A 28 year old male, type 1 diabetic usually requires an average of 110 units of insulin daily. However, since getting Covid-19 infection three months ago, his requirements have gone up to nearly double. Hba1c is also slightly increased. Fortunately, he has never suffered from complications of hyperglycaemia as he is very well educated and understands how to control his blood glucose quite well. This is not his first Covid-19 infection, he has had two previous infections and both times his insulin requirements went back to normal within 2-3 weeks. Is there anything that can be done to help his control?

For patients with active lupus nephritis, obinutuzumab, a humanized type II anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody plus standard therapy is more efficacious for providing a complete renal response than standard therapy alone, according to a study published online Feb. 7 in the New England Journal of Medicine. The research was published to coincide with the International Society of Nephrology annual World Congress of Nephrology, held from Feb. 6 to 9 in New Delhi.

Richard A. Furie, M.D., from Northwell Health in Great Neck, New York, and colleagues randomly assigned adults with biopsy-proven active lupus nephritis to receive obinutuzumab in one of two dose schedules or placebo (135 and 136 participants, respectively). In addition, all patients received standard therapy with mycophenolate mofetil plus oral prednisone. The primary end point was a complete renal response at week 76, defined by a urinary protein-to-creatinine ratio of less than 0.5, an estimated glomerular filtration rate of at least 85 percent of the baseline value, and no intercurrent event.

The researchers found that 46.4 and 33.1 percent of patients in the obinutuzumab and placebo groups had a complete renal response at week 76. More patients in the obinutuzumab group than the placebo group had a complete renal response at week 76 with a prednisone dose of 7.5 mg per day or lower between weeks 64 and 76 (42.7 versus 30.9 percent). A urinary protein-to-creatinine ratio lower than 0.8 without an intercurrent event was more common in the obinutuzumab group than the placebo group (55.5 versus 41.9 percent). There were no unexpected safety signals noted. More serious adverse events occurred with obinutuzumab than with placebo, and the adverse events reported were mainly infections and events related to COVID-19.

"These findings, and those from the NOBILITY trial, support the hypothesis that deep B-cell depletion with obinutuzumab is an effective treatment for patients with lupus nephritis," the authors write.

Several authors disclosed ties to biopharmaceutical companies, including F. Hoffmann-La Roche, which manufactures obinutuzumab and funded the study.

Abstract/Full Text (subscription or payment may be required)

More Information

Copyright © 2020 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

Diabetes mellitus type 1 (DM1) is associated with lower probability of incident cardiovascular events than type 2 (DM2), according to a study published online Feb. 12 in the Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions.

Andrew M. Goldsweig, M.D., from Baystate Medical Center in Springfield, Massachusetts, and colleagues compared the prevalence of incident cardiovascular events including myocardial infarction, percutaneous coronary intervention, coronary artery bypass grafting, stroke, carotid revascularization, limb ischemia, and peripheral revascularization among DM1 and DM2 patients (aged 46 to 75 years) receiving care at outpatient facilities with primary care and/or endocrinology, enrolled in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Veradigm Metabolic Registry 2017 to 2022.

The study population included 5,823 and 156,204 DM1 and DM2 patients, respectively, with a total of 758,643 visits. The researchers found that DM1 patients were younger and had fewer comorbidities. There were 11,096 incident cardiovascular events, with a prevalence ratio of 0.63 for events associated with DM1 versus DM2. The prevalence ratio was 0.66 after adjustment for age. DM1 was associated with less myocardial infarction, percutaneous coronary intervention, stroke, and limb ischemia than DM2 when analyzed by separate cardiovascular events. Across all 10-year age categories, overall cardiovascular event probability was lower in DM1 than DM2 in both female and male patients, before and during/after the COVID-19 pandemic, and after adjustment for comorbidities, hemoglobin A1c, and serum creatinine.

"Although these findings represent good news for DM1 patients, further research is necessary specifically in DM1 patients to prevent and treat cardiovascular events," the authors write.

One author disclosed ties to the life science industry.

Abstract/Full Text

Copyright © 2020 HealthDay. All rights reserved. 

In the United States, the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with increased odds of leaving the emergency department before medically advised (BMA), according to a study published in the April issue of the American Journal of Emergency Medicine.

Yahya Alnashri, M.D., M.P.H., from Prince Sattam bin Abdulaziz University in Al-Kharj, Saudi Arabia, and colleagues conducted a cross-sectional study using data from the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey from 2016 to 2021 to examine factors associated with leaving BMA from emergency departments.

