More than 90 norovirus outbreaks were reported during the week of Dec. 5, the most recent week for which data is available, according to the CDC.
CDC data from previous years for the same December week show a maximum of 65 outbreaks reported.
National CDC data reflects what has been reported in state and counties across the country.
In Minnesota, more than 40 outbreaks were reported in December, almost twice the usual number, according to the state Department of Health.
Earlier this month, an event celebrating the top restaurants in Los Angeles left at least 80 people sickened with norovirus, which was linked to raw oysters, the county’s Department of Public Health confirmed to ABC News.
Norovirus is a highly contagious virus that is the most common cause of viral gastroenteritis, which is an inflammation of the inside lining of the gastrointestinal tract.
Although it’s often referred to as the “stomach bug” or “stomach flu,” norovirus illness is not related to influenza.
The most common symptoms are nausea, vomiting, stomach pain and diarrhea. Patients, however, can also experience fever, headaches and body aches.
According to the federal health agency, every year the virus causes between 19 and 21 million illnesses, 109,000 hospitalizations and 900 deaths.
A person can become infected by having direct contact with someone who is infected and sharing food or utensils with them; touching surfaces or objects contaminated with norovirus and then touching their face or mouth; or consuming contaminated foods or liquids.
Typically, an infected person will develop symptoms between 12 to 48 hours after being infected. However, norovirus typically resolves quickly and, in most healthy adults, lasts one to three days, according to the CDC.
There is no specific medication or antiviral for norovirus, meaning the only treatment available is managing symptoms.
The CDC recommends staying hydrated and drinking liquids that replenish electrolytes, which can be depleted through diarrhea and vomiting.
Although symptoms will resolve in a few days for most people, certain groups are at high risk for severe dehydration including those under age 1, the elderly and the immunocompromised.
Health experts say the best way to prevent getting norovirus is to wash hands with warm soap and water for 20 seconds. Hand sanitizer does not work well against norovirus.
The CDC says people should wash their hands after using the toilet or changing diapers as well as when eating, preparing or handling food.
To prevent contamination from food, make sure fruits and vegetables are washed, and that shellfish is cooked to at least an internal temperature of 145 F.
LW, who asked not to show her face, is a 16-year-old transgender teenager challenging Tennessee’s ban on gender-affirming medical treatments that have improved her quality of life. (ABC News)
(WASHINGTON) — Medical treatments for transgender children, endorsed by major American medical associations and safely used for decades, hang in the balance at the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday as the Biden administration and three families with transgender teenagers ask the justices to strike down a state law banning some gender-affirming care for kids.
The landmark case — U.S. v. Skrmetti — comes from Tennessee, which is among 26 states that have moved to prohibit administration of puberty-blocking medication and hormone therapy to minors who seek to identify with, or live as, a gender identity inconsistent with his or her sex at birth.
Oral arguments mark the first time the nation’s highest court has openly considered a state law targeting transgender people. It is also the first time an openly transgender litigator, ACLU attorney Chase Strangio, will argue a case in the Supreme Court chamber.
The historic hearing thrusts the justices to the forefront of a cultural debate that has sharply divided the country and tested the limits of science and parental rights.
The outcome of the case could determine access to health care for hundreds of thousands of trans teens and more broadly influence how communities treat transgender people in hospitals, schools and on sports fields.
The government argues that Tennessee’s SB1, which was enacted in March 2023, violates the Constitution’s Equal Protection clause because it discriminates on the basis of sex to decide who can receive otherwise legal medical treatments available to youth.
“Put simply, an adolescent assigned female at birth cannot receive puberty blockers or testosterone to live as a male, but an adolescent assigned male at birth can,” the administration wrote in its brief to the court.
The Tennessee law expressly allows minors who are not transgender to receive gender-affirming treatments to address a “congenital defect, precocious puberty, disease, or physical injury.”
