentionally released the resurrected virus that may later be called the Russian flu. In the worldwide rush to stop a possible latest pandemic of H1N1 swine flu from Fort Dix through research and vaccination, accidents could have happened anywhere.

Of course, biosecurity facilities and policies have improved dramatically during the last half century. But at the identical time, there was an equally dramatic Proliferation of high-security laboratories world wide.

Overreaction. Unintended consequences. Worsening of the situation. Self-fulfilling prophecy. There are a wide range of terms to explain how the most effective intentions can go awry. The world remains to be reeling from COVID-19 and now faces latest threats from the cross-species spread of avian influenza viruses, mpoxviruses and other viruses. It is critical that we respond quickly to those latest threats to stop one other global disease outbreak. Quickly, but not too quickly, as history shows.

National News

WASHINGTON (AP) — Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg says senior Biden administration officials pressured Facebook to “censor” certain COVID-19 content in the course of the pandemic and vowed the social media giant would fight back if faced with such demands again.

In a letter to Republican Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee Jim Jordan, Zuckerberg claims that officials, including those from the White House, have “repeatedly pressured” Facebook over months to remove “certain COVID-19 content, including humor and satire.”

When the corporate didn’t agree, officials “expressed their deep frustration,” the letter said.

“I believe the government's pressure was wrong and I regret that we did not speak more clearly about this,” Zuckerberg wrote within the Aug. 26 letter, which was posted on the committee's Facebook page and on his X account.

With the letter, Zuckerberg once more turns away from efforts to counter misinformation in regards to the coronavirus pandemic during and after the 2020 presidential election, especially after allegations emerged that some posts were wrongfully deleted or restricted.

“I also think we made some decisions that, in hindsight and with new information, we would not make today,” he said, without elaborating. “We are prepared to fight back if something like this happens again.”

In response, the White House said in an announcement: “In the face of a deadly pandemic, this administration has promoted responsible actions to protect public health and safety. Our position has been clear and consistent: We believe technology companies and other private actors should consider the impact of their actions on the American people while making independent decisions about the information they present.”

Experts warn that this 12 months's U.S. election could possibly be flooded with disinformation on social media, which uses artificial intelligence and other tools to provide false news and content that would mislead voters.

In early 2021, Facebook added labels with what Zuckerberg called “credible information” to posts about COVID-19 vaccines. That got here after Facebook moved to warn users who were spreading misinformation about COVID-19 in April 2020, just because the virus had led to global shutdowns and radical changes to day by day life.

Conservatives have long derided Facebook and other big technology firms for favoring liberal priorities and accused them of censorship.

Zuckerberg has sought to alter right-wing perceptions of the corporate by appearing on podcaster Joe Rogan's show in 2022 and calling Republican candidate Donald Trump's response to an assassination attempt “crass.” He sent his Monday letter to the House Judiciary Committee, whose chairman Jordan is a longtime Trump ally.

Zuckerberg also said he would stop donating money through the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, the corporate that runs the charity for him and his wife, Priscilla Chan, to assist voters access elections.

The couple had previously donated $400 million to assist local election offices prepare for the 2020 presidential election. The funds were used for protective equipment to contain the spread of coronavirus at polling places, drive-in polling stations and equipment to process mail-in ballots.

“I know some people believe this work has benefited one party more than the other,” despite evaluation showing otherwise, he said. “My goal is to remain neutral and not play a role in either direction – or even to appear to play a role. So I don't plan to make a similar contribution this election cycle.”

Americans who felt most vulnerable within the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic viewed Republicans as an infection risk, resulting in greater disgust and avoidance of them—no matter their very own political party. Even Republicans who felt vulnerable became more distrustful of other Republicans. This is a Findings from a study we recently published within the journal American Psychologist and has vital implications for understanding a fundamental feature of human illness psychology.

Many Republican politicians and supporters, in comparison with their Democratic counterparts, downplayed the specter of COVID-19 to public and private health and opposed mask-wearing and social distancing. These attitudes and actions appear to have made political affiliation a brand new indicator of potential infection risk.