Overall, 5.9 million (0.8 percent) of 721.0 million emergency department visits resulted in leaving BMA. The researchers found that the odds of leaving BMA were increased in association with public or no insurance coverage (Medicare, Medicaid/CHIP/state-based, uninsured/self-pay: adjusted odds ratios, 1.74, 1.86, and 1.51, respectively), alcohol or substance use disorders (adjusted odds ratio, 2.19), arrival by ambulance (adjusted odds ratio, 1.68), and being male (adjusted odds ratio, 1.32). Lower odds of leaving BMA were seen in association with hospital admissions and trauma or overdose-related visits (adjusted odds ratios, 0.11 and 0.54, respectively). Significantly increased odds of leaving BMA were seen in association with the COVID-19 pandemic (adjusted odds ratio, 1.44), with an overall increase of 53.6 percent in BMA-related emergency department visits post-March 2020 versus previous years.

"These findings highlight the need for targeted interventions to improve patient-provider communication and ED triage efficiency, especially in resource-constrained facilities serving lower-income individuals," the authors write.

Abstract/Full Text (subscription or payment may be required)

Copyright © 2020 HealthDay. All rights reserved. 

Postpandemic hospital occupancy is higher than prepandemic and is expected to continue increasing without changes in the hospitalization rate or staffed hospital bed supply, according to a research letter published online Feb. 19 in JAMA Network Open.

Richard K. Leuchter, M.D., from the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA in Los Angeles, and colleagues repurposed the COVID-19 dashboard to describe several possible U.S. hospital bed occupancy scenarios arising from an aging population over the next decade.

The researchers found that the mean U.S. hospital occupancy was 63.9 percent from 2009 to 2019 compared with 75.3 percent in May 2023 to April 2024, the year following the end of the COVID-19 public health emergency (PHE). There was a decline seen in the number of staffed hospital beds, from a prepandemic steady state of 802,000 to a post-PHE steady state of 674,000; the mean daily census steady state remained at about 510,000. Substantial state-to-state variation was seen in the post-PHE hospital occupancy steady state. With the aging population, total annual hospitalizations were projected to increase from 36,174,000 in 2025 to 40,177,000 in 2035 without changes in the hospitalization rate or staffed hospital bed supply, corresponding to a national hospital occupancy of about 85 percent by 2032 and by 2035 for adult beds and adult and pediatric beds combined, respectively.

"Experts in developed countries have posited that a national hospital occupancy of 85 percent constitutes a hospital bed shortage (a conservative estimate); our findings show that the U.S. could reach this dangerous threshold as soon as 2032, with some states at much higher risk than others," the authors write.

One author serves on the board of directors of M3 Inc.

Abstract/Full Text

Editorial

Copyright © 2020 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

New York Attorney General Letitia James filed a major lawsuit yesterday, accusing 13 e-cigarette companies of illegally selling flavored vapes and targeting young kids through deceptive marketing.

The 192-page complaint claims the companies -- Puff Bar, Evo Brands, PVG2, Demand Vape, Magellan, Happy Distro, Midwest Goods, Pod Juice, Safa Goods, Mi-One, Mylé, MVH I and Price Point -- violated New York's ban on flavored vapes, which studies show are preferred by young users, The Washington Post reported.

“The vaping industry is taking a page out of Big Tobacco’s playbook: they’re making nicotine seem cool, getting kids hooked, and creating a massive public health crisis in the process,” James said in a statement.

“For too long, these companies have disregarded our laws in order to profit off of our young people,” she added.

The lawsuit seeks hundreds of millions of dollars in penalties and restitution for the companies’ public health impact. This includes fines for violating federal and state laws, recovery of revenue from illegal vape sales and the creation of a fund to address the youth vaping crisis in New York.

The attorney general’s office describes these penalties as a “conservative estimate,” given the widespread impact of youth vaping.

The lawsuit claims companies marketed flavors like “Strawberry Donut” and “Tropical Rainbow Blast” using bright packaging and social media influencers to appeal to teens.

One example cited was a Puff Bar ad during COVID-19 lockdowns, promoting vapes as “the perfect escape from back-to-back zoom calls [and] parental texts," The Post reported.

The complaint also alleges that companies have used illegal shipping methods to supply retailers and that many retailers are concentrated around public middle and high schools.

The Vapor Technology Association, a trade group, dismissed the lawsuit’s claims as “false.”

“The facts are that since President Donald Trump raised the age to buy all tobacco products in 2019, youth vaping has dropped to the lowest level in over a decade,” Tony Abboud, the association's executive director, said.

"This suit is the latest example of why President Trump needs to take bold and decisive action to end the government law-fare against the flavored vaping industry,” Abboud added.

Despite the decline, e-cigarettes remain the most commonly used tobacco product among U.S. middle and high school students, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

In 2024, 1.6 million students (6%) reported e-cigarette use. What's more, 87.6% of those used flavored e-cigarettes.

But, a federal survey released last fall found youth e-cigarette use has decreased nearly 70% since its peak in 2019.

