Covid-19
'We're doomed': How the CARES Act forget America's most vulnerable hospitals
A federal economic relief package passed by Congress in March promised to provide a lifeline for hospitals, particularly those in rural communities where many facilities struggled to survive even before the coronavirus pandemic.
But over the past 10 months, the distribution of more than $100 billion in CARES Act funding for health care providers has been plagued by a dizzying rollout and, at times, contradictory guidelines for how to use the funding.The result has been a patchwork of problems for rural hospitals, which were already at far greater risk of closure than other health care facilities and in dire need of help, The Frontier and ProPublica found. The scope of those problems is clearly visible in Oklahoma, which tied for the third-highest number of hospital closures in the country in the nine years before the pandemic.
One hospital used more than $1 million in federal aid to pay off its years-old debt to a management company that left before Oklahoma's first coronavirus case was diagnosed, a potential violation of federal guidelines that could require the hospital to return the money, according to experts.
Three Oklahoma hospitals that were purchased last year after filing for bankruptcy were unable to access more than $6 million in funds deposited by the Department of Health and Human Services, the agency in charge of the rollout for health care providers. The money was instead deposited into accounts tied to the previous owners, leaving the new owners with few options as they tried to keep the facilities from becoming insolvent.
And administrators at yet other hospitals have left millions in relief aid untouched, spiraling deeper into debt for fear that the wrong decision could force them to return money.
“Every day we have new rules, new guidelines, and it's a struggle," said Shelly Dunham, CEO of Okeene Municipal Hospital in western Oklahoma. Dunham said she used only $50,000 of the $3 million the hospital received in April and May because of concerns that the facility would have to return the money. “I can't say we need more money right now. We just need to be able to keep what they've given us."
Under the CARES Act, funding can be used to prevent, prepare for and respond to the coronavirus or to help with expenses or losses caused by COVID-19. The problem is in the details, which Congress left to HHS.
HHS has primarily managed concerns by publicly releasing responses to more than 100 frequently asked questions. Those responses have sometimes contradicted previous guidance from the agency, leaving health care providers confused about how money can be used and what the agency would seek to claw back. The whipsawing guidance has covered a range of topics, including how health care providers could calculate losses from the pandemic and whether they could use the money to pay for long-term capital improvement projects such as new heating, ventilating and air conditioning systems.
“Hospitals' challenge right now is keeping their doors open and paying their debts," said Carrie Cochran-McClain, vice president of government affairs and policy for the National Rural Health Association. “There is not enough flexibility to help providers really use the funds as Congress intended for the kinds of things that they need to address for COVID."
Rural hospitals across Oklahoma and the country are disappearing at an alarming pace that could hasten without help from the federal government, Cochran-McClain said. In 2019, the year before the coronavirus pandemic, rural hospital closures reached a record high, with 18 nationwide. Texas led the country with three closures. Tennessee, Kansas and Oklahoma followed with two each.
Last year, despite the infusion of federal funding, another 17 rural hospitals shuttered, bringing the total number of closures since 2005 to 176.
Unlike larger, wealthier facilities, rural hospitals often have only a few weeks' worth of cash on hand to operate with. Experts have warned that even with the federal relief aid, many hospitals would struggle. But without it, they would surely fail.
“There was a tussle between the desire early on to get funds out quickly into the hands of people and providers who need it first, and also a compelling need to have oversight of where the money is going," said James Cosgrove, health care director for the Government Accountability Office. After the first distribution of $50 billion in April, the GAO found that the federal government had sent $558,000 to four closed hospitals that either declined or returned the money.
The Frontier and ProPublica found six other hospitals that closed in 2019 but received more than $3.2 million combined in federal relief payments. More than half of the money went to a hospital in Ellwood City, Pennsylvania, that closed in December 2019 after state inspectors found unsafe conditions for patients.
The relief money was being used for security and to respond to medical records requests until Ellwood City Medical Center could be sold, a bankruptcy trustee said in a December 2020 court filing. The trustee did not respond to requests for comment.
An HHS official said the agency is “in the process of recovering payments'' from hospitals that permanently closed before Jan. 31, 2020, but would not say how much it was pursuing or identify any closed facilities that had received aid. Officials said they could not comment specifically on the six hospitals identified by The Frontier and ProPublica because the agency does not release information on individual facilities.
