This TV spot and others, which I presume are all from HHS, encourages people over 65 to get an updated vaccination "if your last vaccine was before Sept 2022". They don't make it clear whether they're referring to the bivalent booster or an earlier vaccine. So since we got the booster last September we called our local pharmacy that gives vaccinations and they said some committee has not agreed on offering these boosters. This definitely needs explaining because the adverts are worrisome. https://youtu.be/019IKGiUUQs
It will be a bivalent vaccine. Monovalent ancestral vaccines are unlikely to be used much anymore, as the ancestral strains have been eclipsed by omicron variants and recombinant strains. The bivalent vaccines do retain a sample of ancestral RNA. and those bivalent vaccines as currently constituted, have demonstrated efficacy beyond what their omicron or subsequent variant strains have shown for naturally-acquired immunity. In other words, vaccines with boosters still exceed the ability of immunity derived from infection to protect against serious illness, hospitalization, and death.
excess death line we will be taking one more step towards normalizing all of the covid deaths. Next step will to collapse all of the covid deaths into respiratory deaths and poof the pandemic will be gone. This is what the CD C is moving towards - hiding the data.
“Excess deaths (red line below) continue to be above the “epidemic threshold” (black line). We haven’t had a national conversation defining the new baseline. What do we now consider normal given that we have an additional threat in our repertoire? As we move out of the pandemic phase, this black line needs to shift up. “
May not, the boomer generation was expected to continue to elevate baseline death rate through the next decade or two.
And even though it seems like a lot of death, we went from .88% of population dying per year to a peak of 1.045% in 2021 and back to .98% in 2022. Perhaps we get back to .88% but with an aging population maybe not.
I think this raises the question: what’s the definition of the black line? Is it based on past actual results and if so, how many years does it look backwards? Or is it based on some calculation which takes possible future variables in to account? The fact that "we haven’t had a national conversation defining the new baseline" makes me wonder how subjective (and possibly biased) the line is in the first place.
Moving it up might be seen by some as accepting that the excess deaths from Covid, plus all collateral damage (suicides, overdoses), are here to stay - which might weaken our resolve to reverse them.
Well put and consider me one of the “some” who see the moving up as "accepting that the excess deaths from Covid, plus all collateral damage (suicides, overdoses), are here to stay - which might weaken our resolve to reverse them."
The black line is also the bar each country uses to assess how well their government has managed the pandemic. Moving it up is to move the goalpost. Moving it up is to sweep unnecessary deaths under the rug.
Why can't we study countries that don't have such high excess death (if there are any), and learn from them? The US is very insular when it comes to learning from the rest of the world, which is unfortunate.
"This is what the CD C is moving towards - hiding the data.” That doesn’t give the CDC enough “credit”. They are not “hiding” it but obfuscating the situation so that they can plausibly say that “the data doesn’t verify..."
Thanks again. Now we can shift our attention to other issues, like the climate, democracy, guns.... Sorry. As Gilda said, it's always something. Your posts continue to be extremely clear and helpful. I hope you get some rest!
Dr. Jetelina— why the “wash your hands” warning for Norovirus, but not one peep about masking after reporting the horrendous COVID-19 death toll over the last few months?
I am familiar with how transmissible Norovirus is and what the guidelines are for hand washing. Washing hands is always a great idea. What I was asking was why she recommends mitigation for Norovirus (rarely fatal) but says absolutely nothing about masking to prevent transmission of a deadly respiratory virus.
She's been pushing masks for 3 years. I can't imagine there's a single person out there, certainly not a subscriber o YLE, on the fence about whether they are going to wear one.
Many of the biggest voices in this space have decided to start minimizing COVID. I am starting to feel like Dr. Jetelina’s message has shifted in that direction— hence my question.
It's year 3. It's probably not going away anymore than the flu or noroviruses are going away.
