(NEW YORK) — Drinking more water every day is a healthy habit, but a new study has raised concerns about the container you should sip from.
Researchers from Columbia University and Rutgers University published the study Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, which reveals an average of 240,000 detachable plastic fragments were found in a standard liter of bottled water.
Although the tiny “nanoplastics,” which are smaller than one micrometer in size — less than one-seventieth the width of a human hair — may seem too small to be an issue, the data showed a large jump in concentrations found in bottled water.
Concentrations of micro-nano plastics found in testing were estimated to be 240,000 particles on average per liter of bottled water, “about 90% of which are nanoplastics,” researchers wrote in the paper, after testing three unidentified brands of bottled water.
“This is orders of magnitude more than the microplastic abundance reported previously in bottled water,” the paper notes.
“Individual particles for all seven plastic polymers from the library were identified, enabling statistical analysis of plastic particles with sizes down to 100 to 200 [nanometers],” the researchers said.
The International Bottled Water Association (IBWA) responded to the study, saying in part that there is “both a lack of standardized methods and no scientific consensus on the potential health impacts of nano- and microplastic particles,” and adding that “media reports about these particles in drinking water do nothing more than unnecessarily scare consumers.”
The IBWA also noted that the organization had “very limited notice and time to review this new study closely” and so “cannot provide a detailed response at this time.”
For years, scientists have looked for microplastics, which can measure anywhere from one micrometer to half a centimeter in size. But identifying and analyzing nanoplastics, which are far smaller, presented a greater challenge. In response, researchers in the new study developed a “hyperspectral stimulated Raman scattering (SRS) imaging platform with an automated plastic identification algorithm” — essentially, using laser technology combined with computer analysis and machine learning — to enable identification and analysis of particles of plastics “at the single-particle level,” according to the report.
Pieces of tiny plastics have previously been found in oceans, beaches and even tap water.
Phoebe Stapleton, a professor of pharmacology and toxicology at Rutgers University and co-author of the new study, said that scientists have known nanoplastics were in water, but explained, “if you can’t quantify them or can’t make a visual of them, it’s hard to believe that they’re actually there.”
The new findings can help further study and identify the extent that nanoplastic consumption by humans may pose a health threat.
In 2022, the World Health Organization said there wasn’t enough evidence “for reliable characterization and qualification of the risks to human health” adding the need for further research.
Although microplastics have been discovered in people’s lungs, blood and excrement, scientists have said evidence that the particles may be harmful to human health has so far been inconclusive.
(NEW YORK) — Aides to President Joe Biden remain divided on a plan to ban menthol cigarette sales, according to several people familiar with the matter who say concerns of voter backlash in the election and pressure from civil rights groups are stalling the measure.
The fate of the proposal has been the subject of internal discussions in recent days among White House aides and top officials from the Department of Health and Human Services.
The internal debate, described by officials who spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to speak publicly, comes on the 60th anniversary of the landmark warning by the surgeon general urging Americans not to smoke.
If Biden wants to guarantee the rule is enacted under his watch, he would have to finalize the regulation by next week.
“This moment goes beyond public health — it is about who we are as a nation and whose lives we value. We strongly urge the administration to make the right choice, and to make it now,” said Dr. Avenel Joseph, vice president of policy at the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
Behind the lobbying effort to keep menthols on the market are some civil rights groups, including Al Sharpton’s National Action Network and lawyer Ben Crump.
The National Action Network has declined to comment on reports that major tobacco companies have sponsored some of the organization’s activities, but says it’s concerned about criminal prosecution of Black smokers.
“National Action Network has taken the position that, unless there are real safeguards against criminal prosecution of Black and Brown communities, the proposed menthol ban will have unintended consequences,” the organization told ABC News.
The rule would prevent the marketing and distribution of menthols. It would not make possession of a menthol tobacco product illegal.
Crump did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Menthol is a flavor additive with a minty taste and aroma that health experts say masks the harsh effects of smoking. Menthol also makes smoking harder to quit, according to the Food and Drug Administration, which initiated the proposed ban.