The distribution of funding for health care providers is just one example of complications with the sweeping $2 trillion CARES Act. More than $174 billion in temporary tax breaks benefited mostly wealthy people and large companies. The Paycheck Protection Program, another effort aimed at helping small businesses stay afloat, drew widespread criticism after large companies, including the restaurant chains Ruth's Chris and Shake Shack, qualified for loans, while smaller struggling businesses were shut out. Ruth's Chris and Shake Shack later agreed to return the money.
The hospital rescue program similarly helped wealthier facilities pad their bottom lines, while poorer hospitals struggled. In the first round of funding, wealthier hospitals received a larger share of the $50 billion than poor and rural hospitals, according to a report from the Kaiser Family Foundation, a health policy research organization. The report found that those hospitals with a larger share of revenue coming from private insurers received about $44,000 per bed, while poor, rural hospitals got about half that amount.
Subsequently, HHS set aside billions more for rural health care providers and for hospitals with a higher percentage of COVID-19 patients. But that wasn't enough to make up for the inequities, said Karyn Schwartz, a senior fellow for Kaiser.
“I think they (HHS) were under a lot of pressure to do it quickly, and so they prioritized a quick and simple formula over really targeting the money towards the providers who might be most vulnerable," Schwartz said.
HHS officials said they have repeatedly made improvements to the system in response to feedback from Congress and health care providers. The agency has changed the way it distributes money, seeking a formal application instead of releasing funding to all hospitals. A new $900 billion pandemic relief package passed in December also gave hospitals more flexibility in calculating revenue losses from the pandemic.
“HHS has balanced the need for flexibility in use of funds to stabilize the health care system with program integrity requirements and the responsible use of taxpayer dollars," the agency said in a statement released before President Joe Biden took office.
“We're Doomed"
As rural communities across Oklahoma began experiencing an uptick in COVID-19 cases, the new owner of the only hospital in the small Oklahoma town of Prague fought for access to part of $3.2 million in federal relief aid.
The Prague Community Hospital was one of three that in June asked U.S. Bankruptcy Court Judge Joseph Callaway to help them solve what appeared to be an intractable problem.
The facilities, which included the Fairfax Community Hospital and the Haskell County Community Hospital, were among 11 that entered bankruptcy in 2019 amid accusations that the company that owned them, EmpowerHMS, had engaged in fraud. In a federal indictment unsealed in June, prosecutors accused the company's owner, Jorge Perez, and nine others of a scheme that allowed rural hospitals to bill at higher rates for blood and urine tests performed elsewhere. The case is set to go to trial in September 2021. Perez and eight other defendants have pleaded not guilty. A tenth defendant has not yet appeared in court.
Each Oklahoma hospital owned by the company was auctioned off by a bankruptcy trustee in charge of settling financial debts incurred under EmpowerHMS.
After unexpected revenue losses from the pandemic, the new owners banked on federal funding from the hospital relief package. But when the money was dispersed, they got nothing.
HHS had instead deposited a total of $6.4 million into accounts connected to the hospitals' previous owners and managed by bankruptcy trustee Thomas Waldrep.
Since federal rules prevented the money from being transferred, it had to be returned to HHS, Department of Justice attorney Michael Quinn said during a June bankruptcy court hearing.
The new owners would have to wait for another round of relief, Quinn said. Even then, they may not qualify because the money was distributed using the hospitals' 2019 tax identification numbers and none of the current owners controlled the facilities at the time.
“This is not specific to this case, this is a response to an enormous program of unprecedented size that rolled out billions of dollars on an emergency basis to provide relief and used estimated data to get the money out the door as fast as possible," Quinn said during the court hearing. “As soon as that happens though, that creates an expectation that, in some cases, the money will not go and land in the correct place. And here, it happened to land in the middle of a corporate sale of an asset."
Waldrep, the bankruptcy trustee, later said in an interview that he believed the new owners should get a portion of the relief aid but he was hamstrung by the federal rules. The trustee also wanted to use a portion of the money to pay some of the hospitals' debts from before the sale, including his fee and charges from the management company that operated the facilities during the transition.
“This puts our clients in a very bad position in terms of the continued delivery of care in these very critical needed areas," Hugh Robert, an attorney for Transcendental Union with Love and Spiritual Advancement, said during the hearing. The Tulsa-based nonprofit that purchased the Prague Community Hospital in May.
Attorneys for the new owners of the three hospitals and for Waldrep asked the judge to allow them to use the money despite objections from the federal government. During the hearing, Callaway grew increasingly irritated at what he viewed as the federal government's failure to help the clearly struggling hospitals.
