Scientists agree we need an off-ramp, but when?
An informed guide to the pandemic, with the latest developments and expert advice about prevention and treatment. |
(Was this email forwarded to you? Sign up here.) |
 | | Daily reported coronavirus cases in the United States, seven-day average.The New York Times |
|
"Scientists agree that we need an off-ramp for masking and that mask mandates are probably on their way out — if not now, then soon," said my colleague Emily Anthes, who covers health and science. "But there is still some debate about what precisely the right moment is and how to make those decisions in the first place." |
Some scientists argue that in communities like those in the Northeast — where cases have fallen drastically, hospitals are no longer overwhelmed and large portions of the population are vaccinated — the risk of loosening mask rules is low. |
Other scientists argue that we're still weeks away from safely doing away with mask rules and that, if we end them now, it could slow our exit from the Omicron surge. They also say that masks should be considered in context, including local hospitalization and vaccination rates or, for schools, child vaccinations and the number of infections at the school. |
Overall, the basic science of masking hasn't changed. "The simplest version of the science is that masks work and better masks work better," Emily said. Evidence continues to demonstrate that masks protect not only you but also the people around you. |
Another point of agreement, even among experts who think we should lift the mandates now, is that doing so would not mean that we should end masking forever. Masks are a useful public health intervention, and we might need to bring them back at some point, for example if there is a surge next fall and winter. |
"But there is concern that officials don't like to go back and forth on policies like this, even if that's what makes scientific and public health sense," Emily said. "The public doesn't have a high tolerance for it, and officials don't like to be seen as flip-flopping on masking. It's a hard sell in the real world, even though that's pretty clearly what the science suggests is appropriate." |
A high-stakes vaccine decision |
The F.D.A. is about to hold a critical and unprecedented meeting on Pfizer's vaccine for young children, my colleague Apoorva Mandavilli reports. |
Next week, scientific advisers to the agency will decide whether to endorse two doses of the vaccine for children 6 months through 4 years of age. They'll make a decision several weeks before data from clinical trials will show whether the full course — three doses — is effective. |
Experts say such an authorization would be a first for the agency. And the F.D.A. urged the companies to apply for the early authorization, which is also highly unusual. |
"We've never done that before. That's what gives me some pause," said Dr. Gregory Poland, founder and director of the Mayo Vaccine Research Group in Minnesota and the editor in chief of the journal Vaccine. "I don't like that there isn't more data." |
There's a reason for the rush: The fast-moving pandemic has forced federal health officials to make important decisions with limited data, and officials argue that it's important to begin vaccinating young children now, before a new, potentially more dangerous variant arrives. |
The third dose is likely to build up additional immunity in young children, several scientists said, but it is not guaranteed to do so. |
Authorizing a vaccine before that may undermine the public's trust in the regulatory process and deter parents who are already anxious about immunizing their children. Still, the spate of infections during the Omicron surge has left some parents eager for a vaccine. |
Scientific advisers to the F.D.A. will meet on Feb. 15 to weigh the current data, which will be released that Friday. The C.D.C. could recommend the two-dose regimen for the youngest children shortly afterward. |
What else we're following |
I'm hard of hearing, and I understand others by reading lips. I was fairly functional until masks came into our lives. For the past two years, things like medical care, dental care, haircuts and anything else that involves human communication have been out of reach for me. I comply with my state's mask mandate, but I live for the day when we can all remove them. I can't tread water much longer. The pandemic has been an absolute nightmare for those of us who need to see faces in order to "hear." — Kerry Scott, New Mexico |
Let us know how you're dealing with the pandemic. Send us a response here, and we may feature it in an upcoming newsletter. |
|
No comments:
Post a Comment