Omicron anecdata?

[mommyoffive]

The Pandemic’s Soft Closing (msn.com)

The most recent pivots are not likely to spark a wave of behavioral change: Many people already weren’t quarantining after exposures, or routinely being tested by their schools or workplaces, or keeping six feet apart. But shifting guidance could still portend trouble long-term. One of the CDC’s main impetuses for change appears to have been nudging its guidance closer to what the public has felt the status quo should be—a seemingly backward position to adopt. Policies are what normalize behaviors, says Daniel Goldberg, a public-health ethicist at the University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus. If that process begins to operate in reverse—“if you always just permit what people are doing to set your policies, guaranteed, you’re going to preserve the status quo.” Now, as recommendations repeatedly describe rather than influence behavior, the country is locked into a “circular feedback loop we can’t seem to get out of,” Ganapathi told me. The policies weaken; people lose interest in following them, spurring officials to slacken even more. That trend in and of itself is perhaps another form of surrender to individualism, in following the choices of single citizens rather than leading the way to a reality that’s better for us all.

No matter how people are acting at this crossroads, this closing won’t work in the way the administration might hope. We can’t, right now, entirely shut the door on the pandemic—certainly not if the overarching goal is to help Americans “move to a point where COVID-19 no longer severely disrupts our daily lives,” as Massetti noted in a press release. Maybe that would be an option “if we were genuinely at a point in this pandemic where cases didn’t matter,” says Jason Salemi, an epidemiologist at the University of South Florida. Relaxed guidance would be genuinely less “disruptive” if more people, both in this country and others, were up to date on their vaccines, or if SARS-CoV-2 was far less capable of sparking severe disease and long COVID didn’t exist. 

Layered onto this reality, however, chiller guidelines will only spur further transmission, Planey told me, upending school and workplace schedules, delaying care in medical settings, and seeding more long-term disability. For much of the pandemic, a contingent of people has been working to advance the narrative that “the measures to prevent transmission are the cause of disruption,” Stanford’s Salomon told me; vanishing those mitigations, then, would purport to rid the country of the burdens the past couple years have brought. But unfettered viral spread can wreak widespread havoc as well.

Right now, the country has been walking down an interminable plateau of coronavirus cases and deaths—the latter stubbornly hovering just under 500, a number that the country has, by virtue of its behaviors or lack thereof, implicitly decided is just fine. “It’s much lower than we’ve been, but it’s not a trivial number,” Salemi told me. Held at this rate, the U.S.’s annual COVID death toll could be about 150,000—three times the mortality burden of the worst influenza season of the past decade. And the country has little guarantee that the current mortality average will even hold. Immunity provides a buffer against severe disease. But that protection may be impermanent, especially as the virus continues to shapeshift, abetted by unchecked international spread. Should the autumn bring with it yet another spike in cases, long COVID, hospitalizations, and deaths, the country will need to be flexible and responsive enough to pivot back to more strictness, which the administration is setting Americans up poorly to do.

Acceptance of the present might presage acceptance of a future that’s worse—not just with SARS-CoV-2 but with any other public-health threat. Months on end of weakening guidelines have entrenched “this idea that mitigation can only be dialed in one direction, which is down,” Salomon told me. If and when conditions worsen, the rules may not tighten to accommodate, because the public has not been inured to the idea that they should. “If it’s going to be 600 deaths a day soon,” or perhaps far more, Ganapathi told me, “I won’t be surprised if we find a way to rationalize that too.”

Edited August 16, 2022 by mommyoffive

[mommyoffive]

First lady Jill Biden tests positive for coronavirus (msn.com)

[KSera]

35 minutes ago, mommyoffive said:

The Pandemic’s Soft Closing (msn.com)

😔

[SHP]

3 hours ago, TexasProud said:

Ok, most of the world is not like the Hive who does all of this obscure research and finds all of these "experts" and such that you quote on here.

The experts in my life are the doctors in  my life as well as the doctors my husband knows/we know.  I mean if the doctors you know will not give you accurate advice...then what.  That is what "normal" people listen to. That and what the CDC/government tells you. I am tired of being pulled between this board and what real life tells me. I am just done.  I need to put blocking software on my computer or something cause I can't stop myself sometime. But I am so tired of living online.

 

In my social circle most people do MORE research than what is being posted here. 

I go to my doctors for their specialty. None of my doctor's are Virologists. None study covid in relation to their specialty. None can do more than quote other studies about what is known about risks for people with certain underlying medical conditions.

No one knows if they will encounter someone who will end up with long covid or potentially die. Wearing a mask properly at all times, no mask breaks in the bathroom, is a small thing to do to reduce transmission and viral load. I hope you don't catch it a second time. I hope you don't end up with long covid. I hope everyone you know is unaffected by a death, bankruptcy from prolonged hospital stays and disability. 

I live in a state that has worked to keep data from the public. The county dropped mask mandates ages ago because of threats to them and their families. The mayor of my city dropped it early as well, but wasn't following the mandates anyway. The local hospitals have covid date and press releases about a rise in admissions, the media rarely acknowledges them anymore. They are still begging for mask mandates. 