Anti-tobacco advocates warn that nicotine exposure harms developing brains and can lead to addiction, often alongside traditional cigarette use.

“At every turn, each Defendant’s New York-touching commercial conduct in the Flavored E-Cigarette industry undercuts New York’s efforts and law -- which must be now enforced to protect the public,” the lawsuit says.

“By first dodging all of New York’s regulatory safeguards, then making these products as cheap as possible and as abundantly available as possible in our communities, each Defendant cashes in without regard to the lasting harm they cause,” the complaint says.

More information

Johns Hopkins Medicine has more on the dangers of vaping.

SOURCES: The Washington Post, media report, Feb. 20, 2025; Office of the New York State Attorney General, news release, Feb. 20, 2025; U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Oct. 17, 2024

Copyright © 2020 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

For patients with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), fixed-duration acalabrutinib-venetoclax with or without obinutuzumab significantly prolongs progression-free survival compared with chemoimmunotherapy, according to a study published online Feb. 5 in the New England Journal of Medicine.

Jennifer R. Brown, M.D., from Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, and colleagues conducted a phase 3, open-label trial involving patients with CLL aged 18 years or older with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance-status score of 0 to 2, who did not have a 17p deletion or TP53 mutation. Patients were randomly assigned to receive acalabrutinib-venetoclax, acalabrutinib-venetoclax-obinutuzumab, or chemoimmunotherapy with the investigator's choice of fludarabine-cyclophosphamide-rituximab or bendamustine-rituximab (291, 286, and 290 [143 and 147], respectively).

The researchers found that at a median follow-up of 40.8 months, the estimated 36-month progression-free survival was 76.5, 83.1, and 66.5 percent with acalabrutinib-venetoclax, acalabrutinib-venetoclax-obinutuzumab, and chemoimmunotherapy, respectively (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.65 [P = 0.004], for acalabrutinib-venetoclax versus chemoimmunotherapy; P < 0.001 for acalabrutinib-venetoclax-obinutuzumab versus chemoimmunotherapy). The estimated 36-month overall survival was 94.1, 87.7, and 85.9 percent with acalabrutinib-venetoclax, acalabrutinib-venetoclax-obinutuzumab, and chemoimmunotherapy, respectively. The most common adverse event of clinical interest of grade 3 or higher was neutropenia, which was reported in 32.3, 46.1, and 43.2 percent in the three groups, respectively. Ten, 25, and 21 patients died from COVID-19 in the three groups, respectively.

"Continued follow-up will be essential to clarify which patients would be most suitable for acalabrutinib-venetoclax and which for acalabrutinib-venetoclax-obinutuzumab," the authors write.

Several authors disclosed ties to the biopharmaceutical industry, including AstraZeneca, which funded the study.

Abstract/Full Text (subscription or payment may be required)

Copyright © 2020 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

The Trump administration changed course on Tuesday, deciding to keep the government's free COVID test program running, just minutes before the website, COVIDtests.gov, was set to shut down.

Earlier that day, The Washington Post reported that officials were preparing to end the program and possibly destroy tens of millions of unused tests worth more than a half-billion dollars.

But 12 minutes before the shutdown, Andrew Nixon, a spokesman for the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), announced the site would remain active.

“With COVID-19 infections decreasing after a winter peak, we are in the process of regular discussions on closing this round of the COVID-19 test ordering program. At this point, the program is still open, and we will share additional updates as needed,” he said in a statement.

Internal documents showed that HHS officials had been debating two options: Disposing of more than 160 million COVID tests, or continuing to ship them to U.S. households. The stockpile is maintained by the Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response (ASPR).

Only a small fraction of the tests had expired, and tens of thousands were still being ordered daily, Dawn O’Connell, an ASPR chief under the Biden administration, told The Post.

“It’s expensive to stockpile these tests,” she said. “Destruction costs a significant amount of money, but hanging on to them costs a significant amount of money.”

The reversal followed concerns from public health experts about losing a valuable tool during flu season and future COVID surges.

In his first days back in office, President Donald Trump rescinded many of former President Joe Biden’s COVID-related executive orders, including one aimed at expanding national testing strategy.

“The virus is not posing a major public health threat now,” said Dr. Ashish Jha, who led the White House COVID response from March 2022 to April 2023 under Biden.

Jha, now the dean of Brown University School of Public Health, told The Post that trashing the tests “feels like an act of self-destruction here. It’s going to be expensive. And it takes away a tool that the administration would want to use in the scenario that we get a highly immune-evasive variant."

While COVID cases have decreased after the winter peak, experts warn that free testing remains critical to control infection.

“Destroying an asset that was paid for by the American people, that doesn’t make any sense,” said Dr. Tom Inglesby, who was White House national coordinator for COVID testing from the end of 2021 to April 2022. He's now the director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security at the Bloomberg School of Public Health.

