Category Archives: Covid-19

Introduction

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is a worldwide threat in many aspects, making developing countries with scarce primary health care and medical services more vulnerable. Evaluation of the relationship between the COVID-19 pandemic, sociodemographic variables, and medical services provides useful information to take countermeasures to stop the infection spread and could mitigate the damage. Therefore, this study investigated the relationship between the spread of COVID-19 and sociodemographic variables, medical services, and the transportation system in Myanmar.

This study was a cross-sectional study and was conducted using data on COVID-19 cases from August 20, 2020 to January 31, 2021 in Myanmar. We evaluated the association between the COVID-19 cases and 13 independent variables that were sociodemographic, medical services, and transportation system factors using simple linear regression analysis and multiple linear regression analysis in three phases (increasing (from August 20th to October 10th), stable (from October 11st to December 4th) and decreasing phases (from December 5th to January 31st)) on the infection timeline.

It was found that the population density wasparallelly associatedwith COVID-19 cases. On the other hand, among the medical services factors, the number of doctors was parallelly associated with COVID-19 cases and the number of nurses was inversely related to COVID-19 cases.

The result indicated that a high population density area was a risk factor for the increase of COVID-19 cases. This supported the worldwide countermeasures to deal with the spread of the infection, such as social distancing, banning largegatherings, working from home, and implementing quarantine procedures for suspected individuals to reduce person-to-person contact. Finally, at least in Myanmar, employing a large number of nurses could reduce the emergence ofnew COVID-19 cases. We believe that our study can make valuable contributions to tackling future epidemics like COVID-19 not only in Myanmar but also in other developing countries.

This article was previously presented as an abstract at the 91stconference of The Japanese Society for Hygiene (JSH ) on March 08, 2021.

The first case of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was reported in Wuhan, the capital city of Hubei Province of China on December 8, 2019[1]. The infection subsequently spread rapidly across the world, turning the epidemic into a pandemic. The World Health Organization (WHO) reported that by July 2022, over 564 million people were infected and suffering and of these nearly 6.4 million people died worldwide, while in Myanmar, the number of cumulative COVID-19 cases was 614,009 and deaths were 19,434 [2]. Coronavirus belongs to theCoronaviridaefamily, which consists of enveloped viruses with positive-sense single-stranded RNA. Primal clinical symptoms are high fever, cough, myalgia, and dyspnea, which could develop into acute respiratory distress syndrome or multiorgan failure[3], finally causing death. COVID-19 spreads from person to person via droplet infection [4]. Since the R naught (R0: basic reproduction number) of COVID-19 has been measured at 3.0 and above[5], it is more contagious than the influenza virus (R0 of Influenza A(H1N1) is 1.4 to 1.6) [6]. The average incubation period of the virus is between three and seven days, and over 80% of the virus may have been transmitted - asymptomatically or symptomatically - with the early onset of symptoms[7,8]. Since the vaccine had not yet been invented, during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic, countermeasures such as keeping social distancing, maintaining personal hygiene, wearing masks, and lockdowns of cities[9,10] were implemented.The transmission of the virus and the infection rate was restrainedby various government policies such as mitigation and containment strategies [11].

The COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with several factors like socioeconomic factors, demographic factors, climate, and individual immunity [10,12-14], but the impact of these factors has varied across countries. Therefore, it is important to detect the factors that affected the COVID-19 infection in each area. While there has been a considerable amount of literature on the topic available with regard to developed countries, the literature is scant in developing countries,and there is none pertaining to Myanmar.Medical services are now vulnerable in Myanmar. Therefore, we tried to evaluate the relation between the COVID-19 cases and some independent variables such as sociodemographic factors, medical services, and the transportation system. We believe that our findings are a valuable contribution for formulating government policies and handling further outbreaks.

The first COVID-19 case in Myanmar was reported on March 23, 2020, and the first death was confirmed on March 31, 2020[15]. Since the rise in patients started on August 20, 2020 and converged in February 2021,we used the COVID-19 data from August 20, 2020 to January 31, 2021.

Myanmaris dividedintoseven regions, seven states, and one union territory, and its total population is 51,486,253[16]. Therefore, we set the 15 survey areas as our evaluation fields.

The number of COVID-19 cases from August 20, 2020, to January 31, 2021 was retrieved from the Ministry of Health and Sport (Myanmar)[15]. Our evaluation of independent variables in this study, such as population density; aging rate (population aged 65 years and above); unemployment rate; average monthly income; average annual temperature; number of doctors, nurses, midwives, hospitals and rural health centers; number of cars, buses, and two-wheelers were derived from the Myanmar Population Census[16]and the official government websites of Myanmar (Ministry of Labor, Employment, and Social Security[17], Ministry of Transportation and Communication[18], Ministry of Health and Sports[15], Department of Meteorology and Hydrology[19], and Myanmar Statistical Information Services[20]). The population density, aging rate, and unemployment rate were of 2014[16]; the year 2017 was considered for the average income per month [21]; average annual temperature was based upon the years 2008-2017[20]; medical facility and staff data was from 2021 [15]; and transportation data was from 2020 [18].Since Myanmar is a developing country, its electronic database system is not very advance; therefore, it was very difficult to assemble independent variables data of the same year. However, we have conducted this research with limited datasets without ignoring the fact that there have been some changes in these datasets for several years.