It is difficult, but not impossible to find information about community transmission rates because the health departments are scared of lawsuits, of the threats to their and their families personal safety for reporting facts. I was finally able to find a couple of dashboards. One for all the local hospitals on admissions and deaths and one from my city. My city has transmission at high. Yet no masks and no behavior changes. Why? Because people are tired. People want to convince themselves that because they didn't have it bad, it isn't that bad. Or that the casualty rate is acceptable. Or whatever. I get being tired. I really do. I am so over the pandemic. I gave up on a career that paid really well to protect my loved ones. I want my old normal back. I don't mind the online interaction, but I miss coffee with friends, game nights, and date nights. 

 

[KSera]

Some thing I’m noticing with the current really weak CDC guidelines, is that people and organizations seem to be leaning into them where it suits them, but ignoring them where it doesn’t. People are all in on the five day return to work or school with no testing: “The CDC says!” Yet lots of the country is currently in the high transmission zone that the CDC says means that everybody should be masking up, and almost nowhere is requiring that nor are the vast majority of people masking most places right now. Either you’re following the CDC guidelines or you’re not. Don’t pretend you’re doing things because CDC says if you’re not doing any of the other things they also say.

[kbutton]

5 hours ago, TexasProud said:

Ok, most of the world is not like the Hive who does all of this obscure research and finds all of these "experts" and such that you quote on here.

The experts in my life are the doctors in  my life as well as the doctors my husband knows/we know.  I mean if the doctors you know will not give you accurate advice...then what.  That is what "normal" people listen to. That and what the CDC/government tells you. I am tired of being pulled between this board and what real life tells me. I am just done.  I need to put blocking software on my computer or something cause I can't stop myself sometime. But I am so tired of living online.

That is true. 

A lot of people in the medical community are cavalier about some things that they see all the time. Others are not. I am sure local culture influences that. I feel like it's similar to dealing with teachers in school--some raise the alarm about everything and wear a parent out, and other teachers don't worry about anything and are okay with a kid struggling while the parent tries to wear the teacher out with getting help for their child. Most teachers, thankfully, are in-between! 

Just like with your kids and their school issues, you have to decide what level of risk you want to accept and live it out. 

I think people are concerned that if you are talking about flu rates, they want you to make your decision based on the best information, not a snapshot that shows only part of the picture. What you do with that information is really up to you, and I don't mean that in a snotty way at all. It's just that people here will not let you think that a snapshot is the full picture. Our family has in mind that we'll return to some form of nearly normal when/if Covid is like the flu, but we feel that it's not that way yet for many of the reasons mentioned here. 

We are choosing to accept more risk than in the last 2.5 years, but we're still masking everywhere. We have founds masks to be really effective. We cannot help that our son will have to eat at school, and we are unwilling to continue homeschooling him, largely because of Covid (we lost most of the community we had). 

I think you like to have people agree, but people here will contextualize any facts shared, and it does muddy the waters if you were feeling pretty good before reading these threads. That doesn't mean that you have to modify your course of action.

I am sorry it's so stressful. We have big decisions to make if we want to see certain family members again (they don't live nearby, so any visiting requires close contact). It's really hard.

[Corraleno]

5 hours ago, TexasProud said:

Ok, most of the world is not like the Hive who does all of this obscure research and finds all of these "experts" and such that you quote on here.

The experts in my life are the doctors in  my life as well as the doctors my husband knows/we know.  I mean if the doctors you know will not give you accurate advice...then what.  That is what "normal" people listen to. That and what the CDC/government tells you. I am tired of being pulled between this board and what real life tells me. I am just done.  I need to put blocking software on my computer or something cause I can't stop myself sometime. But I am so tired of living online.

The fact that someone went to med school 20 or 30 years ago does not mean they know anything at all about epidemiology or virology. I have been given "inaccurate advice" (to put it politely) so many times by so many different doctors I could write a whole thread about it — the idea that the best person to provide expert advice on protecting myself from a brand new, rapidly-mutating virus that has killed millions of people in a worldwide pandemic would be my local GP seems like a joke. And it's not like the last 2.5 years haven't provided numerous examples of doctors displaying their total lack of understanding in very public ways while spreading misinformation and pushing bogus treatments. And yet you put "experts" in quotes when referring to scientists who actually are experts in those fields, whose research has been published in peer reviewed journals and covered in mainstream (not "obscure") publications.

Obviously you should make your own decisions about mitigation measures and choose whichever "experts" you feel comfortable listening to. And, believe it or not, you can actually do that without having to continually insist that people who make different decisions must be wrong because that's not what "normal" people in your part of Texas do.

 

[kbutton]

7 minutes ago, Corraleno said:

The fact that someone went to med school 20 or 30 years ago does not mean they know anything at all about epidemiology or virology. I have been given "inaccurate advice" (to put it politely) so many times by so many different doctors I could write a whole thread about it

True!

Or even if they went to med school recently. It's astounding how often they don't know what they don't know and don't course correct. 

My DH doesn't get his underwear in a wad when his POV is limited--he tries to give disclaimers. More in the medical field need to learn to do that. At the same time, when his expertise is relevant, and people close to us disdain it (or medical people taking care of a family member ignores it), he sees it as a problem.