Denying discrimination, the state argues its law is a reasonable regulation of medical treatment based on its purpose, meant to protect children from potential long-term health risks and possible irreversible changes to the body.
The law’s Republican sponsors claim that contradictory scientific evidence and documented regret among some young people who have transitioned both warrant caution in developing standards of care.
The law also cites a “compelling interest in encouraging minors to appreciate their sex, particularly as they undergo puberty” and preventing them from becoming “disdainful of their sex.” The government says the text proves an intent to enforce gender conformity.
Hundreds of Tennessee transgender children were receiving treatments before SB1 was enacted, legislators concluded. It is not known how many suffered alleged harm.
The plaintiffs in the case include 16-year-old LW and her parents Brian and Samantha Williams of Nashville. After several years of successful hormone therapy, LW now has to travel out of state to continue treatments she says have dramatically improved her quality of life.
“I feel normal now,” LW said in an exclusive interview with ABC News last month.
“Our state legislature had made such a big deal out of parents rights during COVID, about masks and vaccines — that that’s for parents to decide these medical decisions for their children,” noted Samantha Williams. “And then, they made this medical decision for our child.”
Nationwide, an estimated 300,000 Americans ages 13 to 17 identify as transgender, according to the Williams Institute at UCLA School of Law. Of those, nearly 100,000 live in states that have banned access to gender-affirming medical treatments for minors.
“It’s a case of enormous significance that presents fundamental questions about the scope of state power to regulate medical care for minors, of the rights of parents to make medical decisions for their children… and the level of scrutiny that courts should apply to laws that discriminate against transgender people in general,” said Deepak Gutpa, a veteran Supreme Court litigator. “This is a major, major constitutional civil rights issue.”
More than 60% of Americans say they oppose law banning certain types of gender-affirming medical treatment for minors, according to Gallup.
Major American medical associations have endorsed the treatments for more than a decade as part of “individually tailored interventions” to support trans kids and affirm their sense of self. Not all transgender children seek medical care to facilitate transition to another sex.
“It needs to be part of a very deliberate process that involves medical specialists, who are expert at doing this, and, again, are following the science,” said Dr. Ben Hoffman, a pediatrician and president of the American Academy of Pediatrics. “It all begins and ends with science. This is not about any sort of agenda.”
Clinical practice guidelines from the American Endocrine Society, based on more than 260 research studies, recommend the use of puberty-delaying medications and waiting until a child reaches adulthood to consider gender-affirming surgery.
The American Academy of Pediatrics says the effects of puberty blockers are not permanent if treatment is discontinued. Many effects of hormone therapy can also be reversed. Long-term risks may include fertility challenges and possible harm to bone density, but the group says those risks require further study.
In contrast to the U.S. medical establishment, several European countries, including the United Kingdom, have reversed course on the use of gender-affirming treatments as a standard-of-care for transgender children, citing insufficient scientific evidence of long-term benefits.
“When you look at the totality of the medical research, to me there is more than enough uncertainty and evidence of bad outcomes for kids who’ve gone through these treatments when they reach the later stages in life,” said Tennessee Senate GOP Leader Jack Johnson.
A federal district court sided with the plaintiffs, temporarily halting enforcement of SB1, but the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals reversed. The panel of judges concluded Tennessee had a rational basis for enacting the law.
“Kind of the whole ballgame in the case is the debate about whether there actually is discrimination on the basis of sex,” said Erin Murphy, a Supreme Court litigator and former clerk to Chief Justice John Roberts.
“It’s really not,” Murphy argued. “To say providing testosterone to a biological boy and biological girl is the same thing because testosterone is involved — it’s a different treatment that has different risks.”
David Cole, former legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union, which is representing the Williams family, says the court’s conservative majority will have to confront the legacy of its decision.
“I think there’s no question in 25 years that the court will have recognized that treating people differently because their gender identity is sex discrimination,” Cole said.