Figure1indicates the epidemic curve of COVID-19 casesin Myanmar.The period was divided visually into three phases as shown in Figure 1 - the increasing, the stable, and the decreasing phase - and we evaluated the relationship between the COVID-19 cases and the independent variables for each phase.

Simple linear regression analysis and multiple linear regression analysis were obtained with p < 0.05 being considered statistically significant. We used the variance inflation factor (VIF) index to evaluate the degree including multicollinearity and removed some variables to reduce the VIF index (about 5.0 or less) and to fit the model. High VIF contains much multicollinearity that needs to be corrected generally [22].We evaluated the relation between the number of COVID-19 cases and the independent variables usingmultiple linear regressionanalysis. Excel 2003 (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, USA) and JMP 16 (SAS Institute, Cary, USA) were used for the analysis.

Figure1shows the epidemic curve of COVID-19 cases in Myanmar. The number of COVID-19 cases for increasing, stable, and decreasing phases are 25668, 71983, and 42059, respectively. Table1summarizes the outline of the number of COVID-19 cases, the sociodemographic variables and other independent variables. Yangon is the biggest city in Myanmarand ranked first in population, population density, average income, number of doctors, and number of cars.

We separately evaluated the correlation between the number of COVID-19 cases(per 10,000 people) and the variables in each of the three phases by using a simple linear regression analysis (Table2) in each phase. The results indicated a parallel relationship between COVID-19 cases and population density, average income, and the number of doctors, cars, and buses.

Additionally, we verified the relationship between the number of COVID-19 casesand the variables using multiple linear regression analysis (Table3, Model 1). Thereafter, we eliminated the number of cars, buses, nurses, midwives, and hospitals from the variables to minimize VIF (about 5.0 or less) for reducing multicollinearity, and re-evaluated the relationship (Table3, Model 2). We detected a statistically significant parallel relationship between the cases and population density. However, this relationship was not observed for the decreasing phase.

After we divided the variables into two categories - the variables excluding medical services and the variables concerning medical services, we also investigated the relationship between the number of COVID-19 cases and the variables (Tables 4, 5 ) while excluding the number of cars, buses, midwives, and hospitals to minimize VIF. The results showed that the population density was statistically significantly associated with increased cases during all three phases (increasing, stable, and decreasing) (Table 4 Model 4). The number of doctors displayed a significant parallel association, while the number of nurses revealed a significant reverse association statistically (Table 5 Model 6).

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused immense suffering and many deaths worldwide. This disease has had a detrimental impact globally and affected both developed and developing countries, including Myanmar. Immunization by vaccination was limited to developed countries, and it took a long time for the vaccine to be available in developing countries. Therefore, it is important to understand the risk factors that can cause the infection to spread, and to put into place effective countermeasures.

Since the coronavirus gets transmitted from person to person through droplet infection, contact with people is a high-risk factor. Living in urban or major cities [10,23] and a crowded public transportation system [24-26]could be assumed risk factors for increasing COVID-19 cases. It was reported that there was a parallel relation between population density and virus contagion and morbidity [27,28]. Moreover, the number of buses was considered a more important factor for rapid contagion than the number of cars[24,26,29,30]. Using public transportation could increase the risk of contagion [24,26,29,30]. Other factors such as high unemployment rate [14], being senior citizens [31], and residing in areas with poor medical facilities [32,33] could be factors causing the rise of COVID-19 cases. Additionally, high income, a developing economy, and high employment rate could induce the rapid spread of emerging infectious diseases due to increased human mobility necessitated by economic activity [14,34]. Therefore, it is important to detect risk factors for the increase of COVID-19 cases, and prevent the infection when effective vaccines are not available. We evaluated the relationship between the COVID-19 cases and the variables such as sociodemographic and other factors (population density, aging rate, unemployment rate, average income per month, average annual temperature, numbers of hospitals, health centers, doctors, nurses, and transportation system (buses, cars and two-wheelers)).

Table2indicates that population density, average income per month, and the number of doctors, cars, and buses had a parallel correlation with the number of COVID-19 cases. Our results aligned with those of other studies [24-28,35,36].

We also re-evaluated the relationship using multiple linear regression analysis to evaluate the influence of the variables individually with reducing multicollinearity. We found that only population density was significantly associated with the increased number of COVID-19 cases (Table3 Model 2). It means that living in urban or major cities could be a potential risk for the infection spread. Therefore, staying at home, keeping social distance, and banning large gatherings could be effective countermeasures to contain the spread of the COVID-19 infection, especially for those living in densely populated areas. During the decreasing phase, the population density was not associated with the increase in COVID-19 cases. Though the reason is unclear, we believe that the preventive countermeasures were already effective in the decreasing phase. We could not evaluate the relation between the COVID-19 cases and the transportation system, such as the number of cars and buses, because of high multicollinearity with other variables.