I don't really even think it's usually arrogance; medical people hang with medical people for the most part, and from my view of the community, it's not the most self-aware group of people I've ever seen. I mean, they don't even really seem to understand that people who do 80% of what they do but get paid half of what they get paid might not appreciate hearing them stress about their kids' ACT scores and scholarship opportunities or hear them worry about paying their mortgage on their wine cave house in the gated community. It would be hilarious if it weren't so in-your-face annoying, lol! For the record, we do some providers who are a bit more self-aware as well.

[wathe]

Doctors are people.  I feel that bears repeating on this board  (where there is often trend toward doctor-bashing/doctors are idiots threads, and at the same time, lots of magical thinking about doctors as a special group.)

They come in all the same flavours that regular people do.  Some are great at their job.  Some aren't.  Some love their job.  Some hate it. Some are self-aware, some really, really aren't.  Some are greedy or grifters.  Some are selfless.  Some have personality disorders, mental illness, addictions, bad marriages, are victims of domestic violence, are perpetrators of domestic violence.......all the general afflictions of humanity affect doctors too.  Some are very knowledgable about covid.  Some aren't.  Some are heavily influenced by their politics.  Some are heavily influenced by peer-pressure and social pressure; some are independent thinkers and resistant to social pressure.  Just people.

(I am somewhat sensitive about this topic.)

[kbutton]

23 minutes ago, wathe said:

Doctors are people.  I feel that bears repeating on this board  (where there is often trend toward doctor-bashing/doctors are idiots threads, and at the same time, lots of magical thinking about doctors as a special group.)

They come in all the same flavours that regular people do.  Some are great at their job.  Some aren't.  Some love their job.  Some hate it. Some are self-aware, some really, really aren't.  Some are greedy or grifters.  Some are selfless.  Some have personality disorders, mental illness, addictions, bad marriages, are victims of domestic violence, are perpetrators of domestic violence.......all the general afflictions of humanity affect doctors too.  Some are very knowledgable about covid.  Some aren't.  Some are heavily influenced by their politics.  Some are heavily influenced by peer-pressure and social pressure; some are independent thinkers and resistant to social pressure.  Just people.

(I am somewhat sensitive about this topic.)

I can remove my post if it's rubbing you the wrong way, and I won't be offended at all. I am not trying to slam doctors specifically but to demonstrate what you said above, actually.

I am having a bad medical people day. I am looking for a provider that doesn't have multiple levels of gatekeeping for their complicated patients because gatekeeping can end a life when the ER fails to respond. We had a horrid ER experience beyond our control. Gatekeeping made a pediatrician visit difficult and basically worthless after the ER failed to act. It took a week to get our son's emergent condition diagnosed, and it was outpatient bloodwork that finally got things rolling; bloodwork that was time sensitive and that the pediatrician would've likely ordered for us before we came in (Friday afternoon--places were closing) if we had been allowed to talk to him or if the office people would've been willing to stop him for a moment and ask a question. So we are looking for a new practice. Today a nurse from a potential practice spent a long time on the phone telling me that what happened to my family this summer wouldn't happen to her or her family because she'd be a better advocate than we were for my son. The hubris. As if we didn't try everything short of lying down in front of the door to get him treatment!!! Meanwhile, I told her that DH sees patients all the time that are in his ER because their condition was missed the first time, it's still emergent, but they aren't having the same symptoms anymore--they are easily overlooked. A nurse should know that emergent things don't always kill you on the spot--it can take a while and still be an emergency. Delayed treatment can maim and kill. Symptoms don't always remain acute.

My grandmother got really iffy care for a heart attack this weekend as well. ETA: We don't live anywhere close to her, so the lack of care is widespread.

Being married to a mid-level provides an interesting seat because hands are tied relative to a doctor (even more so because he's a PA and not an NP, and the laws are kind of random about where their scope of practice differs, but both have some limitations on placing bloodwork orders or Rxing for family members that doctors do not face) but yet, the missed diagnosis for my son is bread and butter for him, and the doctors chose not to listen to him (and my son's symptoms were classic).

I have similar things to say about nurses as I do about doctors, who often get a pass straight to sainthood, lol! They also are people with varying levels of interest and competence on the job.  

Edited August 16, 2022 by kbutton

[Malory]

2 hours ago, Corraleno said:

Obviously you should make your own decisions about mitigation measures and choose whichever "experts" you feel comfortable listening to. And, believe it or not, you can actually do that without having to continually insist that people who make different decisions must be wrong because that's not what "normal" people in your part of Texas do.

I agree that we should make our own decisions, including choosing which experts to trust. But I don't see anything in TexasProud's posts that suggests she thinks others are making the wrong decisions for themselves. I think many people who participate in the covid threads on this board live with vulnerable family members, so they tend to be more cautious than the general population. Boardies who aren't high risk or living with high risk individuals don't seem to participate much, but that doesn't mean they are a minority. Many of them probably live "normal" lives like TP observes.

[Corraleno]

37 minutes ago, Malory said:

I agree that we should make our own decisions, including choosing which experts to trust. But I don't see anything in TexasProud's posts that suggests she thinks others are making the wrong decisions for themselves. I think many people who participate in the covid threads on this board live with vulnerable family members, so they tend to be more cautious than the general population. Boardies who aren't high risk or living with high risk individuals don't seem to participate much, but that doesn't mean they are a minority. Many of them probably live "normal" lives like TP observes.