That’s why health experts say it’s particularly troubling that menthol cigarettes have been aggressively marketed to Black communities. Nearly 85% of all non-Hispanic Black smokers use menthol cigarettes, compared to 30% of non-Hispanic white smokers, per the FDA.
An estimated 45,000 Black people die from smoking each year, according to the American Lung Association.
“By quickly finalizing and implementing rules to remove menthol cigarettes and flavored cigars from the market, the administration would be taking historic action to reduce disparities, advance health equity and prevent death and disease from tobacco use,” said Nancy Brown, CEO of the American Heart Association.
With groups like the American Heart Association and the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids pushing the administration to move ahead with the plan, the proposal was nearing its final regulatory hurdle this month with a review by the White House budget office. But sources say internal debate on whether to finalize the plan — or to wait until the election is over — stalled those efforts.
(NEW YORK) — Although rates of strokes in the adult population have generally decreased over the last several decades, the racial inequity gap persists, according to a new study in Neurology, which found that Black adults are still more likely to have strokes compared to white adults, and at younger ages.
Researchers analyzed data on patients with their first stroke in Ohio and Kentucky from 1993 to 2015, and found that overall, the rates of strokes have decreased. However, Black adults became more likely to have their first stroke at a younger age than white adults – the average age for a Black adult decreased from 66 to 62 years of age, and for white adults only decreased from 72 to 71. Black adults remained 52 to 83% more likely to have first-time strokes than white adults for all time points of the study, especially for younger adults aged 20 to 44.
“Black adults had higher rates of stroke in all of the study periods, and unfortunately the difference in the higher rates in Black versus white adults did not improve over time,” said Dr. Tracy Madsen, associate professor of emergency medicine at Brown University.
Strokes are leading causes of long-term disability and death, and from 2018-2019 cost the U.S. health care system nearly $56.5 billion, according to the CDC.
Inequities in stroke diagnosis, management, and long-term functional and cognitive outcomes have been well documented for Black Americans. The study showed that medical conditions that increase risk for stroke, such as diabetes and high blood pressure, became more common in both Black and white groups, but disproportionately for Black individuals.
Structural racism creates access barriers to treatment, financial and transportation barriers, and lived experiences of personal racism, all of which contribute to toxic stress, inflammation and conditions like high blood pressure, according to Dr. Olajide Williams, professor of neurology at Columbia University. “These are searing, tragic, preventable inequities, really driven by structural racism,” said Williams. “It’s like an endless ocean of problems, disproportionally with Black and brown people”.
Experts do not feel like biologic differences drive this inequity, especially given that race is a social construct and cannot be genetically or biologically defined. While structural determinants of health may result in altered epigenetics, reversible expressions in DNA that are caused by one’s environment, ultimately it is still the upstream social factors that are the root cause. “Black people don’t have genes that predispose them to getting more strokes,” said Williams. “That is a myth.”
The study was not able to examine systemic racism or barriers in access to care. The study also did not look at other minoritized groups such as Latine, Asian, Native Hawaiian, and American Indian individuals.
While Madsen feels that future research on these inequities is important to raise awareness, the next step is to take action. “We have enough evidence to show that these inequities exist without a doubt,” she said. “The next step is to look towards the interventions that could help address or eliminate these disparities.”
Angela Y. Zhang, MD (she/hers), is a pediatric resident at University of Washington/Seattle Children’s Hospital and a member of the ABC News Medical Unit.
AED are portable, life-saving devices designed to treat people experiencing sudden cardiac arrest, a medical condition in which the heart stops beating suddenly and unexpectedly. CREDIT: Boy_Anupong/Getty Images
(NEW YORK) — Bystander use of automated external defibrillators, or AEDs, for witnessed out-of-hospital cardiac arrests remains low despite legislative efforts to improve access to these life-saving devices at recreational facilities across the United States, according to a study recently published in the Journal of the American Medical Association.