Some references suggest that medical services were a mitigating factor in containing the spread of COVID-19 [33,37,38]. However, we could not evaluate this due to high multicollinearity with other variables. Therefore, we evaluated the relation between the COVID-19 cases and the variables excluding medical services and the variables concerning medical services (Tables 4, 5). Our finding was that there was a significant parallel correlation between the population density and the number of doctors with the number of COVID-19 cases, while there was an inverse correlation with the number of nurses. Some studies showed that medical services could be an important protective measure for COVID-19 infection [33,37,38]. However, the relation between the number of doctors and the number of COVID-19 cases in our study did not align with the results of other studies [33,39]. A plausible reason is that we detected a high correlation between the population density and the number of doctors. First, there are not many doctors in Myanmar, and they are concentrated in the highly populated areas; moreover, their main role is that of curative care. The infection prevention activities are mainly carried out by nurses. Previous studies have also indicated that nurses played an important role in the successful prevention and control of mosquito-borne outbreaks, such as the zika and dengue viruses [40]. The results of our study did not show a correlation between the number of nurses and the population density. Notably, there is an imbalance between doctors and nurses in Myanmar [41].

Some studies have reported that high incomes and increasing employment rates are factors responsible for the spread of emerging infectious diseases [14,34]. Additionally, elderly people are more prone to infection [31]and could be a risk factor for contagion. However, we could not find any significant association between the COVID-19 cases and the aging rate, unemployment rate, or average income in Myanmar. Though we could not provide sufficient reasons for this, the difference in the unemployment rate, average income and aging rate between areas was small (Table 1) when compared to other reports [42].

Our study is not without limitations. We acknowledge that vaccination is an important countermeasure for infectious diseases. However, since most people were not vaccinated before January 31, 2021, we could not evaluate the influence of vaccination on the spread of the infection. Moreover, Myanmar was faced with a military coup on February 1, 2021, which hindered our efforts to obtain additional detailed information on the COVID-19 contagion and vaccination status.

The formulation of governmental policies with regard to COVID-19 is an important countermeasurefor reducing infection. The countermeasures employed in Myanmar were social distancing, restricting gatherings of more than 15 people, a temporary ban on international commercial flight landings, establishing public health labs, and home quarantining, which isolated infected individuals. However, the Myanmar government was unable to systematically implement these countermeasures, and it was difficult to obtain the data regarding state- and region-wise anti-COVID-19 infection policies. Therefore, we could not evaluate the relation between the number of COVID-19 cases and the policies.

In general, using the latest data that are also of the same year is important for high validity. Myanmar is a developing country, and its electronic database is still not fully developed. Additionally, the political situation in Myanmar is currently unstable. The latest national demographic survey (census) was carried out in 2015, and the largest national survey, Myanmar Living Conditions Survey, was carried out in 2017. It is impossible to obtain the data for the same year as the timeline of COVID-19 outbreak. Therefore, this study had to be carried out with limited valuable data. Additionally, it is essential to identify the difference in the variables mediating the COVID-19 cases between urban and rural areas. However, unfortunately, we could not obtain detailed data on COVID-19 cases and variables area-wise (urban and rural).

Despite the limitations mentioned above, this research was the first report concerning the relationship between COVID-19 cases and variables, such as sociodemographics and other factors. We believe that this report could help to formulate countermeasures in Myanmar if and when confronted with an epidemic in the future.

This study was conducted to evaluate the relationship between the COVID-19 cases and the variables concerning the sociodemographic, medical, and transportation systems. We identified population density to be a contributing factor to the spread of infection and the number of nurses as a protective factor, in Myanmar. However, we could not indicate any correlation between the COVID-19 cases and aging rate, unemployment rate, and average income, unlike other previous studies. This is the first study to investigate the various factors regarding the COVID-19 contagion in Myanmar. It aims to provide useful information to control the spread of infectious diseases like COVID-19and makes valuable contributions for policy-makers to consider in times of future epidemics not only in Myanmar but also in other developing countries.

See the article here:

Socio-Demographic, Health, and Transport-Related Factors Affecting the COVID-19 Outbreak in Myanmar: A Cross-Sectional Study - Cureus

It is that time of year. In many places, there is a chill in the air, and soon there will be dazzling colors.

It is also the season when updated influenza shots become available, and this year, the new bivalent COVID-19 vaccines targeting multiple SARS-CoV-2 strains are also being considered.

Each February, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) experts gather to predict the strains of flu most likely to be circulating in the following fall, and now freshly formulated, 2022-2023-specific, flu shots are available.

The two manufacturers of COVID-19 vaccines in the United States, Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna, have also been busy developing a new bivalent booster vaccine designed to adapt more readily to ever-changing Omicron strains of the virus that causes COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2. Both companies have now received FDA approval for their new vaccines.

Which one, or both, should you get?

We asked three experts to answer a few questions for us about this autumns vaccines. Our experts are:

Dr. Farley: The bivalent Moderna COVID-19 vaccine is for individuals 18 years of age and older, whereas the bivalent Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine is for individuals 12 years of age and older.

Dr. Schaffner: The win is, youre eligible now, and so I would urge people to [get their COVID-19 booster].