Right now, annually, there are 995 annual deaths per 100,000 people. Before Covid it was 855 deaths per 100K. Even a 995 we have a lower death rate than Germany, UK, Spain, Portugal, and Finland did pre-Covid - to put it in perspective.
There are vaccines and lots of boosters, if you choose to take them. There are masks if you want to wear them. When these were enforced, things were worse than now. Not a single country in the world made a dent in Covid with Masks, not sure what you are asking from YLE? You want her platform to urge us to mask forever? Or 5 years?
Masks, alone, are a lone issue for addressing an airborne virus. A layered approach where masks are prominent but not alone, does work… look at the 2020 and 20w1 flu seasons. But you’re correct: masks alone aren’t likely to be sufficient. A big portion of the issue is 2-fold. First, we’ve learned the importance of good quality masks. Second, no mask is effective when improperly worn. This doesn’t address fit testing and leaks, as you and I are well aware.
I maintain we no longer have sufficient testing to have any meaningful statistics. The reasons for this are many; there’s still time for blamestorming. But without sufficient data, it’s hard to reach good conclusions.
Your data provides good perspective but most of us who subscribe to YLE are interested in what she has to say on the issue of masks. I realize the response is probably going to be nuanced or a "it depends" kind of answer but I'd like to know what she is doing personally as an epidemiologist. I came to the comments today to ask this same question specifically.
Yes, it is hard to criticize the folks who have embraced you and are clearly “nice, well meaning, well informed people” like those at the FDA/CDC and their advisory committees. I am afraid we have “lost another” another critical thinker to this all too human trait.
The message on masking has been out, but between misinformation and frank denial, the mask message has lost traction. Also, emphasizing masks leads to online and even more direct harassment and even formal threats. We also have an issue in that CDC is, in some ways, echoing vocal critics who say, or believe, COVID isn’t as big a deal as “the government” has said. I wish this wasn’t the case, and maybe, with changes at the agency, next time, and there will be a next time, we can do a better job with the messaging.
Thanks for sharing this update. I would like to be able to get another vaccine, last was bi in Sept, before traveling to Ireland this June. But as it stands now our practitioners can not administer another vaccine to those who have completed all vaccinations approved to date. It has been 6 months and those of us 65 yrs and older should be able to receive a vaccine if our physicians feel one is warranted. What is the FDAs hold up on this decision.
No sensible answer to your question. Only that they are bureaucrats whose inclination is to do nothing so that any possible bad outcomes - however unlikely - can’t be blamed on their mistakes.
Thank you for educating us on the dynamism of pandemics. Like Dr. Fauci (but much less famous) I too started my medical career with one pandemic and am ending it with another. I was a third year med student when the 5th case of HIV in Chicago was on our service. My intern wouldn't even go in the patient's room. At that time infected patients had at most two hospitalizations before they completed their lives. I recall when in the 1990s I first encountered a patient on full anti-retrovirus therapy. I thought I was in the wrong room, the patient was muscular and vibrant.
We now are transitioning into that phase with COVID. Last week I participated in the care of patient with COVID who had multiple features to predict almost certain mortality based on 2020 data. The patient opted for "treat but don't intensify" level of care. Within a few days the patient began to recover. I then dove into the immunization record - all recommended doses had been given.
As with HIV we will continue to learn how to care for patients with this infection.
Would you consider doing an update on the status of drug-resistant Candida that seems to be a thing now? There were more signs about Candida than covid in my hospital yesterday. I was very weird.
Thank you again. I am still masking and washing my hands when I am around others. Having just recently come out of the hospital for surgery, I do not know what I was exposed to. It makes sense to me to monitor temperature and take covid tests for a period of time to stay informed.
I am concerned that we are going to an "it's all over" mentality prematurely. Given the mutability of the virus, and it's known track record of reinfectivity and going around the various barriers we have thrown up to stop it, I don't consider a lull in the numbers to justify any thoughts that we're into a permanent state of endemicity. That seems wishful thinking. Can epidemiology say with even 70% certainty that it is improbable the virus will not take a new form that will throw us back into a pandemic? We are in a zone of epistemic uncertainty and simply relying on past pandemic trajectories, while helpful, does not clear away the fog. Best to accept that we are not yet in the position to relax our defenses.