The lack of guidance and flexibility from the federal government endangered hospitals instead of helping communities keep them open, Callaway said.
“We don't do things like this around here," he said. “All I hear are reasons from the government of why it can't be done, instead of reasons why it can be done."
The judge eventually allowed Waldrep to reach agreements with the hospitals. As part of the final plan, Waldrep could use about $750,000 to pay his fees and expenses for overseeing the bankruptcy cases. He would use another $1.4 million to pay Cohesive Healthcare Management and Consulting, which operated the hospitals in bankruptcy.
Some of the money would also go to expenses that were incurred before the sale but were directly related to COVID-19.
The Fairfax and Prague hospitals would each then receive a portion of the remaining $4 million. But because the federal government threatened to later take back money it determined was misused, the hospitals would have to obtain a line of credit that would protect the previous owner from any collection attempts.
Dr. Vishal Aggarwal, who founded the nonprofit that purchased the Prague hospital, said he was never able to secure the financing that would serve as collateral because of the facility's poor financial state.
“If a second wave hits us, we are doomed," Aggarwal said in an interview.
Coming to Collect
During the pandemic, hospitals were forced to forgo elective surgeries and other nonessential services that help drive the minimal revenue that rural facilities bring in annually. The losses, coupled with the added costs of preparing hospitals for the pandemic, heightened the urgency of obtaining federal relief.
Some Oklahoma rural hospitals received federal relief aid before the coronavirus pandemic spread to their small towns and immediately began using the money without considering how expenses could later be justified.
In May, Cimarron Memorial Hospital, in the Oklahoma Panhandle, was two weeks away from closing. It had fallen behind on state taxes and was working to settle a lawsuit filed months earlier by the electric company after the hospital failed to pay its several bills. It also owed $1.2 million in past-due fees to NewLight Healthcare, a management company that ran the hospital for nearly a decade before abruptly departing in January 2020.
The hospital received $3.5 million in federal relief payments and loans.
Tim Beard, Cimarron's chief executive officer, used nearly a third of the relief aid to pay off NewLight Healthcare, a decision that experts say could force the hospital to repay the federal government. HHS has called it “highly unusual" that the relief aid could be used for expenses incurred before Jan. 1, 2020.
For nearly a decade, NewLight provided loans to the Cimarron hospital and deferred management fees, under a contract that allowed it to charge interest on the past-due amounts. The company then placed a lien on the hospital's incoming payments. If NewLight chose to enforce the lien, as it had already done in another Oklahoma town, the hospital would be required to pay the company before it paid employees or covered bills for medical supplies.
Lee Hughes, an executive vice president for NewLight, declined an interview and did not respond to detailed written questions. In a statement, Hughes said that the company acted in good faith by settling for less than what it was owed.
“NewLight did this both to resolve all past indebtedness owed by the hospital, but also as a gesture of good will," Hughes said.
The hospital had run out of options to settle its debts, said Beard, adding that he believed there were no restrictions on the coronavirus relief money.
“If I didn't do things as I should have then we will pay the price for that but we got the community taken care of for eight months longer than we were looking at," Beard said in an email.
Hospitals will be required to start reporting how they spent the federal relief aid, but HHS officials said no deadline has been set. Those that received at least $750,000 must undergo audits that HHS will use to determine whether money must be returned.
“I think there's probably many in the industry optimistic that the government doesn't want to recoup this money, and they're going to come up with a way to allow the hospitals to keep it," said Eric Shell, a rural hospital finance expert with the health care consulting firm Stroudwater Associates.
By the time COVID-19 arrived in Cimarron County, the hospital had already used $2 million in federal funds. Aside from the payment to NewLight, Beard said he used $250,000 to replace the hospital's broken CT scanner, $81,000 to settle its debt to the electric company and another $750,000 to cover payroll and other bills.
The hospital still has $1 million in provider relief funds, according to Beard, who did not provide detailed financial records requested by The Frontier and ProPublica. Beard said he hadn't compiled the information because it doesn't have to be reported to the federal government until this year.
“If they take back the money or what we have in savings, we won't survive," Beard said in an email to The Frontier and ProPublica.
Another Shot at Relief Funding
Despite vastly different problems with the rollout of the federal program, hospital administrators share a fear that money they thought would save them could now accelerate their closure.
This month, Dunham started using more of the $3 million she had been holding on to. The hospital, she said, needs the money. But Dunham said she hasn't stopped worrying about the crushing financial situation the hospital will face if the federal government disagrees with how the money is spent and asks for it to be returned.