This is an example of what scientists call Behavioral immune system at work.

Why it is necessary

Most persons are acquainted with the physiological immune system, which is how your body fights disease after an infection by activating defense mechanisms comparable to fever and cough.

In contrast, your behavioral immune system tries to guard you from infection. It looks for recognizable cues related to an infectious disease – comparable to coughs and other people's open wounds. It then organizes feelings comparable to disgust and behaviors comparable to distancing that show you how to avoid contagious people. These reactions probably occur without conscious awareness or intention.

Scientists have learned lots about this process, but some vital questions remain unanswered. As psychology ResearchersWe were focused on how the behavioral immune system can quickly adapt to recent cues regarding infectivity and changing risks.

How we work

Starting in April 2020, shortly after the primary COVID-19 lockdowns began, our team followed a nationally representative sample of over 1,100 Americans for about eight months. This was a time of great unpredictability, and there was no vaccine.

Every eight weeks, we asked participants in a web-based survey about their motivation to avoid illness and their attitudes toward different groups, including Republicans and Democrats. Because COVID-19 infection rates fluctuated over the eight months of our study, we were in a position to observe changes in the identical person's motivation over time and their evolving views toward political partisans.

We found that Americans who were highly motivated to avoid disease, and whose motivation increased as infection rates rose, perceived Republicans as a greater risk of infection than Democrats. They also reported more dislike and avoidance toward Republicans. These patterns were consistent across respondents' political affiliations, even after accounting for people's strong tendency to favor their very own party and dislike the opposing party.

What other research is being carried out

An unexpected twist gives these findings much more weight.

Previous studies show that Political conservatives are inclined to be more vigilant about disease than political liberals. This vigilance is a approach to protect themselves and their communities from external threats. In addition, Americans are inclined to Favor conservatives in elections during disease outbreaksThe party political response to the COVID-19 pandemic was due to this fact different than expected.

The incontrovertible fact that our respondents used Republican affiliation as an indication of potential infection risk, despite its typically conservative tendencies, shows how flexible the behavioral immune system could be. It was in a position to learn and use a brand new cue of perceived infection risk—on this case, political affiliation—in response to a rapidly changing environment. We also saw that the behavioral immune system can adapt to real-world changes in infection risk over time.

If you thought COVID was a thing of the past, reassess as case numbers rise this summer. The entire Bay Area appears to be catching the virus at once.

Local data shows the virus is spreading rapidly in San Jose and most communities within the Bay Area and California. But despite near-record high levels of COVID in wastewater and rising positivity rates, other metrics show much has modified, confirming the virus shouldn’t be nearly as deadly because it once was before vaccines and coverings became widely available.

Wastewater data for San Jose shows the virus in the town's sewers reached a near-record level this week, lower than a tenth of a percent below the previous record set in the course of the first omicron surge in January 2022. Santa Clara County's three other sewers – Palo Alto, Sunnyvale and Gilroy – have also had high COVID levels because the first days of July.

COVID levels are also rising within the East Bay as more people contract the virus. Public health officials in Alameda County said this week that sewage was showing a spike within the virus and urged people to take precautions.

Statewide, the COVID positivity rate, or the share of COVID tests that come back positive, began to spike in June. On June 1, the positivity rate was 4.1%. By July 1, it had greater than doubled to 10.6%, in keeping with data released Friday. The state is now lower than a percentage point below where it was in the course of the COVID surge this winter, when it reached just over 11%.

The wastewater data shows what doctors and medical professionals see each day.

“We're clearly seeing a surge in cases now,” said Dr. John Swartzberg, clinical professor emeritus of infectious diseases and vaccinology at UC Berkeley's School of Public Health. “We're seeing a sharp increase in positive tests, a sharp increase in emergency room visits, a sharp increase in hospitalizations. All of that tells us there are a lot of cases of COVID.”

“This is the most intense time we have been dealing with COVID since the winter wave, but we are in better shape compared to last year,” he said.

While the threat has turn out to be negligible for most individuals, Swartzberg worries about those that are most in danger.

