“Dumpster diving” is a term used to describe studies using data from the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System database by authors, almost always antivaxxers, who don’t understand its limitations. Last week, non-antivax doctors who should know better fell into this trap when they promoted their study suggesting that COVID-19 mRNA vaccines are more dangerous to children than the disease.

Dumpster diving in the VAERS database to find more COVID-19 vaccine-associated myocarditis in children

10.3389/fpsyg.2021.642616

The COVID-19 pandemic poses great challenges to higher education. Universities had to change their infrastructure to full remote teaching and learning environments in a very short time. Lecturers and students were forced to adjust their established routines and concepts of teaching and learning. During the first nationwide lockdown in Germany, we explored students' anticipations regarding the risks and chances of this challenging situation. They were asked about the negative and positive effects of this sudden switch to online university courses and the relevance personally ascribed to each of these expected effects. A sample of 584 students provided 3,839 statements, which were examined by means of qualitative content analysis. While 57.7% of the statements concerned negative effects, 42.3% dealt with positive ones. The range of expected negative and positive effects was wide, but key themes emerged particularly frequently. While the mentioned effects were generally considered to be of high personal relevance, negative effects were rated as significantly more relevant, but with only a small effect size. The relevance of negative effects was considered higher by master students than by bachelor students. Relevance ratings were significantly higher for the first effect mentioned compared with all subsequent effects, indicating an ease-of-retrieval effect, which is relevant from both a methodological and content perspective. The results provide important insights into students' perspectives on remote learning that will be significant beyond the current pandemic, as they can guide sustainable measures by exploiting opportunities and mitigating risks. We discuss practical implications and methodological limitations of the study.

Forced Remote Learning During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Germany: A Mixed-Methods Study on Students' Positive and Negative Expectations

10.3389/fpsyg.2021.644212

The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) has worsened the physical and mental health of the general population. Healthcare workers have a high risk of suffering a mental disorder after the first wave. In this way, psychologists, who deal with mental health issues and are considered as healthcare workers in many countries, are of interest in this context. The present study aimed to examine anxiety, depression, stress, and obsessions and compulsions across psychologists, healthcare professionals, and the general community. These variables were measured through the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale (DASS-21), as well as the Yale–Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS), which are related to different sociodemographic variables. The study was carried out after the first wave in Spain through an online questionnaire. Structural equation modeling and a multigroup analysis were carried out across the groups and variables under study. The results suggested that; (i) healthcare workers and general community depicted similar results in anxiety and stress, as well as obsessions; (ii) the group of psychologists depicted better scores than the other groups under study; (iii) stress and anxiety did not predict compulsions in the group of psychologists; (iv) anxiety predicted obsessions for all the professions, while the relationship of this variable with stress was different for each group; and (v) invariance reached a full metric level.

Differences Between the Psychological Symptoms of Health Workers and General Community After the First Wave of the COVID-19 Outbreak in Spain

10.3389/fpsyg.2021.714397

Our aim is to analyze the extent to which the psychosocial aspects can characterize the affective states of the teachers, administrative staff, and undergraduate and postgraduate students during the quarantine. A questionnaire was answered by 1,328 people from the community of the Universitat de Barcelona (UB), Spain. The survey was partially designed ad hoc, collecting indicators related to sociodemographic variables, the impact of COVID on the subjects or in their personal context, the psychosocial context of coexistence and perceived social support, characteristics related to the physical context during the quarantine, and labor conditions. Additionally, it included two validated instruments: the Survey Work-Home Interaction–Nijmegen for Spanish Speaking Countries (SWING-SSC) validated in Spanish and PANAS, the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule. Classification and Regression Trees (CART) were performed to identify which variables better characterize the participants' level of positive and negative affective states. Results according to groups showed that students are the ones who have suffered the most as a result of this situation (temporary employment regulation, higher scores in negative work-home and home-work interaction, lower scores in positive home-work interaction, and negative effects of teleworking). Additionally, they reported a higher mean score in interpersonal conflict and worse scores with regard to negative affective states. Based on sex, women were the ones whose environment was shown to be more frequently affected by the pandemic and who exhibited more negative effects of teleworking. In general terms, participants with the highest scores in negative affective states were those who perceived an increase in conflict and a high negative effect from work spilling over into their personal lives. On the contrary, participants with the highest levels of positive affective states were those with medium to low levels of negative home-work interaction, over 42.5 years old, and with medium to high levels of positive work-home interaction. Our results aim to help higher education to reflect on the need to adapt to this new reality, since the institutions that keep pace with evolving trends will be able to better attract, retain, and engage all the members of the university community in the years ahead.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Higher Education: Characterizing the Psychosocial Context of the Positive and Negative Affective States Using Classification and Regression Trees

