Local COVID-19 updates

[edschweppe]

As of 4PM today, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts is reporting 20 newly reported confirmed deaths (6 less than yesterday - down 23.1%) for a total of 8,775 deaths, 365 newly reported confirmed cases (50 more than yesterday - up 15.9%) for a total of 117,450 cases, and 25,340 new patients tested by molecular tests (5,596 more than yesterday - up 28.3%) for a total of 1,649,836 individuals tested, with a total of 2,246,626 molecular tests administered to date. The ratio of newly confirmed cases to individuals tested by molecular test is 1.4%, compared to 1.6% yesterday. The state also reported 769 patients tested by antibody tests (75 less than yesterday - down 8.9%) for a total of 111,148 and 450 patients tested by antigen tests (1,694 less than yesterday - down 79.0%) for a total of 82,573.

The seven day average number of newly confirmed cases per day is 356.7 compared to 256.1 last week (up 39.2%) and 283.4 two weeks ago (up 25.8%). The seven day average number of newly confirmed deaths per day is 19.7 compared to 12.7 last week (up 54.7%) and 14.0 two weeks ago (up 40.5%). The seven day average number of molecular tests per day is 23,455.3 compared to 18,275.1 last week (up 28.3%) and 16,900.1 two weeks ago (up 38.8%). The seven day average percentage of tests coming back positive per day is 1.5% compared to 1.4% last week and 1.7% two weeks ago. (The above averages are calculated from today's raw data download.)

On a day-to-day basis, deaths are down (good), cases are up (bad) but so are molecular tests (good); better, the percent positive ticked down slightly (always good). The seven-day averages are not trending in a good direction, though (except for the volume of molecular tests). I wish I understood why nobody seems to be noticing that upward trend in new cases ...

Speaking of those molecular tests, on Monday the Centers for Disease Control changed their guidance on who should get tested for COVID-19, specifically recommending that people not currently showing symptoms not be tested for COVID-19, even if they had been in recent contact with someone infected with the deadly virus. That change, which I (and many others) strongly suspect was made by orders of the Trump political types, has been getting a lot of pushback from health officials:

Boston-area public health experts are slamming new COVID-19 testing guidelines from the CDC suggesting people don't need tests if they've had contact with an infected person but don't have symptoms themselves.

That abrupt shift runs counter to what authorities have been saying for months: namely that a sizable portion of people carrying the disease are asymptomatic, so a test is advisable if you have contact with a positive case.

But this week, the CDC posted this to its official website, on the question of whether people who don't feel sick should get tested after being in close contact with an infected person:

"You do not necessarily need a test unless you are a vulnerable individual or your health care provider or State or local public health officials recommend you take one."

Dr. Ashish K. Jha, director of the Harvard Global Health Institute, said Thursday that the change is inexplicable.

"Basically, there is no good reason to have made this change," Jha said. "It's clearly going to be harmful. ... I know the scientists at the CDC, and there is no new science that they are responding to."
Get Today's Headlines in your inboxThe day's top stories delivered every morning.

If the science has changed, Jha said, the government should say so and explain how. But the fact that there's no indication anything has changed makes the about-face "disturbing, upsetting and harmful," Jha said.

He said "one can only speculate" on the reason for the change, and that it seems as if the Trump administration is responding to the strain on the nation's testing capacity by "arguing that people who clearly need to be tested shouldn't be tested."

If government officials believe they need to ration limited testing supplies, they should just "level with the American people" and say that, rather than misrepresent the science, Jha said. The new guidelines, he said, will likely "accelerate the number of new infections."

He added that the CDC has long been regarded as the gold standard for public health guidelines, but the current politicization of the agency has tarnished its image.

Many CDC guidelines on COVID-19, he said, are sound, but "it takes a lot of expertise to figure out which ones are based on science and which ones are based on politics. And the whole point of having a CDC is that you didn't have to figure that out."

The CDC didn't immediately respond to a request for comment Thursday.

[ ... ]

On Wednesday, Dr. Anthony Fauci, the country's top infectious disease expert and perhaps the best known task force member, said he wasn't part of the discussion that green-lighted the change.

Fauci told CNN he was undergoing surgery when the new guidance was discussed last week, adding he was "worried it will give people the incorrect assumption that asymptomatic spread is not of great concern. In fact it is."

The town of Acton has yet to post an update today. As of the most recent report at 3:30PM on August 24, the town of Acton reported 195 cumulative cases of COVID-19 in town with 6 individuals in isolation, 168 recovered and 21 fatalities.