Connect with us

Health

Science Amid Chaos: What Worked During the Pandemic? What Failed?

Published

on

Science Amid Chaos: What Worked During the Pandemic? What Failed?

Until 2020, few Americans needed to think about how viruses spread or how the human immune system works. The pandemic offered a painful crash course. Sometimes, it seemed that the science was evolving as quickly as the virus itself.

So The New York Times asked experts to revisit the nightmare. Of the most significant public health measures introduced during Covid, which have held up scientifically, and which turned out to be wrongheaded?

The question is particularly important now, because pandemics that could upend American lives are inevitable. One candidate has already surfaced: bird flu.

Perhaps the biggest lesson learned, several experts said, is that recommendations during any pandemic are necessarily based on emerging and incomplete information. But during Covid, federal agencies often projected more confidence in their assessments than was warranted.

Next time, the scientists said, officials should be more forthright about the uncertainties and prepare the public for guidance that may shift as the threat comes into clearer focus.

Advertisement

Rather than promote preventive measures as infallible solutions, they should also acknowledge that no single intervention is perfect — though many imperfect measures can build a bulwark.

If you venture out in a “huge, heavy rainstorm, your umbrella alone is not going to keep you from getting wet,” said Linsey Marr, an expert in airborne viruses at Virginia Tech.

“You need your umbrella; you need your boots; you need your waterproof pants and jacket; and you would probably try to avoid the puddles,” she said.

A victory, but officials oversold the benefits at first.

The mRNA vaccines were, in a sense, victims of their own unexpected success in clinical trials in 2020. Those results were spectacular: The shots warded off symptomatic illness caused by the original version of the coronavirus at miraculous rates.

Advertisement

But government officials had to walk back their enthusiasm as breakthrough infections with the Delta variant surged in the summer of 2021. Americans were told to get boosters. Then again, and again.

Federal health officials should have acknowledged at the start that the long-term effectiveness was unknown, said Natalie Dean, a biostatistician at Emory University.

Mistrust over the safety and effectiveness of the Covid vaccines is now taking a toll on other immunizations, including those targeting childhood diseases like measles.

“Making claims early on that this was going to prevent all infections was, I think, a little bit of an overpromise” that eventually undermined public trust, said Saskia Popescu, an infection prevention expert at the University of Maryland.

Still, the vaccines saved an estimated 14 million lives just in the first year after their introduction.

Advertisement

Surfaces were not the problem. Indoor air was.

Disagreements among scientists about how the coronavirus traveled had profound ramifications for how Americans were told to protect themselves.

Early on, health officials insisted that the virus was spread through large droplets that were coughed or sneezed out by an infected person onto other people or objects. The “fomite” theory led to protocols that made little sense in retrospect.

Remember the plexiglass barriers during the Presidential debates? The face shields? Schools closed for cleaning days midway through the week. People were scrubbing down groceries and mail.

“The whole hygiene theater was terribly unfortunate,” said Michael Osterholm, an infectious disease expert at the University of Minnesota. It wasted millions of dollars and gave people a false sense of security.

Advertisement

Health agencies took months to admit that the virus was carried aloft by tiny droplets, called aerosols, that could be exhaled, traveling long distances indoors. Sadly, that insight initially led to another overreaction.

Some states closed down beaches and parks, and forbade interactions outdoors, even though “there’s good scientific evidence that outdoor events are lower risk,” Dr. Dean said.

Eventually, understanding that the virus was primarily floating indoors prompted the Biden administration to earmark funds for improved ventilation in schools.

It worked if you used the right masks, correctly.

As the pandemic spread in the United States, masking morphed from a public health intervention into a cultural flashpoint.

Advertisement

Assuming that the coronavirus traveled like the flu and worried that hospitals might not have enough resources, federal heath officials at first told the public that masks were not needed.

That advice was suddenly reversed once scientists learned that the coronavirus was airborne. Even so, officials initially recommended cloth masks — which are not very effective at keeping out airborne viruses — and did not endorse more protective N95 respirators until January 2022, well after much of the public had stopped using cloth masks.

Dozens of studies have shown that when used correctly and consistently, N95 masks or their equivalents can prevent infected people from spreading the virus and protect wearers from contracting it.

Unfortunately, several flawed studies and the politics of personal freedom created a culture war surrounding the use of masks, especially by children, said Bill Hanage, an epidemiologist at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.

In the event of another respiratory outbreak, “I feel quite anxious that a whole constituency has already discarded masks,” he said.

Advertisement

Children in Asia routinely wear masks, especially during respiratory virus and allergy seasons, some experts noted.

“I wish we could infuse more infection prevention into especially elementary schools during respiratory virus season,” Dr. Popescu said. “It seemed like a really great way to get children back in schools.”

