WHO Declares Global COVID-19 Public Health Emergency Over
It's been over for most Americans for a long time already.
It's been over for most Americans for a long time already.
Recent comments by former COVID-19 adviser Anthony Fauci contradict what public health officials told us during the pandemic.
Plus: The editors ponder the lack of women’s pants pockets in the marketplace.
The lesson here: Public health messaging needs to be clear and specific. Oh, and federal bureaucracy sucks, as usual.
Dr. Walensky's proposed bureaucratic reshuffling is too timid.
They're trying to pressure the federal government into getting organized about vaccines.
The feds botch another epidemic.
One vaccination requires 100 pages of government paperwork to be processed before treatment.
Foot-dragging and red tape by the CDC and the FDA have fueled an avoidable outbreak.
It wasn't just autocrats who were frequently tempted to address "fake news" about the pandemic through state pressure and coercion.
The estimate implies an overall infection fatality rate of about 0.5 percent, although that number should be viewed with caution.
The president’s COVID-19 adviser embodies the arrogance of technocrats who are sure they know what’s best for us.
The Biden administration's main priority seems to be leaving the agency's authority vague enough to allow future interventions.
Clarifying the agency's authority could impede future power grabs.
The decision against the rule hinged on whether the agency had the power it asserted.
The surgeon general's definition of misinformation includes statements that are arguably or verifiably true.
The agency emphasizes that children face a very low risk from COVID-19, which it has known all along.
The unions' support for hygiene theater is of a piece with their support for security theater.
Case trends in states with mandates were very similar to case trends in states without them.
The president is waiting until children, who have always faced an infinitesimal risk from COVID-19, are "more protected."
Rochelle Walensky says "now is not the moment" to stop forcing masks on children. Democratic politicians increasingly disagree.
The agency further undermines its credibility by desperately trying to back up conclusions it has already reached.
That recommendation, which never had a firm basis, is even harder to justify in the current context.
Supporters of that policy assume it works, then desperately search for evidence to validate that conviction.
That process takes a long time, and the result would face the same legal objection cited by the Supreme Court.
The country, which has a much lower fatality rate than the U.S., eschewed lockdowns in favor of information.
Nationwide, newly reported infections have been falling since January 14.
Judge Lawrence VanDyke included a satirical opinion that his colleagues can use when they decide otherwise.
Unvaccinated Americans over age 50 are 44 times more likely to be hospitalized than triple-vaccinated folks.
Why did it take so long?
The crux of the argument is the distinction "between occupational risk and risk more generally."
Some epidemiologists estimate that the actual number of new infections peaked last week.
Omicron patients were much less likely to have severe symptoms.
The justice's reference to a national "police power" raised some eyebrows.
The CDC director's explanation of her agency's confusing advice about home COVID-19 testing is hard to understand.
The Supreme Court will ultimately decide how convincing that disguise is.
Based on the experience in South Africa, the Biden administration's top medical adviser says "this thing will peak after a period of a few weeks and turn around."
Vaccination and prior infection induce a strong second line of immunological defense, finds South African study.
Focusing on infections rather than severe disease is more misleading than ever.
As the NFL goes, so goes the nation?
Rochelle Walensky willfully ignores the weaknesses of a study she repeatedly cited to justify "universal masking" of students.
When we decide to stop paying attention to it, say two authors in the health care journal BMJ.
Researchers are still uncertain about how severe the variant will be.
The argument hinges largely on what makes an emergency standard "necessary."
Pfizer/BioNTech reports that a third shot significantly neutralizes the emerging variant.
The appeals court is skeptical of the claim that the Texas governor's order illegally discriminates against people with disabilities.
The World Health Organization warns that such restrictions can cause more harm than they prevent.
Just how infectious and dangerous the new variant could be is not known at this time.