i don't even like gumdrops

Here are the latest national COVID-19 trends, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and major wastewater surveillance providers:

About 1.0 in every 100,000 people were hospitalized for COVID-19 during the week ending May 3.

COVID-19 test positivity stayed the same, with 2.9% of COVID-19 tests returning positive results during both the weeks ending May 3 and May 10.

SARS-CoV-2 concentration in wastewater has decreased 8% between the week ending May 3 and the week ending May 10, and the national wastewater viral activity level is “low,” per the CDC.

SARS-CoV-2 concentration in wastewater has decreased 7% between April 30 and May 7, and the national wastewater trend is “medium,” per WastewaterSCAN.

The U.S. remains in a moderate lull between COVID-19 surges, with national metrics reporting slow declines through mid-May. There are increases in disease spread in a few West Coast states, however, and new variants now arriving in the country are likely to spur outbreaks this summer. Also, Novavax’s COVID-19 vaccine is finally approved — but not universally. Federal health officials are introducing new challenges for further shots.

Wastewater data from the CDC, WastewaterSCAN, and Biobot Analytics all report slight declines in average SARS-CoV-2 levels for early- to mid-May. These levels have declined slowly since February, and are close to reports from early November 2024 or late April 2024 — the last “baseline” points in between surges. Of course, SARS-CoV-2 levels at these points are still several times the true lows that we experienced in 2021 and 2022, when collective health measures were still in place.

Healthcare system data from the CDC’s surveillance networks similarly report slow declines through mid-May. COVID-19 test positivity, from the labs reporting to the agency, was about 2.9% in the weeks ending May 3 and May 10. Last year, the lowest point for this metric was 3.1%, during the weeks ending April 20, April 27, and May 11, 2024.

Most states and regions report COVID-19 declines, but there are continued signs of increased disease spread on the West Coast, following a trend from last week. Test positivity data for federal health regions 8, 9, and 10 (which include West Coast states) report increases in early May, as do wastewater data from the CDC and WWSCAN.

The CDC’s disease forecasting center also estimates that COVID-19 cases are “likely growing” in Nevada and Hawaii as of May 13. Cases are “declining or likely declining” in 30 states and “not changing” in 14, per the center. As I noted last week, it’s hard to say yet whether these are isolated hotspots or first signs of a summer surge, but it would make sense for the West to see a wave first given the last few months’ patterns.

In addition to travel and gatherings without collective precautions, new variants may aid a surge this summer. Variant trackers are now watching recombinant lineages called XFG and XFC, which have been detected in the U.S. but are not spreading widely yet. The CDC estimated that XFC caused 9% of cases in the two weeks ending May 10. Another variant, called NB.1.8.1, is contributing to high cases in Asia.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) finally approved Novavax’s COVID-19 vaccine last weekend. But the vaccine was approved only for people over age 65 and those with health conditions that “put them at high risk for severe outcomes from COVID-19,” even though it’s previously been available more widely. Trump officials have also indicated further COVID-19 vaccine updates may be more restricted, threatening to take away another protective option for millions of people.

Update, May 20, 12 p.m. ET: FDA leaders have just announced that future COVID-19 vaccines will also be limited to those over age 65 and with health conditions that put them at “high risk for severe COVID-19,” until further clinical trials can be conducted. An article by Trump-appointed FDA officials in the New England Journal of Medicine explaining this new policy has no mention of Long COVID or of other measures Americans can use to protect themselves from COVID-19, such as high-quality masks.

Ladyzhets, Betsy. “National Covid-19 Trends, May 20.” The Sick Times - Chronicling the Long Covid Crisis, 20 May 2025, thesicktimes.org/2025/05/20/national-covid-19-trends-may-20/.

The proposal to limit vaccine access is open to comment for three more days:

The US Food and Drug Administration is changing the way it approves Covid-19 vaccines for Americans — a move that will limit future vaccines to older Americans and people at higher risk of serious Covid-19 infection.