10.3389/fpsyg.2021.676116

The current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic elicits a vast amount of anxiety. In the current study, we investigated how anxiety related to COVID-19 is associated with support for and compliance with governmental hygiene measures, and how these are influenced by populist attitudes, anger at the government, and conspiracy mentalities. We conducted an online survey in April 2020 in four different countries (Germany, the Netherlands, Spain, and the UK; N = 2,031) using a cross-sectional design. Results showed that (1) anxiety related to COVID-19 is associated with conspiracy beliefs, anger at the government, and populist attitudes, and (2) support for and compliance with hygiene measures are both positively predicted by anxiety related to COVID-19; however, (3) support for hygiene measures is also predicted by populist attitudes and negatively by conspiracy mentalities, whereas compliance with hygiene measures is more strongly predicted by anger at transgressors (anger at people transgressing the hygiene measures). Consequently, although anxiety related to COVID-19 concerns the health of individual people, it also has political and social implications: anxiety is associated with an increase in anger, either at transgressors or the government.

Anxious and Angry: Emotional Responses to the COVID-19 Threat

I’m fully aware this won’t stop “the vaxx gave me 5G” jokes. But #LetsVaxx anyway.

Average number of deaths was over 86% higher than same period last year as Delta variant continues to spread

Nearly 300% more Covid patients in US hospitals at weekend than a year ago

10.31234/osf.io/v9gax

The explosion of misinformation has undermined public health, uprooted social stability, and threatened the proper functioning of democracies and governance. Helping citizens recognize fake news as fake has been a popular approach in many intervention studies. However, is it possible that fake news that we already know is false still can change our beliefs and attitudes? This paper suggests that the answer is yes. Participants who were thoroughly instructed that they were going to read a made-up article about partisans’ diverging attitude on a novel issue, smoking ban in public places, still end up believing the content. Furthermore, their exposure to the article also shaped their own attitude on the issue based on their partisanship, and the effects are still observable two days later and again ten days later. These findings have profound implications for misinformation research, media practice, polarization and democracy, and common research practices such as deception and debriefing after deception.

Fake News Known as Fake Still Changes Beliefs and Leads to Partisan Polarization

10.31234/osf.io/fcyqd

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, prior studies have modified the Trier Social Stress Test to be conducted remotely. The current report aimed to extend these studies to test whether a remote Trier Social Stress Test (rTSST) can elicit (a) affective, (b) blood pressure, and (c) heart rate responses relative to a control condition and whether these responses were reliable when assessed one week later. Participants (N = 99, 19.7 ± 3.5 years, 55% female) were randomized to a control or stress condition. Controls completed easier versions of the tasks with a single, friendly researcher. Stress participants performed more difficult versions of the task in front of two judges who participants believed were rating their performance. Blood pressure and heart rate were measured every two minutes throughout, while affect was assessed at baseline, after the final task, and following recovery. The rTSST was feasible to administer with minimal technical issues reported. Results suggest that lower positive affect and higher negative affect were reported during the tasks in the stress condition relative to controls. Similarly, stress participants had higher cardiovascular responses during the tasks relative to controls, except that blood pressure was not elevated during mental arithmetic in stress participants relative to controls. Cardiovascular responses demonstrated good test-retest reliability when assessed one week later, especially when computed using area under the curve methods. Overall, a rTSST can be used to elicit affective and cardiovascular reactivity and provides an opportunity to include participants previously unreachable for in-person laboratory procedures.

