It is a daunting task tracking down reliable information during Covid-19. Misinformation tends to spread like …the coronavirus. The Baker institute Blog is providing excellent succinct summaries of reliable information and sources as the pandemic evolves.
The post below originally appeared on the Baker Institute Blog April 20, 2020 and was coauthored by Vivian Ho, Ph.D. (@healthecontx), James A. Baker III Institute Chair in Health Economics, Kirstin Matthews, Ph.D. (@stpolicy), Baker Institute Fellow in Science and Technology Policy and Heidi Russell, M.D., Ph.D., Associate Professor, Department of Pediatrics, Baylor College of Medicine and Associate Director, Center for Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Baylor College of Medicine.
Having finished our fifth week in isolation, we are encouraged that the nation may have passed its peak date for the number of new cases and new deaths. We update you on efforts to identify treatments for the coronavirus, as well as policymakers’ discussions on when to reopen the economy, what that might look like, and where government funding should be directed. Previous issues are posted here.
Epidemiology and Treatment
Health experts warn us not to expect a single peak day in terms of new cases, deaths, or otherwise. Daily reports of new cases and deaths can fluctuate depending upon the availability of tests and delays in reporting. The New York Times’ juxtaposes a bar graph of the number of new cases by day with a line calculating the 7-day average of these numbers, indicating that the number of new cases has fallen to less than 30,000 per day. The 7-day average of new deaths also has begun to fall, to roughly 2,000 per day.
On Friday Worldometers estimated that 58,000 people in the U.S. have recovered from the coronavirus. Mark Lipsitch, an epidemiologist at Harvard University, provides a compelling case that most individuals who contracted the virus will have an immune response, some better than others. He suggests that the immune response will offer some protection over the medium term — at least a year — and then its effectiveness might decline. This view that contracting the virus yields only temporary immunity, is shared by other experts. Thus, treatments and a vaccine for COVID-19 are crucial in ultimately conquering this pandemic.
To date, researchers and drug companies have launched over 100 human experiments to identify treatments for the coronavirus. However, an article in the Washington Post warns that the lack of coordination across investigations could generate numerous small-scale trials with conflicting answers. For example, there are more than two dozen separate U.S. trials listed for the anti-malarial drug hydroxychloroquine. Some use the drug as a preventive, others as a treatment; some in combination with other drugs, and some with no comparison group. Information from multiple investigations is often better, but coordination across these studies could have yielded larger sample sizes and cleaner study designs, so that results could be used to prioritize treatments. Francis Collins, director of the National Institutes of Health has been working behind the scenes to launch an unprecedented public-private partnership to achieve better coordination.
In the scientific journal Immunity, researchers review the COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2 vaccine development and its challenges In addition, the WHO cataloged a long list of potential candidates, and an article from “The Scientist” describes frontrunners that hoped to be tested this year, providing details on each vaccine’s approach to target the virus as well as preliminary evidence. Meanwhile, fake news regarding causes of and treatment for coronavirus are circulating through social media. The World Health Organization (WHO) has posted a series mythbuster infographics to dispel rumors such as one that 5G mobile networks spread COVID-19.
Public health experts continue to emphasize that passing the peak number of cases or deaths does not mean that the pandemic is over, and that we will need to maintain social distancing in one form or the other for months to come. More than a dozen states have extended stay-home orders past the White House deadline of April 30th. In the meantime, governors on the east and west coasts were reported last Monday to have formed pacts to decide when they would reopen their economies. Governors of Midwest states followed suit soon afterwards. These pacts will draw on facts and science to create plans to re-open each state in a way that limits new outbreaks of coronavirus. Among the steps are contact tracing, treatment and social distancing measures.
For example, last week we highlighted the recommendation for A National COVID-19 Surveillance System which included capacity to conduct 750,000 coronavirus tests per week. Unfortunately, most parts of the country report test supply shortages that remain “crippling.” Experts emphasize the need for contact tracers, to identify those who could have contracted the virus by coming into contact with someone who has tested positive for the virus. Policy makers are acting on that recommendation, with the C.D.C. planning to hire hundreds of contacts tracers and, it is in discussions to divert 25,000 Census Bureau workers to do contact tracing in the coming weeks and months. Experts suggest that employers can do their part to reduce the spread of coronavirus by offering screening at their place of business. Employers can help workers to safely self-isolate at home and work with local health authorities to improve contact tracing.