The agency is changing the standard of evidence required for Covid-19 vaccine approval in the US, Dr. Vinay Prasad, the new director of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, and FDA Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary, said in an editorial published Tuesday in the New England Journal of Medicine

The change means that Covid-19 shots will likely be available in the fall for adults ages 65 and older and those with underlying conditions that may put them at higher risk of a Covid-19 infection, but not for everyone who was previously eligible for an updated shot. Nearly three-quarters of Americans age 6 months and older have an underlying medical condition that puts them at higher risk, according to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The change, which was already being studied by experts that advise the CDC on its vaccine recommendations, will more closely align the United States with Covid-19 vaccine recommendations in the UK, Canada and Australia.

Millions of healthy adults and kids will likely lose access to updated vaccines under the new criteria. Prasad and Makary say there’s not enough evidence that healthy kids and adults get clinically meaningful benefit from regular Covid-19 shots. They want to see placebo-controlled trials, particularly in adults ages 50 to 64, before recommending the shots for other groups.

Dr. Noel Brewer, a professor of public health and health behavior at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, said he supports the change.

“The proposed policy moves the US in line with other countries. This global view of public health is a welcome development,” said Brewer, who sits on the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, and was part of the working group mulling the change to Covid vaccine recommendations

But he and other experts say they’re still worried about the youngest children, those under age 2, who have high rates of hospitalization from Covid-19.

Dr. Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and a member of FDA’s independent advisory group on vaccines, says he disagrees with the underlying premise of the new framework, which is that our Covid-19 vaccine recommendations haven’t been based on good evidence.

“We have been using an evidence-based approach to Covid-19 vaccination, but they kind of swoop in and believe that for the first time, we’re going to get, as they say, ‘gold standard’ data, robust data, for the first time, because according to them, we don’t have that, but we do have that,” Offit said.

“That’s why we’ve made good decisions about the vaccine. That’s why that vaccine is remarkably safe. I mean, the mRNA vaccines are remarkably safe.”

The editorial says that going forward, Covid-19 vaccines for people ages 65 and older and those 6 months of age and older with underlying health conditions that put them at higher risk from Covid-19 infections will be approved after pharmaceutical companies can demonstrate that they create protective antibody concentrations in people.

These types of studies are called immunobridging studies. They’re typically done in a smaller number of people, and importantly, they can be done quickly so vaccine manufacturing can ramp up in time to have large numbers of shots ready for an expected wave of illness, usually over the fall and winter.

This is largely how seasonal flu vaccinations are approved each year in the US, and it’s the way FDA has been approving Covid-19 vaccines for the past few years.

For everyone else, the FDA will only approve vaccines after studies that prove the shots can prevent symptomatic Covid-19 better than a placebo. The FDA will also consider several secondary outcomes, including severe illness, hospitalization and death.

The new plan doesn’t consider other impacts of Covid-19 infections, such as long Covid. Studies have shown that vaccination may cut the risk of developing long Covid by somewhere between 25 %to 60%.

Prasad and Makary say the new policy balances the need to swiftly approve vaccines to have them ready by the fall for the most vulnerable adults and children, with the need for more evidence before offering them to others.

What’s more, they say millions of Americans under the age of 65 will still qualify to get a Covid-19 vaccine if they want one if they have any of a broad range of health conditions identified by the CDC as putting a person at high risk of severe disease from Covid-19.

“Estimates suggest that 100 million to 200 million Americans will have access to vaccines in this manner,” the FDA officials wrote.

Prasad and Makary say their goal in requiring more evidence for other groups is to restore public trust in vaccines.

They point out that for the past two seasons, less than 25% of Americans have received a Covid-19 shot, including less than 10% of kids and less than 50% of adults over the age of 75.

They say broad Covid-19 vaccine recommendations and mandates during the pandemic eroded public trust and caused falling rates for other types of vaccines, too, such as the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine.

This is a breaking news story and will be updated.

Goodman, Brenda. “FDA to Limit Future Covid-19 Shots to Older People and Those at Risk of Serious Infection.” CNN, Cable News Network, 20 May 2025, www.cnn.com/2025/05/20/health/covid-vaccine-fda-changes.

