Doctors’ visits for flu highest in 15 years, most since swine flu pandemic: CDC
Guido Meith/Getty
(NEW YORK) — Outpatient health care visits for flu illnesses are at their highest levels in 15 years, according to data updated Friday by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Nearly 8% of outpatient health care visits for respiratory illnesses are due to flu-like illness, which is the highest seen since the 2009-10 flu season, during the swine flu pandemic, data shows.
During the week ending Feb. 1, 8% of emergency department visits were due to flu compared with 3.2% the same time last year, according to the CDC data.
Additionally, 31.6% of tests came back positive for flu during the week ending Feb. 1 compared to a peak of 18.2% last season, CDC data shows.
“Given the sharp rise [of flu illnesses] particularly among young children and in key regions like New York City, this is a stark reminder of how unpredictable flu seasons can be,” said Dr. John Brownstein, an epidemiologist and chief innovation officer at Boston Children’s Hospital and an ABC News contributor.
“With [influenza-like illness] rates exceeding 10% in several states and hospitalization rates climbing in older adults, this wave could put significant pressure on our health systems in the coming weeks,” he added.
What’s more, the rate of people dying from flu is now equal to the rate of people dying from COVID-19, likely for the first time since the COVID pandemic began.
The CDC estimates there have been at least 24 million illnesses, 310,000 hospitalizations and 13,000 deaths from flu so far this season.
At least 57 pediatric flu deaths have been reported so far this season, with 10 reported during the week ending Feb. 1.
Flu vaccines are available for both children and adults, but vaccination coverage remains low, meaning “many children and adults lack protection from respiratory virus infections provided by vaccines,” according to the CDC.
Data shows only 45% of adults aged 18 and older have been vaccinated against flu this season as have 45.7% of children.
CDC data also shows that overall respiratory illness activity is listed as “very high” nationwide. Currently, 12 states are listed as “very high” and 19 states are listed as “high.”
By comparison, seven states were listed as “very high” and 20 states were listed as “high” last week.
Although COVID-19 activity is “elevated” in many areas of the U.S., CDC data shows emergency department visits are at low levels and the number of laboratory tests coming back positive is falling.
Respiratory syncytial virus activity was also described as “elevated” but declining in most areas of the U.S., according to the CDC.
(SAN FRANCISCO) — A child in San Francisco was recently confirmed to be the third human case of bird flu in the United States in which it’s unclear how the person got infected.
Most human cases have occurred after coming into contact with infected cattle, infected poultry farms or other culling operations.
The CDC and other public health officials say there is currently no evidence of human-to-human transmission and the risk to the general public is low.
Doctors tell ABC News they agree but, with few cases that have an unknown — or unclear — source of infection, there may be evidence of some cases slipping through the cracks.
“There are reassuring factors here, which is the child appears to have had mild disease recovered…and kind of mild symptoms,” Dr. Tony Moody, a professor of pediatrics and infectious diseases specialist at Duke University, told ABC News.
Moody added, “That’s reassuring on the one hand, but it’s also concerning, because we don’t know, does this represent the only case, or is it one of 10,000 cases that just haven’t made their way into the health care system?”
Health officials in San Francisco first reported the bird flu case in the child earlier this month before it was confirmed by the CDC.
The child experienced symptoms of fever and eye irritation, and has since fully recovered, officials said. Investigators said they’re looking into how the child was exposed to the virus.
A CDC spokesperson confirmed this is the second child infected with bird flu in the country, the first case being in late November in California, also with unknown exposure.
The agency noted this is the third time that an exposure source has not been identified for a bird flu case with most other cases directly linked to exposure by infected livestock.
Moody said it’s hard what to make of the case because, while the CDC has bumped up surveillance, there are still gaps.
“It’s not universal surveillance. We’re not able to capture all of the cases that we might like to catch,” Moody said. “And so, it’s kind of hard to know what to do with isolated data points like this, when you get a report of, yes, this is a confirmed case. But it’s also like, what is the actual denominator here? How many cases are there really out there? And it’s kind of hard to tell.”