She has made many many posts, since fairly early in the pandemic, expressing difficulty in resolving the very large gap between what people here in the Hive say and do, and what people in her community say and do. She has expressed her frustration, over and over, at being the only one in her community following the precautions she sees recommended here, when everyone around her has been living life as normal while she misses out. 

The constant repetition of this theme suggests that what she she really wants is for people here to agree that covid is no longer any more dangerous than the flu, so life can totally go back to normal, and that those of us continuing to take serious precautions are just being super, extra, over-the-top cautious and overthinking everything because we're reading "obscure research" and listening to "experts" that probably don't know any more than her local GP. She wants there to be a consensus, here and IRL, so she can stop worrying about whether she's making the "right" choices.

But there is no "right" choice that everyone can agree will provide the best balance of risk and reward, because that balance will be different for every family. It's a gamble, there's no way around that, and she needs to decide for herself what level of risk she's comfortable with — and then be willing to own her choice in the knowledge that she made the best decision she could with the information she had available at the time. And she can do that without having to convince herself that the no-mask, no-mitigation folks in her corner of Texas are the "normal" ones while those who make decisions based on "obscure research" are just overly fearful and probably out of touch with reality.

[wathe]

10 hours ago, kbutton said:

I can remove my post if it's rubbing you the wrong way, and I won't be offended at all. I am not trying to slam doctors specifically but to demonstrate what you said above, actually.

 

No worries!  All good. 

[wathe]

I should add:  Even covid experts aren't experts about all aspects of covid.  There are different domains of covid expertise, and no one person is an expert in all of them.

Clinical care, epidemiology, infectious disease, public health, IPAC, occupational health and safety, virology, immunology, vaccine development, aerosol science - an expert may be expert in one of these domains, and may overlap with others, but nobody is an expert in all of them.

Even within domains, an expert may only be expert in his or her particular niche. For example, clinical care: An adult intensivist is an expert in caring for adult patients with critical illness, but may not have a clue about how best to manage his own mild or moderately ill toddler.  An infectious disease MD is an expert in managing covid treatment, but not at managing the whole patient and all their co-morbidities and complications from covid (ARDS, multi-organ failure, myocarditis, stroke, the list goes on).

 

 

[kbutton]

8 hours ago, wathe said:

Even within domains, an expert may only be expert in his or her particular niche. For example, clinical care: An adult intensivist is an expert in caring for adult patients with critical illness, but may not have a clue about how best to manage his own mild or moderately ill toddler. 

Ironically, the ones who know this about themselves are the ones I would most trust to give me straight advice--sometimes over the ones who are technically qualified to do xyz but are also just guessing about how to do xyz themselves due to some unusual aspect of xyz.

My kid breezed past zebra status this summer on to unicorn or pegasus status, so we experienced a lot of this. We felt most confident when the experts tossed up their hands, were honest that they didn't know, and then said what they were doing to monitor the situation.

[Arcadia]

@Laura Corin@Ausmumof3@kbutton Study looks at BCG vaccine, COVID protection for people with type 1 diabetes

https://hms.harvard.edu/news/tb-drug-vs-covid

(ETA: study link https://www.cell.com/cell-reports-medicine/fulltext/S2666-3791(22)00271-3)

”Researchers at Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital have published a new paper in Cell Reports Medicine demonstrating the protective potential of multiple doses of the bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG) tuberculosis vaccine against COVID-19 and other infectious diseases.

In a double-blind, placebo-controlled study of patients with type 1 diabetes conducted at the start of the pandemic, before COVID-specific vaccines were available, the researchers found that 12.5 percent of placebo-treated individuals and 1 percent of BCG-treated individuals met criteria for confirmed COVID-19, yielding a vaccine effectiveness of 92 percent.

The BCG-vaccinated group also displayed protective effects against other infectious diseases, including fewer symptoms, lesser severity and fewer infectious disease events per patient. No BCG-related systemic adverse events occurred.

BCG’s broad-based infection protection suggests that, in addition to current SARS-CoV-2 variants, it may potentially provide protection against new SARS-CoV-2 variants and other pathogens.

The researchers are hoping the results will spur a larger scale study of the effects of the BCG vaccine in patients with type 1 diabetes, considered among the most vulnerable groups at risk for severe COVID-19.”

Edited August 17, 2022 by Arcadia

[YaelAldrich]

12 minutes ago, Arcadia said:

@Laura Corin@Ausmumof3@kbutton Study looks at BCG vaccine, COVID protection for people with type 1 diabetes

https://hms.harvard.edu/news/tb-drug-vs-covid

”Researchers at Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital have published a new paper in Cell Reports Medicine demonstrating the protective potential of multiple doses of the bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG) tuberculosis vaccine against COVID-19 and other infectious diseases.

In a double-blind, placebo-controlled study of patients with type 1 diabetes conducted at the start of the pandemic, before COVID-specific vaccines were available, the researchers found that 12.5 percent of placebo-treated individuals and 1 percent of BCG-treated individuals met criteria for confirmed COVID-19, yielding a vaccine effectiveness of 92 percent.