The best analogy I can summon is that of the outbreaks of wars. With each war over we thought it was the last for a long time ("the war to end all wars" with WWI) yet they kept and keep breaking out. I think with covid 19 we may be in a similar situation.
I suggest an epidemiological version of Pascal's Wager, substituting some language:
Rational actors are safest assuming the possibility of a virulent mutation emerging and take appropriate precautions. If that mutation never emerges, then the cautious actor has only suffered minor inconvenience. But if that mutation does emerge, then if s/he haven't taken precautions they're at risk of losing their life or those of their lived ones.
So temporary inconvenience or possible loss of life? I know how I bet on this! 🙂
I would like to see another mortality chart that includes cardio and pulmonary causes. I know this would be terribly complicated to draw any causal conclusions but shifts (or a lack thereof) would be interesting, considering the suggested complications and effects of the disease. Great post as always.
Thanks for making this understandable to the average lay person - you're great!
Can you commet on how someone finds out the covid variant that has infected them? Also, if someone has been vaccinated several times, and never (to their knowledge) has been infected, is there a way to verify their infection status?
I wonder this as well. As one of the estimated 15% of U. S. “Novids”, it’s hard to belief I haven’t fostered the illness, perhaps asymptomatically, at some point.
I'd be curious to hear more about this: " If this trend continues, having a high baseline throughout the year would be incredibly inconvenient". What are the implications if we have a steady higher-than-expected baseline of Covid transmitting year-round? Are other countries starting to see that with Covid-19? Has that played out with other novel viruses in the past? (1918 Flu, SARS).
This is a really interesting question. Other countries aren’t seeing this yet; we are still seeing swings in waves. It hasn’t really played out with other viruses. SARS vanished (for several reasons). 1918 flu became seasonal very quickly. We don’t really know the implications, other than it would mean more suffering
Thanks! My area (mid-Atlantic) doesn't track wastewater as far as I know, so I assume the sense of case rates in the community is pretty hard to pin down and unreliable/undercounted. But if you look at the past year, basically end of March 2022 to now, it certainly seems like while there were smaller upward spikes in hospitalizations and deaths across the country there was also a higher, steadier 'floor' than during the years prior. So I wonder how enduring that floor is going to be for the next year and if that's our new baseline and what that means.
Thanks! I'll have to look again. Last time I checked, which was admittedly a while ago, I found data for some correctional facilities but didn't see anything easily readable across the whole state.
I believe it is our new baseline. What it means is that a lot of people are going to die that wouldn’t have if our society and especially our health “experts” continue to downplay the problem and not fund solutions. And, of course the baseline could shift higher if a new, more infectious/deadly variant comes along.
Seems like a great (and logical) analogy. But by the time it’s well accepted and strong measures are taken to signicantly reduce that baseline, many people will unnecessarily die.
Do we understand what is causing the high baseline in the US? Earlier in the pandemic, we had very clear peaks and troughs, although its hard to know how much of this was the intrinsic "seasonality" of the virus versus social distancing measures that "pumped the brakes."
Yes, I think that’s part of it. My sense is very few people are taking mitigations right now.
I look at this as a dynamic math model. My best guess is there’s a high level of asymptomatic infection, so the virus keeps circulating and mutating, causing a high baseline. The question is: what is causing this?
I would be curious whether countries with high vaccination/boosters are more likely to experience high asymptomatic spread and baseline? If true, perhaps this is an acceptable trade off because the upside is fewer instances of severe disease, hospitalizations and death. I hope somebody is trying to understand what is causing the high baseline. I use to look forward to the troughs as times to get stuff done (doctor, dentist, home repair) with minimal risk.
A high baseline feels like policy makers have given up.