“So, I’m not sure that the identification of this case tells us a whole lot, other than, yep, it’s circulating,” Moody added.
Dr. Meghan Davis, an associate professor of environmental health and engineering at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, told ABC News that because many of the cases have been mild, people with similarly mild symptoms may not be getting tested for bird flu.
For example, someone with pink eye, also known as conjunctivitis, may not associate it with bird flu, even with recent exposure to cattle.
“I’m certain that we’re missing some cases, because not everybody is going to even go to a health care provider if they’re sick and get swabbed,” she said. “There may be people who have more mild symptoms, and it doesn’t graduate to the level of ‘I need to go to urgent care’ or ‘I need to go to the hospital.'”
Both Moody and Davis said more surveillance needs to be conducted to catch cases that fly under the radar. Davis points out that the CDC is already doing this, announcing Thursday it is calling for a shortened timeline for subtyping all tests that are positive with influenza A to identify non-seasonal influenza.
The CDC said it is reminding clinicians and laboratories to test for influenza in patients with suspected cases and to expedite subtyping to determine if they have bird flu rather than seasonal flu.
“The reason this is important is that what you do for someone who has seasonal flu may be a little bit different than what you do when you’re dealing with a virus that’s novel and you don’t know entirely what to expect clinically, and you don’t know entirely what to expect in terms of its potential to continue to spread,” Davis said.
Moody added that it’s reassuring the recent pediatric case in California did not occur within a cluster of cases, such as an entire family becoming infected.
He explained it would be much more jarring to have a cluster of cases with unconfirmed infection compared to an isolated case.
“When we see a report of a cluster of cases, that’s when my blood pressure is going to go up,” Moody said. “Given everything else we know, I think let’s keep our worry proportional for now.”
ABC News’ Youri Benadjaoud contributed to this report.
Canned cherries made with red dye #3/Photo credit: Linnea Bullion For The Washington Post via Getty Images
(WASHINGTON) — The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is moving to ban the use of Red No. 3 dye in food products.
The agency said Wednesday it is amending its color additive regulations to no longer allow the use of Red No. 3 in food, beverages and ingested drugs, in response to a 2022 petition from health groups and activists.
FD&C Red No. 3, also known as Red 3, is a synthetic food dye that gives foods and drinks a bright, cherry-red color. It is primarily used in foods such as candy, cakes and cupcakes, cookies, frozen desserts, frosting and icings, and some ingested drugs.
At least two studies have shown that high levels of the food dye were linked to cancer in rats. However, the link between the dye and cancer does not occur in humans, the FDA says.
While studies in other animals and humans did not show this link of cancer, an FDA regulation prohibits the agency to authorize color additive found to induce cancer in humans or animals, pushing the agency to revoke the food dye’s authorization.
Food manufacturers will have until 2027 to reformulate their products while drugmakers will have until 2028.
FDA Commissioner Robert Califf was asked at a Senate hearing in December why the dye had not been banned. He said the FDA hasn’t been given the resources to do the kind of post-market monitoring of substances done in Europe, where it has been largely banned since 1994. The FDA also banned the use of Red 3 in cosmetics in 1990.
“We have repeatedly asked for better funding for chemical safety … Please look at our request for funding for the people who do this work, remember that when we do ban something, it will go to court, and if we don’t have the scientific evidence … we will lose in court,” Califf said at the hearing.
Red 40, another synthetic food dye used to achieve a bright crimson color in condiments and candy, will remain available for use. Some studies have also shown Red 40 is a carcinogen in animals.
Red No. 3 was first approved by the FDA in 1969 and had been reviewed “multiple times” since then, according to the agency.
ABC News’ Kelly McCarthy contributed to this report.
(NEW YORK) — If you’re feeling hungover from New Year’s Eve champagne or had one too many boozy eggnogs over the holidays, let January be a fresh start.
Taking the challenge of going dry in January, or Dry January, i.e. having no alcohol for the entire month, is one resolution that might actually make you healthier.