Researchers at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center and the University of Missouri-Kansas City reviewed how frequently bystanders used AEDs in 9,290 cases of witnessed cardiac arrest at recreational facilities, based on data from the Cardiac Arrest Registry to Enhance Survival (CARES). They further compared the frequency of AED use among states with and without enacted laws requiring the presence of AEDs on site at recreational facilities.
Although 46.8% of patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest had shockable heart rhythms, bystander use of AEDs remained low across the country, with only 19% of bystanders using AEDs in AED-enacted law states, and 18.2% of bystanders using AEDs in non-law states, the JAMA study, published Jan. 2, found.
Low rates of “bystander use of AEDs could be due to several reasons, including lack of AED availability on-site,” “unawareness that an AED is available, or not knowing where it is located,” wrote Dr. Ahmed Kolkailah, corresponding author of the study, from the division of cardiology at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center. “Even if an AED is available, bystanders may not know how to use it or may be afraid of causing harm.”
Bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation was only performed in 5,693 cases, or 61.3%, the study found. Additionally, rates for surviving an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and making it to the hospital were similar for patients living in AED law states (44.5%) and non-law states (45.0%).
These findings emphasize the need to increase public awareness of the lifesaving measures AEDs can provide, and where they can be found.
“If CPR is not started within the first few minutes, brain function and survival decline by 10% for every minute without CPR. We need to educate people about CPR and AED use. The American Heart Association strongly advocates for CPR and AED training as a high school graduation requirement,” according to Dr. Dianne Atkins, a pediatric cardiologist and volunteer for the American Heart Association’s Emergency Cardiovascular Care Committee.
“AEDs placed in public areas need to be made very visible. Often AED signage is placed on the wall instead of perpendicular to the wall, so as you’re walking you can see it easily. AEDs need to be obvious and quickly found,” Atkins said. “I always look for an AED when I’m in a new building. Sometimes I’ll ask a receptionist or security guard where the AED is.”
“Cardiac arrest can happen to anyone at any time. CPR and AED use should be considered life skills for everyone,” wrote Dr. Steven Brooks, emergency medicine physician at Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario, and lead author of an American Heart Association statement from the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation published in 2022.
“Using an AED may seem intimidating, but it’s important to remember that all you have to do is power on the unit, and it will guide you through the steps to save a life with audio and visual prompts,” Brooks said. “Just do what the AED says and you could save a life.”
The first steps you can take to save a life involve watching this video from the American Heart Association on how to properly administer hands-only CPR, and be on the lookout for the nearest AED in public spaces.
Joey K. Ng, M.D., is an emergency medicine resident at Wyckoff Heights Medical Center in Brooklyn, New York, and a member of the ABC News Medical Unit.
Jennifer Miao, M.D., is a fellow physician in cardiology at Yale School of Medicine/Yale New Haven Hospital, and a member of the ABC News Medical Unit.
(NEW YORK) — More than three years into the pandemic, hundreds of Americans are still dying from COVID-19 every week.
For the week ending Dec. 9, the last week of complete data, there were 1,614 deaths from COVID, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The last four weeks of complete data show an average of 1,488 weekly deaths.
By comparison, there were 163 weekly deaths from the flu for the week ending Dec. 9, according to CDC data.
While high, these COVID death figures are still lower than the high of 25,974 deaths recorded the week ending Jan. 9, 2021, as well as weekly deaths seen in previous winters, CDC data shows.
The current “weekly rate of COVID mortality is similar to what we were getting per day at [the worst] parts of the pandemic. So, proportionally, we’re in a completely different place than where we were, thankfully,” Dr. Cameron Wolfe, a professor of infectious diseases at Duke University in North Carolina, told ABC News. “But there’s still a pretty significant mortality; 1,500 patients dying every week is unacceptable, frankly.”
Experts said there are several reasons why people might still be dying from the virus, including not enough people accessing treatments or getting vaccinated as well as waning immunity.
Additionally, if more people get sick, even if in lesser numbers than in previous waves, it will naturally lead to more people becoming hospitalized and, in turn, dying.