Dr. Adajla: The people who would benefit most from an Omicron booster are those high-risk individuals who have never been boosted.

Dr. Adajla: If you fall into a high-risk category, you should not wait to be boosted.

Dr. Schaffner pointed out the things you should be mindful of before receiving a COVID-19 booster:

Dr. Schaffner: Now, there are some people who are thinking about this very carefully. For example, they have a trip planned sometime toward, lets say, the beginning of November or end of October, and theyre planning to get their updated COVID vaccines two weeks before they take their trip.

[Whether this makes sense,] I think that a lot depends on who you are. If youre younger and stronger, and dont have any underlying illnesses, if your vaccine is otherwise up-to-date, you could consider that.

If youre older, if youre frail with underlying illnesses, if you have diabetes, heart disease, lung disease, if you are immune-compromised in any way, I would urge you to get it now, rather than put it off because there are risks in the community. These Omicron variants are still circulating briskly across the country.

Dr. Schaffner: The answer is, as they would say in Minnesota, You bet!

And there are a couple of reasons for this. Your COVID-19 vaccine will not protect against influenza, and the reverse is also true: Influenza vaccine will not protect you against COVID-19. Theyre two separate viruses.

Influenza and we may have to remind people of this is another very serious winter respiratory virus.

It puts people in the same risk groups older frail, underlying illnesses, immunocompromised at increased risk of complications of influenza: pneumonia, hospitalization, and dying.

Dr. Adajla: Like is the case with every year, flu vaccination is also an important measure to take.

Dr. Farley: Yes, individuals should receive their annual flu vaccination this year, especially given that the formulation has changed to better match the anticipated circulating influenza viruses in the 2022-23 flu season.

All three experts agreed that there is no difference between getting one or the other vaccine first and that they are safe to receive together.

Dr. Adajla: As flu season has not really begun in the Northern Hemisphere, the [Omicron] booster is more important at this time.

Dr. Schaffner: Theres no contraindication for getting them at the same time. Some people will want to spread them out, simply because they dont want two sore arms at the same time. In fact, I was just giving a lecture and one of my colleagues was there. He said just yesterday he got them both, in one arm and one in the other.

Dr. Schaffner said he wanted to ease any concerns pregnant people may have about vaccines:

Should pregnant women receive these two vaccines? The answer is an unqualified yes. Its so recommended by the American College of Obstetricians and [Gynecologists]. Its clear from the data that both of these vaccines are safe during pregnancy.

We have data from influenza vaccine that [it] not only protects the mother, but some of those antibodies will cross the placenta and give the newborn protection during the first four to six months of its life.

He noted that this hasnt been as well-studied with COVID-19.

We would think its likely because thats been true in other circumstances. When moms are immunized with other vaccines TDAP, for example those antibodies go over into the baby. So, it is likely that is the case with COVID also.

More here:

Flu shot and Omicron COVID-19 booster: What to know about doubling up - Medical News Today

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) on Sept. 28 blocked a resolution that would aim the national emergency declaration over COVID-19.

Wyden stepped in after Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.), a doctor, introduced the resolution.

The one-page measure would terminate the national emergency declaration, which was initially declared by the Trump administration and has been extended through the present day by the Biden administration.

It is this declaration, coupled with other additional emergency powers currently invoked by the president, which this administration is using to supersize government in order to continue their reckless inflationary spending spree and enact their partisan agenda, Marshall said on the Senate floor in Washington. In fact, the White House uses these emergencies to justify their inflationary out-of-control spending, their unconstitutional vaccine and mask mandates, and to forgive student loans.

The declaration has enabled the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to require data reporting and the Department of Health and Human Services to waive certain requirements for Medicare and Medicaid. It was cited by the Biden administration when officials announced in August that they would cancel thousands of dollars in student debt for millions of Americans.

Marshall, a member of the Senate Health Committee noted that President Joe Biden, a Democrat, recently said that the COVID-19 pandemic is over, which he said should mean the end of the emergency.

Wyden, the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee and a member of the Subcommittee on Health Care, said that ending the emergency would exacerbate doctor and nursing shortages.

Right now, there are requirements in Medicare for a lengthy process that must be completed before its possible to hire healthcare providers to serve Medicare patients, Wyden said. If the Marshall proposal goes into effect as written, Health and Human Services could not waive this complicated process to take care of patients. So that would leave our country short of health care providers when theres an acute, even more serious need for them.

I have never had a constituent at home, an Oregonian, say, Ron, what we need is more complicated processes and red tape in American health care. Usually, theyre talking to us about waiving things. So for those reasons I object, he added later.

Marshall took the floor after the objection, saying he agrees the shortages are a problem.

But the difference is, I dont think the government is the solution to the problem. I think the government has created the problem, he said.

The senator said that the solution is to remove some of the red tape, not to continue letting the administration utilize emergency powers.

Its my feeling that this emergency declaration allows the president and the White House to expand those powers, to take our constitutional rights away from us, Marshall said. I have encouraged people to take the vaccine and do all the right things. But I still think that its time to end the emergency, give us our God-given constitutional rights back.

I think that we should support ending this declaration of emergency.