In the event of a resurgence, “we need to be able to figure out who is sick, who is not sick, who needs medicine, who is, in fact, contagious, who may be someone who’s vulnerable," Inglesby told The Post. "These diagnostics really help you make really good decisions, help families make good decisions about how to stay healthy.”

ASPR has distributed more than 2 billion free tests since January 2020, including 900 million sent directly to households through COVIDtests.gov, in partnership with the U.S. Postal Service.

The program has been paused and restarted many times, including seven shutdowns since its launch.

Most recently, it was paused in March 2024 and reopened in September right before the winter respiratory illness season.

More information

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has more on at-home over-the-counter COVID tests.

SOURCE: The Washington Post, media report, Feb. 18, 2025

Copyright © 2020 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

There was a notable decrease in common ophthalmic procedures among Medicare beneficiaries during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, according to a study published online Feb. 6 in JAMA Ophthalmology.

Raziyeh Mahmoudzadeh, M.D., from the Virginia Commonwealth University in Richmond, and colleagues estimated changes in the rates of the 10 most prevalent ophthalmic procedures among Medicare beneficiaries during the COVID-19 pandemic in a retrospective U.S. cross-sectional study. The analyses included 3,879,533 procedure entries in 2019 and 3,181,439 entries in 2020.

The researchers found that from 2019 to 2020, there was a −17.9 percent overall decrease in the rates of the 10 ophthalmic procedures. The largest reduction was seen for laser peripheral iridotomy, while the smallest decrease was seen for eye drug injections (−43.6 and −1.5 percent, respectively). There was a reduction of −23.0 percent in cataract surgery. Regionally, the greatest reductions in cataract surgery occurred in the Northeast (−27.9 percent).

"Our results demonstrated an overall decrease of 17.9 percent in the rates of the 10 most prevalent ophthalmic procedures during the pandemic," the authors write. "This reduction appears less substantial compared with other fields of medicine, like ear nose and throat, where up to 98 percent reduction in volume of surgical procedures was reported."

One author disclosed financial ties to Regeneron, Astellas, Apellis, and Allergan.

Abstract/Full Text (subscription or payment may be required)

Editorial (subscription or payment may be required)

Copyright © 2020 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

Post-COVID condition (PCC) continues to affect children, and 80 percent of those currently experiencing PCC have activity limitation, according to a research letter published online Feb. 3 in JAMA Pediatrics.

Nicole D. Ford, Ph.D., M.P.H., from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta, and colleagues used data from the 2023 National Health Interview Survey to estimate the prevalence of ever and current PCC in U.S. children aged 0 to 17 years and activity limitations among children currently experiencing PCC.

The analytic sample included 7,585 unweighted and 71,027,000 weighted children. The researchers found that about 1.4 percent of children had ever experienced PCC and an estimated 0.4 percent were currently experiencing PCC at the time of interview in 2023. The prevalence of ever and currently experiencing PCC increased with older age (2.3 and 0.8 percent at age 12 to 17 years). With decreasing family income, the prevalence of ever experiencing PCC increased (<100 percent income-to-poverty ratio, 2.6 percent). Compared with non-Hispanic Black children and children from another or multiple races, the prevalence of ever experiencing PCC was higher among Hispanic and non-Hispanic White children. There was variation in the prevalence of ever experiencing PCC by health insurance. Eighty percent of children currently experiencing PCC had any activity limitation compared with the period before they had COVID-19.

"The large proportion of children experiencing PCC with any activity limitation highlights the need to examine the severity of activity limitation, functional outcomes, and days lost from school," the authors write.

Abstract/Full Text (subscription or payment may be required)

Copyright © 2020 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

From 2011 to 2023, there was an increase in early adult mortality in the United States, with further acceleration seen during the COVID-19 pandemic, according to a research letter published online Jan. 31 in JAMA Network Open.

Elizabeth Wrigley-Field, Ph.D., from the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis, and colleagues calculated monthly mortality rates using cause-specific death counts for adults aged 25 to 44 years between 1999 and 2023.

The study analyzed 3,392,364 deaths among the full U.S. population aged 25 to 44 years from 1999 to 2023. Compared with extrapolations of pre-2011 trends, mortality increases across most causes of death produced substantial excess deaths. In 2019, early adult excess mortality was 34.6 percent higher than expected, with further acceleration during the COVID-19 pandemic. All-cause excess mortality was nearly three times higher in 2021 than 2019 (116.2 versus 41.7 deaths per 100,000 population). Excess mortality decreased in 2023 to approximately midway between 2019 and 2021 levels (79.1 deaths per 100,000 population). In 2023, early adult mortality was 70.0 percent higher than it would have been had pre-2011 trends continued, with 71,124 excess deaths. In 2023, drug poisoning, residual natural cause category, transport-related deaths, alcohol-related deaths, and homicide accounted for almost three-quarters of early adult excess mortality (31.8, 16.0, 14.1, 8.5, and 8.2 percent, respectively).