The proposal is open for comment for three more days:

On Thursday, multiple school systems and representatives issued statements rejecting Trump’s executive order that directs schools to discriminate against transgender students or face legal consequences. The order, released Wednesday, labels transgender identity as an “anti-American ideology” and mandates discrimination in bathrooms and locker rooms while threatening teachers with criminal charges for supporting trans students’ social transitions. In response, school officials across the country are making it clear: they will not comply, and they remain committed to protecting the rights of their transgender students.

On Thursday, Julie Yang, President of the Montgomery County Board of Education in Maryland, issued a forceful response to Trump’s executive order in a mass email to families. Representing a school district of 160,000 students, Yang affirmed that Montgomery County would continue to recognize gender identity as a protected characteristic. “We stand by our community and school system values, which include learning, relationships, respect, excellence, and equity. They guide us every day and anchor us when navigating difficult times. We intend to use all legal means necessary to uphold them… We are committed to maintaining local authority over our curriculum, teaching, and learning. And we will fiercely support our teachers and staff as they implement our curriculum and policies.”

Email from MCPS

Harrisonburg City Public Schools Superintendent Michael Richards also issued a strong response to Trump’s executive order. The district was one of three specifically named in the order for its policies supporting transgender students. In his statement, Richards pushed back forcefully, saying, “The claims in their statement are false. We do not have a policy that violates anyone’s rights or indoctrinates children. What we do have is a culture of respect—one that honors the dignity and diversity of all students, families, and educators.”

Superintendent Richards, HCPS

San Francisco Unified School District also responded to Trump’s executive order, affirming that it would continue to embrace its diversity as a core strength. “This includes our district’s trans-identified students and all of our LGBTQ+ students and families,” the statement read. The district made clear that its core values would not change, emphasizing its commitment to supporting all students’ rights, including “addressing students using the name and pronoun that reflects who they are” and “providing access to school activities, spaces such as locker rooms and restrooms, and gender-neutral dress codes that fit with their gender identity.”

Superintendent John Thein, in an email to parents of the St. Paul Public Schools district, reaffirmed the district’s commitment to “respect, affirm, and welcome all students, staff, and family members.” He emphasized that the district would continue supporting students regardless of their minority status, explicitly including gender identity and sexual orientation. Thein closed the message with a quote from Martin Luther King Jr., underscoring the district’s stance on equity and inclusion.

Columbus City Public Schools in Ohio— a state that had already heavily targeted transgender students before Trump’s executive orders— delivered its own fierce message of resistance. In an interview with the Columbus Dispatch, Michael Cole, president of the school district, called Trump’s order a challenge and defiantly stated, “Bring it on.” He emphasized that the district has a “strong infrastructure in place” to support its students. Meanwhile, Scott DiMauro, president of the Ohio Education Association, condemned the order as an attempt to “instill fear and sow division in a way that is intended to try to stop educators from teaching the truth.”

As Trump’s executive orders take effect, the greatest immediate threat isn’t their legality—it’s premature compliance before they can be challenged in court. Most of these orders function more as legal intimidation tactics than enforceable law, relying on the chilling effect of DOJ threats to pressure hospitals, teachers, and institutions into abandoning transgender people before the legal process even begins. But resistance is already mounting. These school districts, and others, recognize the stakes and are refusing to fold, standing firm in their commitment to protect transgender students—students who lack the institutional power to fight back on their own against an administration determined to erase them.

Image: Rep. Steve Scalise speaks about 'The Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act' on Capitol Hill on in April 2023, in Washington, D.C. (Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post/Getty Images)

The House on Tuesday voted 218-206 to ban transgender girls and women from girls’ sports in federally-funded schools by amending Title IX,the federal civil rights law that prohibits sex discrimination in educational institutions. This bill, the first federal anti-trans law brought to a vote in a newly GOP-controlled Congress,is Democrats’ first test on whether they will fight an expected wave of proposed anti-trans laws under President-elect Donald Trump. 

If passed into law, this legislation would change Title IX and revoke federal funding for schools that allow trans girls and women in sports teams that align with their gender identity. Public K-12 schools would be implicated by this new rule, as well as colleges and universities. The bill was brought by Rep. Greg Steube of Florida, who reintroduced legislation he had previously tried to get through the House, alongside an identical bill in the Senate from Sen. Tommy Tuberville of Alabama. 

