Health
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.
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.
Vaccines
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.
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.
Airborne Spread
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.
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.
Masking
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.
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.
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.”
Herd Immunity
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.
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.
School Closures
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.
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.”
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.”
Lockdowns
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.
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.
“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
No sex for 10 weeks? Championship team’s playoff strategy raises eyebrows
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
No sex for the win? This was the advice given to this year’s NBA champions.
New York Knicks owner James Dolan addressed the now-champs as they headed into the playoffs in April 2026, acknowledging their high potential to eventually win the championship.
“I don’t know if you understand what it would mean for you to win a championship this year … It would be life-changing,” he said. “It will stick with you the rest of your lives, and if you don’t win, you’ll be thinking about it the rest of your lives.”
MALE FERTILITY RATES CRASH AS DOCTORS REVEAL HEALTH THREATS: ‘SOMETHING VERY WRONG’
As Dolan’s inspirational speech to the team went on, he explained how the next 10 weeks would require each player to make sacrifices – watching their diets, getting proper sleep and perhaps even abstaining from sex.
“You need sacrifice and you need to eliminate all the distractions around you,” he said.
Jalen Brunson of the New York Knicks celebrates with the Bill Russell NBA Finals Most Valuable Player Award trophy and Knicks owner James Dolan after defeating the San Antonio Spurs in Game Five of the 2026 NBA Finals at Frost Bank Center in San Antonio, Texas, on June 13, 2026. (Gregory Shamus/Getty Images)
“I had this idea that maybe you should give up sex for the next 10 weeks,” the owner said. “You don’t have to give up sex for the next 10 weeks – but, like the Spartans … They denied themselves, so that they can have an edge. Get the edge.”
This received a few snickers from the team, and Dolan responded, “Don’t tell [your wives and girlfriends] you’re not going to have sex and don’t tell them it was my idea. But let them know what this is going to be like … and how they’re going to have to sacrifice, too.”
DOCTORS WARN SOME POPULAR FOODS AND DRINKS COULD BE SECRETLY SABOTAGING MEN’S TESTOSTERONE LEVELS
Dr. Anna Elton, licensed marriage and family therapist and clinical sexologist in Massachusetts, confirmed that this belief has been around for centuries, dating back to the ancients Spartans and early Olympic competitors.
Avoiding sex can preserve energy, increase aggression and sharpen focus, according to Elton.
The theory behind abstaining from sex for better athletic performance supports that it can preserve energy, increase aggression and sharpen focus. (iStock)
But modern research has found little evidence that consensual sexual activity negatively impacts strength, endurance, reaction time or athletic performance when it occurs at least 10 hours before competition, the doctor countered.
However, “activity very close to competition may affect recovery measures,” she added. What may be more important, according to Elton, is the psychological value of abstinence.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
“Choosing to abstain can reinforce discipline and total commitment to a larger goal,” she said. “In those cases, the advantage may come more from mindset and focus than from any physical effect.”
“Whether the sacrifice is alcohol, social activities, favorite foods or sex, the message is often the same: ‘We are all in.’”
New York Knicks guard Jalen Brunson celebrates with teammates after the Knicks defeated the San Antonio Spurs in game five of the 2026 NBA Finals at Frost Bank Center in San Antonio, Texas, on June 13, 2026. (Geoff Burke/Imagn Images)
The science of abstinence
This discussion has historically focused on men, which Elton said is often based on “misconceptions about testosterone and energy depletion.”
CLICK HERE FOR MORE HEALTH STORIES
“Research has not demonstrated that normal sexual activity causes a meaningful decline in athletic performance, and concerns about testosterone depletion have not been consistently supported by the evidence,” she said.
“For women, sexual activity may have additional benefits related to stress reduction, emotional regulation and relationship satisfaction.”
Abstaining from sex for athletic performance may create a sense of discipline, minimize distractions, maintain focus on training and reinforce a team culture centered on sacrifice and commitment, experts say. (iStock)
In a separate interview with Fox News Digital, Dr. Anthony Puopolo, a men’s health expert and lead medical provider for RexMD, echoed Elton’s assessment that research largely does not support abstinence as a performance enhancer.
This is despite a small amount of evidence that suggests engaging in sexual activity within two hours of competition could pose a risk to cardiovascular recovery.
WEIGHT LOSS MEDICATIONS COULD IMPACT SEXUAL HEALTH IN UNEXPECTED WAYS
“Unfortunately, nearly all studies (99%) have been conducted in males aged 20 to 40, so there is virtually no data on female athletes, older athletes or diverse populations,” said the Puerto Rico-based expert. “We know what to tell the Knicks, but we are not sure what to recommend for the New York Liberty.”
Importance of connection
Elton said abstinence may still offer psychological benefits for some competitors. “For some athletes, it can become part of a pre-competition ritual that enhances confidence,” she told Fox News Digital.
CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR OUR HEALTH NEWSLETTER
Some other potential benefits of sexual activity include stress reduction, improved sleep, mood enhancement, emotional connection with a partner and relief from performance-related tension.
“Strong, supportive relationships are associated with better psychological resilience, which can be valuable during high-pressure competitions,” Elton said.
“One of the most overlooked performance advantages may be having a supportive relationship waiting at home,” a doctor said. (iStock)
“Ultimately, there is no universal rule,” she went on. “What helps one athlete perform at their best may not help another.”