The Dry January campaign was started in 2013 by Alcohol Change U.K., a charity focused on reducing alcohol harm. For the past several years, the initiative has proved popular in the United States and other countries too.
What are the health benefits of Dry January?
While research on how quitting alcohol for a month affects your body is still limited, several studies have shown psychological and health benefits.
Over one dozen staff members at the magazine New Scientist teamed up with researchers at the Institute for Liver and Digestive Health at the University College London Medical School in 2013 to investigate the benefits of Dry January.
The staff members, who all considered themselves “normal” drinkers, underwent baseline testing with blood samples, liver ultrasound scans and questionnaires. For the next five weeks, 10 of them stopped drinking and four drank their normal amounts.
The people who stopped drinking had lower levels of liver fat (which can be a precursor to liver damage), improved blood sugars and lower cholesterol than they did at the beginning of the month. They also reported improved sleep and concentration. In contrast, the four people who kept drinking saw no benefit.
Another study out of the U.K. had nearly 100 participants abstain from drinking alcohol for a month and another nearly 50 participants continue drinking alcohol as normal.
They found that moderate-heavy drinkers who took a break from alcohol had improved insulin resistance, weight, blood pressure, and cancer-related growth factors.
The researchers do warn, however, that the study does not show that a short-term ‘detox’ period is all that is required to ‘refresh’ the liver or achieve other health gains. Abstaining from alcohol for a month is only one part of addressing negative effects from longer-term alcohol consumption.
People who drink excessive amounts of alcohol are at higher risk of death and many medical conditions.
People who drink unhealthy amounts of alcohol are more likely to have high blood pressure, heart disease, liver disease, nerve damage, infections including pneumonia and even certain cancers like breast cancer.
Dr. Fulton Crews, director of the Center for Alcohol Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, said attempting to stop drinking for Dry January is a good opportunity for people to see if they have an actual addiction to alcohol.
“Many people are in denial about their drinking and hazardous drinking, and if they try to stop and are not able to, it really points out to them their weakness,” Crews told ABC News. “If they can’t stop for a month, they would realize that they have a problem.
“Either that or they do it, and they realize it’s not that hard for them,” said Crews, who described Dry January as a “good idea.”
Experts say Dry January may be especially helpful to those who consistently drink over the recommended amount of two drinks per day for men and one drink per day for women.
Excessive drinking includes binge drinking, defined as consuming five or more drinks for men in a single occasion and four or more drinks for women, and heavy drinking, defined as consuming 15 or more drinks per week for men or eight drinks or more for women). A standard drink is 12 ounces of a regular beer, 8 ounces of a malt liquor, 5 ounces of a glass of wine, and 1.5 ounces of a spirit, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
For those individuals who drink alcohol within the recommended limits, Crews said he is “not sure there would be any observable benefits.”
“I don’t see any clear potential for a moderate drinking person to stop drinking,” he said.
If you do choose to participate in Dry January, Crews shared his advice for sticking to the program.
“Try to avoid temptation by maybe putting all the alcohol out of the house,” he said.
Does Dry January prompt bigger change for some?
Staying dry for January may also help jump-start people to give up alcohol for longer.
Although most people who participate in Dry January return to drinking, up to 8% stay dry six months later, according to Public Health England and the British Medical Journal.
And those who go back to drinking drink less. A 2015 study conducted in the U.K. and published in the journal Health Psychology found that people who participated in Dry January drank less often, had fewer drinks when they did drink and were drunk less often six months after Dry January was completed.
Dry January participants were also better able to refuse alcoholic drinks. These benefits were even seen in people who did not complete the whole month of Dry January.
It might seem daunting to stop drinking alcohol for a whole month. But a 2020 Alcohol and Alcoholism study found that nearly 70% of people completed the Dry January Challenge in 2019.
If you are concerned about yourself or a loved one, call the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration’s (SAMSA) confidential, free, 24-hour-a-day, 365-day-a-year helpline at 1-800-662-HELP (4357). For information and resources about alcohol-related problems and health, visit the website of the National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) HERE.
Editor’s note: This piece was originally published on Jan. 3, 2018.