“We do have very good vaccines that [researchers] have been able to adjust as the variants have changed and very good treatment options that have been shown to decrease the risk of hospitalization as well as deaths,” Dr. Shivanjali Shankaran, an associate professor of infectious diseases at Rush University Medical Center in Chicago, told ABC News.
“However, if we’re not accessing those particular tools, then having them doesn’t sort of make any difference,” Shankaran added.
Too few people getting vaccinated
As of Jan. 5, just 19.4% of adults aged 18 and older and 8% of children have received the updated COVID vaccine, CDC data shows. Additionally, just 38% of adults aged 65 and older, who are at higher risk of severe illness, have been vaccinated.
The updated vaccine is targeted against variants that are related to XBB, an offshoot of the omicron variant.
Currently, JN.1, a descendant of BA.2.86 — which is itself descended from XBB — makes up an estimated 61.6% of U.S. COVID cases, CDC data shows.
Although the CDC has suggested JN.1 may be more transmissible or better at evading the immune system than other variants, there is no evidence that available vaccines don’t work.
“The longer someone has gone since their last vaccine, or their most recent infection for that matter, the more likely their COVID breakthrough would occur and the more likely it’s going to be severe enough that they land in hospital” and potentially die, Wolfe said.
Experts said there may a level of vaccine fatigue and complacency in the population with people not getting the updated vaccine because they don’t feel like they need it after getting the original vaccine and then subsequent boosters. This, however, doesn’t account for waning immunity.
“[Vaccines] don’t retain their memory as effectively as we might like, so if you were vaccinated short of more than 12 months ago, your chances of maintaining really good memory again from that vaccine is probably pretty poor at this point,” Wolfe said.
For a high-risk person, this increases their chance of severe illness if they get infected. For lower risk people, this increases the risk of them spreading the virus to more at-risk groups, he added.
Americans not accessing treatments
COVID-19 treatments have evolved since the early days of the pandemic with antiviral pills available, particularly Paxlovid from Pfizer.
Paxlovid is three pills given twice daily for five days for those at high risk of severe illness. Initial clinical trial data showed Pfizer’s pill reduced the risk of hospitalization and death for unvaccinated patients at risk of severe illness who began treatment within three days of symptoms by nearly 90%. More recent studies including omicron strains of the virus and vaccinated patients have upheld similar results showing the treatment cut the risk of hospitalization and death in half.
It’s been a relatively underused treatment with some reports suggesting that in some states it’s prescribed in less than 25% of cases — and it may be another reason why deaths have increased.
Experts said there may be several factors at play.
“It’s a combination of misunderstanding about who’s eligible for Paxlovid, a misunderstanding about whether Paxlovid works and then sometimes trouble getting prescriptions,” Dr. Megan Rainey, dean of the Yale School of Public Health, told ABC News. “Because we know, for example, that Paxlovid use is much lower in rural areas, as well as among those who have lower educational levels, so I suspect for Paxlovid that there is this kind of element of access as well.”
Physicians may also feel hesitant to prescribe Paxlovid due to concerns about how the medication interacts with other prescription drugs or even due to instance of people experiencing a Paxlovid rebound, which is a recurrence of COVID symptoms.
“The data on rebound is still being figured out, but what’s clear is that whether or not you get a rebound with Paxlovid, it absolutely decreases risk of hospitalization and death,” Rainey said.
More infections mean more severe illnesses
Another reason for the increase is the sheer fact that more people getting sick naturally means more hospitalizations and more deaths, according to experts.
“It’s nothing obviously like the omicron wave where we had just millions and millions of people getting sick, and because of that many more people going to the hospital and dying, but yeah, as the total number of people who are infected increases, then you are going to have a similar increase in the number of people who need hospitalization,” Shankaran said.
For those who may be elderly or immunocompromised, even a case of mild COVID-19 can result in severe illness and even death.
Experts said the messaging to the public is the same as in earlier phases of the pandemic and advise that Americans remain diligent.