A chimera. We never got there.

For nearly two years after the pandemic began, experts talked of reaching herd immunity once enough of the population had acquired protection either by being ill or getting vaccinated.

That was a mistake, experts said. Herd immunity is only possible if immunity is sterilizing — meaning it prevents reinfections — and lifelong. Immunity to most viruses is neither.

Advertisement

Seasonal coronaviruses change rapidly enough that people undergo repeated infections throughout their lives, said Jeffrey Shaman, an epidemiologist at Columbia University who insisted early on that the new coronavirus might also cause reinfections.

Once vaccines arrived, officials at first presented the shots as a way to stay safe from the virus forever, rather than as a means to lessen the severity of infections.

“There was a lot of confusion and misconceptions about herd immunity — that the toothpaste was going back in the tube somehow,” Dr. Dean said.

Necessary at first. Questionable as time went on.

Few aspects of the pandemic provoke as much rancor as school closures. In many parts of the country, test scores never recovered and absenteeism has become an intractable problem.

Advertisement

But experts said it was the right decision to close schools in the spring of 2020, when a poorly understood pathogen was sweeping across the country. Ideally, schools would have reopened that fall, but with measures — improved ventilation, testing, masks — to mitigate the risks.

“And of course, we didn’t really have any of those things,” Dr. Hanage said.

By early fall in 2020, it was clear that schoolchildren were not driving community transmission significantly. Still, many schools stayed closed for months longer than they needed to, forcing children to muddle through remote learning and causing some to fall irrevocably behind.

“It’s a really difficult one to Monday-morning quarterback,” Dr. Shaman said.

“We don’t have the counterfactual, that alternative scenario to see how it really would have played out.”

Advertisement

If bird flu turns into a pandemic, it would be foolish to base school policies on how the coronavirus behaved, he and others warned. Other respiratory viruses, like the flu, tend to be deadlier among young children and older adults.

“We have every reason to think that a future flu pandemic would be far more dangerous to young people than Covid was,” Dr. Hanage said. “I think we should talk about what we could do to mitigate transmission in schools.”

They slowed the virus, but the price was high.

The pandemic destroyed local businesses, sent unemployment rates soaring and increased household debt. Many people now feel that lockdowns were to blame for much of the damage — and that their harms outweighed any benefits.

Many scientists see it differently. “The economy got shut down by just the pure force of the pandemic,” said Dr. Osterholm.

Advertisement

No American state’s policies neared the strictness of those in China, India, Italy or Jordan — where people were not allowed to leave home at all — and much of the work force and societal activities continued because they were deemed essential, he noted.

By the end of May 2020, indoor dining and religious services had resumed in much of the country, if they had been paused at all, although many cities continued to institute temporary bans as virus levels rose and fell.

The shutdowns may have been unpopular in part because they were introduced with no clear explanation or end in sight.

Instead, Dr. Osterholm said, health officials could have instituted a “snow day” concept. People stayed home when hospitals were overwhelmed, as they do when roads are snowed under, but their behavior returned to normal when the situation eased.

The shutdowns eased the burden on hospitals and slowed the transmission of the virus, buying time to develop a vaccine. Studies from multiple other countries have also shown that stay-at-home orders and restrictions on mass gatherings were the most effective measures for curbing transmission of the virus within communities.

Advertisement

“Whatever people did in 2020, before folks were vaccinated, saved millions of lives,” Dr. Hanage said. “If we had done nothing, truly done nothing at all, things would have been much, much worse.”

Health

Red light therapy could boost brain health in certain groups, new research suggests

Published

on

Red light therapy could boost brain health in certain groups, new research suggests

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Red light therapy has been shown to reduce brain inflammation, protecting people who experience head trauma from long-term health consequences, a University of Utah study has shown.

Brain damage from repeated impact over the years is known to cause cognitive symptoms, ranging from memory issues to full-blown dementia, particularly affecting soldiers and athletes.

Chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) is a progressive, degenerative brain disease linked to repeated head impacts rather than a single injury, according to Mayo Clinic.

ALZHEIMER’S SCIENTISTS FIND KEY TO HALTING BRAIN DECLINE BEFORE SYMPTOMS

Advertisement

More than 100 former NFL football players have been posthumously diagnosed with CTE, according to the new study, which was published in the Journal of Neurotrauma.

Other research has shown that military personnel in active combat suffer from similar issues, as do first responders and veterans.

The treatment was administered three times a week for 20 minutes using specialized headsets and intranasal devices designed to penetrate the skull. (iStock)

In the new study, the researchers recruited 26 current football players to understand more about the impact of red-light therapy on brain injuries.