Thank you for another great post. It's great to hear that covid in wastewater is nosediving.
But not where I live (California). Virus in wastewater is 3x Thanksgiving and 2x Christmas.
What does it mean when the amount of virus in wastewater seems to keep going up? How closely do wastewater levels track (actual) new cases? What's the best way to use wastewater levels to gauge transmission levels and assess personal risk?
At least in the past, covid has exhibited peaks and troughs. What if our future entails living with a permanently elevated level of virus and transmission?
Take a look (select "Central Marin Sanitary Agency" from "Sample Site" menu):
The level of virus in the wastewater where I live is even 2x as high as the Omicron peak in early 2022! What's causing this? Please don't let this be the new normal.
Thanks. It's a bit frustrating being a geezer these days. We know we're at elevated risk but there's precious little guidance on how often we need boosters. I know that a rapidly evolving virus is likely to require regular renewal of immunity, but this one is hard to get a grip on. Political interference from the "plandemic" and anti-vaccine cranks isn't helping any when it comes to getting reliable data.
We have Covid in our house for the first time. My 12 year-old is miserable. It’s not “just a cold” or mild. I regret letting my kids go to school unmasked this year. I just hope he doesn’t have long-term effects.
Good as per the reg.
A discussion in a bit on whether to boost, and what to boost with, would be useful. I'm sure you're already thinking it all through.
On it!
This TV spot and others, which I presume are all from HHS, encourages people over 65 to get an updated vaccination "if your last vaccine was before Sept 2022". They don't make it clear whether they're referring to the bivalent booster or an earlier vaccine. So since we got the booster last September we called our local pharmacy that gives vaccinations and they said some committee has not agreed on offering these boosters. This definitely needs explaining because the adverts are worrisome. https://youtu.be/019IKGiUUQs
It will be a bivalent vaccine. Monovalent ancestral vaccines are unlikely to be used much anymore, as the ancestral strains have been eclipsed by omicron variants and recombinant strains. The bivalent vaccines do retain a sample of ancestral RNA. and those bivalent vaccines as currently constituted, have demonstrated efficacy beyond what their omicron or subsequent variant strains have shown for naturally-acquired immunity. In other words, vaccines with boosters still exceed the ability of immunity derived from infection to protect against serious illness, hospitalization, and death.
If we move the pandemic black line up to the
excess death line we will be taking one more step towards normalizing all of the covid deaths. Next step will to collapse all of the covid deaths into respiratory deaths and poof the pandemic will be gone. This is what the CD C is moving towards - hiding the data.
“Excess deaths (red line below) continue to be above the “epidemic threshold” (black line). We haven’t had a national conversation defining the new baseline. What do we now consider normal given that we have an additional threat in our repertoire? As we move out of the pandemic phase, this black line needs to shift up. “
Is it possible the black line needs to shift down because there are fewer vulnerable people left to die from covid?
May not, the boomer generation was expected to continue to elevate baseline death rate through the next decade or two.
And even though it seems like a lot of death, we went from .88% of population dying per year to a peak of 1.045% in 2021 and back to .98% in 2022. Perhaps we get back to .88% but with an aging population maybe not.
I think this raises the question: what’s the definition of the black line? Is it based on past actual results and if so, how many years does it look backwards? Or is it based on some calculation which takes possible future variables in to account? The fact that "we haven’t had a national conversation defining the new baseline" makes me wonder how subjective (and possibly biased) the line is in the first place.
Moving it up might be seen by some as accepting that the excess deaths from Covid, plus all collateral damage (suicides, overdoses), are here to stay - which might weaken our resolve to reverse them.
Well put and consider me one of the “some” who see the moving up as "accepting that the excess deaths from Covid, plus all collateral damage (suicides, overdoses), are here to stay - which might weaken our resolve to reverse them."
The black line is also the bar each country uses to assess how well their government has managed the pandemic. Moving it up is to move the goalpost. Moving it up is to sweep unnecessary deaths under the rug.