An Online Trier Social Stress Paradigm to Evoke Affective and Cardiovascular Responses

10.31234/osf.io/m8dbc

In the Covid-19 pandemic, digital social connections have taken on a new level of significance. Building on our previous work, we propose a decentralised service model for a digital resilience network (DRN) which enables people with mental and physical illness as well as those experiencing adverse social events to align themselves, provide peer support, share and access resources. The model has five domains: Biopsychosocial, geographical, technological, information and rule domains. Each application of the model can be described using the five domain descriptors and can thereby function as an index which can allow the individual to navigate the networks according to their individual circumstances.

The Digital Resilience Network

10.31234/osf.io/8jsr3

Within the context of reopening society in the summer of 2021, as the UK moved away from ’lockdown,’ the Government of Wales piloted the return on organised ‘mass gatherings’ of people at a number of test events. Behavioral observations were made at two of the test events to support this process. The research was particularly interested in four key factors: How (1) context within a venue, (2) environmental design, (3) staffing and social norms, and (4) time across an event, affected personal protective behaviors of social distancing, face covering use, and hand hygiene. Data collection was undertaken by trained observers across the above factors. Findings suggest that adherence of attendees was generally high, but with clear indications that levels were shaped in a systematic way by the environment, situational cues, and the passage of time during the events. Some instances of large-scale non-adherence to personal protective behaviors were documented. Overall, there were three main situations where behavioral adherence broke down, under conditions where: (1) staff were not present; (2) there was a lack of environmental signalling (including physical interventions or communications); and (3) later into the events when circumstances were less constrained and individuals appeared less cognitively vigilant. Behavioral observations at events can add precision and identify critical risk situations where/when extra effort is required. The findings suggest a liberal paternal approach whereby state authorities, health authorities and other key organisations can help nudge individuals towards COVID-safe behaviors. Finally, an individual’s intentions are not always matched by their actions, and so behavioral insights can help identify situations and contexts where people are most likely to require additional support to ensure COVID-19 personal protective behaviors are followed and hence protecting themselves and others.

COVID-19 personal protective behaviors during mass events: Lessons from observational measures in Wales, UK.

10.31234/osf.io/6j38h

The current research examined the role of values in guiding people’s responses to COVID-19. Results from an international study involving 115 countries (N = 61,490) suggest that health and economic threats of COVID-19 evoke different values, with implications for controlling and coping with the pandemic. Specifically, health threats evoked prioritization of communal values related to caring for others and belonging, whereas economic threats predicted prioritization of agentic values focused on competition and achievement. Concurrently and over time, prioritizing communal values over agentic values was associated with enactment of prevention behaviors that reduce virus transmission, motivations to help others suffering from the pandemic, and positive attitudes toward outgroup members. These results, which were generally consistent across individual and national levels of analysis, suggest that COVID-19 threats may indirectly shape important responses to the pandemic through their influence on people’s prioritization of communion and agency. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

The Role of Values in Coping with Health and Economic Threats of COVID-19

A news interview I did was re-edited and misquoted by online conspiracy theorists. My advice is: get the vaccine

As a virologist I’m shocked my work has been hijacked by anti-vaxxers

Because measles used to infect >99% of humans, this makes the humble measles vaccine perhaps the most important vaccine ever to be developed as it has reduced infections from all other pathogens. Biology never ceases to amaze! 8/

Thus, through a combination of mathematics, ecological modeling, and advanced immunological techniques we were able to discover that by erasing immune memory, measles once was partially responsible for ~50% of childhood infectious disease deaths. 7/

We found that measles eraaed up to 80% of people’s existing antibody repertoire (Immune Amnesia confirmed) and that they then had to build it back through vaccines or infections - placing them at high risk for disease for years. 2nd main paper here: 6/

We used VirScan (developed in Elledge’s lab) to monitor 100,000’s of antibodies in children who were naturally infected w measles and, w Diane Griffin at Hopkins, experimentally infected macaque primates. 5/

A few years later, with @RLdeSwart (involved w 1st studies too and who coined the term immune amnesia) and Steve Elledge and colleagues, we followed up by profiling the immunological memory in kids before and after they were infected w measles. 4/

We hypothesized then that measles was destroying B cells and plasma cells responsible for retaining immune memory. This is bc the measles virus specifically attacks immune memory cells via attachment to CD150 - a protein enriched on memory cells. 3/ https://nature.com/articles/ni0103-19… 3/

