�������ýҕ�l

Without explanation, and in contravention of common sense, federal officials have issued new guidance against testing asymptomatic individuals — specifically, those who have been exposed to someone diagnosed with covid-19. The recommendations, issued without fanfare on Monday by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, pose a danger to public health, and contradict what we know about how to stem the spread of the pandemic. The numbers tell the story. The CDC itself estimates that 40 percent of people with covid-19 don’t have symptoms. (Leana S. Wen, 8/26)

In an editorial earlier this month, we asked readers to submit their questions about coronavirus testing. A selection follows, edited for clarity and length, with some answers to keep in mind as you continue to navigate the morass. (Jeneen Interlandi, 8/26)

Timothy Naimi, an alcohol researcher at Boston University and head of the committee charged with updating the guidelines, says even moderate alcohol has been shown to raise the risk of some cancers — especially breast cancer, which goes up 10% for every daily drink. That’s not a huge increase, but it’s worth noting. According to the American Cancer Society, the lifetime risk of getting breast cancer is 12.8%, so a 10% increase would raise the risk to about 14.1%. Alcohol also raises the risks of esophageal, stomach, liver, and head and neck cancers, though these are relatively rare in both abstainers and moderate drinkers. (Note that we’re talking here about getting cancer, not dying from it.) Naimi says alcohol guidelines are just guidelines — not orders. He’s a doctor, not a police officer. He believes the evidence shows that for people who drink, it’s better for our health to drink less. (Faye Flam, 8/26)

On Monday, the Financial Times reported that the White House may bypass standard Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations to fast-track the use of the so-called Oxford coronavirus vaccine. The possible shortcut seems similar to the administration's decision on Sunday to circumvent the same regulatory body to, as the President said, break "the logjam over the last week" by granting emergency use authorization for convalescent plasma treatment. (Kent Sepkowitz, 8/26)

For a person living with a rare disease, it can take five years or longer to receive an accurate diagnosis. With more than 40% of patients initially misdiagnosed, this “diagnostic odyssey” can have serious and long-term health consequences for the 300 million individuals affected by rare diseases and their families. It is also incredibly frustrating. (Wolfram Nothaft, Gregory Moore and Yann Le Cam, 8/27)

It’s a crisis that will come to us all, sooner or later, and yet we keep acting as if it won’t. Instead of having a consistent comprehensible federal system that will help each of us and all of us when the time comes, we leave each family stranded, as if the frightening dependencies of old age and illness were a brand-new individual emergency. (Joan Wickersham, 8/27)

My parents came to the United States to escape the civil war in El Salvador. They often dismissed my childhood experience with anxiety by saying, “You worry too much. At least there aren’t bullets flying past your house.” Other first-generation Latinos I know have similar stories, and the message has always been clear: mental health issues are a sign of weakness or many believe they don’t exist. Now, even in the Latino community, which has a deep-rooted stigma around discussion of mental health, parents are voicing their concerns. My organization, Latinos for Education, recently surveyed hundreds of Latino parents across Houston, and we found that 46 percent cite a decline in their children’s mental health as a result of COVID-19. (Andy Canales, 8/27)

Even before the pandemic swept through California, a person needing help with depression or a recurring addiction could face a glaring loophole with insurance coverage. Insurers would only cover a few sessions, obliging patients to switch to state-paid Medi-Cal to find care. Put another way, taxpayers were stuck with the bill when private plans balked. Those looking for help were left scrambling for a new doctor or professional in the switch-over. The paper chase and additional worries compounded the stress. (8/27)

"Local control" has long been the mantra of Republican leadership: the idea that decisions affecting communities are best left to their immediate governing bodies, which understand local conditions, rather than dictated from higher up. It's written into Republican Party platforms. But Iowa's recent Republican governors have had trouble letting go of control when they saw an advantage. That's the situation Iowa school boards and superintendents now find themselves in as the governor insists every school district surrender its independent judgment to her mandate that schools physically reopen in the midst of a pandemic, unless she grants an exception. Reynolds has also not only refused to require masks in public places to limit the spread of COVID-19, but has blocked Iowa municipalities from requiring them in their own communities. (Rekha Basu, 8/26)

The American Academy of Pediatrics updated its guidance to note that children older than 10 may spread COVID-19 as efficiently as adults and “many schools where the virus is widespread will need to adopt virtual lessons. ”According to the Harris County Public Health color-coded threat level system, schools should not be open for any in-person activities at COVID-19 Level Red, when there are more than 400 new cases a day. All of Harris County is now at level Red. There were 784 new cases in the county on Monday, 881 on Tuesday and 906 on Wednesday. (8/27)

Gov. Andy Beshear's recent recommendation to delay school reopening is not rooted in science. Closing classrooms, as numerous other states across the country have done, marks peak pandemic paranoia of a virus that one expert estimates kills 0.13% of those it infects outside nursing homes. "I don't believe that we gamble or experiment with our kids," Beshear said in justifying his decision. While much about COVID-19 is still unknown, overwhelming evidence suggests that schools can safely reopen. Keeping them closed overlooks dramatic associated consequences, including to mental health and academic progress. (Molly Rutherford, 8/26)