The BCG-vaccinated group also displayed protective effects against other infectious diseases, including fewer symptoms, lesser severity and fewer infectious disease events per patient. No BCG-related systemic adverse events occurred.

BCG’s broad-based infection protection suggests that, in addition to current SARS-CoV-2 variants, it may potentially provide protection against new SARS-CoV-2 variants and other pathogens.

The researchers are hoping the results will spur a larger scale study of the effects of the BCG vaccine in patients with type 1 diabetes, considered among the most vulnerable groups at risk for severe COVID-19.”

Dang!  When we lived in Japan the kids had the option of the BCG but I didn't want the kids to always have to explain why they would get a positive reaction in the US (if you are immunized you react to the TB test).

[KSera]

16 minutes ago, Arcadia said:

@Laura Corin@Ausmumof3@kbutton Study looks at BCG vaccine, COVID protection for people with type 1 diabetes

https://hms.harvard.edu/news/tb-drug-vs-covid

”Researchers at Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital have published a new paper in Cell Reports Medicine demonstrating the protective potential of multiple doses of the bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG) tuberculosis vaccine against COVID-19 and other infectious diseases.

In a double-blind, placebo-controlled study of patients with type 1 diabetes conducted at the start of the pandemic, before COVID-specific vaccines were available, the researchers found that 12.5 percent of placebo-treated individuals and 1 percent of BCG-treated individuals met criteria for confirmed COVID-19, yielding a vaccine effectiveness of 92 percent.

The BCG-vaccinated group also displayed protective effects against other infectious diseases, including fewer symptoms, lesser severity and fewer infectious disease events per patient. No BCG-related systemic adverse events occurred.

BCG’s broad-based infection protection suggests that, in addition to current SARS-CoV-2 variants, it may potentially provide protection against new SARS-CoV-2 variants and other pathogens.

The researchers are hoping the results will spur a larger scale study of the effects of the BCG vaccine in patients with type 1 diabetes, considered among the most vulnerable groups at risk for severe COVID-19.”

Wow! I’ll have to go back and look at the actual study, but I’m curious if this has broader implications beyond people with type one diabetes. 92% vaccine effectiveness is better than the Covid specific vaccines are doing against current variants. 

[Arcadia]

6 minutes ago, YaelAldrich said:

(if you are immunized you react to the TB test).

Out of 3 of us who had BCG shots, only I have a nearly positive test for the skin prick test. They can always do the blood test to confirm. DS17 was tested at 3 years old and didn’t react to the TB test. DH last BCG booster was when he was 15 and his TB test was when he was 35, no reaction either. Mine is same time line as my husband. 

[Arcadia]

5 minutes ago, KSera said:

Wow! I’ll have to go back and look at the actual study, but I’m curious if this has broader implications beyond people with type one diabetes. 92% vaccine effectiveness is better than the Covid specific vaccines are doing against current variants. 

Study link https://www.cell.com/cell-reports-medicine/fulltext/S2666-3791(22)00271-3

[kbutton]

1 hour ago, KSera said:

Wow! I’ll have to go back and look at the actual study, but I’m curious if this has broader implications beyond people with type one diabetes. 

Me too. I have a couple of immune compromised friends, and some of us are at higher risk as well.

[Laura Corin]

1 hour ago, KSera said:

Wow! I’ll have to go back and look at the actual study, but I’m curious if this has broader implications beyond people with type one diabetes. 92% vaccine effectiveness is better than the Covid specific vaccines are doing against current variants. 

I wonder if it's only earlier variants - from the study timeline. We all had the BCG. Husband and I have not caught Covid, but both kids caught Omicron. 

[KSera]

5 minutes ago, Laura Corin said:

I wonder if it's only earlier variants - from the study timeline. We all had the BCG. Husband and I have not caught Covid, but both kids caught Omicron. 

I was wondering that as well after looking at Hong Kong covid numbers. They had next to nothing there and ultra low death rates until omicron. I don't know all the countries where it has been given though. It seems like a dramatic difference would have been noticed for the first two years of the pandemic if it was offering 92% protection in those countries.

[Arcadia]

15 minutes ago, Laura Corin said:

I wonder if it's only earlier variants - from the study timeline. We all had the BCG. Husband and I have not caught Covid, but both kids caught Omicron. 

 

8 minutes ago, KSera said:

I was wondering that as well after looking at Hong Kong covid numbers. They had next to nothing there and ultra low death rates until omicron. I don't know all the countries where it has been given though. It seems like a dramatic difference would have been noticed for the first two years of the pandemic if it was offering 92% protection in those countries.

On top of the covid variant issue, the BCG vaccines are different in different countries. Still it is worth researching on since many countries produce BCG vaccine so less of a supply issue if it does gives an immunity boost.

Licensed Bacille Calmette-Guérin (BCG) formulations differ markedly in bacterial viability, RNA content and innate immune activation

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X19316147
“Highlights

 

BCG, given to millions of infants, induces both specific and heterologous effects.

BCG viability is important for vaccine-induced immunogenicity & protection in vivo.