"Increases in early adult mortality can signal population risks that may become more pronounced as these cohorts age. These results suggest the possibility of a worsening mortality crisis unless these trends are reversed," the authors write.

Abstract/Full Text

Copyright © 2020 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is associated with more rapid progression of coronary artery lesion-based plaque volume, according to a study published online Feb. 4 in Radiology.

Neng Dai, M.D., from Fudan University in Shanghai, and colleagues examined the impact of SARS-CoV-2 infection on coronary inflammation and plaques using coronary computed tomography angiography. Lesions of patients with and without SARS-CoV-2 infection were compared in terms of the quantitative total and compositional percent atheroma volume (PAV) and annualized PAV change, presence of high-risk plaque, and attenuation of lesion-specific pericoronary adipose tissue (PCAT) at baseline and follow-up.

Data were included for 2,108 coronary artery lesions in 690 patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection and 480 lesions in 113 patients without SARS-CoV-2 infection. The researchers found that lesions in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection demonstrated more rapid progression of overall PAV (0.90 versus 0.62 percent per year) and noncalcified PAV (0.78 versus 0.42 percent per year) compared with lesions in patients without SARS-CoV-2 infection. Despite similar prevalence at baseline, lesions in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection had a higher incidence of becoming high-risk plaque (21.0 versus 15.8 percent) and higher incidence of PCAT attenuation of –70.1 Hounsfield units or higher (27.1 versus 19.8 percent). A higher risk for target lesion failure was seen in lesions in patients with COVID-19 (10.4 versus 3.1 percent; adjusted hazard ratio, 2.90).

"Our findings suggest that SARS-CoV-2 infection may exacerbate cardiovascular risk by accelerating the advancement of susceptible plaque types and coronary inflammation, thus offering a potential mechanistic rationale for the link between prior SARS-CoV-2 infection and adverse clinical events," the authors write.

Abstract/Full Text

Editorial

Copyright © 2020 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

When it comes to the potential of H5N1 avian flu, otherwise known as bird flu, picking up mutations that might lead to human-to-human spread, that "train has already left the station," warns one infectious disease expert.

If and when bird flu -- already widespread in cattle, cats and other mammals -- gains the ability to transmit between people, the best Americans can hope for is to "control the speed of the train" with vaccines, masks and treatment, said Dr. Peter Chin-Hong. He's a professor of medicine at the University of San Francisco.

Speaking with HealthDay, Chin-Hong stressed that both rapid surveillance and reporting on any new cases of H5N1 that arise are crucial. So the recent silencing of communications from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) by the Trump administration is worrisome.

"It's not that people won't get the information eventually if it's serious, it's the rapidity of information that I'm worried about," Chin-Hong said.

He compared the recent CDC gag order to a dysfunctional smoke alarm.

"You hope the fire isn't going to come, but if it comes, there will be a delay before you feel it," Chin-Hong said. "Time means lives when we're talking about infectious diseases that really don't know any borders."

As the UCSF expert explained, the current strain of bird flu has been circulating through avian species for about 30 years. It has only occasionally infected people -- usually those who've had extended close contact with birds, such as poultry farm workers.

However, viruses are built to mutate and find new hosts.

That's what's been happening with alarming rapidity in recent years, with more cases of mammals -- such as seals, cattle, cats, dogs and pigs -- coming down with bird flu.

Just one mutation

Over the past year, especially, there's been an uptick of cases among American people, including the recent death of an already frail patient in Louisiana.

In most human cases, H5N1 was thought to have been contracted from close contact with an infected animal.

Unfortunately, human-to-human transmission may only require a few new genetic tweaks by the virus, Chin-Hong warned.

"I think the length of the road before [we see] a mutation that allows easier entry into our lungs is much shorter than people think," he said.

One recent study "looked at the amount of mutations needed before that can occur, and it was very, very short, just one mutation," Chin-Hong noted. "[That] doesn't mean that this mutation will be picked up, but what it means to me is that it's not that far away."

He explained that H5N1 can also interact with "regular" seasonal flu viruses.

"We have a lot of influenza going around and influenza is engineered to really swap genes with each other and they can pick up tricks," Chin-Hong told HealthDay. "And some of those tricks include getting the combination to enter our bodies, which it is not so great at doing right now."

In the relatively few U.S. cases of human bird flu so far recorded, symptoms have typically been mild -- congestion, pink eye and other transitory effects. But if H5N1 mutated so that it could pass easily between people, "all of this may change," Chin-Hong said.

"You might get 'inside' disease, and that includes shortness of breath and you may have other organ involvement," he said.