The Prague hospital has now changed hands. City officials who purchased the hospital this month for $1.3 million say they are not concerned about whether the government will claw back federal funds. Instead, they're worried about getting access to the money in the first place.
The 25-bed hospital has been operating at or near capacity since Thanksgiving, when Oklahoma experienced a spike in COVID-19 cases that continues to grow. The city loaned the hospital $236,000 from its emergency reserves to pay employee salaries in November and December, according to city officials. And the hospital still needs to make various improvements, including replacing an antiquated system that supplies oxygen to patients.
Prague's mayor, Cliff Bryant, acknowledged the risk the city took in buying the hospital, given the facility's history of financial problems and the additional pressures from the ongoing pandemic. But, he said, the move was necessary to ensure residents had access to quality health care.
“It's either that or shut it down, so it's not a real good choice," Bryant said.
Bryant said the city plans to apply for another round of relief money, probably early this year, but he worries about another denial. HHS has an estimated $24 billion left to allocate. The agency has not released details about which providers will qualify and how much they will receive.
Meanwhile, the $1.7 million in relief money intended to help the Prague hospital weather the pandemic is still sitting in a bank account controlled by the bankruptcy trustee. He's unsure what will happen to the money.
“I think one possibility is that it would just get sent back to the government," Waldrep said.
Nearly half of American adults now want the Covid vaccine — ASAP
Americans' reluctance to get vaccinated for covid-19 is waning, according to a poll released Wednesday.
Nearly half of adults surveyed in January said they have either already been vaccinated or want the vaccine as soon as they can, up from about a third of adults polled in December, according to the latest KFF survey. (KHN is an editorially independent program of KFF.)
About 20 million Americans have been vaccinated for covid since distribution of the first vaccines began in mid-December. The pace has also picked up in recent weeks, with more than a million Americans on average getting vaccinated every day. The survey found that when people know someone close to them who has been vaccinated, they are more likely to want the shots.
About half of those who said they want the shot as soon as possible know someone who has already gotten a dose, a much larger share than among those who said they'll get it only if required (29%) or will refuse to get it (36%).
Nearly half (47%) of adults said they have personally received at least one vaccine dose or know someone who has. People posting their vaccination status on social networks such as Facebook and Twitter has helped spread the word.
Racial, ethnic and economic disparities continue, however. White adults (51%) are more likely than Black (38%) or Hispanic (37%) respondents to have either been vaccinated or know someone who has, and those with annual household incomes of at least $90,000 are almost twice as likely as those with incomes under $40,000 to say so (64% vs. 34%). (Hispanics can represent any race or combination of races.)
About 3 in 10 adults said they want to wait until the vaccine “has been available for a while to see how it is working for others" before getting it themselves. About 7% of adults said they will get the vaccine only “if required to do so for work, school or other activities," and just 13% said they will “definitely not get" the vaccine, not a significant change.
The poll also found about 1 in 3 health care workers planned to wait to see how the vaccine is working or would get it only if required to.
The percentage of people who said they want the vaccine immediately is up among the racial and ethnic groups surveyed, although white (53%) adults remained more likely to say so than Black (35%) and Hispanic (42%) adults. Black (43%) and Hispanic (37%) adults were more likely than white adults (26%) to say they want to “wait and see" before getting vaccinated, according to the poll.
Democrats and independents also showed increased enthusiasm, though Republicans' views were little changed since December.
Republicans remained the least enthusiastic political group, with 32% saying they have already been vaccinated or want the vaccine as soon as they can, 33% saying they want to wait and see how it works for others, and 25% saying they will definitely not get the vaccine.
The KFF survey of 1,563 adults was conducted Jan. 11-18 and had a margin of error of +/-3 percentage points.
Kaiser Health News (KHN) is a national health policy news service. It is an editorially independent program of the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation which is not affiliated with Kaiser Permanente.
USE OUR CONTENT
This story can be republished for free (details).
Subscribe to KHN's free Morning Briefing.
Biden administration aims to have enough vaccine for most Americans by summertime
By Trevor Hunnicutt WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States aims to acquire an additional 200 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines, President Joe Biden said on Tuesday, enough to inoculate most Americans by summertime, as he races to curb a pandemic he warned could still get worse. Biden's administration will purchase 100 million doses each of the vaccines made by Pfizer Inc and BioNTech, and Moderna Inc, increasing the overall total doses to 600 million, with delivery expected by summer. The previous purchase target was 400 million doses. Each vaccine requires two doses per person to be fully ...