“The message I want to get across to the public is that there is a lot of COVID going around,” he said. “If you are at high risk, you need to take precautions.”

This includes getting vaccinated if you will have not received one recently.

This is consistent with observations recently made at Dr. Peter Chin-Hong, a medical professor specializing in infectious diseases at UC San Francisco, at his hospital.

“The data has been consistent for about a year. The people in hospital are generally older than 75 or have very weakened immune systems,” he said.

And they’ve something else in common: “No one I have seen has received the vaccine since it came out in the fall.”

A brand new vaccine was released last fall, and high-risk individuals can and may get a booster shot between latest annual vaccinations, Swartzberg said. If you're within the high-risk groups, it's not too late to get a booster this summer, and also you'll still be eligible for a brand new shot in the autumn.

The now annual reformulation of the COVID vaccine is predicted in August or September and, after some backwards and forwards between the FDA and its vaccine advisory committee, can be based on considered one of the newer FLiRT variants.

While those at high risk could also be taking precautions during this summer's surge, there are some reassuring numbers that show COVID is a special beast now than it was within the early days of the pandemic in 2020.

And while deaths have increased barely in recent weeks, COVID has accounted for under about 1% of California deaths since late June, essentially the most recent data available. That's still much lower than the three.5% in January of this yr in the course of the winter wave, and much lower than January 2021, the primary winter wave, when 40% of all California deaths were on account of COVID.

Before this summer surge, the proportion of deaths on account of Covid had reached a brand new low, remaining well below one percent since March of this yr, the bottom consistent figure because the pandemic began.

“I think what people don't understand right now is that you can easily catch COVID,” said Swartzberg, who has began eating outdoors and wearing masks more often indoors. “It's almost a perfect storm of incredibly contagious variants, a population that's not taking precautions and waning immunity.”

Moderna will receive $176 million to develop a pandemic flu vaccine for humans following a worrying outbreak of bird flu in dairy cows across the country, federal officials announced Tuesday.

“We have successfully leveraged lessons learned during the COVID-19 pandemic to better prepare for future health crises,” Health Secretary Xavier Becerra said in a press release on Tuesday. “As we do so, we continue to develop new vaccines and other tools to fight influenza and strengthen our pandemic response capabilities.”

The federal funds will go toward late-stage development of an mRNA-based vaccine against influenza that uses similar technology to the COVID-19 vaccine and is meant to hurry up the response to similar future public health threats, Moderna said Tuesday. The company is already working on developing the vaccine, and if early results are positive, development could move into late-stage testing next yr.

Bird flu, an H5N1 variant of the flu, is a highly contagious type of viral infection. An outbreak of the virus was first reported in several states in late March, in keeping with the CDC. This was the primary time that bird flu virus was detected in cows.

The CDC continues to take care of that “the current risk to the general population from avian influenza viruses is low,” although the geographic spread of infection in dairy cows “may create additional opportunities for humans to be exposed to these viruses.” Mammal-to-mammal transmission of the virus is believed to be rare.

Mammals can change into infected with the disease by “eating infected birds, poultry, or other animals and/or being exposed to an environment contaminated with the virus,” the CDC says.

The federal funding for the vaccine comes from the Department of Health and Human Services' Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), a program focused on developing countermeasures to public health threats. The department's press release said the funds would also help “support a fair pricing arrangement that continues to ensure equitable access to vaccines on an ongoing basis.”

The mRNA technology used to develop the COVID-19 vaccine offers “advantages in terms of efficacy, speed of development, and scalability and reliability of production,” said Stéphane Bancel, CEO of Moderna, on Tuesday.

The company said it began collecting safety and other data on the vaccine in healthy adults ages 18 and older in 2023. Results are expected in 2024 and can “feed into Phase 3 development plans,” Moderna added.

Federal officials stressed that the event of vaccine technology enables a faster response to potential recent threats.

“Adding this technology to our pandemic influenza toolkit will give us more flexibility and speed to respond to the strains in circulation and their potential variants,” said Dawn O'Connell, undersecretary of state for preparedness and response.