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

Man’s extreme energy drink habit leads to concerning medical discovery, doctors say

Published

on

Man’s extreme energy drink habit leads to concerning medical discovery, doctors say

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Eight energy drinks per day may lead to serious health consequences, recent research suggests.

A relatively healthy man in his 50s suffered a stroke from the overconsumption of unnamed energy beverages, according to a scientific paper published in the journal BMJ Case Reports by doctors at Nottingham University Hospitals in the U.K.

The unnamed man was described as “normally fit and well,” but was experiencing left-side weakness, numbness and ataxia, also known as poor coordination or unsteady walking. 

CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR OUR HEALTH NEWSLETTER

Advertisement

When the man sought medical attention, it was confirmed via MRI that he had suffered an ischemic thalamic stroke, the report stated.

The patient’s blood pressure was high upon admission to the hospital, was lowered during treatment and then rose again after discharge, even though he was taking five medications.

The 50-year-old man (not pictured) admitted to drinking eight energy drinks per day. (iStock)

The man revealed that he consumed eight cans of energy drink per day, each containing 160 mg of caffeine. His caffeine consumption had not been recorded upon admission to the hospital.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE HEALTH STORIES

Advertisement

Once the man stopped drinking caffeine, his blood pressure normalized, and he was taken off antihypertensive medications.

High caffeine content can raise blood pressure “substantially,” a doctor confirmed. (iStock)

Based on this case, the authors raised the potential risks associated with energy drinks, especially regarding stroke and cardiovascular disease.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

They also highlighted the importance of “targeted questioning in clinical practice and greater public awareness.”

Advertisement

The authors say this case draws attention to the potential dangers of over-consuming energy drinks. (iStock)

Fox News senior medical analyst Dr. Marc Siegel reacted to the case study in an interview with Fox News Digital.

“This case report illustrates the high risk associated with a large volume of energy drink consumption, especially because of the high caffeine content, which can raise your blood pressure substantially,” said Siegel, who was not involved in the study.

TEST YOURSELF WITH OUR LATEST LIFESTYLE QUIZ

“In this case, the large amount of caffeine appears to have led directly to very high blood pressure and a thalamic stroke, which is likely a result of that soaring blood pressure.”

Advertisement

Fox News Digital reached out to the case study authors and various energy drink brands for comment.

Continue Reading

Health

5 Surprising Ozempic Side Effects Doctors Are Finally Revealing (Like Back Pain and Hair Loss)

Published

on

5 Surprising Ozempic Side Effects Doctors Are Finally Revealing (Like Back Pain and Hair Loss)


Advertisement


Surprising Ozempic Side Effects Doctors Want Women To Know | Woman’s World




















Advertisement











Advertisement




Use left and right arrow keys to navigate between menu items.


Use escape to exit the menu.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Health

Relationship coach blames Oprah for pushing family estrangement ‘for decades’

Published

on

Relationship coach blames Oprah for pushing family estrangement ‘for decades’

Join Fox News for access to this content

You have reached your maximum number of articles. Log in or create an account FREE of charge to continue reading.

By entering your email and pushing continue, you are agreeing to Fox News’ Terms of Use and Privacy Policy, which includes our Notice of Financial Incentive.

Please enter a valid email address.

Having trouble? Click here.

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Oprah Winfrey is shining a light on family estrangement, which she calls “one of the fastest-growing cultural shifts of our time” — but one expert says the media mogul helped fuel that very culture.

Advertisement

“A Cornell University study now shows that almost one-third of Americans are actively estranged from a family member,” Winfrey said on a recent episode of “The Oprah Podcast,” referring to adult children going “no-contact” with parents, siblings or entire family systems.

Winfrey said the trend is a “silent epidemic” that can be especially relevant during the holidays.

ONE TOXIC BEHAVIOR KILLS RELATIONSHIPS, LEADING HAPPINESS EXPERT WARNS

But family and relationship coach Tania Khazaal, who focuses on fighting “cutoff culture,” took to social media to criticize Winfrey for acting as if the estrangement crisis appeared “out of thin air.”

“Now Oprah is shocked by the aftermath of estrangement, after being one of the biggest voices pushing it for decades,” Canada-based Khazaal said in an Instagram video, which drew more than 27,000 likes and 3,000 comments.