Coronavirus might ‘hide’ in brains of severely ill patients -- wreaking potential lifelong havoc
The novel coronavirus doesn’t just attack the brain, new research shows. It may take up residence and “hide” there. And, like Jason in the unending stream of “Friday the 13th” movies, it could come back. Researchers at Georgia State University measured the levels of SARS-CoV-2 – the pathogen that causes COVID-19 – in the brains of mice that had been infected via their nasal passages and had developed severe illness. They found virus levels 1,000 times higher there than in other organs, they said in a study published in the journal Viruses. The team is now puzzling out the implications of the n...
Biden acknowledges that Trump didn't buy enough vaccines to save Americans
Former President Donald Trump announced last year that he was buying 100 million vaccinations from Pfizer and 100 million vaccinations from Moderna. At the time, it prompted questions from reporters who knew that the American population is over 330 million people and two shots are needed for the virus.
The predicament left incoming President Joe Biden to admit to Americans that there weren't enough vaccinations purchased. In an announcement to the press on Tuesday, Biden said that he would purchase at least 200 million more doses as soon as they're available. His goal, he said is to have the full amount needed by this summer.
In Dec. 2020, it was revealed that Trump was offered more vaccines by Pfizer and Moderna and refused them.
It's still unknown why the former White House refused to buy enough vaccines for all Americans.
See Biden's press conference below:
WATCH: Biden delivers remarks on U.S. coronavirus efforts www.youtube.com
Los Angeles 'vaccine chasers' wait hours in hope of leftover doses
Young "vaccine chasers" with sleeping bags, warm hoodies and folding chairs are lining up for hours outside Los Angeles inoculation centers in the hope of obtaining coronavirus jabs from leftover vials that would otherwise end up in the trash.
Los Angeles county, where Covid-19 cases have surged this winter, is currently only vaccinating frontline medical workers and people aged 65 and over.
Even among those groups, appointments are extremely difficult to obtain, with Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna shots in limited supply.
But a small number of patients fail to show up as scheduled each day, and this is exactly what the "vaccine chasers" are counting on.
"If this vaccine is just going to end up in the trash, then what good does that do to anyone?" asked Elaine Loh, who was outside a community health center in working-class south Los Angeles, where some have been waiting almost 18 hours.
"If we are young enough and healthy enough to spend the night to come and get it, we might as well."
Also waiting outside the Kedren Community Health Center, Adam -- who did not give his last name -- said he was happy to wait for hours because "it's not like anything is open right now, so I would be sleeping."
"I think anyone would feel the same thing. If they throw it out, why waste it, you know?" he added.
- Don't waste a drop -
Success is far from guaranteed, and the county's health authority has not formally sanctioned giving leftover Covid vaccines to people who do not meet the current criteria.
"Officially there is no wait list, there is no queue, there is no standby," said Jerry Abraham, a doctor who oversees the Kedren center vaccination program for a non-profit nongovernmental organization.
But "once we open it, we have to use it all within six hours," he told AFP.
"There are times when the appointment line is down and we have expiring doses of vaccine. And I refuse to let a drop go to waste. Nothing.
"No vaccine will ever be discarded if it's given to us here at Kedren."
At times when doses risk going unused because patients have not arrived or the day is ending, quickly searching for candidates to receive them poses a difficult challenge -- making the informal standby lines a blessing.
Still, only one to three percent of those with appointments fail to show, and it can be "heartbreaking" to watch hopeful young people arriving at 2:00 am and leaving hours later without a shot, Abraham said.
"I can't guarantee them anything."
© 2021 AFP
Fox News host continues his war on public school teachers – this time by calling to ‘just stop vaccinating’ them
"Fox & Friends" co-host Brian Kilmeade says it's time to stop vaccinating public school teachers who refuse to return to work because of the dangers of the coronavirus pandemic.
"In places like Illinois, and in places like New York City, in places like Chicago," ranted Kilmeade Tuesday, talking about his favorite targets, "they have to open up the schools, they'lls [sic] ventilation's getting fixed, everything's being done, money's being given, vaccinations being given to the teachers and they still won't open up to the schools, these K through eighth graders need to go back to public schools – the ones that are being hurt are the lowest income people whose parents most likely both are working if you have two in the family. That has to stop. If not, stop vaccinating teachers. If they're not going to go back to work, stop vaccinating."