“The message is to be aware of your own risk factors, be aware of your own symptoms, recognize that vaccines provide protection, not only against getting sick but severity of sickness,” Wolfe said. “That’s the same message that we try and send for flu and RSV each year, it’s no different.”
(PHILADELPHIA) — The Philadelphia Department of Health is tracking a measles outbreak in the city, with eight confirmed cases as of Monday.
Health officials told ABC News all confirmed cases are among non-immune individuals.
The health department said it’s actively tracking current cases and has listed several known exposure sites across the city, mostly at health care facilities and a daycare.
The first known case was identified as a patient who was admitted to the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia in early December, where three other non-immune children were exposed and later tested positive for the virus, health officials said. At least three of the cases have resulted in hospitalization.
Health officials recommend anyone who thinks they may have been exposed to quarantine alone at home and stay away from other people.
Measles is one of the most contagious infectious diseases and can easily spread from one case to dozens of others in a contained area, said Dr. Indi Trehan, a pediatric infectious disease specialist at the University of Washington/Seattle Children’s Hospital. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, measles virus particles can remain infectious for up to two hours once airborne.
After an initial flu-like illness, patients with measles can develop, ear infections, severe diarrhea, superimposed pneumonia, or brain infection and swelling.
“It’s a ‘surface’ disease, which means that all the major exposed surfaces of your body get broken down, like your respiratory tract, GI tract and eyes,” Trehan said.
Measles infection can lead to blindness, weakness of the immune system and even rare neurologic symptoms years later in life. According to the Philadelphia Department of Health, one in five patients require hospitalization.
Individuals with measles should follow strict isolation measures, or risk spreading it to unvaccinated individuals. High-risk groups for serious illness include young children, the elderly, pregnant people and people with weakened immune systems.
The CDC recommends vaccination with the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine at 12 to 15 months of age, and again at 4 to 6 years of age. There is no known treatment for measles besides supportive care and giving vitamin A to help reduce the risk of death. Experts do not recommend giving vitamin A to prevent measles.
The measles vaccine has prevented 56 million global deaths between 2000 and 2021, according to the World Health Organization. The United States declared measles an eliminated disease in 2000, but outbreaks have been increasing from unvaccinated individuals due to immigration, disrupted vaccine schedules from COVID-19 isolation regulations, and growing vaccine hesitancy since a debunked study falsely linked the MMR vaccine to autism.
The only way to prevent measles is to get the highly effective MMR vaccine, said Dr. Danielle Kerr, medical director for infection prevention at Seattle Children’s Hospital.
“We have to hear families out and respect their concerns and fears, and provide them data-driven evidence and stories that illustrate why it’s so important to be vaccinated,” Kerr said.
She recommended parents and caregivers use reputable sources to answer questions about the vaccine, such as the CDC or their pediatrician.
Trehan encouraged parents and caregivers who notice symptoms of measles in their child to call their local health care center ahead of time so the facility can prepare precautions. These symptoms include a high fever of around 103 to 105 degrees, copious congestion, red eyes, a rash that spreads head to toe and extreme irritability, according to the CDC.
“It’s on all of us to protect each other as a society, as a human family,” Trehan said.
(NEW YORK) — For children under the age of 2, television screen time is associated with sensory differences later in toddlerhood, according to a new study.
Children who watched any television or DVDs at 12 months of age were twice as likely by 36 months to experience “atypical sensory processing” – that is, challenges in processing day-to-day sensory input – compared to others of that age. After 18 months of age, each extra hour of screen exposure was associated with around a 20% increased likelihood of sensory processing differences, according to the study, published Monday in JAMA Pediatrics.
For the study, researchers analyzed 1,500 caregiver surveys regarding their child’s sensory preferences, such as sensitivity to, preference for, or avoidance of different noises, lights, and textures. The study only looked at children who watched television, not smartphones or tablets, because the survey data was gathered prior to 2014.
The study, led by researchers at Drexel University, follows previous research showing how screen time impacts the ways kids speak, hear, feel and think.