This legislation would change the actual statute of Title IX to explicitly exclude transgender people from a federal civil rights law — a major setback for LGBTQ+ rights that would leave trans and nonbinary students more open to discrimination and with fewer avenues to fight it. Notably, the effect of this law would go further than a recent judicial ruling in Kentucky that rolled back Title IX protections nationwide for LGBTQ+ students. 

Two House Democrats voted in support of the bill,  which depicts transgender girls as men, whereas House Republicans voted along party lines. 3 Republicans and 6 Democrats abstained from voting. One House Democrat voted “present.” The Senate version of the bill is not yet scheduled for a vote, but is also expected to be fast-tracked through the legislative process.Senate Democrats may filibuster the bill, derailing its advancement or even stalling it permanently, but it is unclear whether enough of them will commit to doing so in a political environment that has become increasingly hostile to transgender rights. 

This legislation is much more dangerous than the ruling out of Kentucky, said Maha Ibrahim, a program managing attorney at Equal Rights Advocates, because it would change the actual statute of Title IX  — whereas that judge’s decision erased regulations made under the Biden administration that weren’t in place long enough for students to see the difference.

“When Congress gets away with things, that’s when we lose rights,” she said. “This needs to be really strenuously fought.” 

Ibrahim, who worked with other attorneys to sue the Trump administration’s Title IX rules in 2018 and 2020, said that Equal Rights Advocates would fight this bill if passed into law, likely challenging it on constitutional grounds. State nondiscrimination protections would also still have an impact on how LGBTQ+ students are treated if this bill becomes law, she said.

Biden’s Title IX regulations allowed LGBTQ+ students to fight discrimination without mounting a lawsuit; instead, they could just file a complaint with the Education Department’s Office of Civil Rights, which is less stressful and time-consuming. After last week’s ruling, that’s no longer the case. But, Ibrahim said, advocates and legal experts were not depending on these regulations. 

“We were suing for decades on the basis of the statute only,” she said. This federal judge in Kentucky deleted the Biden administration’s efforts to be explicit about how transgender students are protected at schools, but he did not touch their inclusion in gender equity laws. “That’s only the purview of Congress,” she said.  

This bill in Congress would have that effect. Through this legislation, Congress is trying to define what gender discrimination is based on traditional gender norms, said Seth Chandler, a constitutional law professor at the University of Houston Law Center. This legislation doesn’t leave much ambiguity, and the only way to overturn it would be to make a constitutional challenge — which he sees as a difficult undertaking. 

The ban also calls for the Government Accountability Office to conduct a study on any adverse psychological or developmental effects felt by cisgender girls playing sports with transgender girls. 

Research has found that trans women who undergo testosterone suppression through gender-affirming care have no clear biological advantages over cis women in elite sports. Trans athletes have also pointed out that athletic ability among trans people varies just as it does for cisgender people. The NCAA, the largest college sports governing body in the country, calls for each sport’s national governing body to set rules for transgender student-athletes. 

Rep. Lori Trahan, a Massachusetts Democrat, called the bill on Tuesday “a federal takeover of sports on all levels.” Trahan, who played Division 1 sports in college and is the mother of two girls, said on the House floor that Republicans’ approach to this issue will have devastating consequences. She invoked what enforcement of such a law could look like. 

“Girls as young as four years old, being subjected to invasive lines of questioning about their bodies, and even physical inspections by an adult stranger, a predator, all because some creep accuses them of not being a girl?” she said.

House Republicans skirted questions from Democrats about how the bill would be enforced. Rep. Mark Takano, Chair of the Congressional Equality Caucus, and other Democrats portrayed the bill as the “Child Predator Empowerment Act,” saying that it would accelerate a national crisis of sexual assault on women and young girls — and that it would put a target on the back of every young woman who plays school sports.

On the House floor before Tuesday’s vote, Steube railed against the concept of transgender identity as a whole, saying that terms such as “nonbinary,” “trans man,” and “trans women” were made up. However, transgender people and gender diverse people have existed throughout history and in different cultures.