We compared licensed BCGs produced by different manufacturers head-to-head.

We found marked variability in the content of live mycobacteria across BCGs.

BCG viability correlates with immunostimulatory capacity in human blood in vitro.

Identification of optimal BCG formulations for early life immunization is needed.

 

“

[Laura Corin]

57 minutes ago, KSera said:

I was wondering that as well after looking at Hong Kong covid numbers. They had next to nothing there and ultra low death rates until omicron. I don't know all the countries where it has been given though. It seems like a dramatic difference would have been noticed for the first two years of the pandemic if it was offering 92% protection in those countries.

It would have been the Hong Kong vaccine that we had.

[Ausmumof3]

5 hours ago, Arcadia said:

@Laura Corin@Ausmumof3@kbutton Study looks at BCG vaccine, COVID protection for people with type 1 diabetes

https://hms.harvard.edu/news/tb-drug-vs-covid

(ETA: study link https://www.cell.com/cell-reports-medicine/fulltext/S2666-3791(22)00271-3)

”Researchers at Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital have published a new paper in Cell Reports Medicine demonstrating the protective potential of multiple doses of the bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG) tuberculosis vaccine against COVID-19 and other infectious diseases.

In a double-blind, placebo-controlled study of patients with type 1 diabetes conducted at the start of the pandemic, before COVID-specific vaccines were available, the researchers found that 12.5 percent of placebo-treated individuals and 1 percent of BCG-treated individuals met criteria for confirmed COVID-19, yielding a vaccine effectiveness of 92 percent.

The BCG-vaccinated group also displayed protective effects against other infectious diseases, including fewer symptoms, lesser severity and fewer infectious disease events per patient. No BCG-related systemic adverse events occurred.

BCG’s broad-based infection protection suggests that, in addition to current SARS-CoV-2 variants, it may potentially provide protection against new SARS-CoV-2 variants and other pathogens.

The researchers are hoping the results will spur a larger scale study of the effects of the BCG vaccine in patients with type 1 diabetes, considered among the most vulnerable groups at risk for severe COVID-19.”

Wow! That seems like it’s doing better than the MRA vaccines? 

[Arcadia]

3 minutes ago, Ausmumof3 said:

Wow! That seems like it’s doing better than the MRA vaccines? 

The study started at the start of the pandemic and lasted 15 months. So while it looks promising, I don’t think anyone knows how it holds up against omicron.
If it doesn’t reduce infection for omicron but does reduce severity, that to me would be better that getting another covid vaccine booster now. As in getting a BCG booster would make more sense while waiting for an improved covid vaccine booster.

[bookbard]

Interesting, I had the BCG done in the late 90s (and polio booster, and Jap Encephilitis) . . . hope it still works!

[Katy]

My mom said she heard on the news last night thar the CDC guidelines might change again to two negative rapid antigen tests. She didn’t hear the whole conversation and I can’t find anything about it with google. I was wondering if anyone knows about this or if they mean only in people treated with Paxlovid. 

[Arcadia]

11 minutes ago, Katy said:

My mom said she heard on the news last night thar the CDC guidelines might change again to two negative rapid antigen tests. She didn’t hear the whole conversation and I can’t find anything about it with google. I was wondering if anyone knows about this or if they mean only in people treated with Paxlovid. 

https://www.nbcboston.com/news/local/new-massachusetts-covid-quarantine-guidelines-what-to-do-if-you-test-positive/2809171/?amp=1

“After you have ended isolation, you'll also need to wear a mask through day 10, per the guidelines. The CDC also notes, however, that if you have access to antigen tests, "you should consider using them."

"With two sequential negative tests 48 hours apart, you may remove your mask sooner than day 10," the guidance states, adding that if your antigen test results are positive, "you may still be infectious."

Those who continue to test positive shouldn't stop following other precautions.

"You should continue wearing a mask and wait at least 48 hours before taking another test," the CDC recommends. "Continue taking antigen tests at least 48 hours apart until you have two sequential negative results. This may mean you need to continue wearing a mask and testing beyond day 10."

If your symptoms worsen or return after you end isolation, you'll need to restart your isolation at day 0, per the guidelines.”

[Arcadia]

@Katy

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7133e1.htm
“Persons who have access to antigen tests and who choose to use testing to determine when they can discontinue masking should wait to take the first test until at least day 6 and they are without a fever for ≥24 hours without the use of fever-reducing medication and all other symptoms have improved. Use of two antigen tests with ≥48 hours between tests provides more reliable information because of improved test sensitivity (24). Two consecutive test results must be negative for persons to discontinue masking. If either test result is positive, persons should continue to wear a mask around others and continue testing every 48 hours until they have two sequential negative results.****”

[KSera]

It’s still really of note to me that they say people need to continue staying away from people at high risk until day 11. How does this work in the real world? Kids are going back to school after 5 days. Unless the school tells everyone high risk they can’t come, Covid positive people will be around high risk people from days 6-10. This is compounded by the CDC removing guidance that high risk people in schools should be notified if they are exposed.  None of it is consistent.  