Follow

Zachary Stieber covers U.S. and world news. He is based in Maryland.

Read the rest here:

Democrat Blocks Resolution to End National COVID-19 Emergency - The Epoch Times

In 2020, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, population-wide non-pharmaceutical interventions were adopted in the European Union/European Economic Area (EU/EEA) with the aim of reducing close-contact transmission between people. This necessitated new data collections of updated contacts. As a result, the European Commission funded the longitudinal contact mixing (CoMix) extension of the POLYMOD study [1,2], which measured the number of daily contacts between participants of different age groups. The aim of CoMix was to assess how social mixing behaviour changed in the acute phase of the pandemic. The CoMix questionnaire was rapidly implemented first in the United Kingdom (UK), followed by Belgium and the Netherlands and, as a third stage, in over 20 countries in the EU/EEA, yielding unparalleled insight into how people changed their everyday lives in response to the real or perceived risk during a pandemic. For a timeline of the implementation of the CoMix questionnaire across the various countries, see Verelst et al [3].

The development and piloting of the CoMix questionnaire built on questions of the POLYMOD questionnaire as described in Mossong et al. [1], which contains an exemplary POLYMOD social contact diary as an attachment. The original CoMix questionnaire used in the UK was made publicly available as an attachment to the work of Gimma et al. [4]. For an overview of funding sources used for CoMix data collection in various countries, see Verelst et al [3]. For the CoMix data collection in the various European countries, the questionnaire was later updated to accommodate changes in vaccination and testing policies, and was translated into the national languages of all the participating countries and reviewed by local partners for language and cultural appropriateness.

In 2022, the CoMix survey was conducted again to enhance our understanding of contact mixing during the transition period beyond the acute phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. The questionnaire was further modified to accommodate booster vaccination and new types of tests, and incorporated additional feedback from social behaviour experts. The second round of CoMix covered nine countries (Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Italy, Estonia, Poland, Greece, Portugal, and Croatia).

The social contact data resulting from the survey can be accessed openly:

https://zenodo.org/communities/social_contact_data

Home

The questionnaire for the second round of CoMix (available above) can be accessed openly.

License for reuse: CC-BY-4.0.

[1] Mossong, Jol, et al. Social contacts and mixing patterns relevant to the spread of infectious diseases. PLoS Medicine 5.3 (2008): e74.

[2] Prem, Kiesha, Alex R. Cook, and Mark Jit. Projecting social contact matrices in 152 countries using contact surveys and demographic data. PLoS Computational Biology 13.9 (2017): e1005697.

[3] Verelst, Frederik, et al. SOCRATES-CoMix: a platform for timely and open-source contact mixing data during and in between COVID-19 surges and interventions in over 20 European countries. BMC Medicine 19.1 (2021): 1-7.

[4] Gimma, Amy, et al. Changes in social contacts in England during the COVID-19 pandemic between March 2020 and March 2021 as measured by the CoMix survey: A repeated cross-sectional study. PLoS Medicine 19.3 (2022): e1003907.

Excerpt from:

Social contact patterns in the EU/EEA during the COVID-19 pandemic - European Centre for Disease

WEST LAFAYETTE, Ind. An article on the timing of the new COVID-19 booster shot and the flu shot by Libby Richards, associate professor of nursing in Purdue Universitys College of Health and Human Sciences, is available on The Conversation. The article is available to be republished for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.

The webpage for the article has information for republishing in the lower right column. Additional republishing information is also available.

Richards notes that there is a possibility of a difficult flu season this winter, which could set up a COVID-19 and flu twindemic. The good news, she says, is that vaccines are now available for both adults and children 12 years of age and up. She recommends that everyone get a flu shot by the end of October, even those who are not yet eligible for the COVID-19 booster shot.

Writer/Media contact: Steve Tally, steve@purdue.edu, @sciencewriter

Source: Libby Richards, 765-494-1392, earichar@purdue.edu

Link:

When should you get the new COVID-19 booster and flu shot?new article available for free republishing via The Conversation - Purdue University

The West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources (DHHR) reports as of September 26, 2022, there are currently 1,402 active COVID-19 cases statewide. There have been 14 deaths reported since the last report, with a total of 7,396 deaths attributed to COVID-19.

DHHR has confirmed the deaths of an 87-year old female from Raleigh County, a 78-year old male from Kanawha County, a 94-year old female from Kanawha County, a 91-year old female from Cabell County, an 81-year old male from Logan County, a 92-year old female from Raleigh County, an 83-year old female from Jackson County, a 54-year old male from Kanawha County, a 70-year old male from Kanawha County, a 94-year old female from Cabell County, a 96-year old male from Marion County, an 84-year old female from Pocahontas County, an 83-year old female from McDowell County, and a 94-year old female from Jackson County.

COVID-19 has affected far too many West Virginians, said Bill J. Crouch, DHHR Cabinet Secretary. I urge you to utilize the vaccine calculator to help determine when you should receive your COVID-19 vaccine and Omicron booster.