The participants received either red light therapy delivered by a light-emitting headset and a device that clips into the nose, or a placebo treatment with an identical device that doesn’t produce light. Players self-administered the therapy three times a week, 20 minutes each time, for 16 weeks.

Advertisement

CLICK HERE FOR MORE HEALTH STORIES

“My first reaction was, ‘There’s no way this can be real,’” said first author Hannah Lindsey, Ph.D., in the university press release. “That’s how striking it was.”

Specific wavelengths of light are believed to enter the brain and reduce molecules that trigger inflammation, potentially halting the path toward dementia and other cognitive conditions. (iStock)

Players using the placebo treatment experienced increased brain inflammation over the course of the season. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans taken at the end of the season showed significantly more signs of inflammation than at the beginning of the season, the study found.

For players who used red-light therapy during the season, their brain inflammation didn’t increase at all.

Advertisement

ALZHEIMER’S RISK COULD RISE WITH COMMON CONDITION AFFECTING MILLIONS, STUDY FINDS

Previous studies have shown that red light, if powerful enough, can penetrate the skull and reach the brain, where it may reduce inflammation-related molecules.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“When we first started this project, I was extremely skeptical,” said Elisabeth Wilde, Ph.D., the senior author on the study. “But we’ve seen consistent results across multiple of our studies, so it’s starting to be quite compelling.”

Study limitations

The study was conducted using a small sample size, which led to different levels of inflammation in the treatment and control groups, the researchers acknowledged.

Advertisement

While the placebo group showed increased brain inflammation during the football season, those receiving red light therapy showed no increase in inflammatory markers. (iStock)

Future large randomized clinical trials will be “crucial to back up the results” in larger populations, they noted.

CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR OUR HEALTH NEWSLETTER

“We’ve been trying to figure out how to make sports safer, so that our kids, friends and family can participate in sports safely for the long term while they’re involved in activities that give them happiness and joy,” Carrie Esopenko, Ph.D., second author of the study, said in the release.

“And this really feels like part of the hope for protecting the brain that we’ve been searching for.”

Advertisement

TEST YOURSELF WITH OUR LATEST LIFESTYLE QUIZ

The team plans to recruit 300 people with persistent symptoms from TBI or concussion for a randomized controlled trial in 2026, with a focus on first responders, veterans and active-duty service members.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Health

Deadly cancer risk spikes with certain level of alcohol consumption, study finds

Published

on

Deadly cancer risk spikes with certain level of alcohol consumption, study finds

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Drinking heavily and consistently over an adult’s lifetime could lead to a higher risk of colorectal cancer, according to a study published in the journal Cancer by the American Cancer Society (ACS).

The study analyzed 20 years of data from more than 88,000 U.S. adults to determine how long-term drinking impacted the risk of developing colorectal cancer (CRC) or precancerous colorectal adenomas (polyps).

The participants reported their average weekly intake of beer, wine and liquor intake during four age periods 18 to 24, 25 to 39, 40 to 54,  and 55 and older.

DOCTOR REVEALS WHAT 30 DAYS WITHOUT ALCOHOL DOES TO THE BRAIN AND BODY AMID DRY JANUARY

Advertisement

“Heavy drinkers” were identified as having more than 14 drinks per week and “moderate drinkers” had between seven and 14 drinks per week.

The observational research revealed that consistent heavy drinking over adulthood was linked to a higher risk of colorectal cancer, especially rectal cancer.

Researchers found a major association between colorectal cancer diagnosis and heavy lifetime drinking. (iStock)

Heavy lifetime drinking was associated with a 25% higher overall CRC risk and nearly double the risk of rectal cancer. Moderate lifetime drinking had a lower overall CRC risk.

Compared to light drinkers, the consistently heavy drinkers had about a 91% higher risk of CRC.

Advertisement

EXPERTS REVEAL WHAT ‘REASONABLE’ DRINKING LOOKS LIKE – AND WHO SHOULD AVOID ALCOHOL

For colorectal adenomas (precancerous polyps), higher current lifetime drinking did not show a strong pattern, although former drinkers showed a significantly lower risk of non-advanced adenoma compared to current light drinkers.

Out of the 88,092 participants, 1,679 were diagnosed with colorectal cancer.

Out of the 88,092 participants in the study, 1,679 were diagnosed with colorectal cancer. (iStock)

The authors noted that the research was limited, as it was observational and not based on a clinical trial. It also hinged on self-reported alcohol use.

Advertisement

The findings suggest that consistently heavy alcohol intake and higher average lifetime consumption “may increase CRC risk, whereas cessation may lower adenoma risk,” the researchers stated. Associations “may differ by tumor site,” they added.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE HEALTH STORIES

The link between drinking alcohol and cancer is not a new discovery, according to health experts.