Common Symptoms Were Fatigue and Decreased Exercise Tolerance, According to a 2022 Survey

Inequities In the Prevalence and Severity of Symptoms Observed Across Race, Ethnicity, Gender, and Neighborhood Poverty

December 26, 2024 — Today, the New York City Health Department announced that 80 percent of adult New Yorkers infected with COVID-19 who were surveyed experienced at least one symptom lasting one month or longer. According to the results of the COVID-19 Experiences Survey in 2022, the most common symptoms were fatigue and decreased exercise tolerance. While post-acute symptoms may resolve within 12 weeks, many people will go on to develop Long COVID, an infection-associated chronic condition characterized by symptoms lasting three months or longer.

“This survey shows us that the symptoms following COVID-19 infections are a significant public health issue for New Yorkers. Black and Latino communities, women, transgender people, and those living in low-income neighborhoods were more likely to have symptoms, highlighting the disproportionate impact of the pandemic on marginalized communities,” said Acting Health Commissioner Dr. Michelle Morse. “We must invest in a comprehensive long-term response to the COVID-19 pandemic that focuses on prevention through engagement with health care providers and community members. Services for people experiencing the long-term physical, mental, social, and economic impacts of COVID-19 infection should be accessible to all.”

Post-acute symptoms are those that last one month or longer. To better understand experiences of COVID-19 post-acute symptoms, the Health Department conducted the COVID-19 Experiences Survey in November and December 2022. Adult New Yorkers who were members of the probability-based NYC Health Panel were invited to take the survey if they had confirmed or suspected COVID-19; 2,081 people completed the survey online or by phone in English, Spanish, Russian, Simplified Chinese, or Traditional Chinese. The results provide insight into how post-acute symptoms relate to health care seeking, social and demographic factors, disability, and mental health.

Some respondents reported many symptoms at different levels of severity, while others reported few symptoms, only mild symptoms, or none at all. Inequities in the prevalence and severity of post-acute symptoms after COVID-19 were observed across race/ethnicity, gender, and neighborhood poverty levels.

The prevalence of mild symptoms was similar across socio-demographic groups.

Moderate symptoms were more prevalent among Latino and Asian/Pacific Islander adults compared with white adults, and among people living in high poverty neighborhoods compared with people in low poverty neighborhoods.

Severe symptoms were more prevalent among women and transgender or non-binary adults compared with men, among Latino and Black adults compared with white adults, and among people living in very high and high poverty neighborhoods compared with low poverty neighborhoods.

Increasing symptom severity was associated with activity limitations and depression. Those with at least one severe symptom were more likely to report activity limitations compared with those who reported no post-acute symptoms (60 percent vs. 6 percent), which may result in social, economic, and mental health difficulties.

People with at least one severe post-acute symptom reported 10 days of reduced ability or complete inability to carry out usual activities or work in the past month, compared with 6 days for moderate symptoms, 3 days for mild symptoms, and 1 day for no symptoms.

One in three adults (33 percent) with at least one severe post-acute symptom after COVID-19 had probable depression, higher than those reporting only mild symptoms (6 percent) or no symptoms (2 percent).

Black and Latino New Yorkers, women, transgender adults, and those living in low-income neighborhoods were most likely to report severe symptoms, reflecting the disproportionate impact of the ongoing pandemic in these communities.

To address inequities in awareness about the long-term health impacts of COVID-19 and the importance of preventing new infections, the NYC Health Department partners with community and faith-based organizations to serve as trusted messengers and provide tailored and culturally resonant public health outreach to NYC communities.

Anyone can become very sick from COVID-19. To find a COVID-19 or flu vaccination site, visit nyc.gov/vaccinefinder or call 212-COVID-19 (212-268-4319).

#031-24

MEDIA CONTACT: Chantal Gomez [email protected]

Gomez, Chantal. “Health Department Finds Most Adult New Yorkers Infected with COVID-19 Experienced Symptoms Lasting One Month or Longer.” Health Dept. Finds Most Adult NYers Infected With COVID-19 Experienced Symptoms Lasting 1 Mo or Longer - NYC Health, NYC Health, 26 Dec. 2024, www.nyc.gov/site/doh/about/press/pr2024/nyc-adults-with-covid-19-experienced-symptoms-one-month-or-longer.page.