Brian Kilmeade: "Just stop vaccinating teachers; if they're not gonna go back to work, stop vaccinating them." pic.twitter.com/pDoNrl2pBQ
— Bobby Lewis (@revrrlewis) January 26, 2021
This is not the first time Kilmeade has attacked public school teachers.
Just two weeks ago while guest hosting on "The Five" Kilmeade blasted teachers who are afraid to return to in-person classroom teaching, and again targeted "Chicago," which he verbally stressed. His co-host jumped on board, calling public school teachers "disgraceful" and saying they should put children's eduction ahead of their own lives and the lives of their families.
Discussed the push to reopen classrooms as teachers begin receiving the COVID vaccine. Thanks for having me #TheFive! pic.twitter.com/sWReVBsYcz
— Brian Kilmeade (@kilmeade) January 12, 2021
Over the summer, while he broadcasted from the safety of his own home, Kilmeade also demanded teachers return to work despite the pandemic.
Brian Kilmeade says schools must re-open in the fall in part because "life is full of risks, kids should learn that early that life is full of hurdles, you've got to find a way to overcome." pic.twitter.com/zamv1HgMwj
— Bobby Lewis (@revrrlewis) July 8, 2020
Kilmeade has never believed the coronavirus could be controlled and infection rates reduced, as he made clear last month.
Fox News host Brian Kilmeade tells viewers: "There really is no preventing this virus from spreading."
— Jeremy Barr (@jeremymbarr) December 8, 2020
Meanwhile, Kilmeade last week spent some time learning how to be a prime-time host, trying out for Fox News' expansion of its opinion shows into the 7 PM hour. It did not go well, as viewership dropped dramatically.
Brian Kilmeade in primetime did worse on Thursday night. Once again finishing third across the board, Fox News Primetime drew only 1.824 million total viewers and 255,000 in the key 25-54 demo.
In comparison, CNN's Erin Burnett drew three times the demo audience (771,000). https://t.co/HXzbUJgvdy — Justin Baragona (@justinbaragona) January 22, 2021
Why scientists think UK variant could be more deadly
The announcement that the coronavirus strain sweeping Britain could be more deadly as well as more transmissible has raised fresh concerns about the variant that has spread to dozens of countries.
Initially British experts said that their evidence suggested the new strain circulating in the UK -- one of several to have emerged internationally in recent months -- was between 50 percent and 70 percent more transmissible.
On Friday, however, the government said the new variant could also be 30-40 percent more deadly, although it stressed the assessment relied on sparse data.
- What has changed? -
In mid-January, two separate studies by London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and Imperial College London were presented to Britain's New and Emerging Respiratory Virus Threats Advisory Group (NERVTAG).
They linked data from people who tested positive for the virus in the community -- rather than in hospital -- with death data and found a roughly 30 percent increase in the risk of death associated with the new strain.
The groups used slightly different methods, but both matched people with the new variant to those with the older variants, taking into account other variables like age and location and controlling for hospitals being under pressure.
Other studies by Exeter University and Public Health England also found higher deaths and both came up with even higher figures.
Based on these analyses, NERVTAG said there was "a realistic possibility" that infection with the new variant is associated with an increased risk of death compared with previously circulating variants.
The increase in transmissibility associated to the variant was already causing alarm, because the more people the virus infects the more people will suffer serious illness and the risk of death.
"Unfortunately, it looks as if this virus might be both" more infectious and potentially more deadly, John Edmunds, a professor in LSHTM's Centre for the Mathematical Modelling of Infectious Diseases, told a press briefing Monday
"So it's really a serious turn for the worse unfortunately," he said.
- How reliable are the findings? -
Researchers said there were still uncertainties in the data and said the picture would become clearer in the next few weeks.
Edmunds said the findings were "statistically significant".
But he said while the studies used information from those tested in the community, most people who die of Covid-19 go straight to hospital and are tested there.
Researchers do not yet have that hospital information.
NERVTAG said this lag in data could be why the studies did not find evidence of an increase in hospitalisations of people with the new variant, which seems at odds with the findings of increased severity of disease.
It also said the mortality data used in the research only covers eight percent of the total deaths during the study period and said the results "may therefore not be representative of the total population".
- Why more deadly? -
Researchers think it could be the same set of mutations that has made it more infectious -- although all stress more study is needed.
One mutation in particular increases the virus' ability to latch on more strongly to human cells and NERVTAG head Peter Horby, an emerging infectious disease professor at Oxford University, said evidence suggests this means it could make it easier to become infected.
"If it's then able to spread between cells much quicker within the lungs, that may increase the rate of disease and the rate of inflammation, which may then progress quicker than your body can respond to, so it could explain both characteristics of the virus," he said.
Bjorn Meyer, virologist at France's Institut Pasteur, told AFP that the issue could be viral load.
"The virus might not have evolved to be more deadly as such, but it might have evolved to grow more or better, which could cause more damage in a patient overall," he said.
- Does this affect treatments? -
Horby, who also leads the Recovery trial -- which identified the steroid dexamethasone as effective for severely ill hospital patients -- said there was "no evidence" that treatments would work less well.
Anti-inflammatories such as dexamethasone "should work equally as well because it's not related to the virus, it is related to the host response", he said.
Horby said overall improvements in therapies and treatments -- including things like better strategies for hospital respiratory support -- have brought down case fatality rates since the first wave and could even "offset any difference with this new variant".
As for the vaccines, a preliminary study this month from Britain and the Netherlands found the variant would not be able to evade the protective effect of current vaccines.
Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna have also released early research suggesting their vaccines would still be effective against the strain.
- Don't viruses weaken as they spread? -
Scientists have sought to challenge the belief that the virus will become get less virulent as it evolves to become more infectious.
The virus that causes Covid-19 is already "very good at its job of getting transmitted" said Emma Hocroft, an epidemiologist at the University of Bern.
"So I don't think that we can make this assumption that it wants to be less severe. I don't want to downplay that it is severe for many people, but for the majority of people, it's not severe," she told AFP.
She said the ability to transmit before it kills was "a really low bar", citing diseases like measles and HIV that have remained as dangerous.
Graham Medley, a professor of Infectious Disease Modelling at the LSHTM, told the Monday press briefing that despite uncertainties in the new studies on the new variant in the UK, they should dispel the idea that it would become less virulent.
"It's certainly not the case that this is a more benign virus," he said.
© 2021 AFP
WATCH: Dr. Fauci takes down Fox News host who accuses him of 'aggressiveness' toward Trump
Dr. Anthony Fauci on Tuesday scolded a Fox News host who tried to grill him on his alleged "aggressiveness" toward former President Donald Trump.
The confrontation came during an interview on Fox News with hosts Bill Hemmer and Dana Perino.
At one point in the interview, Perino noted that Fauci had complained about his former boss to The New York Times.
"I know that those questions are irresistible for reporters to ask," Perino admitted. "But is there a law of diminishing returns to continue to answer the questions about that relationship if the crisis is as acute as you say?"
"I agree with you, Dana," Fauci replied. "After that interview, I said to myself, we've really got to look forward and ahead and just put that behind us. I totally agree with you. So looking forward, I'm really not enthusiastic at all about reexamining what happened back then rather than looking forward to what we need to do now."
"That's a fair answer," Hemmer interrupted, inserting himself into the interview.
"I heard a lot of interviews with you over the weekend," the Fox News host continued. "It just seems like there's this aggressiveness toward the Trump administration -- I mean, you're the most respected man in America on this topic. Why do you even feel the obligation to answer these questions?"
"And when you were at the White House, no one prevented you from talking," Hemmer added. "Did they?"
"No, that's why I got into trouble," Fauci revealed.
"What do you mean?" Hemmer pressed.
"Well it wasn't happy about some of the things that I said," Fauci said before observing that Hemmer was trying to force him to answer the very types of questions that he was being criticized for entertaining.
"Again, we're getting in to rehashing it again," the doctor pointed out. "I think we should do what Dana just suggested. Namely, put that behind us and take a look at the problems we have ahead."
Hemmer responded by retreating from his question.
"At 9:37 on this Tuesday morning, January 26th, we will mark this moment," Hemmer said. "I'm ready to move on with you as well."
Watch the video below from Fox News.
Lilly Covid antibodies cut hospitalizations and deaths
US pharmaceutical company Eli Lilly's combination of two synthetic antibodies against Covid-19 reduced hospitalizations and deaths by 70 percent in high-risk patients with recent positive tests, the company said Tuesday.
"Bamlanivimab and etesevimab together have the potential to be an important treatment that significantly reduces hospitalizations and death in high-risk COVID-19 patients," Lilly's chief scientific officer Daniel Skovronsky said.
The results meant that the phase 3 trial involving 1,035 people achieved its main goal, and the study also met its secondary goals of reducing patients' viral load and their time to recover from the disease.