CURRENT ACTIVE CASES PER COUNTY: Barbour (8), Berkeley (79), Boone (23), Braxton (6), Brooke (11), Cabell (52), Calhoun (1), Clay (5), Doddridge (2), Fayette (37), Gilmer (1), Grant (10), Greenbrier (25), Hampshire (13), Hancock (15), Hardy (17), Harrison (70), Jackson (12), Jefferson (57), Kanawha (117), Lewis (4), Lincoln (11), Logan (35), Marion (45), Marshall (18), Mason (23), McDowell (21), Mercer (102), Mineral (19), Mingo (19), Monongalia (61), Monroe (11), Morgan (13), Nicholas (24), Ohio (32), Pendleton (5), Pleasants (13), Pocahontas (6), Preston (29), Putnam (36), Raleigh (68), Randolph (20), Ritchie (4), Roane (11), Summers (7), Taylor (26), Tucker (5), Tyler (1), Upshur (23), Wayne (24), Webster (6), Wetzel (11), Wirt (2), Wood (54), Wyoming (52). To find the cumulative cases per county, please visit coronavirus.wv.gov and look on the Cumulative Summary tab which is sortable by county.

West Virginians ages 6 months and older are eligible for COVID-19 vaccination. All individuals ages 6 months and older should receive a primary series of vaccination, the initial set of shots that teaches the body to recognize and fight the virus that causes COVID-19. Those ages 5-11 years are recommended to get an original (monovalent) booster shot when due, and those ages 12 years and older are recommended to get an Omicron booster shot (bivalent) at least two months after completing their primary series.

Visit the WV COVID-19 Vaccination Due Date Calculator, a free, online tool that helps individuals figure out when they may be due for a COVID-19 shot, making it easier to stay up-to-date on COVID-19 vaccination. To learn more about COVID-19 vaccines, or to find a vaccine, visit vaccines.gov, vaccinate.wv.gov, or call 1-833-734-0965. Please visit the COVID-19 testing locations page to locate COVID-19 testing near you.

Read this article:

COVID-19 Daily Update 9-26-2022 - West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources

Mike Stucka USA TODAY NETWORK| Green Bay Press-Gazette

Wisconsin reported 8,092 new cases of coronavirus in the week ending Sunday, down 6.3% from the previous week. The previous week had 8,635 new cases of the virus that causes COVID-19.

Wisconsin ranked 12th among the states where coronavirus was spreading the fastest on a per-person basis, a USA TODAY Network analysis of Johns Hopkins University data shows. In the latest week coronavirus cases in the United States decreased 0.6% from the week before, with 401,433 cases reported. With 1.75% of the country's population, Wisconsin had 2.02% of the country's cases in the last week. Across the country, 17 states had more cases in the latest week than they did in the week before.

Brown County reported 504 cases and one death in the latest week. A week earlier, it had reported 491 cases and two deaths. Throughout the pandemic it has reported 96,669 cases and 587 deaths.

Door County reported 45 cases and zero deaths in the latest week. A week earlier, it had reported 30 cases and zero deaths. Throughout the pandemic it has reported 8,112 cases and 78 deaths.

Kewaunee County reported 18 cases and zero deaths in the latest week. A week earlier, it had reported 16 cases and zero deaths. Throughout the pandemic it has reported 6,428 cases and 61 deaths.

Oconto County reported 47 cases and zero deaths in the latest week. A week earlier, it had reported 37 cases and one death. Throughout the pandemic it has reported 12,605 cases and 126 deaths.

Shawano County reported 73 cases and zero deaths in the latest week. A week earlier, it had reported 79 cases and one death. Throughout the pandemic it has reported 13,250 cases and 157 deaths.

Marinette County reported 74 cases and two deaths in the latest week. A week earlier, it had reported 93 cases and zero deaths. Throughout the pandemic it has reported 13,318 cases and 137 deaths.

Across Wisconsin, cases fell in 46 counties, with the best declines in Milwaukee County, with 1,275 cases from 1,528 a week earlier; in Dane County, with 1,084 cases from 1,194; and in Kenosha County, with 273 cases from 326.

>> See how your community has fared with recent coronavirus cases

Within Wisconsin, the worst weekly outbreaks on a per-person basis were in Menominee County with 483 cases per 100,000 per week; Sawyer County with 205; and Wood County with 204. The Centers for Disease Control says high levels of community transmission begin at 100 cases per 100,000 per week.

Adding the most new cases overall were Milwaukee County, with 1,275 cases; Dane County, with 1,084 cases; and Brown County, with 504. Weekly case counts rose in 25 counties from the previous week. The worst increases from the prior week's pace were in La Crosse, Racine and St. Croix counties.

In Wisconsin, 30 people were reported dead of COVID-19 in the week ending Sunday. In the week before that, 70 people were reported dead.

A total of 1,859,978 people in Wisconsin have tested positive for the coronavirus since the pandemic began, and 15,220 people have died from the disease, Johns Hopkins University data shows. In the United States 96,070,980 people have tested positive and 1,056,416 people have died.

