Wastewater is an early warning system for COVID and other diseases, and a collaborative effort in Nevada appears to be the first in the nation to detect a new strain of the disease — known as FLiRT.

“We detected it as early as March 29,” said UNLV Professor Dr. Edwin Oh, director of the UNLV lab that monitors wastewater in southern and northern Nevada, adding that his check of various websites from labs across the country that do such wastewater monitoring, indicates UNLV was first in finding the new variant.

The goal of the wastewater surveillance and research is to determine if any new strain of the constantly evolving disease — that once killed 25,000 Americans a week at its height in 2020 — might pose a problem for humans.

“So far it does not look like it (FLiRT) poses any major threats,” Oh said of the the two variants — KP.1 and KP.2. — that are mutations of FLiRT.

“We nerd out a lot on the different pathogens and variants,” Oh said of his crew that includes UNLV undergrads and wastewater treatment plant operators. About 15 different sites are checked weekly in Clark County and three or four sites in Northern Nevada.

The effort is to warn and protect the community from COVID variants that could raise the risk of major sickness potential.

Genetic material from the virus that causes COVID-19 can be found in human waste even when individuals have no symptoms. Tracking the amount of viral genetic material (viral load) in wastewater is an emerging method of monitoring increasing and decreasing trends of the virus in communities.

Wastewater surveillance has been ongoing for years. The most recent variant that raised eyebrows was JN.1 around Christmas time, Oh said. “It had about 50 mutations and a lot of us were concerned that it might bring added risk to the immunocompromised (population) or the vaccine resistant (population).”

The wastewater monitoring project is a collaboration between Southern Nevada Health District, Southern Nevada Water Authority, Desert Research Institute and UNLV.

Contact Marvin Clemons at mclemons@reviewjournal.com.

The Nevada Supreme Court on Monday struck down a proposed ballot initiative that would allow voters to decide whether to repeal the public funding that lawmakers approved last year for a new MLB stadium in Las Vegas.

The Monday ruling dealt a blow for detractors of the funding who saw a ballot question this year as the most effective route to repeal key parts of the sweeping bill that paved the way for the Oakland Athletics to move to Las Vegas.

NEVADA SUPREME COURT WILL TAKE ANOTHER LOOK AT CHASING HORSE’S REQUEST TO DISMISS SEX ABUSE CHARGES

Five judges voted to uphold a lower court ruling that struck down the referendum. One judge dissented, while another concurred in-part and dissented in-part.

In a statement following the ruling, Schools over Stadiums political action committee spokesperson Alexander Marks said their focus is now to get the question on the 2026 ballot. The PAC is backed by the Nevada State Education Association, a statewide teachers union who has long opposed public funding for the stadium.

The stadium financing debate in Nevada mirrors those happening nationwide over whether public funds should be used to help finance sports stadiums.

A’s representatives and some Nevada tourism officials have said the public funding could add to Las Vegas’ growing sports scene and act as an economic engine. But a growing chorus of stadium economists, educators and some lawmakers had warned that it would bring minimal benefits, especially when compared to the hefty public price tag.

The Nevada Supreme Court ruled that the entirety of the 66-page bill must be included in the ballot question to provide its full context. But ballot referendums can be no more than 200 words — which lawyers for Schools over Stadiums admitted made it difficult to explain the complex bill during oral arguments last month.

The court ruled that the 200-word description submitted by Schools over Stadiums was “misleading” and “explains the general effect of a referendum, but it does not describe the practical effects of this specific referendum.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Attorney Bradley Schrager, who represents the two plaintiffs who are labor union lobbyists in favor of the public funding, said on Monday that “all Nevadans have a right to participate in direct democracy, but they need to observe the laws that require properly informing the voters of a proposal. This measure obviously fails to do that.”

MLB owners have unanimously approved the A’s move to Las Vegas.

Could the third time be the charm for Donald Trump in Nevada?

It certainly looks like a possibility based on a new poll by the New York Times, Siena College and the Philadelphia Inquirer.

Trump lost in 2016 by 2.4 percentage points to Hillary Clinton and in 2020 by about the same difference to Joe Biden.

But the new poll of six swing states shows that among likely voters surveyed in Nevada, former President Trump leads President Joe Biden by 13 percentage points: 51% to 38%.

That difference may hinge on favorability.

Those with a “net unfavorable” view of Biden – somewhat or very unfavorable – is 64%. It rises to 70% net unfavorable among Nevada’s large nonpartisan population.

Regarding Trump, Nevada registered voters have a 49% net unfavorable view, according to those who responded to the poll. Fifty-four percent of registered nonpartisan have a net unfavorable view – 16 percentage points lower than for Biden.

If Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and other third-party candidates are added to the mix, the difference stays approximately the same: Trump 14 points ahead of Biden if the vote were held today.

RFK Jr. would get 12% of Nevada’s votes, according to the survey.

As for whether he helps or harms one of the major party candidates, it doesn’t appear obvious: 10% of registered Republicans, 10% of Democrats and 15% of independents said they’d vote for RFK Jr.

Other poll findings – race/ethnicity, Rosen v. Brown

The poll shows Trump with a 9 percentage point lead in Nevada among registered Hispanic voters and a 6-point lead among “other” racial or ethnic minorities.

When Nevada voters were asked if they would support Democrat Jacky Rosen or Republican Sam Brown for U.S. Senate, Rosen holds a 2 percentage point advantage: 40% to 38%, which amounts to a toss-up based on the margin of error.

The Senate race shows a lot of room for movement, as about 23% of respondents said they didn’t know which one they’d pick or they refused to answer.

Trump leading in most other swing states

Among all the swing states surveyed, Trump has a 6 percentage point lead with a margin of error of 1.9 points for the overall survey.

Trump has an advantage in all but one of the other swing states surveyed.

• Arizona: Trump ahead by 6 percentage points among likely voters
• Georgia: Trump ahead by 9
• Michigan: Biden ahead by 1
• Pennsylvania: Trump ahead by 3
• Wisconsin: Trump ahead by 1

The margin of error in Nevada’s results is reported as 4.5 percentage points.

The polls were conducted from April 28 to May 9, and 21% of the surveys of Nevada Hispanic voters were conducted in Spanish.

How this poll compares to others

An Emerson College/The Hill poll released April 30 showed the presidential race much tighter in Nevada, with Trump having a 1-point lead over Biden.

A Bloomberg/Morning Consult poll, also in April, showed Trump up by 8 percent points in Nevada while one in March by the Wall Street Journal had Trump ahead by 4.

However, the latest results track with another New York Times/Siena College poll about six months ago that showed Trump with a 12-point lead over Biden.

Mark Robison is the state politics reporter for the Reno Gazette Journal, with occasional forays into other topics. Email comments to mrobison@rgj.com or comment on Mark’s Greater Reno Facebook page.