WEBVTT - Rebound Covid Is Causing the CDC to Change Isolation Guidelines Once Again

0:00:00.040 --> 0:00:04.040
<v Speaker 1>It's Friday, ma I'm Oscar Ramrrors from the Daily Dive

0:00:04.120 --> 0:00:09.160
<v Speaker 1>podcast in Los Angeles, and this is reopening America rebound COVID.

0:00:09.520 --> 0:00:11.840
<v Speaker 1>It's an issue that's been popping up for some getting sick,

0:00:12.080 --> 0:00:14.360
<v Speaker 1>but it's also happening to people that were treated with

0:00:14.400 --> 0:00:17.480
<v Speaker 1>the anti viral packs LEAD. Some are getting better and

0:00:17.520 --> 0:00:21.040
<v Speaker 1>testing negative, only to rebound with symptoms and test positive

0:00:21.440 --> 0:00:24.640
<v Speaker 1>after the illness has dissipated. This caused the CDC to

0:00:24.760 --> 0:00:28.159
<v Speaker 1>change its guidelines and tell people with rebound symptoms to

0:00:28.280 --> 0:00:32.600
<v Speaker 1>isolate for another five days. Karen Weintroub, health reporter at

0:00:32.720 --> 0:00:35.320
<v Speaker 1>USA Today, joins us for What to Know. Thanks for

0:00:35.400 --> 0:00:38.279
<v Speaker 1>joining us, Karen, thanks for having me. Well, let's talk

0:00:38.320 --> 0:00:41.920
<v Speaker 1>about some latest developments with the COVID treatment packs LEAD.

0:00:42.000 --> 0:00:45.120
<v Speaker 1>This is a anti viral that is made by Fiser.

0:00:45.600 --> 0:00:49.360
<v Speaker 1>We're seeing some interesting things, some changing CDC guidelines. So

0:00:49.400 --> 0:00:53.240
<v Speaker 1>I guess they're calling it packs levid rebound where people

0:00:53.400 --> 0:00:57.640
<v Speaker 1>are taking the medication, maybe testing negative for COVID, then

0:00:57.640 --> 0:01:00.560
<v Speaker 1>feeling kind of crummy a few days later, and testing

0:01:00.560 --> 0:01:03.240
<v Speaker 1>positive all over again. And this is causing a little

0:01:03.280 --> 0:01:05.360
<v Speaker 1>bit of changes to some of the CDC guidelines, saying

0:01:05.360 --> 0:01:08.560
<v Speaker 1>that people should start isolating again for five days, I

0:01:08.600 --> 0:01:11.200
<v Speaker 1>think if they do start testing positive. So, Karen, what

0:01:11.200 --> 0:01:13.720
<v Speaker 1>are we seeing with all of this? Right? What I

0:01:13.720 --> 0:01:16.399
<v Speaker 1>actually didn't realize until I started reporting this is this

0:01:16.480 --> 0:01:19.319
<v Speaker 1>post COVID rebound has been a thing all along. A

0:01:19.360 --> 0:01:22.959
<v Speaker 1>small percentage of people have apparently recovered from COVID, even

0:01:23.000 --> 0:01:25.440
<v Speaker 1>tested negative for a couple of days and then got

0:01:25.480 --> 0:01:29.720
<v Speaker 1>symptoms again, and often tested positive. So doctor I spoke

0:01:29.760 --> 0:01:31.800
<v Speaker 1>to said he's seen this and maybe two or three

0:01:31.840 --> 0:01:35.000
<v Speaker 1>or four percent of his patients all along since. So

0:01:35.120 --> 0:01:37.200
<v Speaker 1>what's not clear is whether what we're seeing with this

0:01:37.319 --> 0:01:40.119
<v Speaker 1>drug is specific to the drug, if it's more people

0:01:40.319 --> 0:01:42.319
<v Speaker 1>on the drugs who are getting this, or if it's

0:01:42.360 --> 0:01:45.000
<v Speaker 1>just the same thing that we're seeing normally. But because

0:01:45.040 --> 0:01:48.440
<v Speaker 1>people are tracking themselves more carefully that we're becoming more

0:01:48.480 --> 0:01:51.160
<v Speaker 1>aware of it in connection with taxtlment. Yeah, it's pretty

0:01:51.160 --> 0:01:54.040
<v Speaker 1>interesting because I mean, I went two and a half

0:01:54.120 --> 0:01:57.520
<v Speaker 1>years not going right, without getting sick with anything or

0:01:57.560 --> 0:02:00.080
<v Speaker 1>even getting COVID, and it recently caught up with me

0:02:00.240 --> 0:02:02.160
<v Speaker 1>and they kind of keeped my butt, you know. But

0:02:02.600 --> 0:02:04.960
<v Speaker 1>I was contemplating should I go to the doctor and

0:02:05.000 --> 0:02:07.440
<v Speaker 1>maybe get some of course, of these anti vitals. I

0:02:07.520 --> 0:02:10.679
<v Speaker 1>decided against it only because I wanted to tough it out.