Vaccines, masks, treatments

Chin-Hong stressed that societies are in a better position to fight mutated H1N1 than they were with COVID-19.

"We're in a very different place from the early days of COVID because we have a test, we have vaccines," he said.

The United States currently has a stockpile of 4.5 million H5N1 vaccines, based on older mutations.

"I think that the stockpiled vaccines would mitigate the effects probably by preventing serious disease, hospitalization and death," Chin-Hong said.

But 4.5 million vaccines would run out very quickly, especially when two doses might be needed to protect each recipient.

"It's a good start and it will be a good way to protect probably frontline workers in the event that we need to," Chin-Hong said, but production of any vaccine would need to be scaled up enormously in a potentially short period of time.

Other forms of prevention would be key, too, such as handwashing and widespread use of N95 masks, he said.

A handful of influenza treatments appear to be somewhat effective against H5N1, including oseltamivir (Tamiflu). "We may also need to stockpile more Tamiflu," Chin-Hong said.

A hobbled CDC and FDA

Key to all of this will be a coordinated effort by key government players, however.

Central to that effort is the CDC, which at the present moment seems hamstrung, Chin-Hong said.

"The CDC is generally the conductor of the orchestra" when it comes to safeguarding public health, he said. "And right now, different parts of the orchestra are playing their own music. And, you know, I think that's that's what we suffered from in the early days of COVID, too."

The potential appointment of anti-vaccine activist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to head the Department of Health and Human Services (which oversees both the CDC and the Food and Drug Administration) also has Chin-Hong "worried."

"I'm concerned about, you know, any barriers at the FDA level" when it comes to areas such as vaccine research and distribution, he said.

"I know that humans are resourceful and will come up with the science, but the devil is always in the details, and implementing the science is often even more important than the science itself," Chin-Hong concluded.

More information

Find out more about H5N1 avian flu at the World Health Organization.

SOURCE: HealthDay interview, Peter Chin-Hong, MD, professor of medicine, University of California San Francisco

Copyright © 2020 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

From 2020 to 2021, there was a 34 percent increase in firearm-related hospitalizations, according to a research letter published online Jan. 27 in JAMA Network Open.

Raymond A. Jean, M.D., from the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, and colleagues examined trends in firearm-related hospitalization rates. The analysis included data from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project National Inpatient Sample (2015 to 2021).

The researchers identified 159,215 weighted hospitalizations for firearm-related injury during the study period. There was a steady decline in discharges from 2015 to 2019 that was forecasted to continue by the seasonal autoregressive integrated moving average model. From 2020 to 2021, models estimated 39,212 hospitalizations, but the actual observed number was 52,480 (observed-to-expected ratio, 1.34). There were disproportionate increases in hospitalizations among patients younger than 18 years (observed-to-expected ratio, 1.44), Medicaid-enrolled patients (observed-to-expected ratio, 1.46), and Black patients (observed-to-expected ratio, 1.41) compared with historical trends. 

"While attention has been given to the impact of the initial COVID-19 lockdown on admissions for acute medical conditions, the pandemic's overall effect on trauma-related conditions is much less clear," the authors write. "Despite these limitations, these results confirm a pervasive and troubling phenomenon and suggest the need for urgent policy efforts to mitigate gun harm."

Abstract/Full Text

Copyright © 2020 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

As a bird flu outbreak escalates across the U.S., the Trump administration has paused the release of key public health studies, stalling research that could provide insight into how the virus spreads to animals and people.

The blocked studies were supposed to be published in the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR), a respected journal that has reported on health threats since 1952.

One of the studies examines whether veterinarians working with cattle have unknowingly been infected, and another explores whether people may have passed the virus to pet cats, according to CNN.

These reports could help scientists track and prevent future infections.

But a new memo from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has placed an “immediate pause” on communications. Approval is now required from a presidential appointee before publishing, according to the memo.

“This idea that science cannot continue until there’s a political lens over it is unprecedented,” Dr. Anne Schuchat, a former principal deputy director at the CDC, told CNN. “I hope it’s going to be very short-lived, but if it’s not short-lived, it’s censorship.”

Public health experts warn that delaying research on bird flu could put veterinarians, farmworkers and the public at greater risk.

One study, slated to be published last week in the MMWR, looked at cases in Michigan where dairy workers may have transmitted bird flu to their pet cats.

Dr. Jennifer Morse, medical director at the Mid-Michigan District Health Department and a scientist on the pending study, told CNN she got a note from a colleague last week saying that “there are delays in our publication — outside of our control.”

And this isn't the first time the government has disrupted CDC reports.

During President Donald Trump's first term, CNN noted, White House officials interfered with scientific studies on COVID-19.

“What’s happening now is quite different than what we experienced in covid, because there wasn’t a stop in the MMWR and other scientific manuscripts,” Schuchat told CNN.