A study published last year found that screen time for 1-year-olds was associated with developmental delays in problem-solving and communication as early as ages 2 and 4.
Examples of sensory processing issues can include everything from a child feeling uncomfortable in clothes to handling bright lights or loud noises differently than others, according to the Child Mind Institute, a nonprofit organization focused on kids’ mental health and learning disorders. Sensory processing issues run the spectrum from possibly minimally affecting a child’s life to interfering with their daily function.
Sensory issues can exist on their own, but are sometimes seen with conditions like autism, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD), according to the Institute. The Drexel study was not able to comment on the prevalence of autism, ADHD, or OCD with screen time.
Dr. Karen Heffler, an associate psychiatry professor at Drexel University and lead author of the new study on screen time, said she became interested in research on the impact of screen time on young children after her own son was diagnosed with autism.
“I’m very interested in any potential factors that could help other families whose children are diagnosed with autism,” Heffler told ABC News, adding that this study adds data about screen time for very young children, especially those under one year of age. Prior studies have mostly focused on children older than a year.
The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) currently recommends against any screen time for children under the age of 2, excluding live video chats, like FaceTime with family members. The AAP further recommends a 1-hour per day time limit on screen time for children ages 2 to 5.
Research shows, however, that the majority of children under the age of 5 are watching more screen time than is recommended, due in part to the increasing prevalence of mobile devices as well as digital accessibility, content targeted to children, and increases in screen-time use during COVID-19.
Takeaways for parents on screen time and young kids
While experts agree that limiting screen time is generally better for brain development, they caution against concluding that the screen time itself is leading to sensory differences.
Dr. Emily Myers, a neurodevelopmental pediatrician at the University of Washington and Seattle Children’s Hospital, told ABC News that while non-interactive screen time does decrease opportunities for children to learn self-regulation skills and connection to their physical environment, there are cases where children might use screens more to self-regulate, because of pre-existing sensory differences.
She also said that home and family environments matter, too, and that screen time can sometimes be a proxy for something else going on in the home that might affect development.
The study out of Drexel University associated screen time only with sensory differences, and not necessarily with conditions like ADHD or autism, although past studies have shown that children with these conditions tend to also experience sensory differences.
However, although some specific sensory changes at 18 and 24 months of age can be associated with developing autism, it’s difficult to predict if sensory differences will positively or negatively impact that child’s lived experience, according to Dr. Jade Cobern, a pediatrician and neonatal hospitalist at Johns Hopkins.
“If the sensory differences are getting in the way of them meaningfully engaging in the world or they are distressing to a point that it becomes a problem, that’s when we start to worry about some of the negative impacts of these sensory differences,” Cobern said.
When she counsels parents on decreasing screen time, Myers said she acknowledges the modern ubiquitousness of screens, even for adults, saying, “It’s very difficult to unplug a specific age population when everyone around them has screens on all the time.”
Prior studies have identified lack of affordable alternative activities, parental fatigue, and burnout as barriers to decreasing screen time for children, and note that parents can often experience guilt when regulating screen time for their child.
In her practice, Myers recommends a more holistic approach to identifying possible barriers to decreasing screen time, such as assessing whether a family’s basic housing, food, and safety needs are being met. She said she also spends a lot of time on helping families promote relationships with their child, as well as problem-solving with them.
“I haven’t seen a lot of families actually have a lot of success with decreasing screen time,” Myers said. “Usually there’s some other really significant contextual factors which are interfering and need to be addressed, in addition to screen time.”
Cobern also recommends tailoring approaches to the specific family and patient, and collaboratively brainstorming accessible ways to decrease non-interactive screen time and increase healthy developmental activities, such as reading, playing with objects, and socializing with other children, even if those activities might entail screens.
“Everyone has to be realistic when we’re talking about how parents can support their children’s development,” Cobern said, adding of research like the Drexel study, “It’s not to shame screentime exposure because the reality is we live in a world where screens are part of our daily lives.”
She continued, “It really is inevitable that most kids will see some screen time even early in life, but it is something I encourage families to be mindful of.”
