Health and Safety Regulations for COVID-19: A Policy Analysis.

The COVID-19 pandemic spurred some regulators in the USA to require occupational health and safety programs to prevent COVID-19 transmission in workplaces. The objective of this study was to describe such state and federal regulations enacted between January 2020 and January 2022. Regulations, including emergency temporary standards (ETS) and permanent standards, were identified through a search of Nexis Uni and Bloomberg Law and review of US OSHA websites and the Federal Register. Full texts were reviewed for regulatory scope, hazard and exposure definitions, determination of exposure or risk levels, and control strategies. Four state (California, Michigan, Virginia, and Oregon) and two federal regulations were identified. All regulations described respiratory aerosols as the primary source of SARS-CoV-2 and recognized person-to-person transmission by droplet, airborne, and contact routes. Only the US OSHA ETS for healthcare explicitly stated that inhalation of respiratory particles was the most likely method of COVID-19 transmission. The Virginia, Michigan, and Oregon regulations described different categories of risk defined by exposure frequency and duration or specific workplace activities. California described exposure as places and times when employees come into contact or congregate with other people. The US OSHA ETS for healthcare described exposure as involving close contact with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 patients. While all of the state regulations required strategies from across the hierarchy, only the Virginia regulations specifically incorporated the hierarchy of controls. Only the California and Virginia regulations explicitly linked control strategies to the transmission route, while Virginia demarcated control strategies by risk level. Oregon linked risk level to occupancy levels and physical distancing requirements and referred to the use of a layered approach for transmission control. The US OSHA ETS for healthcare defined droplet and airborne precautions but made no mention of the hierarchy of controls or risk levels. Respirators were discussed in most of the regulations. The first Michigan regulation explicitly required respirators appropriate to exposure risk. The California regulations noted that respirators protect the wearer while face coverings protect people around the wearer. These regulations offer insights for a permanent US OSHA infectious disease regulation, such as the need to consider a range of transmission modes including near- and far-range aerosol inhalation, endemic and novel pathogens, workplaces beyond healthcare settings, factors that contribute to exposure and risk, the hierarchy of controls, the role of vaccination, and the importance of written exposure assessment and infection prevention plans.

Association between Risk Communication Format and Perceived Risk of Adverse Events after COVID-19 Vaccination among US Adults.

The format used to communicate probability-verbal versus numerical descriptors-can impact risk perceptions and behaviors. This issue is salient for the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), where concerns about vaccine-related risks may reduce uptake and verbal descriptors have been widely used by public health, news organizations and on social media, to convey risk. Because the effect of risk-communication format on perceived COVID-19 vaccine-related risks remains unknown, we conducted an online randomized survey among 939 US adults. Participants were given risk information, using verbal or numerical descriptors and were asked to report their perceived risk of experiencing headache, fever, fatigue or myocarditis from COVID-19 vaccine. Associations between risk communication format and perceived risk were assessed using multivariable regression. Compared to numerical estimates, verbal descriptors were associated with higher perceived risk of headache (ß = 5.0 percentage points, 95% CI = 2.0-8.1), fever (ß = 27 percentage points, 95% CI = 23-30), fatigue (ß = 4.9 percentage points, 95% = CI 1.8-8.0) and myocarditis (ß = 4.6 percentage points, 95% CI = 2.1-7.2), as well as greater variability in risk perceptions. Social media influence was associated with differences in risk perceptions for myocarditis, but not side effects. Verbal descriptors may lead to greater, more inaccurate and variable vaccine-related risk perceptions compared to numerical descriptors.

Meta-summaries effective for improving awareness and understanding of COVID-19 vaccine safety research.

Despite the efficacy, safety, and availability of COVID-19 vaccines, a lack of awareness and trust of vaccine safety research remains an important barrier to public health. The goal of this research was to design and test online meta-summaries-transparent, interactive summaries of the state of relevant studies-to improve people's awareness and opinion of vaccine safety research. We used insights from a set of co-design interviews (n = 22) to develop meta-summaries to highlight metascientific information about vaccine safety research. An experiment with 863 unvaccinated participants showed that our meta-summaries increased participants' perception of the amount, consistency, and direction of vaccine safety research relative to the U.S. Center for Disease Control (CDC) webpage, and that participants found them more trustworthy than the CDC page as well. They were also more likely to discuss it with others in the week following. We conclude that direct summaries of scientific research can be a useful communication tool for controversial scientific topics.

Solar simulated ultraviolet radiation inactivates HCoV-NL63 and SARS-CoV-2 coronaviruses at environmentally relevant doses.

The germicidal properties of short wavelength ultraviolet C (UVC) light are well established and used to inactivate many viruses and other microbes. However, much less is known about germicidal effects of terrestrial solar UV light, confined exclusively to wavelengths in the UVA and UVB regions. Here, we have explored the sensitivity of the human coronaviruses HCoV-NL63 and SARS-CoV-2 to solar-simulated full spectrum ultraviolet light (sUV) delivered at environmentally relevant doses. First, HCoV-NL63 coronavirus inactivation by sUV-exposure was confirmed employing (i) viral plaque assays, (ii) RT-qPCR detection of viral genome replication, and (iii) infection-induced stress response gene expression array analysis. Next, a detailed dose-response relationship of SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus inactivation by sUV was elucidated, suggesting a half maximal suppression of viral infectivity at low sUV doses. Likewise, extended sUV exposure of SARS-CoV-2 blocked cellular infection as revealed by plaque assay and stress response gene expression array analysis. Moreover, comparative (HCoV-NL63 versus SARS-CoV-2) single gene expression analysis by RT-qPCR confirmed that sUV exposure blocks coronavirus-induced redox, inflammatory, and proteotoxic stress responses. Based on our findings, we estimate that solar ground level full spectrum UV light impairs coronavirus infectivity at environmentally relevant doses. Given the urgency and global scale of the unfolding SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, these prototype data suggest feasibility of solar UV-induced viral inactivation, an observation deserving further molecular exploration in more relevant exposure models.

α-glucosidase inhibitors as host-directed antiviral agents with potential for the treatment of COVID-19.

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, caused by SARS-CoV-2, has pushed the health systems of many countries to breaking point and precipitated social distancing measures that have crippled economic activities across the globe. A return to normality is unlikely until effective therapeutics and a vaccine are available. The immediacy of this problem suggests that drug strategies should focus on repurposing approved drugs or late-stage clinical candidates, as these have the shortest path to use in the clinic. Here, we review and discuss the role of host cell N-glycosylation pathways to virus replication and the drugs available to disrupt these pathways. In particular, we make a case for evaluation of the well-tolerated drugs miglitol, celgosivir and especially miglustat for the treatment of COVID-19.