As TIME magazine stated, “Public health experts have savaged President Donald Trump’s decision to cut U.S. funding to the WHO.” Critics include U.N. Secretary General António Guterres and the editor-in-chief of the Lancet medical journal, who called the decision “a crime against humanity.” The administration is reportedly withholding funds, because the WHO failed to adequately investigate early information about the virus’s ability to spread between humans and for not criticizing China for its lack of transparency over the virus. This view is echoed in an article in The Atlantic, which points to structural problems at the WHO that make the organization vulnerable to misinformation and political influence, in this case by China. Nevertheless, the U.S. pays for about 22% of the WHO’s budget. Cutting funding for international public health initiatives in the midst of a crisis could have dire consequences for Americans in the future.
Health and Human Services is distributing the first $30 billion in emergency grants to hospitals and doctors from the CARES Act according to their historical share of revenue from the Medicare program for seniors — not according to their coronavirus burden. States lightly hit by the coronavirus, such as Minnesota, are getting more than $300,000 per COVID-19 case, while New York is receiving $12,000 per case. The HHS decision raises the prospects that hospitals in hard-hit areas will be weighing their financial health more heavily than patient well-being for each additional COVID-19 case that comes through their doors.
On the Medical Frontlines
Evidence of strain on the healthcare workforce continues to mount. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) published a report estimating at least 9,282 United States health care workers have been sickened by COVID-19, and at least 27 died. This is likely an underestimate because of how local or state authorities report cases. The CDC concluded that approximately half of these providers were exposed in their workplace. The worse outcomes were in the over 65 workforce, although death and critical illness occurred at all ages. The first installment of a bi-weekly survey of medical staff across the country was performed by MedPage Today. The responses suggest that regional variation in the share of the healthcare workforce that is temporarily out, critically ill or dead because of COVID-19 lies between 1% and 20%. The proportions are much higher in concentrated areas like New York. For an in-depth account of healthcare workers who died from COVID-19, we applaud the stories found in Lost on the Frontline.
Healthcare workers are particularly at risk when performing nasal swabbing to test for the coronavirus, which requires the provider to stand directly in front of the person being tested. The swabbing generates a natural reflex to cough or sneeze, sending droplets into the air. To that end the first COVID-19 test of saliva was approved by the FDA this week. This new test will allow patients to spit into a vial and hand it back to the health care worker. The test is not yet available in most health care organizations, and questions remain about its accuracy. But as these hurdles are overcome, this safer, simpler testing would also circumvent the shortage of nasal swabs that is hindering test availability across the country.
In the coming we week, hopefully new cases of the coronavirus and daily death toll continue to decline. We are most concerned about the continuing short supply of coronavirus tests. We hope that federal, state, and local governments aggressively pursue efforts to hire and train contact tracers throughout the country. Debate has begun on what role smartphone apps by Apple and Google could play in contact tracing, and we will follow that discussion closely. We also look forward to reviewing state governors’ developing plans to reopen their economies.
Still socially distanced but ever skeptically Yours,
4 thoughts on “A Reliable Source for Reliable Sources During Covid-19”
Vaccine for COVID-19 ? When and how ? – We still don’t have a safe one for SARS, and how many years ago was that ‘plague’ ?
Or a HIV vaccine.
Most (metabolically healthy) folk exposed to COV don’t have major symptoms – assuming infection – and those elderly and/or in poor immune health with co-morbidities are more likely to end up in the ICU.
Intubated – ventilated patients have not been doing well either, raising the question of whether the therapy is helping or harming.
Then there are the myriad of drug trials you mentioned.
Yesterday I read of yet another, on Plaquenil. No other nutrient or drug in that arm, yet it’s well known it’s a powerful zinc ionophore, – drags zinc through cell walls and INto the cell, where the zinc hinders viral replication. No comment on this at all, and the “placebo” arm ? – not saline, but an inadequate, 1,000mg/day PO of Vitamin C
. No surpirse what the result will be, nor the fact this trial is partially financed by an inordinately influential yet non-medical person with Vaccine manufacturing interest$..
Then when we hear a leading federal government official touting a saviour vaccine ‘Just around the corner’… and his support for WHO which is at odds with POTUS’s declarations… and when we look at his own performance since SARS and MERS, well, some cynicism by the public becomes understandable.
“A house divided against itself cannot stand” is just as true today, as 2,000 years ago
To: The SDr. Ott performed double bypass on me about 15 years ago. Excellent job, now 78 and great health, proximal Afib first 5 years; permanent last 10 years. I patented device in beginning to ascertain Afib by time finished didn’t need it. It needs no attendant connection or equipment. Can be manf and sold for $19.95(at a profit). Batt life 2 yrs then disposable. It could be of great use today. I have no plans for it and thought you could give me you thoughts about, in general. Vernon Reaser Jr. uspto 8774897
In my opinion this is a poorly written article from a medical standpoint and seems to have a political bent. I don’t find much new or important information here.
Here is offered a corona virus summary update including history, biology, timelines, infectivity, vaccines, testing, treatments