“The question is whether the court wants to write a decision will be overturned, you know, in the course of the next 10 years or 15 years,” he said, “or whether it wants to recognize what is going on, which is sex discrimination.”
A decision in the case is expected by the end of June 2025.
(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.
Jessie Owen was left paralyzed nearly 12 years ago when a tree fell on a car in which she was a passenger. Via ABC News.
(NEW YORK) — Nearly 12 years ago, Jessie Owen’s life changed forever.
“My family was going over a mountain pass and a tree fell on our car. In that moment, my parents passed away, my siblings were severely injured, and I became quadriplegic,” Owen said. “I lost my independence. I lost my job. I lost my apartment. I lost my autonomy and the life that I dreamed for myself.”
Like Owen, more than 300,000 people live with spinal cord injuries in the United States, with an estimated 18,000 new cases each year, data shows.
Motor vehicle accidents account for the majority of spinal cord injuries and are closely followed by falls, acts of violence and sports activities, according to the National Spinal Cord Injury Statistical Center.
For years, options for recovery have been limited, but a newly FDA-cleared external spinal stimulator, ARC-EX Therapy, which received clearance on Dec. 19, may offer hope for people like Owen.
“ARC-EX is simply electrodes attached to skin on the back of the neck,” explained Chet Moritz, M.D., a professor of rehabilitation medicine at the University of Washington. “It allows us to pass current through the skin to activate the sensory nerves as they enter the spinal cord. Now, those sensory nerves make direct connections to the motor nerves which help people to move.”
Owen, who participated in the Up-LIFT study, a clinical trial focusing on the health benefits of ARC-EX Therapy, saw a life-changing impact.
“I was wildly surprised and pleased to see that it was making meaningful change in my life. I can now paint with my hands. I can open a jar of peanut butter. I can tie my shoes. It [used to] take me 30 minutes to get dressed. Now it takes 12. [I used to require] 20 caregiving hours a week and I was able to move down to about eight.”
The Up-LIFT study produced promising results.
Of the 60 patients with cervical spinal cord injuries studied, 72% saw improvements in hand strength and function. Participants also reported fewer muscle spasms, better sleep, less pain, and improved independence during daily activities.
“The success of [this] study of people with spinal cord injuries is phenomenal,” noted Moritz. “There are essentially no current therapies for chronic spinal cord injury, and so having the majority of patients respond in both strength and function measures [is] just an outstanding result.”
With FDA approval, ARC-EX Therapy is expected to become more accessible.
“Patients can work with their local rehabilitation clinics to see a therapist and work with them in the clinic at first to tune the device,” Moritz said. Results may appear quickly — some participants noticed changes within just a few sessions, he added.
While the device is currently cleared for improving hand strength, function and sensation, Moritz noted other benefits: “Some people will have modest improvements in their bladder function, heart rate, or blood pressure control.”
Leah Croll, M.D., vascular neurologist at Maimonides Health and assistant professor of neurology at SUNY Downstate, shared the excitement over the device.
“The idea that ARC-EX Therapy may accelerate or augment neurologic recovery is really exciting. Any improvement in neurologic function is meaningful and has far-reaching impact in the daily lives of these patients and their families,” she said.
The road to recovery after a spinal cord injury is grueling, Croll said.
“After emergency and ICU care is completed, the mainstay of treatment is working closely with physical therapists, occupational therapists and other rehabilitation professionals to support neurologic recovery,” said Croll. “Patients may also need medications and certain procedures, depending on their unique symptoms.”
For Owen and others, ARC-EX Therapy represents a renewed sense of hope and an exciting change in the way these patients can be treated.
“[With ARC-EX Therapy], I continued to gain function back, and I found I was able to pour more into other people,” Owen said. “The first indicator of success that I noticed was my own happiness. It works, and it gives us hope and passion.”
Natalie S. Rosen, M.D., is a physician in the Hematology & Oncology Department at New York-Presbyterian Columbia and a member of the ABC News Medical Unit.