[Arcadia]

40 minutes ago, KSera said:

It’s still really of note to me that they say people need to continue staying away from people at high risk until day 11. How does this work in the real world? Kids are going back to school after 5 days. Unless the school tells everyone high risk they can’t come, Covid positive people will be around high risk people from days 6-10. This is compounded by the CDC removing guidance that high risk people in schools should be notified if they are exposed.  None of it is consistent.  

It is probably inconsistent because the CDC is probably thinking of the economy and feasibility when coming up with the guidelines. Their priority is likely hospitalization levels. 
As for school and work, it likely comes down to the honor code and practicality now. My dad who had covid recently last month would not have test if he wasn’t meeting my cousin’s family for dinner, he had a very mild cough. I don’t think an hourly wage worker or a student would test for a mild cold. 

[Mom_to3]

43 minutes ago, KSera said:

It’s still really of note to me that they say people need to continue staying away from people at high risk until day 11. How does this work in the real world? Kids are going back to school after 5 days. Unless the school tells everyone high risk they can’t come, Covid positive people will be around high risk people from days 6-10. This is compounded by the CDC removing guidance that high risk people in schools should be notified if they are exposed.  None of it is consistent.  

I wish the media were to highlight this aspect of the guidelines (so stay home until day 11, except possibly for meetings with your low risk cousin Betty)! Of course all that people hear is that all is fine after 5 days.

Aren't there also guidelines that high risk people should keep isolating until day 10? Why is that important/help  considering that they already have covid? Does it give an excuse to ask for more time off from work?

Edited August 17, 2022 by Mom_to3

[KSera]

1 minute ago, Mom_to3 said:

I wish the media were to highlight this aspect of the guidelines (so wear a mask everywhere in public until day 11, except possibly with your low risk cousin Betty)! Of course all that people hear is that all is fine after 5 days.

I agree they have not been putting any attention on this at all. I only know about it from reading the guidelines myself. And the guidelines don’t even say to only mask around high-risk people; The guideline is that you mask around everyone through 10 days but stay completely away from high-risk people until day 11. You can’t stay completely away from high-risk people if your employer has made you return to your job at CVS on day six because “the CDC says” or you are a student who has been returned to school on day six and you have two high-risk students in your class.

[Arcadia]

@KSera updated August 11th

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/community/schools-childcare/k-12-childcare-guidance.html

“Schools with students at risk for getting very sick with COVID-19 must make reasonable modifications when necessary to ensure that all students, including those with disabilities, are able to access in-person learning. Schools might need to require masking in settings such as classrooms or during activities to protect students with immunocompromising conditions or other conditions that increase their risk for getting very sick with COVID-19 in accordance with applicable federal, state, or local laws and policies. For more information and support, visit the U.S. Department of Education’s Disability Rights webpage. Students with immunocompromising conditions or other conditions or disabilities that increase risk for getting very sick with COVID-19 should not be placed into separate classrooms or otherwise segregated from other students.“

[YaelAldrich]

8 minutes ago, Arcadia said:

@KSera updated August 11th

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/community/schools-childcare/k-12-childcare-guidance.html

“Schools with students at risk for getting very sick with COVID-19 must make reasonable modifications when necessary to ensure that all students, including those with disabilities, are able to access in-person learning. Schools might need to require masking in settings such as classrooms or during activities to protect students with immunocompromising conditions or other conditions that increase their risk for getting very sick with COVID-19 in accordance with applicable federal, state, or local laws and policies. For more information and support, visit the U.S. Department of Education’s Disability Rights webpage. Students with immunocompromising conditions or other conditions or disabilities that increase risk for getting very sick with COVID-19 should not be placed into separate classrooms or otherwise segregated from other students.“

Does that mean that people of high risk could possibly sue public or private schools and day cares to make masking universal in those locations?

[Arcadia]

12 minutes ago, YaelAldrich said:

Does that mean that people of high risk could possibly sue public or private schools and day cares to make masking universal in those locations?

They could file a complaint with the Office for Civil Rights

https://www.ed.gov/coronavirus/factsheets/disability-rights

“Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act protect the rights of individuals with disabilities to have equal access to public facilities and institutions, which means that students with disabilities have the right to access schools without taking on a far greater risk to their health than other students face. To comply with their federal obligations, school districts must (among other things) make reasonable modifications when necessary to ensure equal access for their students with disabilities, absent a showing that the modifications would constitute a fundamental alteration to the program in question. Depending on the circumstances, a school district could decide that some degree of masking is necessary as a reasonable modification to ensure that students with disabilities have meaningful access to in-person schooling without incurring an elevated risk of hospitalization or death due to COVID-19. This is necessarily a fact-specific inquiry depending on each school's particular circumstances and the modifications sought by their students. 

Similarly, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act guarantees that all eligible children who require special education, regardless of the nature or severity of their disability, receive a free appropriate public education (FAPE) in the least restrictive environment (LRE). Under IDEA, school officials and the child's parents work as a team to develop an individualized education program that details how the student will access education services. Based on the unique needs of the child, the team could determine that some degree of masking is necessary to ensure a specific child can receive a FAPE in the LRE.

For additional COVID-19 resources relating to IDEA and OSERS, please go to Program Information: FAQs and Responses — Special Education & Rehabilitative Services page.