In 2015, along w Bryan Grenfell and colleagues, we discovered an exceptionally strong relationship between measles epidemics and all cause childhood mortality - following outbreaks of measles, child mortality was increased for 2-3 years. 2/

With all the news of vaccines & immunity, did you know measles infections destroy immunity and cause “Immune Amnesia”, increasing risk of all other infections Our research in ‘15 & ‘19 discovered this & the abbreviated story is written up nicely here: 1/

Most people with COVID-19 in the US are legally prevented from knowing which variant infected them. That's because sequencing tests have to be federally approved for results to be disclosed to doctors or patients, and most are not yet. Lab scientists say the process of validating the tests for approval is too costly and time-consuming.

You aren't legally allowed to know which variant gave you COVID-19 in the US, even if it's Delta

10.1126/science.abj0113 PREVIOUS ARTICLEMammalian retrovirus-like protein PEG10 packages its own mRNA and can be pseudotyped for mRNA deliveryPreviousNEXT ARTICLEGlaciohydrology of the Himalaya-KarakoramNext

Understanding the causes and consequences of the emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants of concern is crucial to pandemic control yet difficult to achieve because they arise in the context of variable human behavior and immunity. We investigated the spatial invasion dynamics of lineage B.1.1.7 by jointly analyzing UK human mobility, virus genomes, and community-based polymerase chain reaction data. We identified a multistage spatial invasion process in which early B.1.1.7 growth rates were associated with mobility and asymmetric lineage export from a dominant source location, enhancing the effects of B.1.1.7’s increased intrinsic transmissibility. We further explored how B.1.1.7 spread was shaped by nonpharmaceutical interventions and spatial variation in previous attack rates. Our findings show that careful accounting of the behavioral and epidemiological context within which variants of concern emerge is necessary to interpret correctly their observed relative growth rates.

Spatiotemporal invasion dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 lineage B.1.1.7 emergence

And you can find links to all the studies I am talking about in this slide (and more!) here... 3/3

Here's a thread about the follow-up data from the V-safe pregnancy registry that I have just added to this summary... 2/

Updating my single-slide summary on the safety of #COVID19 #vaccines in #pregnancy to include new data from the V-safe pregnancy registry that came out while I was on holiday.... 1/

@NEJM joining the waning immunity debate. I'm going to push back a bit. Data from @UCSDHealth of vax effectiveness in health workers: 94% in June, 65% in July. Interpreted as "likely to be due to...delta and waning immunity over time, compounded by end of masking requirements."

Being fully vaccinated against Covid-19 not only cuts the risk of catching it, but also of an infection turning into long Covid, research led by King's College London suggests.

Coronavirus vaccines cut risk of long Covid, study finds

10.1038/s41467-021-25207-0

Disease modelling has had considerable policy impact during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, and it is increasingly acknowledged that combining multiple models can improve the reliability of outputs. Here we report insights from ten weeks of collaborative short-term forecasting of COVID-19 in Germany and Poland (12 October–19 December 2020). The study period covers the onset of the second wave in both countries, with tightening non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) and subsequently a decay (Poland) or plateau and renewed increase (Germany) in reported cases. Thirteen independent teams provided probabilistic real-time forecasts of COVID-19 cases and deaths. These were reported for lead times of one to four weeks, with evaluation focused on one- and two-week horizons, which are less affected by changing NPIs. Heterogeneity between forecasts was considerable both in terms of point predictions and forecast spread. Ensemble forecasts showed good relative performance, in particular in terms of coverage, but did not clearly dominate single-model predictions. The study was preregistered and will be followed up in future phases of the pandemic.