Angela Y. Zhang, MD (she/hers), is a pediatric resident at University of Washington/Seattle Children’s Hospital and a member of the ABC News Medical Unit.
(NEW YORK) — The American Red Cross said Monday it is experiencing an emergency blood shortage.
According to the humanitarian organization, it is seeing the lowest number of people giving blood in 20 years.
Hospitals are currently receiving blood products — including whole blood, red blood cells, plasma and platelets — faster than donations are coming in, the Red Cross said in a release.
This means the Red Cross, which says it supplies about 40% of the nation’s blood donations, has had to limit distributions of some of the most transfused blood types to hospitals.
Dr. Eric Gehrie, a medical director at the American Red Cross, said that when hospitals don’t have a full blood bank, patients who need transfusions may have delays, surgeries may be rescheduled and it may result in more of a struggle for patients with rare blood types to find donors that match.
“There is more need for blood at hospitals than we are able to provide at current donation levels and this is an issue that is really … a long-term problem,” he told ABC News.
In addition to donor numbers dropping overall, Gehrie said that since the COVID-19 pandemic began in January 2020, there has been a reduction of 300,000 blood donors.
“To put the numbers in perspective, we need an additional 8,000 donations every week in January in order to meet current hospital need,” he said.
The Red Cross said it experienced a 7,000-unit shortfall between Christmas and New Year’s Day and challenges including respiratory virus season and winter weather could lead to more donation drives being canceled.
Gehrie said there are several factors are behind the decline in blood donations over the years including the pandemic, which led to many people staying at home and working remotely, making it challenging to host blood drives.
“In the past, the American Red Cross worked with a lot of businesses and schools who would host blood drives on site and where it was possible for a lot of people to donate blood,” he said. “As the way that we learn and work has changed, it’s been harder and harder to attract as many donors to a employer- or school-related blood drive.”
Additionally, he said donors are sometimes deferred for reasons including iron levels, hemoglobin levels or travel restrictions. Those donors may not realize they may be able to donate at a future time, he added.
This is not the first the Red Cross has alerted the public to the diminishing blood supply.
In January 2022, during the omicron wave of the pandemic, the Red Cross said the U.S. was seeing “a national blood crisis” due to a drop in donations and donation drives.
Additionally, in September 2023, the Red Cross said the national blood supply had dropped to “critically low levels” due to summer travel and storms such has Hurricane Idalia disrupting donation collection.
According to the Red Cross, only 3% of age-eligible people, or about 6.8 million Americans, donate blood every year.
Recently, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration dropped all restrictions related to sexually active gay and bisexual men donating blood, moving to a new blood donation risk assessment tool that is the same for every donor regardless of how they identify.
Public health experts and gay rights activists have said the new policy could help make blood donation more inclusive and reach new donors at a time when the blood supply is low.
(NEW YORK) — Respiratory illness activity is elevated or increasing across most areas of the country, according to the latest data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
Some 38 states plus New York City are experiencing “high or very high” levels of respiratory illness activity, according to the CDC. Of those states, 21 are experiencing “very high” activity. Last week, 31 states were experiencing “high or very high” activity.
Respiratory illness activity is defined as people going to the doctor with symptoms, including fever and a cough and/or sore throat, from any respiratory disease including flu, COVID-19, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), and the common cold.
“A steady increase in respiratory illnesses is a common annual trend, typically fueled by holiday gatherings and travel,” says ABC News contributor John Brownstein, Ph.D. “This year is no exception. With January and February often marking the peak of such illnesses, it’s crucial to exercise heightened vigilance now.”
Flu hospitalizations also continue to increase, rising 35% in the most recent week. The CDC estimates that there have been at least 10 million illnesses, 110,000 hospitalizations, and 6,500 deaths from flu so far this season. Adults over 65 have the highest rates of flu hospitalizations.
CDC modeling estimates that flu infections are growing or likely growing in 47 states and territories.
COVID-19 hospitalizations also have increased for eight consecutive weeks, rising 20% in the most recent week but so far remaining lower than the same time last year. Adults over 65 have the highest rates of COVID-19 hospitalizations.