In a recent episode of the podcast “The Dr. Mark Hyman Show,” Dr. Mark Hyman, chief medical officer of Function Health in California, detailed how even moderate drinking can impact “nearly every organ system in the body,” due to metabolic stress, inflammation, impaired detoxification and its effect on hormones.

The link between drinking alcohol and cancer is not a new discovery, according to health experts. (iStock)

Advertisement

Drinking has been found to increase the risk of many cancers, metabolic dysfunction, gut microbiome disturbances and mitochondrial toxins, Hyman said.

CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR OUR HEALTH NEWSLETTER

“Bottom line, alcohol taxes every major system in your body, especially your liver, your brain, your gut, your hormones,” he warned.

Reducing or eliminating alcohol can lower the risk of several cancers, according to medical experts. (Getty Images)

In a previous interview with Fox News Digital, Dr. Pinchieh Chiang, a clinician at Circle Medical in San Francisco, shared that taking a break from drinking alcohol for longer periods of time can “reshape health more profoundly.”

Advertisement

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“Over months to a year, we see sustained improvements in blood pressure, liver function and inflammation,” she said. “Those changes directly affect long-term heart disease and stroke risk.”

Chiang added, “Reducing or eliminating alcohol lowers the risk of several cancers, including breast and colorectal, over time.”

TEST YOURSELF WITH OUR LATEST LIFESTYLE QUIZ

Fox News Digital reached out to the study researchers for comment.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Health

Unexplained nighttime noises provoke fear, sleepless nights as residents seek answers

Published

on

Unexplained nighttime noises provoke fear, sleepless nights as residents seek answers

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

A mysterious hum is reportedly plaguing the residents of Cincinnati, keeping people up at night and even disturbing them psychologically.

Residents of the Northside, Clifton and Camp Washington neighborhoods have been reporting the disturbances since December. The noises are said to be louder and more noticeable at night.

“We were hearing this siren-like quality noise — whirring, oscillating, going up and down,” said Clifton resident Shaun Herold, who contacted local news outlet WKRC about the noises.

MYSTERIOUS HUM RATTLES AMERICAN CITY AS RESIDENTS REPORT SLEEPLESS NIGHTS AND RISING FEAR

Advertisement

“My son came up to me and said, ‘Dad, the tornado sirens are going off,’” Herold said. “Usually, it starts at about 10 p.m. It can go till 3 a.m., 4 a.m. But it’s quite unpredictable.”

“It kind of stresses me out ’cause I don’t know what it is. It’s kind of scary,” added his son, Elijah Herold.

A mysterious, intermittent hum has been disturbing Cincinnati residents since December, disrupting sleep and causing psychological stress. (iStock)

Herold said he spent one entire night tracking how many times he heard the noise going on and off. The duration of the noises can vary from a few seconds to several minutes.

“I feel like it’s definitely like a foreign sound,” Northside’s Brendan Marcum told the news outlet. “Some nights it would be a little louder, some nights it would be a little quieter.”

Advertisement

“It kind of stresses me out because I don’t know what it is, and it’s kind of scary,” added another resident.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE HEALTH STORIES

Hundreds of Cincinnati residents have shared their theories about potential sources of the sound on social media, ranging from biblical to supernatural.

On Reddit, other users blamed the recycling plant. “My favorite theory is River Metals Recycling,” one person wrote, claiming that the plant moved neighborhoods when the original location “wouldn’t put up with the noise from its metal shredder any longer.”

Residents have described the sound as a siren-like, oscillating whirring that can last from seconds to several minutes. (iStock)

Advertisement

Others suspect the noise is coming from a failing turbocharger on a diesel train engine at the nearby CSX Queensgate, a major freight rail yard in Cincinnati. 

While the yard routinely generates loud, mechanical sounds, residents say they’ve never heard anything like this before.

CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR OUR HEALTH NEWSLETTER

WKRC reported that an anonymous source sent recordings of the locomotive, claiming it to be the source of the sound. However, a spokesperson for CSX told the news station that he “has not heard a noise like that on our property” and suggested it could be coming from another location.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Advertisement

He added that any equipment requiring maintenance is “handled through established operating and mechanical protocols.”

According to a source, rail crews have reported the engine for excessive noise and believe it will be repaired. (iStock)

“We just hope to get to the bottom of it, figure out what it is, and if it’s, you know, a temporary thing or not,” Herold told the news outlet. “And hopefully the community can rally if it’s not temporary, because it’s really impacting us.”

TEST YOURSELF WITH OUR LATEST LIFESTYLE QUIZ

City officials recommend that residents report the noise to 311, the city’s non-emergency line.

Advertisement

Fox News Digital reached out to Cincinnati officials for updates.

Continue Reading

Trending