CDC insiders say the pause will last until at least Feb. 6, though it’s unclear if publishing will resume as scheduled.

The bird flu has infected at least 67 people in the U.S., and claimed the life of one person in Louisiana earlier this year.

It's affected more than 148 million birds and heightened concern about human transmission.

“Maintaining open lines of communication and continuing research with our federal partners is critical as we fight this outbreak.” Dr. Fred Gingrich, executive director of the American Association of Bovine Practitioners, a group for veterinarians specializing in cattle medicine, told CNN.

Schuchat hopes efforts to spin or influence scientific reports won’t happen again.

“The MMWR cannot become a political instrument,” she concluded in a report published by CNN.

More information

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has more on the current situation of bird flu.

SOURCE: CNN, media report, Jan. 30, 2025; U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Copyright © 2020 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

Infant mortality rates decreased from 1999 to 2022, but infant mortality from sudden unexpected infant death (SUID) increased significantly, according to a study published online Jan. 27 in JAMA Pediatrics.

Elizabeth R. Wolf, M.D., M.P.H., from the Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine in Richmond, and colleagues examined the top 13 causes of infant death from Jan. 1, 2018, to Dec. 31, 2022, substituting sudden infant death syndrome with the more inclusive SUID.

The researchers found that infant mortality rates decreased by 24.2 percent from 736.0 to 558.0 per 100,000 from 1999 to 2022, with the steepest decline from 2007 to 2011 (annual percent change, –3.6). For many causes of death, recent decreases in mortality were seen. A notable exception was seen for SUID, which increased from 89.9 to 100.5 per 100,000 between 2020 and 2022. For all causes of death except congenital malformations and hemorrhage, mortality rates were two to four times higher among Black than White infants. For Black versus Asian infants, the rate ratios were 10.7 for SUID, 4.6 for unintentional injuries, and 4.2 for hypoxia and birth asphyxia. For American Indian and Alaska Native infants, mortality rates were significantly higher for SUID, unintentional injuries, and necrotizing enterocolitis compared with Asian infants (rate ratios, 9.6, 5.5, and 2.8, respectively).

"This study found that infant mortality from SUID has increased significantly," the authors write. "Possible explanations include COVID-19 or other respiratory illnesses, maternal opioid use, and social media's influence on infant sleeping practices."

Abstract/Full Text (subscription or payment may be required)

Copyright © 2020 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

People still see COVID-19 as an ongoing public health threat, even though the pandemic officially ended in 2023, according to a new HealthDay/Harris Poll.

Nearly 3 in 4 people (72%) agree COVID is still a serious public health issue, including more than a third (35%) who strongly agree, the poll found.

COVID has settled into the sort of ongoing health threat already posed by the seasonal flu, which had its turn as a pandemic back in 1918, Dr. Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, said.

“You'll get hundreds of thousands of people hospitalized with influenza every year,” Offit told HealthDay TV. “You'll get tens of thousands of people who die every year from influenza. I think that's what COVID is now. I think this virus will be with us for decades, if not longer.”

People also are apt to respond to any symptoms they might develop, with nearly 3 in 4 (73%) saying they would take an at-home test or go to a doctor or pharmacy to get tested for COVID, the poll says.

“That 73% number is higher than I would have guessed,” Offit said.

People with symptoms of COVID -- fever, cough, sore throat, shortness of breath, runny nose, body aches -- would do better to stay home and take a rapid test, for everyone else’s sake, Offit said.

High-risk groups in particular should get tested, Offit added, so that they can receive antiviral Paxlovid to limit the severity of their infection.

“Although the pandemic is over, I think we have to understand that this is a serious infection,” Offit said. “I wish we felt the same about flu, which is also a serious infection, which people should also get vaccinated and take seriously, but we often don't.”

However, Offit also said that he doesn’t agree with recommendations from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) that everyone 6 months and older get a COVID vaccine.

“We're one of only two countries that do that,” Offit noted. “Most countries -- like countries in Western Europe, Australia, the World Health Organization, Scandinavian countries -- all pretty much target high-risk groups, meaning people who have obesity or chronic lung, chronic kidney disease or neurological diseases, people who are elderly really defined as greater than 75 and people who are pregnant.”

“I think those are the groups most likely to be hospitalized if they were infected with this virus,” Offit added.

The U.S. guidelines are probably as broad as they are due to a “messaging issue,” Offit said.

“The thinking is that if we recommend it for everybody, then those high-risk groups are more likely to get it,” Offit said. “But I mean, we do have other targeted recommendations. I agree with most other countries in this world, which is we should target high-risk groups.”

The HealthDay/Harris Poll also found that:

• Of those unlikely to test for COVID, about 42% wouldn't test if their symptoms weren’t serious or severe and 28% would assume they have some other infection or illness.

