There is enough to cover with two topics this week. There wasn’t much new on H5N1 other than it is showing up in more places and continued resistance by big agriculture to allow public health to conduct surveillance monitoring. That seems to be an analogy to the “Goodbye Data” section related to COVID this week.
Contents:
Goodbye Data
Two major sources of COVID data went dark this week. First, Biobot Analytics stopped their public reporting of wastewater data. Wastewater has been a useful early tool to detect increasing rates of COVID in a community.
Worse, the CDC had pulled the plug on mandatory reporting of COVID data by hospitals on May 1st. I simply had thought that the consequences of this would be having a smaller sample size from which to draw inferences. I had been using two large data tables as important sources for the visualizations on this site.
Last June, the CDC had dropped the reporting requirements for suspected cases. I had developed a methodology to still visualize data adjusted for these changes and had thought that I could use the same approach for when some hospitals stopped reporting. The data from the CDC lags the reporting dates by two weeks, so this current weekend was when I expected to see just how that was starting to impact data. May 1st was on a Wed, so there would have been full reporting for the first half of the week and then voluntary for the last.
Unfortunately, that’s not how things played out. Instead, CDC just stopped updating the data tables altogether. This was unnecessary because many sites continued to report. I still continued to report daily for my hospital, even on weekends and did so this morning (Saturday). I can see what hospitals are reporting in my region of the state I’m currently in and saw that hospitals that represent 84% of beds in the region are still reporting. This makes me think that the CDC is still getting a lot of data but is not making it available under political pressure. Sometimes I honestly wonder if this site put enough pressure on the CDC or embarrassed them enough to drive the change. I know that many had tweeted out some of my tweets using it to @cdcdirector and @cdcgov.
I have been doing MORE to make this data readily understandable by the public which is part of the reason I created this site since nobody had been doing so. I hoped that a university might do something as well, but it didn’t happen. Early on we knew the need for data for making public health decisions.
On the CDC’s data authority web page, they even discuss the need for quality data at the federal level.
In the MMWR, they even titled an article “Summary of Guidance for Minimizing the Impact of COVID-19 on Individual Persons, Communities, and Health Care Systems — United States, August 2022.” The article tells people to know their risk. How are they supposed to do that with no data available? They even provided an infographic showing their four recommendations. I had been using this data all the way down to the metro area level to help people understand their local risk and not just that of their state.
In the article, they state “Persons can use information about the current level of COVID-19 impact on their community to decide which prevention behaviors to use and when (at all times or at specific times), based on their own risk for severe illness and that of members of their household, their risk tolerance, and setting-specific factors.”
Unfortunately, this is pretty much impossible to do now. In May 2022, the CDC dropped their “Community Levels” tool, which really had been efficient at minimizing COVID compared to their prior tool, but at least it was something. Even so, this data lagged quite a bit because of the 7-10 days it takes to develop symptoms after an infection. Forbes stated it nicely. “Relying on hospitalizations and deaths to determine what to do can be sort of like saying that you are going to wait until you’re fired or the company is bankrupt before determining whether you need to improve your job performance. Or waiting until the divorce papers arrived before saying, ‘Hmm, maybe I should start doing the dishes and not do all that that cheating stuff?’ Hospitalizations tend to occur about one to two weeks after people have gotten infected.”
On September 9, 2021 President Biden stated “But what makes it incredibly more frustrating is that we have the tools to combat COVID-19, and a distinct minority of Americans –supported by a distinct minority of elected officials — are keeping us from turning the corner. These pandemic politics, as I refer to, are making people sick, causing unvaccinated people to die.” One of the biggest tools is gone. Maybe it’s time for the Democratic party to look in the mirror and do some reflection and fix this.
True, things would have been far worse under a Republican administration, and there are many studies supporting this, leaving us three bad options for president. One who minimized the pandemic from the beginning setting the stage to make it political, one who is a science denying quack infested by a brain worm, and the current one who is following the minimizing lead of the prior in the support of politics. From a public health standpoint, we are screwed.
This is incredibly bad timing with the emergence of the FLiRT strains, not that any time is good IN THE MIDDLE OF A PANDEMIC.
SHAME ON YOU CDC
Antibiotic Resistance and COVID
A massive (n=892,312) global study and metanalysis of 173 studies on antibiotic resistance was published this week. What was particularly alarming is the high prevalence of resistant organisms among COVID patients.
Part of my role in healthcare is related to antibiotic stewardship and ensuring that patients with any of these above categories of resistant organisms are properly isolated to prevent spread. It makes me wonder if we should be asking patients on admission if they have a COVID history. If they do, I wonder if we should be doing surveillance cultures given these high rates to ensure that they are placed in contact precautions.
Antibiotics are useful when indicated. Unfortunately, many of the antivax/ivermectin grifters include antibiotics in their protocols. Antibiotics do as much for viruses as hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin – absolutely nothing. They are beneficial if there is a secondary bacterial infection, but widespread use of them pushes us closer to the post-antibiotic era.
One of the organizations pushing these protocols is the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC). Their protocol BEGINS with ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine. Both have been shown to be useless for COVID, but they are making a lot of money of people by selling this stuff. I’ve previously written a rebuttal to one of the websites that is often used to push ivermectin. What is written in this screenshot is simply unsubstantiated garbage used for grifting patients.
DON’T DO THIS:
If patients don’t improve within three days, then they suggest adding antibiotics.
Their website is designed to make it look like that their protocols are a widely used. That’s simply not the case. Further, this blind use of antibiotics contributes to the antibiotic resistance problem leading to the post-antibiotic era. To put that phrase into context, “Imagine a world where routine surgery or chemotherapy is considered too dangerous because there are no drugs to prevent or treat bacterial infections.“
Imagine living in a world where tending to your rose bushes causes a small scratch to your skin or a small scrape to a knuckle like I had yesterday could become fatal if an infection invades.
The last time I spoke on antibiotic resistance was about 10 years ago. I’m going to provide a few slides from that presentation many of which contain references if interested. I would also recommend the book reviewed here if this topic interests you.
I also want to give a shout out to @ejustin46 (who reviews more primary sources than I think possible in a day and is worth following on Twitter) for this summary on resistance and COVID from a year ago.