A pre-registered short-term forecasting study of COVID-19 in Germany and Poland during the second wave

10.1101/2021.08.25.21262631

Background Avoiding “causal” language with observational study designs is common publication practice, often justified as being a more cautious approach to interpretation.Objectives We aimed to i) estimate the degree to which causality was implied by both the language linking exposures to outcomes and by action recommendations in the high-profile health literature, ii) examine disconnects between language and recommendations, iii) identify which linking phrases were most common, and iv) generate estimates by which these phrases imply causality.Methods We identified 18 of the most prominent general medical/public health/epidemiology journals, and searched and screened for articles published from 2010 to 2019 that investigated exposure/outcome pairs until we reached 65 non-RCT articles per journal (n=1,170). Two independent reviewers and an arbitrating reviewer rated the degree to which they believed causality had been implied by the language in abstracts based on written guidance. Reviewers then rated causal implications of linking words in isolation. For comparison, additional review was performed for full texts and for a secondary sample of RCTs.Results Reviewers rated the causal implication of the sentence and phrase linking the exposure and outcome as None (i.e., makes no causal implication) in 13.8%, Weak in 34.2%, Moderate in 33.2%, and Strong in 18.7% of abstracts. Reviewers identified an action recommendation in 34.2% of abstracts. Of these action recommendations, reviewers rated the causal implications as None in 5.3%, Weak in 19.0%, Moderate in 42.8% and Strong in 33.0% of cases. The implied causality of action recommendations was often higher than the implied causality of linking sentences (44.5%) or commensurate (40.3%), with 15.3% being weaker. The most common linking word root identified in abstracts was “associate” (n=535/1,170; 45.7%) (e.g. “association,” “associated,” etc). There were only 16 (1.4%) abstracts using “cause” in the linking or modifying phrases. Reviewer ratings for causal implications of word roots were highly heterogeneous, including those commonly considered non-causal.Discussion We found substantial disconnects between causal implications used to link an exposure to an outcome and the action implications made. This undercuts common assumptions about what words are often considered non-causal and that policing them eliminates causal implications. We recommend that instead of policing words, editors, researchers, and communicators should increase efforts at making research questions, as well as the potential of studies to answer them, more transparent.

Causal and Associational Linking Language From Observational Research and Health Evaluation Literature in Practice: A systematic language evaluation

Michael Mansfield QC began the fifth session of the People’s Covid Inquiry by pointing out that the Archbishop of Canterbury had now added his voice to the many organisations and individuals calling for a judicial inquiry into the pandemic. However, there was still no sign of the government setting one up. He reminded people that even if the government did start the process, it could dictate its own terms of reference which meant that it could choose not to examine certain areas such as the awarding of contracts during the pandemic.

People’s Covid Inquiry: impact of covid on frontline staff and key workers

Strength is in engagementThe rise of an online scientific community during the COVID‐19 pandemic

10.15252/embr.202152612

Many scientists, confined to home office by COVID‐19, have been gathering in online communities, which could become viable alternatives to physical meetings and conferences.

10.1177/13684302211009708

The global spread of antiscience beliefs, misinformation, fake news, and conspiracy theories is posing a threat to the well-being of individuals and societies worldwide. Accordingly, research on why people increasingly doubt science and endorse “alternative facts” is flourishing. Much of this work has focused on identifying cognitive biases and individual differences. Importantly, however, the reasons that lead people to question mainstream scientific findings and share misinformation are also inherently tied to social processes that emerge out of divisive commitments to group identities and worldviews. In this special issue, we focus on the important and thus far neglected role of group processes in motivating science skepticism. The articles that feature in this special issue cover three core areas: the group-based roots of antiscience attitudes; the intergroup dynamics between science and conspiratorial thinking; and finally, insights about science denial related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Across all articles, we highlight the role of worldviews, identities, norms, religion, and other inter- and intragroup processes that shape antiscientific attitudes. We hope that this collection will inspire future research endeavors that take a group processes approach to the social psychological study of science skepticism.

A group processes approach to antiscience beliefs and endorsement of “alternative facts”