>> Track coronavirus cases across the United States

USA TODAY analyzed federal hospital data as of Sunday, Sept. 25. Likely COVID patients admitted in the state:

Likely COVID patients admitted in the nation:

Hospitals in 13 states reported more COVID-19 patients than a week earlier, while hospitals in 20 states had more COVID-19 patients in intensive-care beds. Hospitals in 25 states admitted more COVID-19 patients in the latest week than a week prior, the USA TODAY analysis of U.S. Health and Human Services data shows.

The USA TODAY Network is publishing localized versions of this story on its news sites across the country, generated with data from Johns Hopkins University and the Centers for Disease Control. If you have questions about the data or the story, contact Mike Stucka at mstucka@gannett.com.

More:

Brown County reported 504 additional COVID-19 cases this week - Green Bay Press Gazette

Mike Stucka USA TODAY NETWORK| Montgomery Advertiser

Alabama reported far fewer coronavirus cases in the week ending Sunday, adding 5,770 new cases. That's down 27.5% from the previous week's tally of 7,954 new cases of the virus that causes COVID-19.

Alabama ranked 23rd among the states where coronavirus was spreading the fastest on a per-person basis, a USA TODAY Network analysis of Johns Hopkins University data shows. In the latest week coronavirus cases in the United States decreased 0.6% from the week before, with 401,433 cases reported. With 1.47% of the country's population, Alabama had 1.44% of the country's cases in the last week. Across the country, 17 states had more cases in the latest week than they did in the week before.

Montgomery County reported 236 cases and one death in the latest week. A week earlier, it had reported 343 cases and two deaths. Throughout the pandemic it has reported 66,594 cases and 993 deaths.

Last week:Montgomery County's COVID cases fall 22.2%; Alabama cases plummet 19.5%

Mid-September cases:Montgomery County's COVID cases fall 14.2%; Alabama cases plummet 32.8%

Elmore County reported 89 cases and zero deaths in the latest week. A week earlier, it had reported 152 cases and zero deaths. Throughout the pandemic it has reported 27,610 cases and 358 deaths.

Autauga County reported 56 cases and zero deaths in the latest week. A week earlier, it had reported 70 cases and one death. Throughout the pandemic it has reported 18,359 cases and 227 deaths.

Dallas County reported 17 cases and zero deaths in the latest week. A week earlier, it had reported 55 cases and zero deaths. Throughout the pandemic it has reported 10,069 cases and 254 deaths.

Lowndes County reported eight cases and zero deaths in the latest week. A week earlier, it had reported 23 cases and zero deaths. Throughout the pandemic it has reported 3,061 cases and 80 deaths.

Across Alabama, cases fell in 56 counties, with the best declines in Jefferson County, with 649 cases from 1,046 a week earlier; in Mobile County, with 188 cases from 507; and in Limestone County, with 115 cases from 272.

>> See how your community has fared with recent coronavirus cases

Within Alabama, the worst weekly outbreaks on a per-person basis were in Calhoun County with 631 cases per 100,000 per week; Covington County with 615; and Cullman County with 466. The Centers for Disease Control says high levels of community transmission begin at 100 cases per 100,000 per week.

Adding the most new cases overall were Calhoun County, with 717 cases; Jefferson County, with 649 cases; and Madison County, with 486. Weekly case counts rose in 11 counties from the previous week. The worst increases from the prior week's pace were in Calhoun, Covington and Cullman counties.

In Alabama, 73 people were reported dead of COVID-19 in the week ending Sunday. In the week before that, 83 people were reported dead.

A total of 1,517,904 people in Alabama have tested positive for the coronavirus since the pandemic began, and 20,395 people have died from the disease, Johns Hopkins University data shows. In the United States 96,070,980 people have tested positive and 1,056,416 people have died.

>> Track coronavirus cases across the United States

USA TODAY analyzed federal hospital data as of Sunday, Sept. 25. Likely COVID patients admitted in the state:

Likely COVID patients admitted in the nation:

Hospitals in 13 states reported more COVID-19 patients than a week earlier, while hospitals in 20 states had more COVID-19 patients in intensive-care beds. Hospitals in 25 states admitted more COVID-19 patients in the latest week than a week prior, the USA TODAY analysis of U.S. Health and Human Services data shows.

The USA TODAY Network is publishing localized versions of this story on its news sites across the country, generated with data from Johns Hopkins University and the Centers for Disease Control. If you have questions about the data or the story, contact Mike Stucka at mstucka@gannett.com.

See original here:

Montgomery County reported 236 additional COVID-19 cases this week - Montgomery Advertiser

On Sept. 15, the Cal/OSHA Standards Board held a public hearing on a proposed non-emergency COVID-19 two-year standard. The hearing and subsequent board discussion demonstrated that there remains a great deal of disagreement about whether a non-emergency standard is needed at all, and that there are serious concerns from both management and labor representatives about the provisions currently contained in the proposed non-emergency regulation.

Throughout 2022, the state Division of Occupational Safety and Health has repeatedly stated its major objective to have a non-emergency COVID-19 standard approved in time for it to become effective upon the expiration of the current COVID-19 emergency temporary standard, no later than Jan. 1, 2023. As currently framed, the proposed non-emergency regulation would remain in effect for two years until Dec. 31, 2024.