Patients were assigned either a placebo or the combination of bamlanivimab and etesevimab, the two antibodies, at 2.8 grams each.
There were 11 deaths or hospitalizations in the patients who received the therapy, or 2.1 percent of that group.
In the placebo arm, there were 36 deaths or hospitalizations, or 7.0 percent of the group.
The therapy thus represented a risk reduction of 70 percent, and the result was statistically significant, meaning it was unlikely to have occurred by chance.
There were 10 deaths total, all of which occurred in patients taking placebo, and none in the therapy group.
The company said it would continue to study the drug in another trial to examine whether lower doses would yield the same impact.
Monoclonal antibodies are lab-made versions of the body's natural infection-fighting defenses.
Many scientists have welcomed their Covid fighting potential, and both Lilly and biotech firm Regeneron have received emergency use authorizations for their treatments.
But their uptake has been limited in the US by several factors, from a lack of patient interest to not enough staffing and logistical capacity by hospitals to administer them.
In its press release, Lilly acknowledged some of these difficulties.
"Lilly has received feedback from front-line nurses and doctors administering these infusions regarding the complexity and time requirements for preparation and administration," the statement said.
As a result, the company is working with the Food and Drug Administration to potentially reduce the infusion time from the current 60 minutes to as little as 16 minutes.
White House says Florida used just half of COVID-19 vaccines sent by federal government
WASHINGTON — President Joe Biden’s press secretary said Monday that Florida has used only half of its COVID-19 vaccines from the federal government, noting that the state — where over-65 residents have been struggling to get appointments for the shots — has “a good deal of the vaccine.” The comments from press secretary Jen Psaki came after she was asked during a White House briefing about criticism last week from Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis on Biden’s vaccine distribution plan. Biden plans to use the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the National Guard to help with distributing COVID-19 v...
Gorilla treated with antibodies recovering from COVID, says US zoo
An elderly gorilla was recovering from a serious case of Covid-19 after he was treated with cutting-edge synthetic antibodies, the San Diego Zoo said Monday.
Veterinarians are now identifying which animals to inject with the zoo's limited supply of vaccines.
Winston, 48, was one of several gorillas among the San Diego Zoo Safari Park's troop who were confirmed positive for the virus on January 11, based on fecal samples.
It was the first known case of natural transmission of the virus to great apes, and was suspected to have occurred because of contact with an asymptomatic staff member, despite the use of personal protective gear.
"The troop was infected with a new, highly contagious strain of the coronavirus, recently identified in California," San Diego Zoo Global, the nonprofit that operates the zoo and safari park said in a statement.
Two research groups in California have identified a homegrown strain that they believe was driving the Golden State's year-end surge in infections.
The troop remained under close observation following the diagnosis, with some of the gorillas showing symptoms including mild coughing, congestion, runny noses and bouts of lethargy.
Because of his advanced age, his symptoms and concern about underlying conditions, Winston was examined under anesthesia.
Veterinarians confirmed the silverback had pneumonia and heart disease, and initiated a treatment that included heart medication, antibiotics, and monoclonal antibody therapy.
Monoclonal antibodies are a lab-made version of the body's natural infection-fighting proteins, and they are delivered by intravenous infusion.
Covid-19 monoclonal antibodies have been approved for emergency use in the US, and were notably used to treat former president Donald Trump.
But Winston's treatment came from a supply not permitted for human use, the statement said.
"The veterinary team who treated Winston believe the antibodies may have contributed to his ability to overcome the virus," it added.
Winston, a critically endangered western lowland gorilla, arrived at the San Diego Safari Park in 1984 and will celebrate his 49th birthday on February 20, according to the website.
He is considered to be one of the oldest breeding male gorillas in a managed care setting, and is the leader of his troop.
San Diego Zoo Global has also been provided with some Covid-19 vaccines and is in the process of identifying suitable animal candidates at the zoo and safari park.
The statement didn't identify which vaccine it was, but said it was based on synthetic versions of a surface protein of the virus, and was intended for animal use.
Veterinarians routinely vaccinate wildlife against a range of diseases, both in captivity and in their natural environment.
Copyright © 2025 Raw Story Media, Inc. PO Box 21050, Washington, D.C. 20009 |
Masthead
|
Privacy Policy
|
Manage Preferences
|
Debug Logs
For corrections contact
corrections@rawstory.com
, for support contact
support@rawstory.com
.