Parents, guardians and other caregivers may reach out to their local parent training and information center for direct assistance and referrals to other organizations, as well as to gain skills to effectively participate in the education and development of their children.  They may also file a complaint with the Office for Civil Rights if they believe that their efforts working with the child's school has not resulted in necessary protections to ensure that their child with a disability can remain safe in the classroom.”

[Arcadia]

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2795246

“Results  Of the 210 participants (median [range] age, 51 (23-84) years; 136 women [65%]) with serological evidence of recent Omicron variant infection, 44% (92) demonstrated awareness of any recent Omicron variant infection and 56% (118) reported being unaware of their infectious status. Among those who were unaware, 10% (12 of 118) reported having had any symptoms, which they attributed to a common cold or other non–SARS-CoV-2 infection. In multivariable analyses that accounted for demographic and clinical characteristics, participants who were health care employees of the medical center were more likely than nonemployees to be aware of their recent Omicron variant infection (adjusted odds ratio, 2.46; 95% CI, 1.30-4.65).

Conclusions and Relevance  Results of this study suggest that more than half of adults with recent Omicron variant infection were unaware of their infectious status and that awareness was higher among health care employees than nonemployees, yet still low overall. Unawareness may be a highly prevalent factor associated with rapid person-to-person transmission within communities.”

[Ausmumof3]

4 hours ago, Arcadia said:

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2795246

“Results  Of the 210 participants (median [range] age, 51 (23-84) years; 136 women [65%]) with serological evidence of recent Omicron variant infection, 44% (92) demonstrated awareness of any recent Omicron variant infection and 56% (118) reported being unaware of their infectious status. Among those who were unaware, 10% (12 of 118) reported having had any symptoms, which they attributed to a common cold or other non–SARS-CoV-2 infection. In multivariable analyses that accounted for demographic and clinical characteristics, participants who were health care employees of the medical center were more likely than nonemployees to be aware of their recent Omicron variant infection (adjusted odds ratio, 2.46; 95% CI, 1.30-4.65).

Conclusions and Relevance  Results of this study suggest that more than half of adults with recent Omicron variant infection were unaware of their infectious status and that awareness was higher among health care employees than nonemployees, yet still low overall. Unawareness may be a highly prevalent factor associated with rapid person-to-person transmission within communities.”

Health employees makes sense because they often to RAT tests as screening protocols etc

[Katy]

12 hours ago, YaelAldrich said:

Does that mean that people of high risk could possibly sue public or private schools and day cares to make masking universal in those locations?

Private, absolutely not. Public schools… idk how some states handle this, but pre-pandemic some states had teachers visit homebound students to tutor them for about an hour per day. If your immune system couldn’t handle being in public their accommodations included a teacher with a surgical mask. 

My stepmother was a teacher in Florida and she had a homebound kid she tutored for more than a year, I think the kid needed a bone marrow transplant and wasn’t allowed in school because of her immune system. She retired 15 years ago and I haven’t asked my teacher friends in Florida if that’s still handled that way, but I bet it is. 

[kbutton]

7 hours ago, Ausmumof3 said:

Health employees makes sense because they often to RAT tests as screening protocols etc

Maybe for nursing homes or oncology folks. DH has worked in the ER for all but 2.5 months of the pandemic and never had a test for work purposes.

[mommyoffive]

Biden Administration Plans for End of Covid-19 Shot, Treatment Coverage (msn.com)

[mommyoffive]

I heard a blip on the tv news last night that kids will be eligible for new boosters in Sept.  However they didn't know what ages of kids and how far off they had to be from their last booster. 

[KSera]

16 minutes ago, mommyoffive said:

I heard a blip on the tv news last night that kids will be eligible for new boosters in Sept.  However they didn't know what ages of kids and how far off they had to be from their last booster. 

The guidance on this has been the worst. It has made it impossible for people to decide whether to go ahead with boosters now or wait for new ones.

[mommyoffive]

Just now, KSera said:

The guidance on this has been the worst. It has made it impossible for people to decide whether to go ahead with boosters now or wait for new ones.

Yes.  At this point though I just totally expect it.   I hate it and the weight of it.  I am so tired.  I am tired of being the disease expert in the house, which of course I am no expert.  Having to decide every move.  At this point I am so envious of people that have gone back to pre Covid life and are not worried about this anymore.  I am upset because I boosted my 3 littles in the start of summer because of the wave and we were going to have lots of exposure all summer.  I thought it was the right thing to do.  Well I bet that I just messed up their chances of getting this booster in Sept.  Yay me.

[mommyoffive]

Covid’s Harmful Effects on the Brain Reverberate Years Later - Bloomberg

[mommyoffive]

‘Most have thrown their hands up’: has the US forgotten about Covid? (msn.com)

[mommyoffive]

Why older people are at higher risk for severe COVID-19 (substack.com)

[Mom_to3]

Omicron booster timing? Pfizer again first?!? No updated boosters for the 5-11 year old group (kids left behind again??). Really upset that DH and I will have to decide whether to get Pfizer or wait for Moderna, that my eldest will have to get Pfizer (again! Moderna still not authorized as a booster!!), and that we have no idea when my younger two can get an Omicron booster.