Employer Concerns

Multiple representatives of the employer community expressed opposition to any non-emergency standard after the expiration of the current emergency temporary standard, commenting that the measure is untethered to any current underlying data or information to justify the significant regulatory burdens it would impose. In addition, employer representatives commented that the two-year duration of the proposed regulation appears entirely arbitrary, with no connection to sunsetting that might be based on factors such as declining COVID-19 case data, effectiveness of emerging preventative and treatment measures, such as additional boosters or medication, or other mitigating measures.

Meanwhile, a bill recently signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, AB 2693, contains provisions that would end various COVID-19 related requirements on Jan. 1, 2024.

Employer representatives further argued that specific provisions in the proposed regulation would create unmanageable and extremely burdensome obligations that require the division to consider revisions to the proposed text.

For example, the proposed regulation presently defines a close contact as "sharing the same indoor space" with a COVID-positive individual for a cumulative total of 15 minutes or more over a 24-hour period during the individual's infectious period. It also would require that employers "keep a record of persons who had a close contact, including their names, contact information, and the date upon which they were provided notice of the close contact."

Multiple commentors noted that both the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the California Department of Public Health have recognized the general ineffectiveness of contact tracing in limiting the spread of COVID-19 and the enormous expenditure of time and resources that is involved with imposing a duty to perform contact tracing on employers.

In addition, AB 2693 will amend California's statute regarding COVID-19 notices (Labor Code 6409.6) so as to permit employers to meet notice obligations to employees by prominently posting notices in the workplace, rather than providing individualized notices. The text of the bill thus directly contradicts the notice requirements in the proposed regulation. Employer representatives asserted that it made no sense and may violate the state's Administrative Procedure Act for Cal/OSHA to impose a more strenuous obligation on employers.

Employer representatives also contended that the definition for an outbreak should be modified to be proportional to the size of the workforce, rather than triggered any time that three COVID-19 cases occur within an exposed group in a 14-day period. As pointed out during the meeting, this stringent definition as proposed could mean that larger employers are nearly always in an outbreak status under the regulation, resulting in numerous additional obligations.

Conversely, representatives of labor expressed strong support for continuation of COVID-19 regulations by Cal/OSHA after the expiration of the current emergency temporary standard, but asserted that the proposed regulation in its current form would be unworkable and fail to provide workers with adequate protections. Labor representatives contended that the proposed regulation is fatally flawed because it does not contain provisions requiring employers to provide exclusion pay to employees when they cannot work due to having COVID-19 or in the event of other work-related COVID-19 circumstances requiring exclusion under the regulation.

Although the public hearing demonstrated that stakeholders, including members of the Cal/OSHA Standards Board, have serious concerns about the proposed regulation, the options available to the division for addressing those concerns is limited because of the additional procedural requirements applicable to non-emergency regulations under the state's Administrative Procedure Act.

Next Steps

California employers should continue to comply with their obligations under the current emergency temporary standard through Dec. 31. They also should be aware that it remains highly likely that the board will conduct a vote by or at its Dec. 15 meeting to approve some final version of a proposed non-emergency COVID-19 regulation.

The fact that the currently proposed text met with significant opposition from all sides at the Sept. 15 meeting suggests that a final regulatory outcome may not be fully satisfactory. Nonetheless, despite significant employer concerns with the proposed non-emergency standard in its current form, it would be relatively less complex than the emergency temporary standard for employers from a compliance perspective, and it remains possible that adjustments may still occur to address problematic definitions and other concerns.

David Dixon is an attorney with Littler in Idaho. Alka Ramchandani-Raj and Melissa Peters are attorneys with Littler in Walnut Creek, Calif. Eric Compere is an attorney with Littler in Los Angeles. Krystal Weaver is an attorney with Littler in San Diego. 2022. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

The rest is here:

Cal/OSHA Hearing Reflects Disagreements Over Non-Emergency COVID-19 Standard - SHRM

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention updated Athens-Clarke County's COVID-19 community level to low in its most recent weekly report, according to a release from ACCs Emergency Management Office.

According to CDC data, the last time ACC had a low COVID-19 community level was in early July.

COVID-19 community levels help determine which prevention actions to take based on the most recent data, according to the CDC. Using data on hospitalizations and cases, each level helps convey how much COVID-19 is affecting areas. Communities are classified as low, medium or high based on these data.

On Sept. 1, the CDC recommended that everyone in the United States aged 12 and up get an updated COVID-19 booster before a possible surge in COVID-19 illnesses later this fall and winter. The updated doses, like the original boosters, help restore protection that may have been lost since someones last dose, but they also provide additional protection for individuals and those around them against the most recent variants.

Keeping up to date on COVID-19 vaccines is the best way to avoid severe illness, hospitalization and death caused by COVID-19, the release said. It is recommended that everyone who is eligible, including those who are moderately to severely immunocompromised, receive one dose of the updated booster at least two months after their last dose.

The Moderna COVID-19 vaccine is approved for use as a single booster dose in people aged 18 and up. The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine is approved for use as a single booster dose in adults and children aged 12 and up, the release said.

See the rest here:

Athens reaches low COVID-19 community level for first time in three months - Red and Black