For those of us in the ‘Western’ world, wearing face masks was likely something we rarely did prior to the Covid-19 pandemic. Now, over a year since our first experiences with lockdowns and public health responses dominating public life, masks are ubiquitous. For some, instructions to wear masks in public places have been an opportunity to chart new courses in fashion or have simply been a minor inconvenience in the effort to prevent the further spread of Covid-19. Alternatively, for others in more libertarian and sometimes conspiratorial groups, the face mask has become a symbol of the overreach of the state. They argue that it is not the state’s role to decide their own personal appetite for risk with regards to exposure to covid. Anand Pandian, an anthropologist who has been working with members of American conservative circles, has recently written in The Guardian how masks have become symbols mapping political polarisation in the United States. Pandian’s informants even refer to masks as “face diapers” and as fitting neatly into a narrative of the United States entering into a “heedless slide into totalitarian culture”, characterised by “ever-expanding state control”. There has also been widespread controversy around the Governor of Florida banning mask mandates in the state. I suspect for many of those reading this blog post the opposition to wearing masks seems deeply irrational and perplexing. Likewise, I have found these sentiments troubling and an affront to my own sense of community and ethics. For myself, wearing a mask has become a way of publicly presenting my commitment to stopping the spread of viruses and an acknowledgement of science and evidence as a guide to public health policy. So how has the face mask become a symbol of such divergent meanings?

Masks and Their Moralities

10.3201/eid2709.211042

Not all persons recovering from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection develop SARS-CoV-2–specific antibodies. We show that nonseroconversion is associated with younger age and higher reverse transcription PCR cycle threshold values and identify SARS-CoV-2 viral loads in the nasopharynx as a major correlate of the systemic antibody response.

Predictors of Nonseroconversion after SARS-CoV-2 Infection

Just adding that even though differences in sex weren't statistically different in this study, 65% of men seroconverted compared to 35% of women. This has come up in several other studies and needs to be researched further: https://twitter.com/ahandvanish/status/1387140392794079236… 7/

When paired with this other CDC study showing 65% are seronegative at 60 days, it looks like the *majority* of patients never seroconvert or serorevert early. This has big implications for care & research. Antibody tests can't be required for either! https://twitter.com/ahandvanish/status/1430614546356621315… 6/Quote Tweet

This also has implications for reinfections and vaccine efficacy as well - the study itself mentions that "seroconverters and nonseroconverters will probably also respond differently to vaccination." 5/

This study has huge implications not only for the many #LongCovid patients who have been denied care for not having antibodies, but also for how we think about protection from infection in society more broadly! 4/

B) Small viral load: people who had higher PCR Ct values (meaning the test had to run more cycles before returning positive) were also less likely to seroconvert. This implies mild and asymptomatic cases are less likely to seroconvert. #LongCovid 3/

They found two major risk factors that predicted a lack of seroconversion: A) Age: people under 40 are statistically less likely to make antibodies. #LongCovid 2/

New CDC study finds that 36% of COVID patients *never seroconvert*, meaning they NEVER make antibodies! #LongCovid This is a huge finding which we need to amplify broadly! Please retweet & send to providers, patients, support groups, #MedTwitter, etc. https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/27/9/21-1042_article… 1/

um,

A 2015 paper on a chicken virus showed vaccines could enable more deadly variants to spread – in chickens. But that outcome is rare. Only a minority of human and animal vaccines have affected the evolution of a virus. In most of those cases, evolution didn’t increase the severity of the pathogen. The hypothetical possibility that the COVID-19 vaccines could result in more harmful variants is no reason to avoid inoculation. Rather, it shows the need to continue developing vaccines.

Vaccines could affect how the coronavirus evolves - but that’s no reason to skip your shot

10.1038/d41586-021-02341-9

Facebook’s heavy-handedness could open a window for research in the public interest.

Demand five precepts to aid social-media watchdogs

10.31234/osf.io/8y2zt

During crises and disasters, such as hurricanes, terrorist threats, or pandemics, policymakers must often increase security at the cost of freedom. Psychological science, however, has shown that the restriction of freedom may have strong negative consequences for behavior and health. We suggest that psychology can inform policy both by elucidating some negative consequences of lost freedom (e.g., depression or behavioral reactance) and by revealing strategies to address them. We propose four interlocking principles that can help policymakers restore the freedom-security balance. Careful consideration of the psychology of freedom can help policymakers develop policies that most effectively promote public health, safety, and well-being when crises and disasters strike.

Balancing the Freedom-Security Tradeoff During Crises and Disasters

As of this week, 72% of the adult population in the United States have received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. While this progress represents a marked achievement in vaccinations that has led to steep declines in COVID-19 cases and deaths, vaccination coverage—and the protections provided by it—remains uneven across the country. With the growing spread of the more transmissible Delta variant, cases, hospitalizations, and deaths are once again rising, largely among unvaccinated people. While White adults account for the largest share (57%) of unvaccinated adults, Black and Hispanic people remain less likely than their White counterparts to have received a vaccine, leaving them at increased risk, particularly as the variant spreads.