Elton stressed that sleep, recovery, nutrition, stress management and support from loved ones are universal performance boosters.
TEST YOURSELF WITH OUR LATEST LIFESTYLE QUIZ
“Athletes devote tremendous attention to training their bodies, while overlooking the importance of their personal relationships,” she cautioned. “A supportive partner can be one of the greatest assets during a demanding season.”
“If competition requires temporary sacrifices, make those decisions together and keep communication open.”
Health
Zero sugar, more problems? Study reveals surprising gut health effects
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Eliminating sugar from your diet may seem like the key to healthy eating, but research suggests it could have unintended effects on digestive health.
A study presented at ENDO 2026, the Endocrine Society’s annual meeting, suggests that a total lack of sucrose, or table sugar, may harm gut health and disrupt the body’s natural metabolism.
To explore how the total absence of dietary sugar impacts the body, researchers at the Dasman Diabetes Institute in Kuwait City conducted a 16-week study on two groups of mice. Both groups were placed on a low-fat diet, but with one critical difference.
COMMON CHEMICALS FROM FOOD ADDITIVES TO PESTICIDES MAY BE WRECKING YOUR GUT HEALTH, STUDY SAYS
One group consumed a low-fat diet that included a standard amount of sucrose, while the other group ate a low-fat diet that was completely sugar-free, according to the study’s press release.
Throughout the trial, the scientists monitored a wide variety of physiological factors, including the animals’ weight, glucose tolerance, insulin sensitivity, hormone levels, internal inflammation and the specific composition of their gut bacteria.
A total lack of dietary sugar can cause imbalances in the gut bacteria and lead to signs of fatty liver disease, even without any weight gain, researchers said. (iStock)
The study outcome suggested that completely removing sugar caused several unexpected health problems.
“Completely removing sucrose from a low-fat diet may unexpectedly disrupt gut health and promote inflammation and metabolic dysfunction,” Rasheed Ahmad, principal scientist and head of the Immunology & Microbiology Department at the Dasman Diabetes Institute, said in the release.
AMERICANS’ HIGH SUGAR CONSUMPTION PROMPTS URGENT WARNING FROM HEALTH LEADERS
Even though the mice on the sugar-free diet did not gain any extra weight compared to the control group, their internal health indicators deteriorated.
TEST YOURSELF WITH OUR LATEST LIFESTYLE QUIZ
The animals that lacked sucrose developed an imbalance in their gut microbes and increased inflammation within the intestines and liver.
They also showed signs of poor glucose regulation, insulin resistance and cellular changes associated with fatty liver disease, according to the research.
Future dietary guidelines may shift away from strict, absolute sugar bans and instead focus on overall gut health through balanced nutrition. (iStock)
“The findings suggest that complete removal of sucrose from a low-fat diet may negatively affect gut microbiota and metabolic health,” Ahmad concluded.
CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR OUR HEALTH NEWSLETTER
While the risks of high-sugar diets are well-established, the researchers noted that little attention has been given to the effects of completely eliminating sugar from low-fat meals.
Scientists say these new findings highlight that dietary carbohydrates play a valuable role in supporting balance between the immune system and the gut microbiome.
Completely cutting sucrose from a low-fat diet can unexpectedly trigger gut inflammation and disrupt the metabolism, experts say. (iStock)
Because this research was conducted on mice over a relatively short 16-week period, further clinical trials are necessary to determine whether a completely sugar-free diet causes the same gut and liver inflammation in humans.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE HEALTH STORIES
Additionally, the study focused specifically on removing sucrose from low-fat meals, meaning the results might not apply to people eliminating sugar while following higher-fat or ketogenic eating plans, the researchers noted.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
The team believes that future dietary guidelines may shift away from strict, absolute sugar restrictions and instead place a greater emphasis on maintaining a diverse, healthy population of gut bacteria through balanced nutrition.
“In the long term, these findings could help improve strategies for preventing and managing metabolic disorders, fatty liver disease and chronic inflammatory conditions,” Ahmad said.
Health
Can You Lose Weight Without Exercise? 7 Surprisingly Easy Tricks
Use left and right arrow keys to navigate between menu items.
Use escape to exit the menu.
Sign Up
Create a free account to access exclusive content, play games, solve puzzles, test your pop-culture knowledge and receive special offers.
Already have an account? Login
-
Alabama2 minutes ago
Kids take center stage at Alabama Shakespeare Festival summer camp
-
Alaska7 minutes agoAlaska Airlines names CFO as new president
-
Arizona14 minutes agoWife turns in Arizona startup CEO husband over fraud allegations
-
Arkansas17 minutes ago
Arkansas men’s track and field celebrates banner season with updated flag | Northwest Arkansas Democrat-Gazette
-
California22 minutes agoCalifornia lawmakers seek $32M to combat invasive pest found on grapevines sold at Costco
-
Colorado29 minutes agoColorado’s Deion Sanders With Controversial Big 12 Coach Ranking
-
Connecticut32 minutes agoSierra Club Connecticut, State Representatives Host Black Lungs Matter: Juneteenth Press Event – CleanTechnica
-
Delaware37 minutes agoFrom blueprint to breakthrough: Tackling affordable housing in Wilmington