Why can't we study countries that don't have such high excess death (if there are any), and learn from them? The US is very insular when it comes to learning from the rest of the world, which is unfortunate.
"This is what the CD C is moving towards - hiding the data.” That doesn’t give the CDC enough “credit”. They are not “hiding” it but obfuscating the situation so that they can plausibly say that “the data doesn’t verify..."
Touché
Thanks again. Now we can shift our attention to other issues, like the climate, democracy, guns.... Sorry. As Gilda said, it's always something. Your posts continue to be extremely clear and helpful. I hope you get some rest!
Dr. Jetelina— why the “wash your hands” warning for Norovirus, but not one peep about masking after reporting the horrendous COVID-19 death toll over the last few months?
https://www.cdc.gov/norovirus/about/transmission.html
I am familiar with how transmissible Norovirus is and what the guidelines are for hand washing. Washing hands is always a great idea. What I was asking was why she recommends mitigation for Norovirus (rarely fatal) but says absolutely nothing about masking to prevent transmission of a deadly respiratory virus.
She's been pushing masks for 3 years. I can't imagine there's a single person out there, certainly not a subscriber o YLE, on the fence about whether they are going to wear one.
Many of the biggest voices in this space have decided to start minimizing COVID. I am starting to feel like Dr. Jetelina’s message has shifted in that direction— hence my question.
It's year 3. It's probably not going away anymore than the flu or noroviruses are going away.
Right now, annually, there are 995 annual deaths per 100,000 people. Before Covid it was 855 deaths per 100K. Even a 995 we have a lower death rate than Germany, UK, Spain, Portugal, and Finland did pre-Covid - to put it in perspective.
There are vaccines and lots of boosters, if you choose to take them. There are masks if you want to wear them. When these were enforced, things were worse than now. Not a single country in the world made a dent in Covid with Masks, not sure what you are asking from YLE? You want her platform to urge us to mask forever? Or 5 years?
Masks, alone, are a lone issue for addressing an airborne virus. A layered approach where masks are prominent but not alone, does work… look at the 2020 and 20w1 flu seasons. But you’re correct: masks alone aren’t likely to be sufficient. A big portion of the issue is 2-fold. First, we’ve learned the importance of good quality masks. Second, no mask is effective when improperly worn. This doesn’t address fit testing and leaks, as you and I are well aware.
I maintain we no longer have sufficient testing to have any meaningful statistics. The reasons for this are many; there’s still time for blamestorming. But without sufficient data, it’s hard to reach good conclusions.
Your data provides good perspective but most of us who subscribe to YLE are interested in what she has to say on the issue of masks. I realize the response is probably going to be nuanced or a "it depends" kind of answer but I'd like to know what she is doing personally as an epidemiologist. I came to the comments today to ask this same question specifically.
Yes, it is hard to criticize the folks who have embraced you and are clearly “nice, well meaning, well informed people” like those at the FDA/CDC and their advisory committees. I am afraid we have “lost another” another critical thinker to this all too human trait.
The message on masking has been out, but between misinformation and frank denial, the mask message has lost traction. Also, emphasizing masks leads to online and even more direct harassment and even formal threats. We also have an issue in that CDC is, in some ways, echoing vocal critics who say, or believe, COVID isn’t as big a deal as “the government” has said. I wish this wasn’t the case, and maybe, with changes at the agency, next time, and there will be a next time, we can do a better job with the messaging.
Thanks for sharing this update. I would like to be able to get another vaccine, last was bi in Sept, before traveling to Ireland this June. But as it stands now our practitioners can not administer another vaccine to those who have completed all vaccinations approved to date. It has been 6 months and those of us 65 yrs and older should be able to receive a vaccine if our physicians feel one is warranted. What is the FDAs hold up on this decision.
No sensible answer to your question. Only that they are bureaucrats whose inclination is to do nothing so that any possible bad outcomes - however unlikely - can’t be blamed on their mistakes.
Thank you for educating us on the dynamism of pandemics. Like Dr. Fauci (but much less famous) I too started my medical career with one pandemic and am ending it with another. I was a third year med student when the 5th case of HIV in Chicago was on our service. My intern wouldn't even go in the patient's room. At that time infected patients had at most two hospitalizations before they completed their lives. I recall when in the 1990s I first encountered a patient on full anti-retrovirus therapy. I thought I was in the wrong room, the patient was muscular and vibrant.
We now are transitioning into that phase with COVID. Last week I participated in the care of patient with COVID who had multiple features to predict almost certain mortality based on 2020 data. The patient opted for "treat but don't intensify" level of care. Within a few days the patient began to recover. I then dove into the immunization record - all recommended doses had been given.
As with HIV we will continue to learn how to care for patients with this infection.
Thank you for being part of the learning process.
Sure hope - but doubt - that your analogy turns out to be true across the board based on many more statistics than this anecdotal comparison.
Would you consider doing an update on the status of drug-resistant Candida that seems to be a thing now? There were more signs about Candida than covid in my hospital yesterday. I was very weird.
on it!
Thank you again. I am still masking and washing my hands when I am around others. Having just recently come out of the hospital for surgery, I do not know what I was exposed to. It makes sense to me to monitor temperature and take covid tests for a period of time to stay informed.
I am concerned that we are going to an "it's all over" mentality prematurely. Given the mutability of the virus, and it's known track record of reinfectivity and going around the various barriers we have thrown up to stop it, I don't consider a lull in the numbers to justify any thoughts that we're into a permanent state of endemicity. That seems wishful thinking. Can epidemiology say with even 70% certainty that it is improbable the virus will not take a new form that will throw us back into a pandemic? We are in a zone of epistemic uncertainty and simply relying on past pandemic trajectories, while helpful, does not clear away the fog. Best to accept that we are not yet in the position to relax our defenses.
The best analogy I can summon is that of the outbreaks of wars. With each war over we thought it was the last for a long time ("the war to end all wars" with WWI) yet they kept and keep breaking out. I think with covid 19 we may be in a similar situation.
I suggest an epidemiological version of Pascal's Wager, substituting some language:
Rational actors are safest assuming the possibility of a virulent mutation emerging and take appropriate precautions. If that mutation never emerges, then the cautious actor has only suffered minor inconvenience. But if that mutation does emerge, then if s/he haven't taken precautions they're at risk of losing their life or those of their lived ones.
So temporary inconvenience or possible loss of life? I know how I bet on this! 🙂
Agree! Look, would you or any other rational actor, wager say your house against a resurgence? In say, the next five years
I would like to see another mortality chart that includes cardio and pulmonary causes. I know this would be terribly complicated to draw any causal conclusions but shifts (or a lack thereof) would be interesting, considering the suggested complications and effects of the disease. Great post as always.
Thanks for making this understandable to the average lay person - you're great!
Can you commet on how someone finds out the covid variant that has infected them? Also, if someone has been vaccinated several times, and never (to their knowledge) has been infected, is there a way to verify their infection status?
I wonder this as well. As one of the estimated 15% of U. S. “Novids”, it’s hard to belief I haven’t fostered the illness, perhaps asymptomatically, at some point.
I'd be curious to hear more about this: " If this trend continues, having a high baseline throughout the year would be incredibly inconvenient". What are the implications if we have a steady higher-than-expected baseline of Covid transmitting year-round? Are other countries starting to see that with Covid-19? Has that played out with other novel viruses in the past? (1918 Flu, SARS).
This is a really interesting question. Other countries aren’t seeing this yet; we are still seeing swings in waves. It hasn’t really played out with other viruses. SARS vanished (for several reasons). 1918 flu became seasonal very quickly. We don’t really know the implications, other than it would mean more suffering
Thanks! My area (mid-Atlantic) doesn't track wastewater as far as I know, so I assume the sense of case rates in the community is pretty hard to pin down and unreliable/undercounted. But if you look at the past year, basically end of March 2022 to now, it certainly seems like while there were smaller upward spikes in hospitalizations and deaths across the country there was also a higher, steadier 'floor' than during the years prior. So I wonder how enduring that floor is going to be for the next year and if that's our new baseline and what that means.
Maryland tracks wastewater.
Thanks! I'll have to look again. Last time I checked, which was admittedly a while ago, I found data for some correctional facilities but didn't see anything easily readable across the whole state.
I believe it is our new baseline. What it means is that a lot of people are going to die that wouldn’t have if our society and especially our health “experts” continue to downplay the problem and not fund solutions. And, of course the baseline could shift higher if a new, more infectious/deadly variant comes along.
There’s an evolutionary biologist in Canada who has been talking about baseline rising, “Not tsunamis. Rising sea level with regular high and low tides.” (But imo it doesn’t seem to be a concept that’s taking hold yet.) One example here: https://twitter.com/tryangregory/status/1636745340303863810?s=46&t=hOibpRA2wDbvCtpFqTKpTw
Seems like a great (and logical) analogy. But by the time it’s well accepted and strong measures are taken to signicantly reduce that baseline, many people will unnecessarily die.
Do we understand what is causing the high baseline in the US? Earlier in the pandemic, we had very clear peaks and troughs, although its hard to know how much of this was the intrinsic "seasonality" of the virus versus social distancing measures that "pumped the brakes."
Wouldn’t it be people not taking mitigations?
Yes, I think that’s part of it. My sense is very few people are taking mitigations right now.
I look at this as a dynamic math model. My best guess is there’s a high level of asymptomatic infection, so the virus keeps circulating and mutating, causing a high baseline. The question is: what is causing this?
I would be curious whether countries with high vaccination/boosters are more likely to experience high asymptomatic spread and baseline? If true, perhaps this is an acceptable trade off because the upside is fewer instances of severe disease, hospitalizations and death. I hope somebody is trying to understand what is causing the high baseline. I use to look forward to the troughs as times to get stuff done (doctor, dentist, home repair) with minimal risk.
A high baseline feels like policy makers have given up.
Thank you for another great post. It's great to hear that covid in wastewater is nosediving.
But not where I live (California). Virus in wastewater is 3x Thanksgiving and 2x Christmas.
What does it mean when the amount of virus in wastewater seems to keep going up? How closely do wastewater levels track (actual) new cases? What's the best way to use wastewater levels to gauge transmission levels and assess personal risk?
At least in the past, covid has exhibited peaks and troughs. What if our future entails living with a permanently elevated level of virus and transmission?
Take a look (select "Central Marin Sanitary Agency" from "Sample Site" menu):
https://coronavirus.marinhhs.org/surveillance
The level of virus in the wastewater where I live is even 2x as high as the Omicron peak in early 2022! What's causing this? Please don't let this be the new normal.
What would lead us to assume anything else "but a permanently elevated level of virus and transmission”?
Thanks. It's a bit frustrating being a geezer these days. We know we're at elevated risk but there's precious little guidance on how often we need boosters. I know that a rapidly evolving virus is likely to require regular renewal of immunity, but this one is hard to get a grip on. Political interference from the "plandemic" and anti-vaccine cranks isn't helping any when it comes to getting reliable data.
We have Covid in our house for the first time. My 12 year-old is miserable. It’s not “just a cold” or mild. I regret letting my kids go to school unmasked this year. I just hope he doesn’t have long-term effects.
Thanks as always for a clear summary of the state of affairs. The Guardian ran a somewhat alarmist story today about H5N1 influenza jumping from birds to a variety of mammal species. Might be something to keep an eye on. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/mar/21/bird-flu-peru-sea-lions-suffer-death-beach-aoe-h5n1
Hard to make a constructive comment when you covered the material so well. Thanks.