• Two in 3 (66%) people who would test for COVID cite the desire to protect friends and family, and more than half (56%) say they would want to make sure it’s not some other infection.

• More than 4 in 5 (85%) said if they tested positive for COVID, they would quarantine and wear a mask.

• However, more than half (56%) don’t know the current recommended quarantine period for COVID.

The CDC now recommends that people with COVID stay away from others until at least 24 hours after their fever has ended and their symptoms also have improved.

The recommendation also asks that people mask and keep their distance from others for five days afterward.

More information

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has more about COVID-19.

SOURCE: HealthDay/Harris Poll, results, Jan. 30, 2025

Copyright © 2020 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. faced a plethora of tough questions on vaccines, abortion and public health policy during his Senate confirmation hearing Wednesday as President Donald Trump’s pick for secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS).

Lawmakers pressed Kennedy, a longtime vaccine critic and former Democrat-turned-independent, on his qualifications to oversee HHS, a $1.7 trillion agency that would put him in charge of Medicare, Medicaid, funding for medical research, public health outreach and much more.

While he's expected to win Republican support, his responses left many unconvinced about his ability to run the nation's largest health agency.

Here are some top takeaways from the hearing, from national and international news agencies:

Vaccine stance sparks a heated debate

Kennedy’s long history of vaccine skepticism was a major focus. Sen. Ron Wyden, a Democrat of Oregon, set the tone for his party with a deeply critical opening statement.

“Mr. Kennedy has embraced conspiracy theories, quacks, charlatans, especially when it comes to the safety and efficacy of vaccines,” Wyden said, as reported by USA Today.

Kennedy repeatedly claimed he was not anti-vaccine but "pro-safety."

Unsurprisingly, he was pressed about his past claims that COVID was made to target white and Black people while sparing Chinese people and Ashkenazi Jews and that Lyme disease was “highly likely” to have been a bioweapon.

“I probably did say that,” Kennedy said about Lyme disease, as reported by The New York Times. As for the COVID-19 claim, Kennedy stated that he had not said the virus was “deliberately targeted.”

Kennedy also said he supports the current childhood vaccination schedule and that he is not a conspiracy theorist.

"That's a pejorative that's applied to me to keep me from asking difficult questions about powerful interests," he told senators, as reported by BBC.

Medicare and Medicaid

Kennedy struggled to explain how he would manage Medicare and Medicaid, two major programs overseen by HHS.

Wyden argued that “from abortion to universal health care, Kennedy has changed his views so often it’s nearly impossible to know where he stands,” according to AP News.

Under questioning by Sen. Bill Cassidy, a Louisiana Republican who chairs the Senate Health Committee, Kennedy said he would like to integrate the two programs, The New York Times reported. Cassidy asked him how he would do it.

“I do not know the answer to that,” Kennedy said. “I look forward to, uh, exploring options with you.” He also said of Medicaid: “The premiums are too high, the deductibles are too high, and everybody’s getting sicker.” But except in very rare cases, Medicaid enrollees do not pay either premiums or deductibles.

Abortion stance leaves Democrats skeptical

Kennedy’s stance on abortion has shifted in recent years, aligning him more closely with Trump's.

He sidestepped questions about whether he would support attempts to restrict the abortion pill mifepristone, a goal of abortion opponents.

That led to a sharp response from Sen. Maggie Hassan, a New Hampshire Democrat. She noted that when Kennedy visited her state as a presidential candidate in 2023, he described himself as “pro-choice.” At that time, he also said the government did not have “any business telling people what they can or cannot do with their body,” Hassan recalled.

“When was it that you decided to sell out the values you’ve had your whole life in order to be given power by President Trump?” Hassan asked.

Kennedy sidestepped the question, The New York Times reported. “I agree with President Trump that every abortion is a tragedy," he said, in contrast to his past support for abortion access and reproductive rights.

Food policy and chronic disease prevention

On another note, there was some common ground when Kennedy outlined his plan to implement a nutrition-oriented disease prevention plan, CNN reported.

He received loud applause when he promised he would "make America healthy again."

"We will reverse the chronic disease epidemic and put the nation back on the road to health," Kennedy said, according to the BBC.

However, he reassured the public he wasn’t banning fast food.

"If you like a McDonald's cheeseburger or a Diet Coke - which my boss loves - you should be able to get them," he said, referring to Trump's well-known admiration for the fast-food giant.

More information

Learn more about the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services.

SOURCE: The New York Times, media report, Jan. 29, 2025; USA Today; media report, Jan. 29, 2025; Associated Press, media report, Jan. 29, 2025; BBC, media report, Jan. 29, 2025; CNN, media report, Jan. 29, 2025

Copyright © 2020 HealthDay. All rights reserved.