CDC modeling further estimates that COVID-19 infections are growing or likely growing in 42 states and territories.
RSV activity remains elevated in many areas of the country, though decreases have been observed in some areas. Infants under 4 years of age have the highest rates of RSV hospitalizations.
Adults over 65 and American Indian/Alaska Natives, as well as and Asians/Pacific Islanders, have the highest rates of death due to COVID-19, flu and RSV, though COVID-19 remains the main driver of all viral respiratory deaths in those groups.
Health officials recommend that everyone get an updated flu and COVID-19 vaccine, as well as RSV vaccines, if eligible. It’s best to get vaccinated a soon as possible, since it often takes up to two weeks after being vaccinated to reach full protection, according to the CDC.
The federal government maintains a national database of vaccine locations at vaccines.gov. You can also call 800-232-0233. For RSV vaccines, the CDC recommends talking to your doctor or health care provider.
“My advice is to prioritize health safety measures like staying home when sick, get vaccinated if you haven’t already, and practice good hygiene to prevent the spread of illnesses,” Brownstein tells ABC News.
(NEW YORK) — A variant that has been circulating in the U.S. for the last couple of months currently makes up a majority of COVID-19 cases in the United States.
JN.1, a descendant of BA.2.86 — which is itself an offshoot of the omicron variant — now makes up an estimated 61.6% of cases in the country, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. This is up from the estimated 3.3% of cases the variant made up in mid-November, CDC data shows.
The Northeast is the region of the U.S. with the highest prevalence, making up an estimated 74.9% of COVID-19 cases, according to the CDC.
Last month, the World Health Organization listed JN.1 as a “variant of interest,” meaning it contains changes that may result in increased spread or reduced efficacy of treatments or vaccine but is not as serious as a “variant of concern.”
This comes as COVID-19 hospitalizations continue to increase across the U.S., rising for the eighth consecutive week to levels not seen since January 2023.
JN.1 has an additional mutation in its spike protein compared to its parent, BA.2.86, according to the CDC. The spike protein is what the virus uses to attach to and infect cells.
The CDC says this suggests that either the variant is more transmissible or better at evading the immune system than other variants that are circulating.
“It does seem to be more transmissible because it’s rising up the charts, not only in terms of the majority of cases right now, but the rate of increase is really dizzying,” Dr. Peter Chin-Hong, a professor of medicine and an infectious disease expert at the University of California, San Francisco, told ABC News.
He pointed that out that the U.S. being able to track JN.1 is sign that public health systems are successfully identifying new variants and following variant spread.
“To me, anyway, the U.S. lagged many countries early on in the pandemic, but right now, I think by tracking where JN.1 is going — not only as a country but in regions — really gives me confidence that, as we move along in the pandemic, we are able to hopefully identify new variants, the programs in airports, wastewater. They are all going to work together,” he said.
Public health experts said there is no evidence JN.1 has different symptoms or causes more severe illness and that it’s normal for the virus to mutate, causing new variants to emerge.
Additionally, existing tests, vaccines and treatments are still expected to work, experts say.
In an update on Friday, the CDC said that COVID test positivity levels in wastewater samples are higher than this time later year.
Chin-Hong said data from Singapore and from other countries, where JN.1 was predominant earlier, shows it does not seem to be causing a higher proportion of people to be hospitalized.
“But like with other variants that are more transmissible, the more people that get infected, even if a smaller percentage of them go to the hospital, it’s going to numerically mean a lot,” he said.
He explained that this is why it’s important to get the updated vaccine. As of Friday, only 19.4% of adults ages 18 and older have received the updated vaccine, CDC data shows.
“We know that immunity wanes the fastest in those who are older and those who are immunocompromised,” Chin-Hong said. “And for people who didn’t get [COVID] in the summer, they might say, ‘Well, look, I did all these things. I didn’t get it.’ It may not be true for JN.1. Enough time has elapsed since many [people] got a shot.”