Latest Data on COVID-19 Vaccinations by Race/Ethnicity

#GetVaccinatedNow

from the makers of ivermectin

Just reported: About half of recent ICU patients with #Covid19 in #Vermont are vaccinated. Sounds like the vaccines aren't working, right? WRONG. Vaccines are working and here's why. But first, let's talk a bit about unprotected sex. A thread. (Refs at the end.) 1/n

10.1136/jnnp-2021-326405

There is accumulating evidence of the neurological and neuropsychiatric features of infection with SARS-CoV-2. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to describe the characteristics of the early literature and estimate point prevalences for neurological and neuropsychiatric manifestations.We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL up to 18 July 2020 for randomised controlled trials, cohort studies, case-control studies, cross-sectional studies and case series. Studies reporting prevalences of neurological or neuropsychiatric symptoms were synthesised into meta-analyses to estimate pooled prevalence.13 292 records were screened by at least two authors to identify 215 included studies, of which there were 37 cohort studies, 15 case-control studies, 80 cross-sectional studies and 83 case series from 30 countries. 147 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The symptoms with the highest prevalence were anosmia (43.1% (95% CI 35.2% to 51.3%), n=15 975, 63 studies), weakness (40.0% (95% CI 27.9% to 53.5%), n=221, 3 studies), fatigue (37.8% (95% CI 31.6% to 44.4%), n=21 101, 67 studies), dysgeusia (37.2% (95% CI 29.8% to 45.3%), n=13 686, 52 studies), myalgia (25.1% (95% CI 19.8% to 31.3%), n=66 268, 76 studies), depression (23.0% (95% CI 11.8% to 40.2%), n=43 128, 10 studies), headache (20.7% (95% CI 16.1% to 26.1%), n=64 613, 84 studies), anxiety (15.9% (5.6% to 37.7%), n=42 566, 9 studies) and altered mental status (8.2% (95% CI 4.4% to 14.8%), n=49 326, 19 studies). Heterogeneity for most clinical manifestations was high.Neurological and neuropsychiatric symptoms of COVID-19 in the pandemic’s early phase are varied and common. The neurological and psychiatric academic communities should develop systems to facilitate high-quality methodologies, including more rapid examination of the longitudinal course of neuropsychiatric complications of newly emerging diseases and their relationship to neuroimaging and inflammatory biomarkers.psychiatryclinical neurologysystematic reviewsCOVID-19meta-analysisThis article is made freely available for use in accordance with BMJ’s website terms and conditions for the duration of the covid-19 pandemic or until otherwise determined by BMJ. You may use, download and print the article for any lawful, non-commercial purpose (including text and data mining) provided that all copyright notices and trade marks are retained.

Neurology and neuropsychiatry of COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the early literature reveals frequent CNS manifestations and key emerging narratives

10.3389/fpsyg.2021.672634

In the current exploratory study, we investigated the willingness of participants to vaccinate against the novel coronavirus [severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)] that has shaken up the world since the beginning of 2020. More specifically, we tested the mediating role of conspiracy beliefs (CBs) on the relationship between threat perception (TP) and willingness of participants to vaccinate against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), along with a series of associated demographic variables. Overall, 40% of our sample expressed total rejection of the COVID-19 vaccine. Our results suggested no significant differences in gender, age, educational level, and vaccine acceptance or hesitancy of participants. The results also indicated that CBs partially mediated the relationship between TP and willingness of participants to vaccinate. The current findings are discussed within the theory of planned behavior (TPB) framework and their importance for public health communication and practices and building public trust within the global fight against COVID-19. We considered the present results as a valuable starting point in understanding the psychological constructs related to the extended model of TPB and other personal factors and addressed the attitudinal roots that shape the acceptance and rejection of COVID-19 vaccination.

SARS-CoV-2 Threat Perception and Willingness to Vaccinate: The Mediating Role of Conspiracy Beliefs