Advertisement

Oprah Winfrey recently discussed what she called a “silent epidemic” of family estrangement on her podcast. (Theo Wargo/Getty Images)

Khazaal claimed that Winfrey’s messaging started in the 1990s and has contributed to a cultural shift where walking away became the first resort, not the last.

According to the relationship coach, millennials, some of whom grew up watching Oprah, are the leading demographic cutting off family members — and even if it wasn’t intentional, “the effect has absolutely been harmful,” Khazaal told Fox News Digital.

FAMILY BREAKUPS OVER POLITICS MAY HURT MORE THAN YOU THINK, EXPERT SAYS

The coach, who has her own history with estrangement, questioned why Winfrey is now treating the issue as a surprising crisis.

Advertisement

“Now she hosts a discussion with estranged parents and estranged kids, speaking on estrangement like it’s some hidden, sudden, heartbreaking epidemic that she had no hand in,” she said in her video.

Nearly one-third of Americans are estranged from a family member, research shows. (iStock)

Khazaal said she believes discussions about estrangement are necessary, but insists that people shouldn’t “rewrite history.”

“Estrangement isn’t entertainment or a trending conversation piece,” she added. “It’s real families, real grief, parents dying without hearing their child’s voice.”

JENNIFER ANISTON, KATE HUDSON, HEATHER GRAHAM’S SHOCKING REASONS THEY BECAME ESTRANGED FROM THEIR PARENTS

Advertisement

Winfrey reportedly responded in the comments, writing, “Happy to have a conversation about it — but not on a reel. Will have my producer contact you if you’re interested.” But the comment was later deleted due to the backlash it received, Khazaal told Fox News Digital.

“I would still be open to that discussion,” Khazaal said. “The first thing I’d want her to understand is simple: Setting aside cases of abuse or danger, the family unit is the most sacred structure we have.” 

Experts emphasize that estrangement should be a last resort. (iStock)

“When children lose their sense of belonging at home, they search for it in the outside world,” she added. “That’s contributing to the emotional fragility we’re seeing today.”

Her critique ignited a debate online, with some social media users saying Khazaal is voicing a long-overdue concern.

Advertisement

PSYCHIATRIST REVEALS HOW SIMPLE MINDSET SHIFTS CAN SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCE CHRONIC PAIN

“The first time I heard, ‘You can love them from a distance’ was from Oprah … in the ’90s,” one woman said.

My son estranged himself from us for five years,” one mother commented. “The pain, hurt and damage never goes away.”

TEST YOURSELF WITH OUR LATEST LIFESTYLE QUIZ

Others, however, argued that Winfrey’s podcast episode was empathetic and that estrangement shouldn’t be oversimplified.

Advertisement

Mental health experts say the conversation around estrangement is more complex than any single celebrity influence, and reflects broader cultural shifts.

Experts say today’s focus on boundaries and emotional well-being has reshaped family expectations. (iStock)

In the episode with Winfrey, Joshua Coleman, a California-based psychologist, said, “The old days of ‘honor thy mother and thy father,’ ‘respect thy elders’ and ‘family is forever’ has given way to much more of an emphasis on personal happiness, personal growth, my identity, my political beliefs, my mental health.” 

Coleman noted that therapists sometimes become “detachment brokers” by unintentionally green-lighting estrangement.

CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR OUR HEALTH NEWSLETTER

Advertisement

Jillian Amodio, a licensed master’s social worker at the Maryland-based Waypoint Wellness Center, told Fox News Digital that while public figures like Winfrey help normalize these conversations, estrangement might just be a more openly discussed topic now.

“Estrangement used to be handled privately and quietly,” she said.

Winfrey’s take on family estrangement is prompting a broader discussion amid the holiday season. (iStock)

But even strained relationships can be fixed with the right support, experts say.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE HEALTH STORIES

Advertisement

Susan Foosness, a North Carolina-based clinical director of patient programs at Rula Health, said families can strengthen their relationships by working with a mental health professional to improve communication, learn healthier conflict-resolution skills, and build trust and empathy through quality time together.

“No family is perfect,” Foosness told Fox News Digital.

Khazaal agreed, saying, “Parents need to learn how to listen without slipping into justification, and children need help speaking about their pain without defaulting to blame or avoidance.”

Fox News Digital reached out to Winfrey for comment.

Advertisement

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending