Plan will also allow states most reliant on tourism to make bilateral arrangements with non-EU members – including UK

First dose COVID-19 vaccination rates among people aged 70 years and older who live in England, both in private households and communal establishments. Includes estimates for the population as a whole by age and sex, and for ethnic minorities, religious groups, those identified as disabled and by area deprivation.

Over-70s of black African heritage 7.4 times more likely not to have had first dose than white people, says ONS

n a letter to the editor published in The New England Journal of Medicine, Danuta M. Skowronski, MD, and Gaston De Serres, MD, PhD, reviewed documentation submitted to the Food and Drug Administration to derive vaccine efficacy for Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine, BNT162b2.1 In the original study, conducted by Polack et al, efficacy after the first dose was calculated to be 52.4% and collected during the first 2 weeks after injection, when “immunity would have still been mounting.”

Hilda Bastian on the most important pandemic vaccine in the pipeline and why we’re on track for annual booster shots.

BERLIN (Reuters) - Germany has administered only 15% of the AstraZeneca coronavirus shots it has available, the health ministry said, as the vaccine faces public resistance after trials showed it to be less effective than alternatives.

Alongside COVID-19 as a viral pandemic, the World Health Organization was quick to declare COVID-19 an infodemic, a superabundance of online and offline information with the potential to undermine public health efforts. Here, Dr. Elinor Carmi, Dr. Myrto Aloumpi and Dr. Elena Musi discuss how philosophical fallacies can be instrumentalised in response to the COVID-19 infodemic and assist those coming into contact with fake news resist its rhetorical appeal.

V-safe is a smartphone-based tool that uses text messaging and web surveys to provide personalized health check-ins after you receive a COVID-19 vaccine. Through v-safe, you can quickly tell CDC if you have any side effects after getting a COVID-19 vaccine. Depending on your answers to the web surveys, someone from CDC may call to check on you and get more information. V-safe will also remind you to get your second COVID-19 vaccine dose if you need one.

In December 2020, 2 mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines (Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna) were granted Emergency Use Authorization by the US Food and Drug Administration as 2-dose series and recommended for use by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.1-3 In late February 2021, the US Food and Drug Administration granted Emergency Use Authorization for a third COVID-19 vaccine, a single-dose adenovirus vector-based vaccine from Janssen (Johnson & Johnson). In clinical trials of the mRNA-based 2-dose vaccines, participants reported local and systemic reactions (reactogenicity).4,5 Frequently reported reactions included injection site pain, fatigue, and headache; greater reactogenicity was reported following the second dose.4,5 Continued monitoring of reactogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines outside of clinical trial settings may provide additional information for health care practitioners and the public about transient local and systemic reactions following COVID-19 vaccination.

Focusing on vaccine hesitancy could mean we are missing an opportunity to maximise uptake by better understanding people’s capability, opportunity and motivation to get the Covid-19 vaccination, say psychologists.

SPI-M Roadmap modelling suggests new variants with increased transmissibility are capableof generating a wave of infections bigger than previous waves.●Incontrovertible evidence that B.1.617.2 is more transmissible may come too late.●It is possible the outbreak in India is partly the result of higher transmission of B.1.617.2.●In the face of uncertain evidence the risk of over-reacting seems small compared to thepotential benefit of delaying a third wave until more people are vaccinated.●Rapid containment in Bolton and Blackburn, Sefton, Liverpool, and the area around Bedfordis warranted. Surge testing for B.1.617.2 in these areas is needed.●Active surveillance for further outbreaks using S-gene positive tests results is valuable, andshould be extended to any areas that are not currently being tested with the TaqPath assay.●Aggressive use of asymptomatic testing, contact tracing and isolation of S-gene positive casesin targeted areas in the rest of the country may be needed to contain or delay outbreaks.●Surge vaccination is worth considering, however protection will take time to develop, so maynot be enough on its own. Surge vaccination will redistribute vaccines, and require increasedlocal resources, may not be achievable if growth continues.●We can translate a difference in growth rates, using the following quick conversions. Thisassumes the same generation times for S-gene positives and negatives. If the S-gene positiveshave a growth rate of -0.05, then we see that positive growth of S-gene positives implies atransmission advantage of more than 1.4 times the S-gene negatives.

Chinese foreign ministry denies that staff fell illReport may boost calls for wider probe into originsArticle published on eve of key WHO meeting

Within the context of the current replication and credibility crisis, open science practices have been pivotal in facilitating greater transparency in research. However, practices like preregistration have been applied nearly exclusively to basic academic research, with very rare consideration of, or application to, applied and consultancy-based research. This is particularly problematic as such research typically represents very low levels of transparency and accountability despite being disseminated as influential grey literature to inform practice. Evidence-based practice is best served by an appreciation of multiple sources of quality evidence, thus the current review considers the potential of preregistration to improve both the credibility and accessibility of applied research towards more rigorous evidence-based practice. The current review critically evaluates the strengths, concerns and opportunities for preregistration of applied research activity, and provides recommendations for academics, industry, and the structures they are held within, to consider such potential.

We fitted a model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in care homes and the community to regional surveillance data for England. Compared with other approaches, our model provides a synthesis of multiple surveillance data streams into a single coherent modelling framework allowing transmission and severity to be disentangled from features of the surveillance system. Of the control measures implemented, only national lockdown brought the reproduction number (Rteff) below 1 consistently; if introduced one week earlier it could have reduced deaths in the first wave from an estimated 48,600 to 25,600 (95% credible interval [95%CrI]: 15,900–38,400). The infection fatality ratio decreased from 1.00% (95%CrI: 0.85%–1.21%) to 0.79% (95%CrI: 0.63%–0.99%), suggesting improved clinical care. The infection fatality ratio was higher in the elderly residing in care homes (23.3%, 95%CrI: 14.7%–35.2%) than those residing in the community (7.9%, 95%CrI: 5.9%–10.3%). On 2nd December 2020 England was still far from herd immunity, with regional cumulative infection incidence between 7.6% (95%CrI: 5.4%–10.2%) and 22.3% (95%CrI: 19.4%–25.4%) of the population. Therefore, any vaccination campaign will need to achieve high coverage and a high degree of protection in vaccinated individuals to allow non-pharmaceutical interventions to be lifted without a resurgence of transmission.

There is a long history of research about the scientific process, particularly with fields such as philosophy of science, sociology of science, and science-technology studies contributing unique insights about how science operates. There is also a growing cadre of researchers deploying modem methodologies and big data to investigate the scientific process. Together, these communities of researchers and stakeholders are the research and development pipeline for improving research practices. The Metascience 2021 meeting is a point of convergence to share knowledge, foster community, and define a roadmap of research and intervention priorities to accelerate science. 

An important knowledge dimension of science and technology is the extent to whichtheir development is cumulative, that is, the extent to which later findings build onearlier ones. Cumulative knowledge structures can be studied using a network ap-proach in which nodes represent findings and links represent knowledge flows. Ofparticular interest to those studies is the notion of network paths and path length.Starting from the Price model of network growth, we derive an exact solution for thepath length distribution of all unique paths from a given initial node to each node inthe network. We study the relative importance of the average in-degree and cumula-tive advantage effect and implement a generalization where the in-degree depends onthe number of nodes. The cumulative advantage effect is found to fundamentally slowdown path length growth. As the collection of all unique paths may contain manyredundancies, we additionally consider the subset of the longest paths to each node inthe network. As this case is more complicated, we only approximate the longest pathlength distribution in a simple context. Where the number of all unique paths of agiven length grows unbounded, the number of longest paths of a given length convergesto a finite limit, which depends exponentially on the given path length. Fundamentalnetwork properties and dynamics therefore characteristically shape cumulative struc-tures in those networks, and should therefore be taken into account when studyingthose structures

International travel won’t be ‘normal’ until 2022

Determining the duration of protective immunity to infection by SARS-CoV-2 is crucial for understanding and predicting the course of the COVID-19 pandemic. Clinical studies now indicate that immunity will be long-lasting.

Gemma Derrick revisits calls for a better research culture.

Early research shows that 15 to 80 percent of people with certain medical conditions, such as specific blood cancers or organ transplants, are generating few antibodies after receiving coronavirus vaccines.

Studies of two SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines suggested that they yield ∼95% protection from symptomatic infection at least short-term, but important clinical questions remain. It is unclear how vaccine-induced antibody levels quantitatively compare to the wide spectrum induced by natural SARS-CoV-2 infection. Vaccine response kinetics and magnitudes in persons with prior COVID-19 compared to virus-naı̈ve persons are not well-defined. The relative stability of vaccine-induced versus infection-induced antibody levels is unclear. We addressed these issues with longitudinal assessments of vaccinees with and without prior SARS-CoV-2 infection using quantitative enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) of anti-RBD antibodies. SARS-CoV-2-naı̈ve individuals achieved levels similar to mild natural infection after the first vaccination; a second dose generated levels approaching severe natural infection. In persons with prior COVID-19, one dose boosted levels to the high end of severe natural infection even in those who never had robust responses from infection, increasing no further after the second dose. Antiviral neutralizing assessments using a spike-pseudovirus assay revealed that virus-naı̈ve vaccinees did not develop physiologic neutralizing potency until the second dose, while previously infected persons exhibited maximal neutralization after one dose. Finally, antibodies from vaccination waned similarly to natural infection, resulting in an average of ∼90% loss within 90 days. In summary, our findings suggest that two doses are important for quantity and quality of humoral immunity in SARS-CoV-2-naı̈ve persons, while a single dose has maximal effects in those with past infection. Antibodies from vaccination wane with kinetics very similar to that seen after mild natural infection; booster vaccinations will likely be required.

What is already known about this topic? Messenger RNA (mRNA) COVID-19 vaccines have been shown to be effective in preventing symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection in randomized placebo-controlled Phase III trials. What is added by this report? Prospective cohorts of 3,950 health care personnel, first responders, and other essential and frontline workers completed weekly SARS-CoV-2 testing for 13 consecutive weeks. Under real-world conditions, mRNA vaccine effectiveness of full immunization (≥14 days after second dose) was 90% against SARS-CoV-2 infections regardless of symptom status; vaccine effectiveness of partial immunization (≥14 days after first dose but before second dose) was 80%. What are the implications for public health practice? Authorized mRNA COVID-19 vaccines are effective for preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection in real-world conditions. COVID-19 vaccination is recommended for all eligible persons.

Serious questions remain about managing the games safely

EDMONTON -- New numbers from Alberta Health are showing just how effective vaccines have been in Alberta in reducing new COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations and deaths. 

“Be safe, be smart, be kind” were the words of WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. India has been facing the worst second wave in the pandemic. With daily cases crossing 350 000 at the time of writing, hospitals in India have witnessed a surge in the number of critically ill patients. The battle between the health-care system serving the second largest population in the world and the severe manifestations of COVID-19 is intense and ongoing. Doctors, nurses, hospital staff, and ambulance drivers are at the forefront of managing the complications of COVID-19. In a Media Watch piece, Graham Mackenzie described the experience of lockdown in the UK, as captured through social media.1Mackenzie G A year and a day of #Covid19uk tweets.Lancet Infect Dis. 2021; 21: 616Summary Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Google Scholar In India, social media has turned out to be a saviour in the middle of this pandemic.

The SARS-CoV-2 variant of concern B.1.617.2 displaced B.1.1.7 as the dominant variant in England and other countries. This study aimed to determine whether B.1.617.2 was also displacing B.1.1.7 in the United States. We analyzed PCR testing results and viral sequencing results of samples collected across the United States, and showed that B.1.1.7 was rapidly being displaced and is no longer responsible for the majority of new cases. The percentage of SARS-CoV-2 positive cases that are B.1.1.7 dropped from 70% in April 2021 to 42% in just 6 weeks. Our analysis showed rapid growth of variants B.1.617.2 and P.1 as the primary drivers for this displacement. Currently, the growth rate of B.1.617.2 was higher than P.1 in the US (0.61 vs. 0.22), which is consistent with reports from other countries. Lastly, we showed that B.1.617.2 was growing faster in counties with a lower vaccination rate.

This page is for reporting: side effects to medicines and problems with medical devices (adverse events) counterfeit (fake) medicines and medical devices issues with a medicine's packaging or storage.

Results from the long-awaited US trial of the Oxford-AstraZeneca Covid vaccine are out and confirm that the shot is both safe and highly effective.

ONS estimates 1.1m people in community had ongoing symptoms in four weeks to 6 March

BackgroundAge is the major risk factor for mortality after SARS-CoV-2 infection and older people have received priority consideration for COVID-19vaccination. However vaccine responses are often suboptimal in this age group and few people over the age of 80 years were included in vaccine registration trials.MethodsWe determined the serological and cellular response to spike protein in 100 people aged 80-96 years at 2 weeks after second vaccination with the PfizerBNT162b2 mRNA vaccine.FindingsAntibody responses were seen in every donor with high titres in 98%. Spike-specific cellular immune responses were detectable in only 63% and correlated with humoral response. Previous SARS-CoV-2 infection substantially increased antibody responses after one vaccine and antibody and cellular responses remained 28-fold and 3-fold higher respectively after dual vaccination. Post-vaccine sera mediated strong neutralisation of live Victoria (Wuhan-like prototype) infection and although neutralisation titres were reduced 14-fold against the P.1 variantfirst discovered in Brazilthey remained largely effective.InterpretationThese data demonstrate that the mRNA vaccine platform delivers strong humoral immunity in people up to 96 years of age and retains broad efficacy against the P.1 Variant of Concern

1.Drawing on access to a private conference attended by the world’s leading anti-vaxxers, CCDH has been able to reveal their plan to use social media to spread distrust about the Covid vaccine and recruit new supporters to their cause.2.Leading anti-vaxxers view Covid as an historic opportunity forthem to reach larger numbers of the public than ever before, and to create long-lasting distrust in the effectiveness, safety and necessity for vaccination.3.Online anti-vaxxers continue to grow, with 147 of the leading accounts gaining 10.1 million followers since 2019, an increase of 25%. The additional growth took place primarily on Instagram and YouTube, with anti-vaxxers adding an extra 4.3 million followers on each platform.4.Anti-vaxxers have developed a sophisticated playbook for spreading uncertainty about a Covid vaccine, converting vaccine-hesitant people into committed anti-vaxxers, and resisting attempts to remove their misinformation.5.Online anti-vaxxers have organised themselves around a “master narrative” comprised of three key messages: Covidis not dangerous, the vaccine is dangerous and vaccine advocates cannot be trusted.6.Alternative health entrepreneurs, conspiracy theorists and accounts aimed at parents or ethnic communities vastly expand the reach of this master narrative and tailor it to cause uncertainty in their audiences.7.Anti-vaxxers have created accessible online “answering spaces” such as Facebook Groups, Instagram accounts and purpose-built websites that are designed to answer legitimate questions about a Covid vaccine with anti-vaccine misinformation.8.The most establishedanti-vaccine“answering spaces” identify vaccine hesitant individuals, convert them into committed anti-vaxxers and offer training to make them more effective activists.9.Anti-vaxxers are attempting to mitigate the removal of their misinformation by adopting a “Lifeboat Strategy” of migrating their followers to “alt-tech” platforms such as Telegram and Parler, but with little success.10.The public are urged not to engage with anti-vaxx misinformation online, even to rebut it or criticise it, because doing so only spreads the misinformation to new audiences. The example is given of anti-vaxxer narratives “trending” on social media on the first day of the vaccine rollout, primarily due to pro-vaccine accounts amplifyingthem. Instead, users are urged to share pro-vaccine messages.11.Platforms are urged to remove the accounts of anti-vaxx “superspreaders”, those accounts with the largest followings and using the most cynical tactics. The report provides evidence that some are guilty of promoting false cures for Covid and training their social media followers to spread harmful misinformation.12.Pro-vaccine practitioners are advised to focus on inoculating the public by ignoring individual memes and focusing on the master narrative, with a series of suggestions for how “inoculation” can make individuals more resilient to anti-vaxxer messaging

Summary1.R in England is estimated to be between 0.8 and 1.0, higher than that estimated before schools reopened (between 0.6 to 0.8). As yet, the full effect of schools has not been fully reflected in these estimates nor has theimpactof easing restrictions from 29thMarch.2.The modelling presented here does not account for waning immunity nor the future emergence of immune-or vaccine-escapevariants.TheB.1.351 strain of SARS-CoV-2 is of particular concern for the UK,given the known reduced protection against mild tomoderate diseasefrom some vaccines. 3.There is considerable uncertainty about the level of control that can be achieved at each step of the Roadmap, and therefore the subsequent trajectory of hospital admissions and deaths. It remains criticalto evaluate the effect of each step before taking the next.4.While more data have accrued on real-world vaccine effectiveness and coverage, modelling results remain highly dependent on assumptions about unknown factorsincluding the rate of transmission at each stepas a result of behaviour changes; the extent to which baseline measures continue to reduce transmission once restrictions are lifted; the impact of seasonal changes in transmission; and future vaccine rollout speed.High vaccine coverage (90% in under 50-year olds) is assumedhere. Uncertainty increases when looking further into the future.5.Any resurgence in hospital admissions and deaths following Step 2 of the Roadmap aloneis highly unlikely to put unsustainable pressure on the NHS. 6.It is highly likely that there will be a further resurgence in hospitalisations and deathsafter the later steps of the Roadmap. The scale, shape, and timing of any resurgence remain highly uncertain;in most scenarios modelled,any peakis smaller than the wave seen in January 2021, however, scenarios with little transmission reduction after Step 4 orwith pessimistic but plausible vaccine efficacy assumptionscan result in resurgences in hospitalisations of asimilar scale to January2021.7.Maintaining baseline measures to reduce transmission once restrictions are lifted is almost certain to save many lives and minimise the threat to hospital capacity.8.Even accounting for some seasonal variation in transmission, thepeak could occur in either summer or late summer/autumn. It is possible that seasonality could delay or flatten the resurgence but is highly unlikely to prevent it altogether.

All medical treatments have potential harms as well as potential benefits, and it's important to be able to weigh these against each other. With vaccines, the benefits are particularly complex as they can involve benefits to others as well as to ourselves - and the harms can feel particularly acute because we take vaccines when we are healthy, as a preventative measure.

Background Covid-status certification – certificates for those who test negative for the SARS-CoV-2 virus, test positive for antibodies, or who have been vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 – has been proposed to enable safer access to a range of activities. Realising these benefits will depend in part upon the behavioural and social impacts of certification. The aim of this rapid review was to describe public attitudes towards certification, and its possible impact on uptake of testing and vaccination, protective behaviours, and crime.Method A search was undertaken in peer-reviewed databases, pre-print databases, and the grey literature, from 2000 to December 2020. Studies were included if they measured attitudes towards or behavioural consequences of health certificates based on one of three indices of Covid-19 status: test-negative result for current infectiousness, test-positive for antibodies conferring natural immunity, or vaccination(s) conferring immunity.Results Thirty-three papers met the inclusion criteria, only three of which were rated as low risk of bias. Public attitudes were generally favourable towards the use of immunity certificates for international travel, but unfavourable towards their use for access to work and other activities. A significant minority was strongly opposed to the use of certificates of immunity for any purpose. The limited evidence suggested that intention to get vaccinated varied with the activity enabled by certification or vaccination (e.g., international travel). Where vaccination is seen as compulsory this could lead to unwillingness to accept a subsequent vaccination. There was some evidence that restricting access to settings and activities to those with antibody test certificates may lead to deliberate exposure to infection in a minority. Behaviours that reduce transmission may decrease upon health certificates based on any of the three indices of Covid-19 status, including physical distancing and handwashing.Conclusions The limited evidence suggests that health certification in relation to COVID-19 – outside of the context of international travel – has the potential for harm as well as benefit. Realising the benefits while minimising the harms will require real-time evaluations allowing modifications to maximise the potential contribution of certification to enable safer access to a range of activities.

Posts are sharing the false statement that the spike protein in COVID-19 vaccines is cytotoxic, suggesting that it kills or damages cells. There is no evidence to support this.

Online data collection has become indispensable to the social sciences, polling, marketing, and corporate research. However, in recent years, online data collection has been inundated with low quality data. Low quality data threatens the validity of online research and, at times, invalidates entire studies. It is often assumed that random, inconsistent, and fraudulent data in online surveys comes from ‘bots.’ But little is known about whether bad data is caused by bots or ill-intentioned or inattentive humans. We examined this issue on Mechanical Turk (MTurk), a popular online data collection platform. In the summer of 2018, researchers noticed a sharp increase in the number of data quality problems on MTurk, problems that were commonly attributed to bots. Despite this assumption, few studies have directly examined whether problematic data on MTurk are from bots or inattentive humans, even though identifying the source of bad data has important implications for creating the right solutions. Using CloudResearch’s data quality tools to identify problematic participants in 2018 and 2020, we provide evidence that much of the data quality problems on MTurk can be tied to fraudulent users from outside of the U.S. who pose as American workers. Hence, our evidence strongly suggests that the source of low quality data is real humans, not bots. We additionally present evidence that these fraudulent users are behind data quality problems on other platforms.

We can maximize the impact of scientific conferences by uploading all conference presentations, posters, and abstracts to highly-trafficked public repositories for each content type. Talks can be hosted on sites like YouTube and Youku, posters can be published on Figshare, and papers/abstracts can become Open Access PrePrints.

Our basic beliefs about reality can be impossible to prove and yet we can feel a strong intuitive conviction for them, as exemplified by insights that imbue an idea with immediate certainty. Here we presented participants with worldviews such as “people’s core qualities are fixed”, and simultaneously elicited an aha moment. In the first experiment (N = 3,000), which included a direct replication, participants rated worldview beliefs as truer when they solved anagrams and experienced aha moments. A second experiment (N = 1,005) showed that the worldview statement and the aha moment must be perceived simultaneously for the insight misattribution effect to occur. These results demonstrate that artificially induced aha moments can make worldviews seem truer, possibly because humans rely on feelings of insight to appraise an idea’s veracity. Feelings of insight are therefore not epiphenomenal and should be investigated for their effects on decisions, beliefs, and delusions.

Older adults face significant challenges in regards to the various stereotypes associated with ageing, which have consequences for their mental health and wellbeing. The COVID-19 pandemic has heightened these age-based stereotypes due to older adults’ proportionally higher vulnerability to the virus. The present research explored how the pandemic has exacerbated the challenges of ageing by impacting on the social identities of older adults and how these challenges have been met. Eleven focus groups were conducted with 32 UK older adults from a range of household compositions. Guided by the social identity approach, a thematic analysis found that participants faced a number of recognisable stereotype threats: loss of opportunities to enact meaningful identities, loss of autonomy and loss of usefulness. Despite these threats, we also found participants used identity management strategies and mobilised existing or new social identities to give and receive of support and to retain a meaningful and purposeful life. The implications of this research are that governments and those supporting older adults can attend to the negative psychology impact of protective policies and know that fostering group connections can be a source of pandemic resilience.

Online behavioral data, such as digital traces from social media, have the potential to allow researchers an unprecedented new window into human behavior in ecologically valid everyday contexts. However, research using such data is often purely observational, limiting its ability to identify causal relationships. Here we review recent innovations in experimental approaches to studying online behavior, with a particular focus on research related to misinformation and political psychology. In hybrid lab-field studies, exposure to social media content can be randomized, and the impact on attitudes and beliefs measured using surveys; or exposure to treatments can be randomized within survey experiments, and their impact observed on subsequent online behavior. In field experiments conducted on social media, randomized treatments can be administered directly to users in the online environment - e.g. via social tie invitations, private messages, or public posts - without revealing that they are part of an experiment, and the impacts on subsequent online behavior observed. The strengths and weaknesses of each approach are discussed, along with practical advice and central ethical constraints on such studies.

Contemporary society is facing many pressing challenges, including climate change, Covid-19, and misinformation. Here we illustrate how these three crises are each social dilemmas, characterized by a conflict between short-term self-interest and longer-term collective interest. The climate crisis requires paying costs today to benefit distant others in the future. The Covid-19 crisis requires the less vulnerable to pay costs to benefit the more vulnerable, in the face of great uncertainty. The misinformation crisis requires investing effort to assess truth, as well as resisting the temptation to spread attractive falsehoods. Addressing these crises therefore requires understanding human cooperation. To that end, we present (i) a brief overview of mechanisms for the evolution of cooperation, including mechanisms based on similarity (i.e., kinship, spatial selection, and group selection) and those based on interaction (i.e., direct reciprocity, reputation); (ii) a detailed discussion of how reputation can incentivize cooperation via conditional cooperation and signaling; and (iii) a review of social preferences that undergird the proximate psychology of cooperation, including positive regard for others (i.e., a cooperative orientation to others in general), parochialism (i.e., a cooperative orientation to ingroups, sometimes at a cost to outgroups or the collective as a whole), and egalitarianism (i.e., an orientation that seeks to reduce absolute differences in outcomes for self and others). We then discuss each of the three focal crises facing our society through the lens of cooperation, emphasizing how insights from cooperation research can inform efforts to address these crises.

In the last two years, governments of many countries imposed heavy social restrictions to contain the spread of the COVID-19 virus, with consequent increase of bad mood, distress, or depression for the people involved. Few studies investigated the impact of these restrictive measures on individual social proficiency, and specifically the processing of emotional facial information, leading to mixed results. The present research aimed at investigating systematically whether, and to which extent, social isolation influences the processing of facial expressions. To this end, we manipulated the social exclusion experimentally through the well-known Cyberball game (within-subject factor), and we exploited the occurrence of the lockdown for the Swiss COVID-19 first wave by recruiting participants before and after being restricted at home (grouping factor). We then tested whether either form of social segregation influenced the processing of pain, disgust or neutral expressions, across multiple tasks probing access to different components of affective facial responses (state-specific, shared across states). We found that the lockdown (but not game-induced exclusion) affected negatively the processing of pain-specific information, without influencing other components of the affective facial response related to disgust or broad unpleasantness. In addition, participants recruited after the confinement reported lower scores in both empathy questionnaires and affective assessments of Cyberball co-players. These results suggest that social isolation affected negatively individual sensitivity to other people’s affect and, with specific reference to the processing of facial expressions, the processing of pain-diagnostic information.

June 23 (Reuters) - The U.S. Food and Drug Administration said on Wednesday it plans to move quickly to add a warning about rare cases of heart inflammation in adolescents and young adults to fact sheets for the Pfizer/BioNTech (PFE.N), and Moderna (MRNA.O) COVID-19 vaccines.

Objective: Although several COVID-19 vaccines are available, the current challenge is achieving high vaccine uptake. We aimed to explore university students’ intention to get vaccinated and select the most relevant determinants/beliefs to facilitate informed decision-making around COVID-19 vaccine uptake. Methods: A cross-sectional online survey with students (N = 434) from Maastricht University was conducted in March 2021. The most relevant determinants/beliefs of students’ COVID-19 vaccine intention (i.e., determinants linked to vaccination intention, and with enough potential for change) were visualized using CIBER plots. Results: Students’ intention to get the COVID-19 vaccine is high (80 %). Concerns about safety and side effects of the vaccine and trust in government, quality control, and the pharmaceutical industry are identified as the most relevant determinants of vaccine intention. Other predictors are risk perception, attitude, perceived norm, and self-efficacy beliefs. Conclusion: Our study identified several predictors of COVID-19 vaccine intention (e.g., safety, trust, risk perception, etc.) and helped to select the most relevant determinants/beliefs to target in an intervention to maximize the COVID-19 uptake. Where concerns and trust related to the COVID-19 vaccine are the most important target for future interventions, other determinants that were already positive (i.e., risk perception, attitudes, perceived norms, and self-efficacy) could be further confirmed.

The chance of getting covid-19 after being vaccinated drops sharply 21 days following a first dose, new analysis suggests.

Repeated statements are rated as subjectively truer than comparable new statements, even though repetition alone provides no new, probative information (the illusory truth effect). Contrary to some theoretical predictions, the illusory truth effect seems to be similar in magnitude for repetitions occurring after minutes or weeks. This Registered Report describes a longitudinal investigation of the illusory truth effect (n = 608, n = 567 analysed) in which we systematically manipulated intersession interval (immediately, one day, one week, and one month) in order to test whether the illusory truth effect is immune to time. Both our hypotheses were supported: We observed an illusory truth effect at all four intervals (overall effect: χ2(1) = 169.91; Mrepeated = 4.52, Mnew = 4.14; H1), with the effect diminishing as delay increased (H2). False information repeated over short timescales might have a greater effect on truth judgements than repetitions over longer timescales. Researchers should consider the implications of the choice of intersession interval when designing future illusory truth effect research.

Interevent times in temporal contact data from humans and animals typically obey heavy-taileddistributions, and this property impacts contagion and other dynamical processes on networks. Wetheoretically show that distributions of interevent times heavier-tailed than exponential distributionsare a consequence of the most basic metapopulation model used in epidemiology and ecology, inwhich individuals move from a patch to another according to the simple random walk. Our resultshold true irrespectively of the network structure and also for more realistic mobility rules such ashigh-order random walks and the recurrent mobility patterns used for modeling human dynamics.

In contrast to the common assumption in epidemic models that the rate of infection betweenindividuals is constant, in reality, an individual’s viral load determines their infectiousness. Wecompare the average and individual reproductive numbers, epidemic dynamics, and interventionstrategies for a model incorporating time-dependent infectiousness and a standard SIR model forboth fully-mixed and category-mixed populations. We find that the reproductive number onlydepends on the total infectious exposure and the largest eigenvalue of the mixing matrix and thatthese two effects are independent of each other. We also find that when we compare our time-dependent mean-field model to the SIR model with identical rates, the epidemic peak is advancedand more pronounced and modifying the infection rate function has a strong effect on the timedynamics of the epidemic. Lastly, we explore the effect of social and pharmaceutical interventionson our theoretical framework.

Despite the significant advances in identifying the driver nodes and energy requiring in networkcontrol, a framework that incorporates more complicated dynamics remains challenging. Here, weconsider the conformity behavior into network control, showing that the control of networked sys-tems with conformity will become easier as long as the numberof external inputs beyond a criticalpoint. We find that this critical point is fundamentally determined by the network connectivity. Inparticular, we investigate the nodal structural characteristic in network control and propose optimalcontrol strategy to reduce the energy requiring in controlling networked systems with conformitybehavior. We examine those findings in various synthetic andreal networks, confirming that theyare universal in describing the control energy of networkedsystems. Our results advance the under-standing of network control in practical applications.

Background Seasonal influenza is an infectious respiratory disease which circulates annually and is associated with a considerable health and economic burden globally. The most effective means of preventing seasonal influenza is through strain-specific vaccination. For many decades, only trivalent influenza vaccines (that include two influenza A strains and one influenza B strain) have been available. In recent years, quadrivalent (two influenza A strains and two influenza B strains) have been authorised and are increasingly available. Traditional influenza vaccines have limitations in terms of immune response and the substrate used in their manufacturing which can reduce overall effectiveness. Newer and enhanced influenza vaccines have been developed, both in trivalent and quadrivalent forms, in an attempt to counteract these limitations. Objective The objective of this systematic review is to assess and synthesise the literature on the efficacy, effectiveness and safety of newer and enhanced inactivated seasonal influenza vaccines for the prevention of laboratory-confirmed influenza in individuals aged 18 years or older, namely: MF59® adjuvanted, cell-based, high-dose, and recombinant haemagglutinin (HA) influenza vaccines. MethodsA systematic literature search was conducted in electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and The Cochrane Library) and grey literature sources up to 7 February 2020. No restrictions were placed on date or language. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies of interventions (NRSIs) were eligible for inclusion. Returned records were screened for relevance and the full-text of potentially relevant articles assessed, applying predefined eligibility criteria. Two reviewers independently extracted data, and pooling was considered where two or more studies reported an outcome. Study results were pooled using both fixed and random effects meta-analysis. Two reviewers independently assessed the risk of bias of included studies using standardised tools. Certainty of evidence for key outcomes was assessed using the GRADE methodology.Main results The collective search returned 28 846 records. Removal of duplicates and screening resulted in 868 full-texts being assessed for relevance with 110 studies being included. Of these 110 studies, 48 possessed results relevant to adjuvanted influenza vaccines, 36 to high-dose influenza vaccines, 19 to cell-based influenza vaccines, and 10 to recombinant HA influenza vaccines. The primary outcomes of interest to this review are presented below, with consideration towards the hierarchy of evidence whereby only the highest available level is presented. No studies were identified which compared any, or all, of these newer and enhanced vaccines to each other. No efficacy data were identified for adjuvanted influenza vaccines for any comparator (another vaccine, placebo or ‘no vaccination’). In terms of relative vaccine effectiveness, there was no significant difference in vaccine effectiveness reported by included studies that compared adjuvanted trivalent vaccine with either non-adjuvanted trivalent or quadrivalent vaccines in adult or older adult (aged ≥65 years) populations. Adjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccines displayed a significant effect in preventing laboratory-confirmed influenza in older adults (aged ≥65 years) when compared with no vaccination for any influenza subtype (vaccine effectiveness (VE) = 45%, 95% CI 23 to 61, five NRSIs across three influenza seasons, random effects model (REM), I2=63%, low-certainty evidence), influenza A(H1N1) (VE=61%, 95% CI 44 to 73, four NRSIs across two influenza seasons, REM, I2=14.5%, low-certainty evidence) and influenza B (VE=29%, 95% CI 5 to 46, five NRSIs across three influenza seasons, REM, I2=0%, low-certainty evidence), but not for influenza A(H3N2) (VE=11%, 95% CI -25 to 36, 8 NRSIs across five influenza seasons, REM, I2=49%, very-low certainty evidence).

Pooled analyses of effectiveness data comparing adjuvanted with non-adjuvanted vaccines was restricted by limited study numbers and statistical and clinical heterogeneity. Compared with traditional trivalent influenza vaccines, adjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccines were associated with a greater number of combined local adverse events (risk ratio (RR)= 1.90, 95% CI 1.50 to 2.39, four RCTs, REM, I2=0%, moderate-certainty evidence), pain at injection site (RR=2.02, 95% CI 1.53 to 2.67, 12 RCTs, REM, I2=75%, moderate-certainty evidence), combined systemic reactions (RR=1.18, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.38, five RCTs, REM, I2=8%, moderate-certainty evidence), myalgia (RR=1.71, 95% CI 1.09 to 2.69, 10 RCTs, REM, I2=31%, moderate-certainty evidence), fever (RR=1.97, 95% CI 1.07 to 3.61, nine RCTs, REM, I2=31%, low-certainty evidence) and chills (RR=1.70, 95% CI 1.20 to 2.40, seven RCTs, REM, I2=0%, moderate-certainty evidence). High-dose trivalent influenza vaccination was shown to have higher relative vaccine efficacy in preventing influenza compared with standard-dose trivalent influenza vaccines in older adults aged 65 years and over (VE=24%, 95% CI 10 to 37, one RCT, moderate-certainty evidence). One NRSI demonstrated significant effect for high-dose trivalent vaccine against influenza B (VE=89%, 95% CI 47 to 100), but not for influenza A(H3N2) (VE=22%, 95% CI -82 to 66) when compared with no vaccination in older adults (aged ≥65 years). Based on pooled estimates, high dose trivalent and quadrivalent vaccines were associated with significantly higher rates of a range of local and systemic adverse events compared with their standard dose trivalent and quadrivalent equivalents. Specifically, they were associated with significantly higher rates of combined local reactions (RR=1.40, 95% CI 1.20 to 1.64, three RCTs, FEM, I2=25%, low-certainty evidence), pain at injection site (RR=1.56, 95% CI 1.26 to 1.93, seven RCTs, REM, I2=57%, moderate-certainty evidence), swelling (RR=2.20, 95% CI 1.12 to 4.32, I2=46%, six RCTs, low-certainty evidence), induration (RR=1.63 95% CI 1.10 to 2.39, FEM, I2=68%, two RCTS, low-certainty evidence), headache (RR=1.35, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.77, REM, I2=0%, seven RCTs, moderate-certainty evidence), chills (RR=1.73, 95% CI 1.07 to 2.81, REM, I2=0%, four RCTs, low-certainty evidence), and malaise (RR=1.28, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.51, REM, I2=0%, seven RCTs, moderate-certainty evidence). No relative efficacy data were identified for the direct comparison of cell-based vaccines compared with traditional vaccines. Efficacy data were available comparing cell-based trivalent influenza vaccines with placebo in adults (aged 18-49 years), against any influenza (VE=70%, 95% CI 61% to 77%, two RCTS, fixed effects model (FEM), I2=0%, moderate-certainty evidence), influenza A(H1N1) (VE=82%, 95% CI 71% to 89%, two RCTs, FEM, I2=62%, moderate-certainty evidence), influenza A(H3N2) (VE=72%, 95% CI 39% to 87%, two RCTs, FEM, I2= 0%, moderate-certainty evidence) and influenza B (VE=52%, 95% CI 30% to 68%, two RCTs, FEM I2=0%, moderate-certainty evidence). Limited and heterogeneous data were presented for effectiveness when compared with no vaccination. One NRSI compared cell-based trivalent and quadrivalent vaccination with traditional trivalent and quadrivalent influenza vaccines which highlighted no significant difference in effect for any influenza or specific strains in older adults. The safety profile of cell-based trivalent vaccines was comparable to traditional trivalent influenza vaccines with higher rates of ecchymosis in cell-based vaccine recipients being the only significant difference (RR=1.27, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.56, three RCTs, FEM, I2=47%, low-certainty evidence).One study found that the quadrivalent recombinant HA influenza vaccine had higher relative vaccine efficacy in preventing influenza compared with traditional quadrivalent influenza vaccination in adultsaged ≥50 years (VE=30%, 95% CI 10 to 47, one RCT, moderate-certainty evidence). Another study found that the trivalent recombinant HA vaccine had higher efficacy compared with placebo (VE=45%, 95% CI 19 to 63, one RCT) in adults aged 18-55 years. No effectiveness data were identified for comparison with no vaccination or traditional influenza vaccines. Pooled estimates indicate that, with the exception of a higher rate of chills (RR=1.33, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.72, three RCTs, FEM, I2=46%, low-certainty evidence), the safety profile of the recombinant HA trivalent and quadrivalent influenza vaccines was comparable to that of their traditional trivalent and quadrivalent vaccine equivalents.Conclusions The evidence base for the efficacy and effectiveness of newer and enhanced influenza vaccines is limited at present. Based on reviewed evidence, it is probable that these vaccines provide greater protection than no vaccination. Evidence regarding the comparability of these vaccines with traditional seasonal influenza vaccines is uncertain due to a dearth of available literature, clinical and statistical heterogeneity. A large body of evidence was presented for the safety of these influenza vaccines, with the safety profiles found to be largely in keeping with that expected when considering their individual compositions. Reporting within individual studies limited the data coverage of this review. Recommendations are provided to enhance research conduct and reporting regarding these newer and enhanced influenza vaccines which are anticipated to improve data coverage overall. A large number of potentially relevant studies were identified as ongoing, highlighting a need for this review to be updated in the near future.

20 million children worldwide – more than 1 in 10 – missed out on lifesaving vaccines such as measles, diphtheria and tetanus in 2018, according to new data from WHO and UNICEF. Globally, since 2010, vaccination coverage with three doses of diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis (DTP3) and one dose of the measles vaccine has stalled at around 86 percent. While high, this is not sufficient. 95 percent coverage is needed – globally, across countries, and communities - to protect against outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases.

Routine childhood vaccines are among the most cost-effective life-saving interventions. In addition, vaccines have been linked with reduced stunting and improved health and other outcomes in later life. However, evidence on such long-term benefits remain inadequate. In this study, we examined the associations between the initiation and implementation of the Universal Immunization Programme (UIP) in India and schooling attainment among adults. We obtained district-level data on the rollout of the UIP in 1985–1990 and matched those with data from the National Family Health Survey of India, 2015–2016. Adults who were born in the five years before and after the rollout period (1980–1995) and always lived in the same location were included in the analysis (n=109,908). We employed household, village or city ward, district, and state fixed-effects linear regression models, which incorporated a wide range of socioeconomic and demographic indicators and community-level infrastructure, amenities, and access to healthcare. We compared schooling attainment in years among individuals who were born during or after the UIP was implemented in their districts (intervention group) with those who were born before UIP implementation (control group). In household fixed-effects analysis, intervention group adults attained 0.18 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.02, 0.33; p<0.05) more schooling grades as compared with control group adults from the same household. In village or city ward, district, and state fixed-effects analysis, intervention group adults attained 0.23 (95% CI: 0.13, 0.32; p<0.001), 0.29 (95% CI: 0.19, 0.38; p<0.001), and 0.25 (95% CI: 0.1, 0.39; p<0.01) additional schooling grades, respectively, compared to the control group. In subgroup analyses, positive associations between UIP implementation and schooling grades were observed among women and among rural, urban, and richer households. Our results support the association of vaccines with improved school attainment.

Immunization is one of modern medicine’s greatest success stories. Time and again, the international community has endorsed the value of vaccines and immunization to prevent and control a large number of infectious and, increasingly, cancers and other chronic diseases. Expanding access to immunization is crucial to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Not only do vaccinations prevent sickness and death associated with infectious diseases such as diarrhoea, measles, pneumonia, polio and whooping cough, they also hold up broader gains in education and economic development.

Suboptimal vaccination rates are a significant problem in many countries today, in spite of improved access to vaccine services. As a result, there has been a recent expansion of research on how best to communicate about vaccines. The purpose of the present article is to provide an updated review of published, peer-reviewed empirical studies that examined the effectiveness of gain versus loss framing (i.e., goal framing) in the context of vaccine communication. To locate studies, we examined the reference list from the previous meta-analytic review (O’Keefe & Nan, 2012), and we conducted systematic searches across multiple databases. We included 34 studies in the qualitative synthesis. The relative effectiveness of goal-framed vaccine messages was often shown to depend on characteristics of the message recipient, perceived risk, or situational factors, yet most effects were inconsistent across studies, or simply limited by an insufficient number of studies. Methodological characteristics and variations are noted and discussed. The review points to several directions concerning moderators and mediators of framing effects where additional rigorous studies would be needed.

PurposeThere is good evidence that for many behaviours, increasing risk appraisal can lead to a change in behaviour, heightened when efficacy appraisals are also increased. The present systematic review addressed whether interventions presenting a risk message increase risk appraisal and an increase in vaccination intentions and uptake.MethodA systematic search identified randomized controlled trials of interventions presenting a risk message and measuring risk appraisal and intentions and uptake post‐intervention. Random‐effects meta‐analyses investigated the size of the effect that interventions had on vaccination risk appraisal and on vaccination behaviour or intention to vaccinate, and the size of the relationship between vaccination risk appraisal and vaccination intentions and uptake.ResultsEighteen studies were included and 16 meta‐analysed. Interventions overall had small significant effects on risk appraisal (d = 0.161, p = .047) and perceptions of susceptibility (d = 0.195, p = .025), but no effect on perceptions of severity (d = −0.036, p = .828). Interventions showed no effect on intention to vaccinate (d = 0.138, p = .195) and no effect on vaccination behaviour (d = 0.043, p = .826). Interventions typically did not include many behaviour change techniques (BCTs), with the most common BCT unique to intervention conditions being ‘Information about Health Consequences’. Few of the included studies attempted to, or successfully increased, efficacy appraisals.ConclusionsOverall, there is a lack of good‐quality primary studies, and existing interventions are suboptimal. The inclusion of additional BCTs, including those to target efficacy appraisals, could increase intervention effectiveness. The protocol (CRD42015029365) is available from http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/.

Nucleocapsid (N) protein of the SARS-CoV-2 virus packages the viral genome intowell-defined ribonucleoprotein particles, but the molecular pathway is still un-clear. N-protein is dimeric and consists of two folded domains with nucleic acid(NA) binding sites, surrounded by intrinsically disordered regions that promoteliquid-liquid phase separation. Here, we use biophysical tools to study N-proteininteractions with oligonucleotides of different lengths, examining the size,composition, secondary structure, and energetics of the resulting states. Weobserve the formation of supramolecular clusters or nuclei preceding growthinto phase-separated droplets. Short hexanucleotide NA forms compact 2:2 N-protein/NA complexes with reduced disorder. Longer oligonucleotides exposeadditional N-protein interactions and multi-valent protein-NA interactions, whichgenerate higher-order mixed oligomers and simultaneously promote growth ofdroplets. Phase separation is accompanied by a significant change in protein sec-ondary structure, different from that caused by initial NA binding, which maycontribute to the assembly of ribonucleoprotein particles within macromolecularcondensates.

Schuck's research, recently published in iScience, investigates how the N protein interacts with oligonucleotides—short stretches of DNA and RNA—to demystify how the viral genome is packaged. Using biophysical methods, Schuck and his colleagues found out that when the N protein interacts with nucleotides of sufficient length, it adopts a shape that promotes interactions with other proteins. What's more, when the N protein binds with multiple copies of itself and long stretches of oligonucleotides, it can condense into highly concentrated droplets that are thought to ultimately enable the formation of ribonucleoprotein particles. Targeting interactions between the N protein and its binding partners might be a viable way to inhibit the viral replication of SARS-CoV-2, Schuck said.

A review of more than 9,000 US patients with severe COVID-19 infection showed less than 1 percent contracted the illness again, with an average reinfection time of 3.5 months after an initial positive test.

Re-infection with SARS-CoV-2 was infrequent, occurring in 63 (0.7%) of 9,119patients, but was associated with two deaths. Re-infection appeared to be milder than primary infection.

Every state that has passed President Joe Biden’s goal of partially or fully inoculating at least 70% of their adults by July 4 also voted for the president in 2020, a further sign of how politics has affected the vaccine rollout. 

Across the world, more than 2bn doses of Covid-19 vaccines have gone into arms, and on 2 June, the BBC headline “75% of UK adults have had [their] first vaccine jab” was based on an Office for National Statistics estimate of the UK population aged 18 or over in June 2019

To make the most of England’s vaccination rollout we may need to keep wearing masks even after restrictions are lifted

Emerging reports of SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infections entail methodical genomic surveillance for determining efficacy of vaccines. This study elaborates genomic analysis of isolates from breakthrough infections following vaccination with AZD1222/Covishield and BBV152/Covaxin.Variants of concern B.1.617.2 and B.1.1.7 responsible for cases surge in April-May 2021 in Delhi, were the predominant lineages among breakthrough infections.

Since the vaccine programme began the NHS has been battling a tsunami of misinformation which risks discouraging some of the communities most at risk from catching coronavirus.Overcoming vaccine hesitancy among – and offering reassurance to – people from ethnic minority backgrounds, has been one of the biggest challenges we have faced in the battle against Covid.

I got my first COVID-19 vaccine recently. The whole experience was tremendously routine: I showed my registration, stood in a waiting area, saw a nurse, got the jab, waited 15 minutes in case of an adverse reaction, and left.Oh, and I got a button.The waiting period, of course, was when it happened.James, said the pestilential voice inside my head, while I was scrolling on my phone. James!What is it?What if they microchipped you? You know, Bill Gates, with the 5Gs and the Wi-Fis?Shut up, I’m looking at cat memes.James! You design wearable devices for a living. You know that microchipping someone is possible.Yeah, of course it is. They didn’t.So prove it, big boy.It’s true, I am the chief scientific officer of a data company that makes wearable devices. I’ve spent the past 15 years sticking tech on people, and in people. Thinking about how body-mounted devices work takes up basically my whole day, and one of my favorite mental exercises is seeing if I can pry practical insights from the wild and irresponsible conceptions of the smooth-brained garbage-people on the internet.Ergo: Had Uncle Bill microchipped me?

A star-filled video urging people from ethnic minority communities to get the Covid vaccine will be shown across the UK's main commercial TV channels later.

he Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System or VAERS is being misused by anti-vaxxers to terrify the public. It’s a shame because VAERS plays a vital role in detecting important but rare reactions caused by vaccines. The weaponization of VAERS by anti-vaccine activists serves as a reminder that having access to more information does not always lead to better decisions. Information needs to be correctly interpreted to guide us in the right direction.

As mass vaccination campaigns against coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) commence worldwide, vaccine effectiveness needs to be assessed for a range of outcomes across diverse populations in a noncontrolled setting. In this study, data from Israel’s largest health care organization were used to evaluate the effectiveness of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine

The COVID-19 pandemic has been damaging to the lives of people all around the world. Accompanied by the pandemic is an infodemic, an abundant and uncontrolled spreading of potentially harmful misinformation. The infodemic may severely change the pandemic's course by interfering with public health interventions such as wearing masks, social distancing, and vaccination. In particular, the impact of the infodemic on vaccination is critical because it holds the key to reverting to pre-pandemic normalcy. This paper presents findings from a global survey on the extent of worldwide exposure to the COVID-19 infodemic, assesses different populations' susceptibility to false claims, and analyzes its association with vaccine acceptance. Based on responses gathered from over 18,400 individuals from 40 countries, we find a strong association between perceived believability of misinformation and vaccination hesitancy. Additionally, our study shows that only half of the online users exposed to rumors might have seen the fact-checked information. Moreover, depending on the country, between 6% and 37% of individuals considered these rumors believable. Our survey also shows that poorer regions are more susceptible to encountering and believing COVID-19 misinformation. We discuss implications of our findings on public campaigns that proactively spread accurate information to countries that are more susceptible to the infodemic. We also highlight fact-checking platforms' role in better identifying and prioritizing claims that are perceived to be believable and have wide exposure. Our findings give insights into better handling of risk communication during the initial phase of a future pandemic.

In recent years, researchers have used artificial intelligence to improve translation between programming languages or automatically fix problems. The AI system DrRepair, for example, has been shown to solve most issues that spawn error messages. But some researchers dream of the day when AI can write programs based on simple descriptions from non-experts.On Tuesday, Microsoft and OpenAI shared plans to bring GPT-3, one of the world’s most advanced models for generating text, to programming based on natural language descriptions. This is the first commercial application of GPT-3 undertaken since Microsoft invested $1 billion in OpenAI last year and gained exclusive licensing rights to GPT-3.

The COVID-19 Fact Checkers Dataset is a comprehensive international repository of over 200 active fact-checking groups and organizations that verify COVID-19 misinformation. The dataset is maintained by Ryerson University’s Social Media Lab as part of an international initiative to study the proliferation of COVID-19 misinformation and to map fact-checking activities around the world in partnership with the World Health Organization (WHO). It was created to provide the public with a better understanding of the COVID-19 fact-checking ecosystem and is intended for use by policy makers and others to make data-informed decisions in the fight against COVID-19 misinformation.

The New Zealand Defence Force is threatening to sack service members who do not get a Covid-19 vaccination.

A hospital trust in the Midlands has said that it is working to understand why some of its staff remain unvaccinated against covid-19 after preliminary findings from a study showed that uptake was especially low among doctors and ethnic minority staff.The analysis, published as a preprint on 13 February,1 looked at 19 044 staff at the University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust who had all been offered a vaccination since 12 December. As of 3 February, 65% (12 278) had received at least one dose of vaccine. But this masked substantial variation, with 71% (8147 of 11 485) of white staff taking up the vaccine, compared with 59% (2843 of 4863) of South Asian staff and 37% (499 of 1357) of black staff. Overall, 36% of the trust’s staff are from ethnic minority backgrounds.

The U.K. is experiencing a growing surge of COVID infections with a new variant that appears more pathogenic, and that first became prevalent in India. The current outbreak in the U.K. appears to be clustered most heavily among unvaccinated individuals.

The northern state of Amazonas is among the regions in Brazil most heavily affected by the COVID-19 epidemic and has experienced two exponentially growing waves, in early and late 2020. Through a genomic epidemiology study based on 250 severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) genomes from different Amazonas municipalities sampled between March 2020 and January 2021, we reveal that the first exponential growth phase was driven mostly by the dissemination of lineage B.1.195, which was gradually replaced by lineage B.1.1.28 between May and June 2020. The second wave coincides with the emergence of the variant of concern (VOC) P.1, which evolved from a local B.1.1.28 clade in late November 2020 and replaced the parental lineage in <2 months. Our findings support the conclusion that successive lineage replacements in Amazonas were driven by a complex combination of variable levels of social distancing measures and the emergence of a more transmissible VOC P.1 virus. These data provide insights to understanding the mechanisms underlying the COVID-19 epidemic waves and the risk of dissemination of SARS-CoV-2 VOC P.1 in Brazil and, potentially, worldwide.

160 maternal deaths due to COVID-19 have been reported worldwide, most of them in middle-income countries, representing a barrier to reducing maternal mortality.

but 3 people had URI symptoms in november

This report looks at attitudes towards a COVID-19 vaccine in 15 countries between November 2020 and February 2021. Countries included are Australia, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Israel (added in January), Japan, Netherlands, Norway, Singapore, South Korea, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom. For each country except Israel there are at least 5 waves of responses. Exact sample sizes in each country and wave are included at the end of the report. As of mid-February, •Over half (58%) of respondents report they would definitely get a COVID-19 vaccine if it were made available to them the week of the survey. Comparing November 2020 and February 2021, the share of respondents who “strongly agreed” that they would get the vaccine has increased by at least 9 percentage points in 11 of the 14 countries surveyed, and by over 20 percentage points in 7 of these. The share of respondents who “strongly disagreed” has decreased or remained relatively constant across all 14 countries surveyed. •Less than half (45%) of respondents feel worried about potential side effects of a COVID-19 vaccine. One in four (25%) state they are indifferent. Comparing November 2020 and February 2021, the share of respondents who “strongly agreed” that they were worried about side effects has decreased or remained relatively constant across all 14 countries surveyed.•Less than half (45%) of respondents are worried about getting COVID-19. One in four (28%) state they are indifferent. Comparing November 2020 and February 2021, the share of those that are indifferent has remained close to or above 30% in 11 of the 14 countries surveyed. Across all countries, there has been relatively little variation in the responses during this time.•Over half (56%) of respondents believe their government health authorities will provide them with an effective COVID-19 vaccine. One in four (27%) report no opinion on the matter. While there was an increase in confidence from November 2020 to January 2021, this may be decreasing in some countries. The share of those who “strongly agree” that their government will be able to provide a vaccine decreased between January and February in 8 of the 14 countries surveyed. As of mid-February, the share of those who “strongly agree” is within +/-8 percentage points of its respective rate in November in all countries except the UK, where this share has increased from 19% to 38%. •Two of every three respondents (68%) trust COVID-19 vaccines “very much” or “moderately”, with only 11% reporting no trust at all. Except for Israel and Denmark, response rates across countries surveyed have remained relatively consistent, with changes of +/-5 percentage points between January and February. In Israel, the share of those who report trusting the vaccine “very much” increased from 34% at the end of January to 47% mid-February. In Denmark, this rate decreased from 43% to 35% during the same time period.•Over half (55%) of respondents report that it would be hard to get a COVID-19 vaccine. This is the case in 9 of the 15 countries surveyed. Except for the UK, response rates in all countries have remained relatively consistent, with changes of +/-7 percentage points between January and February. In the UK, the share of those who report it would not be hard to get a vaccine increased from 42% mid-January to 54% mid-February.

Labour leftwingers and Tory libertarians oppose them, while Keir Starmer’s position appears flexible

Consortium experts note that higher participation in inoculations will be needed

Background The effect of vaccination for COVID-19 on onward transmission is unknown.Methods A national record linkage study determined documented COVID-19 cases and hospitalisations in unvaccinated household members of vaccinated and unvaccinated healthcare workers from 8th December 2020 to 3rd March 2021. The primary endpoint was COVID-19 14 days following the first dose.Results The cohort comprised of 194,362 household members (mean age 31·1 ± 20·9 years) and 144,525 healthcare workers (mean age 44·4 ± 11·4 years). 113,253 (78·3%) of healthcare workers received at least one dose of the BNT162b2 mRNA or ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine and 36,227 (25·1%) received a second dose. There were 3,123 and 4,343 documented COVID-19 cases and 175 and 177 COVID-19 hospitalisations in household members of healthcare workers and healthcare workers respectively. Household members of vaccinated healthcare workers had a lower risk of COVID-19 case compared to household members of unvaccinated healthcare worker (rate per 100 person-years 9·40 versus 5·93; HR 0·70, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0·63 to 0·78). The effect size for COVID-19 hospitalisation was similar, with the confidence interval crossing the null (HR 0·77 [95% CI 0·53 to 1·10]). The rate per 100 person years was lower in vaccinated compared to unvaccinated healthcare workers for documented (20·13 versus 8·51; HR 0·45 [95% CI 0·42 to 0·49]) and hospitalized COVID-19 (0·97 versus 0·14; HR 0·16 [95% CI 0·09 to 0·27]). Compared to the period before the first dose, the risk of documented COVID-19 case was lower at ≥ 14 days after the second dose for household members (HR 0·46 [95% CI 0·30to 0·70]) and healthcare workers (HR 0·08 [95% CI 0·04 to 0·17]).Interpretation Vaccination of health care workers was associated with a substantial reduction in COVID-19 cases in household contacts consistent with an effect of vaccination on transmission.

Are you sick and tired of peeling forks off your head and car keys off your fingers? Are you suddenly a master of magnetism, capable of bending metal with your mind like the Marvel villain Magneto?Then you might be one of the imaginary “victims” of the coronavirus vaccine, according to an anti-vax doctor and known conspiracy theorist who testified in the Ohio House on Tuesday.

Organizers told me they found that date appropriate because the ending of slavery and resistance to vaccines are both about "liberation"

Background Though SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks have been documented in occupational settings and in-person essential work has been suspected as a risk factor for COVID-19, occupational differences in excess mortality have, to date, not been examined. Such information could point to opportunities for intervention, such as vaccine prioritization or regulations to enforce safer work environments. Methods and findings Using autoregressive integrated moving average models and California Department of Public Health data representing 356,188 decedents 18–65 years of age who died between January 1, 2016 and November 30, 2020, we estimated pandemic-related excess mortality by occupational sector and occupation, with additional stratification of the sector analysis by race/ethnicity. During these first 9 months of the COVID-19 pandemic, working-age adults experienced 11,628 more deaths than expected, corresponding to 22% relative excess and 46 excess deaths per 100,000 living individuals. Sectors with the highest relative and per-capita excess mortality were food/agriculture (39% relative excess; 75 excess deaths per 100,000), transportation/logistics (31%; 91 per 100,000), manufacturing (24%; 61 per 100,000), and facilities (23%; 83 per 100,000). Across racial and ethnic groups, Latino working-age Californians experienced the highest relative excess mortality (37%) with the highest excess mortality among Latino workers in food and agriculture (59%; 97 per 100,000). Black working-age Californians had the highest per-capita excess mortality (110 per 100,000), with relative excess mortality highest among transportation/logistics workers (36%). Asian working-age Californians had lower excess mortality overall, but notable relative excess mortality among health/emergency workers (37%), while White Californians had high per-capita excess deaths among facilities workers (70 per 100,000). Conclusions Certain occupational sectors are associated with high excess mortality during the pandemic, particularly among racial and ethnic groups also disproportionately affected by COVID-19. In-person essential work is a likely venue of transmission of coronavirus infection and must be addressed through vaccination and strict enforcement of health orders in workplace settings.

Includes patients admitted after 01 August 2020There are 106569 patients included in CO-CIN. Of these, 21625 patient(s) have died and 18419 required ICU. 64219 havebeen discharged home

Is it really easier to remember that the British variant is now named “Alpha” instead of B.1.1.7? And does Britain really need Geneva’s protection?

Each year, 3M’s State of Science Index explores global attitudes about science. In 2021, science has inspired a sense of optimism around the world.

Although the impact of the pandemic has been much smaller in Japan than in other industrialised countries, there have still been substantial difficulties with Japan’s COVID-19 response. A third state of emergency has had to be announced in Tokyo, Osaka, and other prefectures to curb transmission. The vaccine roll-out has also been slow compared to other industrialised nations. In this webinar, Dr Hitoshi Oshitani will analyse the Japanese response to COVID-19, and its current status and challenges.

Q: I’ve heard that humidity can reduce spread, but also that the virus dries out in dry air. ??? A: It seems like 40-60% humidity is ideal. Our bodies are more effective at expelling irritants when it’s a bit humid, and in dry air dropletsaerosols. More:

Covid-19 research made it painfully clear that the scandal of poor medical research, as denounced by Altman in 1994, persists today. The overall quality of medical research remains poor, despite longstanding criticisms. The problems are well known, but the research community fails to properly address them. We suggest most problems stem from an underlying paradox: although methodology is undeniably the backbone of qualitative and responsible research, science consistently undervalues methodology. The focus remains more on the destination (research claims and metrics) than on the journey. Notwithstanding, research should serve society more than the reputation of those involved. While we notice that many initiatives are being established to improve components of the research cycle, these initiatives are too disjointed. The overall system is monolithic and slow to adapt. We assert that a top-down action is needed from journals, universities, funders and governments to break the cycle and put methodology first. These actions should involve the widespread adoption of registered reports, balanced research funding between innovative, incremental and methodological research projects, full recognition and demystification of peer review, mandatory statistical review of reports, adherence to reporting guidelines, and investment in methodological education and research. Currently, the scientific enterprise is doing a major disservice to patients and society.

Exclusive: Equalities watchdog tells government documents could create ‘two-tier society’

The Oxford/AstraZeneca coronavirus vaccine may be associated with a slightly increased risk of some bleeding disorders, according to new data, but such cases are very rare and the vaccine’s benefits continue to outweigh the risks, say researchers.

The spread of false health information casts a shadow over required vaccine coverage. Melinda Mills says that we must, reluctantly, consider criminalising people who deliberately spread false information—but Jonas Sivelä argues that the definitions are too murky and that criminalisation may do more harm than good

ST PETERSBURG, June 4 (Reuters) - Argentina and Serbia gave an official start to the industrial production of Russia's Sputnik V vaccine against coronavirus, Russian state TV channel Rossiya 24 reported on Friday.Russian President Vladimir Putin was shown on TV watching the start of vaccine production in both countries via videolink.The Russian vaccine produced in Argentina and Serbia will meet their domestic needs first and is expected to be exported at a later stage, the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF) which is marketing the vaccine said in a statement.

Nationwide chains criticise plan as undemocratic, unworkable and unfair to younger people

Last December, a German epidemiologist said the COVID-19 vaccines might make women’s bodies reject a protein that’s connected to placenta, therefore making women infertile. He thought this because the genetic code of the placenta protein, called syncytin-1, shares a hint of similarity with the genetic code of the spike protein in COVID-19. If the vaccines caused our bodies to make antibodies to protect us from COVID-19, he thought, they could also make antibodies to reject the placenta. This, however, was a theoretical risk that was completely disproven in the clinical trials and continues to be disproven in real time as more women of child-bearing age become fully vaccinated. “It’s inaccurate to say that COVID-19’s spike protein and this placenta protein share a similar genetic code,” says D’Angela Pitts, M.D., a maternal fetal medicine specialist with Henry Ford Health System. “The proteins are not similar enough to cause placenta to not attach to an embryo.” 

Objective To quantify the background incidence rates of 15 prespecified adverse events of special interest (AESIs) associated with covid-19 vaccines.Design Multinational network cohort study.Setting Electronic health records and health claims data from eight countries: Australia, France, Germany, Japan, the Netherlands, Spain, the United Kingdom, and the United States, mapped to a common data model.Participants 126 661 070 people observed for at least 365 days before 1 January 2017, 2018, or 2019 from 13 databases.Main outcome measures Events of interests were 15 prespecified AESIs (non-haemorrhagic and haemorrhagic stroke, acute myocardial infarction, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, anaphylaxis, Bell’s palsy, myocarditis or pericarditis, narcolepsy, appendicitis, immune thrombocytopenia, disseminated intravascular coagulation, encephalomyelitis (including acute disseminated encephalomyelitis), Guillain-Barré syndrome, and transverse myelitis). Incidence rates of AESIs were stratified by age, sex, and database. Rates were pooled across databases using random effects meta-analyses and classified according to the frequency categories of the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences.Results Background rates varied greatly between databases. Deep vein thrombosis ranged from 387 (95% confidence interval 370 to 404) per 100 000 person years in UK CPRD GOLD data to 1443 (1416 to 1470) per 100 000 person years in US IBM MarketScan Multi-State Medicaid data among women aged 65 to 74 years. Some AESIs increased with age. For example, myocardial infarction rates in men increased from 28 (27 to 29) per 100 000 person years among those aged 18-34 years to 1400 (1374 to 1427) per 100 000 person years in those older than 85 years in US Optum electronic health record data. Other AESIs were more common in young people. For example, rates of anaphylaxis among boys and men were 78 (75 to 80) per 100 000 person years in those aged 6-17 years and 8 (6 to 10) per 100 000 person years in those older than 85 years in Optum electronic health record data. Meta-analytic estimates of AESI rates were classified according to age and sex.Conclusion This study found large variations in the observed rates of AESIs by age group and sex, showing the need for stratification or standardisation before using background rates for safety surveillance. Considerable population level heterogeneity in AESI rates was found between databases.

Background In most countries, healthcare workers (HCWs) represent a priority group for vaccination against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) due to their elevated risk of COVID-19 and potential contribution to nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Concerns have been raised that HCWs from ethnic minority groups are more likely to be vaccine hesitant (defined by the World Health Organisation as refusing or delaying a vaccination) than those of White ethnicity, but there are limited data on SARS-CoV-2 vaccine hesitancy and its predictors in UK HCWs.Methods Nationwide prospective cohort study and qualitative study in a multi-ethnic cohort of clinical and non-clinical UK HCWs. We analysed ethnic differences in SARS-CoV-2 vaccine hesitancy adjusting for demographics, vaccine trust, and perceived risk of COVID-19. We explored reasons for hesitancy in qualitative data using a framework analysis.Findings 11,584 HCWs were included in the cohort analysis. 23% (2704) reported vaccine hesitancy. Compared to White British HCWs (21.3% hesitant), HCWs from Black Caribbean (54.2%), Mixed White and Black Caribbean (38.1%), Black African (34.4%), Chinese (33.1%), Pakistani (30.4%), and White Other (28.7%) ethnic groups were significantly more likely to be hesitant. In adjusted analysis, Black Caribbean (aOR 3.37, 95% CI 2.11 - 5.37), Black African (aOR 2.05, 95% CI 1.49 - 2.82), White Other ethnic groups (aOR 1.48, 95% CI 1.19 - 1.84) were significantly more likely to be hesitant. Other independent predictors of hesitancy were younger age, female sex, higher score on a COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs scale, lower trust in employer, lack of influenza vaccine uptake in the previous season, previous COVID-19, and pregnancy. Qualitative data from 99 participants identified the following contributors to hesitancy: lack of trust in government and employers, safety concerns due to the speed of vaccine development, lack of ethnic diversity in vaccine studies, and confusing and conflicting information. Participants felt uptake in ethnic minority communities might be improved through inclusive communication, involving HCWs in the vaccine rollout, and promoting vaccination through trusted networks.Interpretation Despite increased risk of COVID-19, HCWs from some ethnic minority groups are more likely to be vaccine hesitant than their White British colleagues. Strategies to build trust and dispel myths surrounding the COVID-19 vaccine in these communities are urgently required. Public health communications should be inclusive, non-stigmatising and utilise trusted networks.Funding MRC-UK Research and Innovation (MR/V027549/1), the Department of Health and Social Care through the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), and NIHR Biomedical Research Centres and NIHR Applied Research Collaboration East Midlands.Evidence before this study We searched Pubmed using the following search terms ((COVID-19).ti,ab OR (SARS-CoV-2).ti,ab) AND ((vaccine).ti,ab OR (vaccination).ti,ab OR (immunisation).ti,ab)) AND ((healthcare worker).ti,ab OR (health worker).ti,ab OR (doctor).ti,ab OR (nurse).ti,ab OR (healthcare professional).ti,ab)) AND ((hesitancy).ti,ab OR (refusal).ti,ab OR (uptake).ti,ab)). The search returned 60 results, of which 38 were excluded after title and abstract screening, 11 studies were not conducted in a population of healthcare workers, 20 did not present data on vaccine intention or uptake, 5 were related to vaccines other than the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, 1 was unrelated to vaccination and 1 had been withdrawn. The 22 remaining articles were survey studies focussed on SARS-CoV-2 vaccine intention in healthcare workers. Estimates of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine acceptance varied widely from 27·7% - 94·5% depending on the country in which the study was performed, and the occupational group studied. Only 2 studies (both conducted in the USA) had a sample size greater than 10,000. Most studies found females, non-medical healthcare staff and those refusing influenza vaccine to be more likely to be hesitant. There was conflicting evidence about the effects of age and previous COVID-19 on hesitancy. Only 3 studies (all from the USA), presented data disaggregated by ethnicity, all finding Black ethnic HCWs were most likely to be hesitant. Common themes amongst studies that investigated reasons for vaccine hesitancy were concerns about safety of vaccines, fear of side effects and short development timeframes. We did not find any studies on SARS-CoV-2 vaccine hesitancy in UK healthcare workers in the published literature.Added value of this study This study is amongst the largest SARS-CoV-2 vaccine hesitancy studies in the literature. It is the largest study outside the USA and is the only study in UK HCWs. Our work focusses on the association of ethnicity with vaccine hesitancy, and we are the first study outside the USA to present results by ethnic group. The large number of ethnic minority HCWs in our study allows for examination of the outcome by more granular ethnicity categories than have previously been studied, allowing us to detect important differences in vaccine hesitancy levels within the broad White and Asian ethnic groupings. Our large sample size and the richness of our cohort study dataset allows us to control for many potential confounders in our multivariable analysis, and provide novel data on important potential drivers of hesitancy including discrimination, COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs, religion/religiosity and personality traits. Additionally, we combine quantitative with qualitative data providing a deeper understanding of the drivers of hesitancy and potential strategies to improve vaccine uptake in HCWs from ethnic minority communities.Implications of all the available evidence Around a quarter of UK healthcare workers reported SARS-CoV-2 vaccine hesitancy. In accordance with previous studies in other countries, we determined that female sex and lack of influenza vaccine in the previous season were important predictors of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine hesitancy in UK HCWs, although in contrast to most studies in the published literature, after adjustment we do not demonstrate differences in hesitancy levels by occupational role. Importantly, previous literature provides conflicting evidence of the effects of age and previous SARS-CoV-2 infection on vaccine hesitancy. In our study, younger HCWs and those with evidence of previous COVID-19 were more likely to be hesitant. This study provides novel data on increased hesitancy levels within Black Caribbean, Mixed White and Black Caribbean, Black African, Chinese, Pakistani and White Other ethnic groups. Mistrust (of vaccines in general, in SARS-CoV-2 vaccines specifically, in healthcare systems and research) and misinformation appear to be important drivers of hesitancy within HCWS in the UK. Our data indicate that despite facing an increased risk of COVID-19 compared to their White colleagues, UK HCWs from some ethnic minority groups continue to exhibit greater levels of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine hesitancy. This study provides policy makers with evidence to inform strategies to improve uptake.

It is clear that coronavirus vaccines are safe and effective, but as more are rolled out, researchers are learning about the extent and nature of side effects.

Various non-pharmaceutical interventions were adopted by countries worldwide in the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic with adverse socioeconomic side effects, which raises the question about their differential effectiveness. We estimate the average dynamic effect of each intervention on the incidence of COVID-19 and on people’s whereabouts by developing a statistical model that accounts for the contemporaneous adoption of multiple interventions. Using daily data from 175 countries, we show that, even after controlling for other concurrent lockdown policies, cancelling public events, imposing restrictions on private gatherings and closing schools and workplaces had significant effects on reducing COVID-19 infections. Restrictions on internal movement and public transport had no effects because the aforementioned policies, imposed earlier on average, had already de facto reduced human mobility. International travel restrictions, although imposed early, had a short-lived effect failing to prevent the epidemic from turning into a pandemic because they were less stringent. We interpret the impact of each intervention on containing the pandemic using a conceptual framework which relies on their effects on human mobility behaviors in a manner consistent with time-use and epidemiological factors.

Background: BNT162b2 mRNA and ChAdOx1 nCOV-19 adenoviral vector vaccines have been rapidly rolled out in the UK. We determined the factors associated with vaccine coverage for both vaccines and documented the vaccine effectiveness of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine in our healthcare worker (HCW) cohort study of staff undergoing regular asymptomatic testing.Methods: The SIREN study is a prospective cohort study among staff working in publicly funded hospitals. Baseline risk factors, vaccination status (from 8/12/2020-5/2/2021), and symptoms are recorded at 2 weekly intervals and all SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and antibody test results documented. A mixed effect proportional hazards frailty model using a Poisson distribution was used to calculate hazard ratios to compare time to infection in unvaccinated and vaccinated participants to estimate the impact of the BNT162b2 vaccine on all (asymptomatic and symptomatic) infection.Findings: Vaccine coverage was 89% on 5/2/2021. Significantly lower coverage was associated with prior infection (aOR 0.59 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.54-0.64), female (aOR 0.72, 95% CI 0.63-0.82), aged under 35 years, being from minority ethnic groups (especially Black, aOR 0.26, 95% CI 0.21-0.32), porters/security guards (aOR 0.61, 95% CI 0.42-0.90),or midwife (aOR 0.74, 95% CI 0.57-0.97), and living in more deprived neighbourhoods (IMD 1 (most) vs. 5 (least) (aOR 0.75, 95% CI 0.65-0.87). A single dose of BNT162b2 vaccine demonstrated vaccine effectiveness of 72% (95% CI 58-86) 21 days after first dose and 86% (95% CI 76-97) seven days after two doses in the antibody negative cohort.Conclusion: Our study demonstrates that the BNT162b2 vaccine effectively prevents both symptomatic and asymptomatic infection in working age adults; this cohort was vaccinated when the dominant variant in circulation was B1.1.7 and demonstrates effectiveness against this variant.Trial Registration: IRAS ID 284460, REC reference 20/SC/0230 Berkshire Research Ethics Committee, Health Research Authority and Health and Care Research Wales approval granted 22 May 2020. Trial registered with ISRCTN, Trial ID: ISRCTN11041050. https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN11041050Funding: The study is funded by the United Kingdom’s Department of Health and Social Care and Public Health England, with contributions from the Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish governments. Funding is also provided by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) as an Urgent Public Health Priority Study (UPHP). SH, VH are supported by the National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit (NIHR HPRU) in Healthcare Associated Infections and Antimicrobial Resistance at the University of Oxford in partnership with Public Health England (PHE) (NIHR200915). AC is supported by NIHR HealthProtection Research Unit in Behavioural Science and Evaluation at University of Bristol in partnership with Public Health England. MR, NA, AC are supported by NIHR HealthProtection Research Unit in Immunisation at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine in partnership with Public Health England.Conflict of Interest: The Immunisation and Countermeasures Division has provided vaccine manufacturers(including Pfizer) with post-marketing surveillance reports on pneumococcal andmeningococcal infection which the companies are required to submit to the UK Licensing authority in compliance with their Risk Management Strategy. A cost recovery charge is made for these reports.Ethical Approval: The study was approved by the Berkshire Research Ethics Committee, Health Research Authority (IRAS ID 284460, REC reference 20/SC/0230) on 22 May 2020; the vaccine amendment was approved on 12/1/2021.

Despite their life-saving capabilities, many countries have yet to administer enough doses to reap the full benefits

What we hear most often “talk to your health care provider if you have any questions/concerns on COVID19 vaccines” Vs Where many are actually turning to for COVID19 vaccine info This is also why it’s so important for the media to report responsibly based on science/evidence

Airborne transmission by droplets and aerosols is important for the spread of viruses. Face masks are a well-established preventive measure, but their effectiveness for mitigating SARS-CoV-2 transmission is still under debate. We show that variations in mask efficacy can be explained by different regimes of virus abundance and related to population-average infection probability and reproduction number. For SARS-CoV-2, the viral load of infectious individuals can vary by orders of magnitude. We find that most environments and contacts are under conditions of low virus abundance (virus-limited) where surgical masks are effective at preventing virus spread. More advanced masks and other protective equipment are required in potentially virus-rich indoor environments including medical centers and hospitals. Masks are particularly effective in combination with other preventive measures like ventilation and distancing.

Doctors @vanessa_apea and @crageshri busting myths about COVID-19 vaccination.

Some have reported changes amid vaccine rollout but experts say ‘one unusual period is no cause for alarm’

The head of NHS England said tonight that despite some progress the country remains in a “pandemic of disinformation” – in the effort to overcome vaccine hesitancy among some in the Black and south Asian communities.

This is great data about vaccine hesitancy, declining since 2020. There is a difference between the "wait and see" (31%) and the anti-vaxxers (13%). Of "wait and see", 37% are simply at "not first" and want to assess family/friends. In short, vaccinations beget vaccinations.

To all who claim that there's no evidence that #SARSCoV2 is transmitted in bars: If the risk of transmitting #SARSCoV2 is provenly greater in crowded indoor places, why should bars be magically protected? Burden of the proof is on bar's owners, not on scientists @BillHanage

Grant Shapps says work has started on app many people already use to book GP appointments

The United States experienced historically high numbers of measles cases in 2019, despite achieving national measles vaccination rates above the World Health Organization recommendation of 95% coverage with two doses. Since the COVID-19 pandemic began, resulting in suspension of many clinical preventive services, pediatric vaccination rates in the United States have fallen precipitously, dramatically increasing risk of measles resurgence. Previous research has shown that measles outbreaks in high-coverage contexts are driven by spatial clustering of nonvaccination, which decreases local immunity below the herd immunity threshold. However, little is known about how to best conduct surveillance and target interventions to detect and address these high-risk areas, and most vaccination data are reported at the state-level—a resolution too coarse to detect community-level clustering of nonvaccination characteristic of recent outbreaks. In this paper, we perform a series of computational experiments to assess the impact of clustered nonvaccination on outbreak potential and magnitude of bias in predicting disease risk posed by measuring vaccination rates at coarse spatial scales. We find that, when nonvaccination is locally clustered, reporting aggregate data at the state- or county-level can result in substantial underestimates of outbreak risk. The COVID-19 pandemic has shone a bright light on the weaknesses in US infectious disease surveillance and a broader gap in our understanding of how to best use detailed spatial data to interrupt and control infectious disease transmission. Our research clearly outlines that finer-scale vaccination data should be collected to prevent a return to endemic measles transmission in the United States.

Our pre-print publication on #COVIDVaccine hesitancy in health care workers. Vaccination rates: White 70% South Asian 59% Black 37% rates in Allied HCPs & administrative/exe staff vs Drs Urgently need to identify barriers & overcome these

When governments fail to ban outright falsehoods that endanger their citizens, they are neglecting their primary duty

Hello! I'm briefly resurfacing from a glorious Twitter hiatus (to accompany an equally glorious book leave) to plug a few things.

One of the most powerful conservative celebrities is actively working against vaccinations

The Indian crisis is precipitating a global one. One-third of the world currently relies on vaccine exports from a single company in India. However, to meet the overwhelming domestic need, India banned vaccine exports, which means that countries in sub-Saharan Africa are now scrambling for vaccines—leaving their population more vulnerable to resurgences of the virus. Ayoade Alakija, a co-chair of the African Vaccine Delivery Alliance, told the Financial Times, “We’re at the point where we’re rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.”President Joe Biden must help, by removing patent barriers and making vaccine technology available to other countries.

The U.S. "has the chance to elevate vaccine manufacturing around the world, both by immediately making two @WHO–certified vaccine recipes available and...funding the infrastructure to manufacture even more of them." Spot-on @ChelseaClinton & Achal Prabhala

Another framing for this tweet: Wow, the US will soon be able to expand vaccine access to 12-15 year olds. Meanwhile, there are countries where healthcare workers treating COVID patients can’t access vaccines. What more can the US government do to support the global community?

And sharing this report from @joshmich and @jenkatesdc on actions the US government can take.

Another tweet on the same topic:

The imminent FDA authorization of a vaccine for 12-15 year olds is great news, and adolescents should be able to access vaccine. But in the short term, we must also grapple with the ethics of vaccinating adolescents ahead of high-risk adults in other countries.

1. This is "Politics For All" A strictly impartial political news account. It has more than 100,000 followers, growing fast and has been promoted by some influential people.