0:02:10.720 --> 0:02:12.160
<v Speaker 1>You know, I didn't think I needed it. It It wasn't

0:02:12.200 --> 0:02:14.360
<v Speaker 1>that bad. But then, yeah, you go back and you

0:02:14.400 --> 0:02:16.720
<v Speaker 1>start seeing these things. But so tell me about what

0:02:16.720 --> 0:02:19.040
<v Speaker 1>the CDC said, because they're changing some of the guidelines,

0:02:19.040 --> 0:02:21.400
<v Speaker 1>saying you should isolate again if if you get that

0:02:21.440 --> 0:02:24.560
<v Speaker 1>rebound right. One of the open questions has been when

0:02:24.560 --> 0:02:27.040
<v Speaker 1>you have COVID, should you test before you go back

0:02:27.040 --> 0:02:29.680
<v Speaker 1>out into the world. So I recently had COVID. Also,

0:02:29.840 --> 0:02:32.320
<v Speaker 1>I was testing positive on a rapid test for eleven

0:02:32.400 --> 0:02:34.960
<v Speaker 1>days after I had COVID, and I was very careful

0:02:34.960 --> 0:02:36.959
<v Speaker 1>in that time frame, even though after five I was

0:02:37.000 --> 0:02:39.600
<v Speaker 1>allowed out in public. I was very vigilant about a

0:02:39.600 --> 0:02:42.200
<v Speaker 1>mask and I really did try to avoid enclosed spaces

0:02:42.280 --> 0:02:44.680
<v Speaker 1>for those eleven days. But in the past, the CDC

0:02:44.840 --> 0:02:47.359
<v Speaker 1>has said five days of isolation is enough. Then wear

0:02:47.400 --> 0:02:49.720
<v Speaker 1>your mask for another five and then you're good with

0:02:49.840 --> 0:02:52.600
<v Speaker 1>pastuate it. Because people are testing so much, they're seeing

0:02:52.880 --> 0:02:56.160
<v Speaker 1>that they are going negative and then positive again. CDC

0:02:56.320 --> 0:02:59.160
<v Speaker 1>says if that happens, you should start the isolation period

0:02:59.280 --> 0:03:02.200
<v Speaker 1>all over again. And but honestly, we just don't know.

0:03:02.800 --> 0:03:05.480
<v Speaker 1>There's not enough data to really say. There's one study

0:03:05.520 --> 0:03:09.200
<v Speaker 1>that found that somebody had this rebound infected their family members,

0:03:09.680 --> 0:03:12.960
<v Speaker 1>So it's possible to be contagious with this rebound in

0:03:13.000 --> 0:03:15.600
<v Speaker 1>most cases, I don't think that. I've asked several people.

0:03:15.639 --> 0:03:18.239
<v Speaker 1>They said they've never heard of a hospitalization from a rebound.

0:03:18.440 --> 0:03:20.600
<v Speaker 1>It seems to be sort of a lesser symptom, or

0:03:20.720 --> 0:03:22.880
<v Speaker 1>your body is just getting rid of the last dregs

0:03:22.960 --> 0:03:25.480
<v Speaker 1>of the virus. So it's just not clear how dangerous

0:03:25.760 --> 0:03:28.560
<v Speaker 1>that period is. But in an abundance of caution, CDC

0:03:28.760 --> 0:03:30.800
<v Speaker 1>is saying that you should isolate if you're positive, right,

0:03:30.840 --> 0:03:32.720
<v Speaker 1>And that's one and that's one of the criticisms that

0:03:32.760 --> 0:03:35.240
<v Speaker 1>comes out of it. Right, should we be changing public

0:03:35.280 --> 0:03:37.960
<v Speaker 1>policy because of this? I guess, as you mentioned, right,

0:03:38.080 --> 0:03:41.000
<v Speaker 1>the study that was cited by the CDC was really

0:03:41.040 --> 0:03:43.720
<v Speaker 1>just a report of a single case of a rebounding

0:03:43.720 --> 0:03:47.560
<v Speaker 1>patient passing on the virus. Is that enough to apply

0:03:47.640 --> 0:03:50.440
<v Speaker 1>that to everybody? I guess when you're being super cautious, yes,

0:03:50.520 --> 0:03:54.640
<v Speaker 1>But again the criticism is should that be changing public policy?

0:03:54.800 --> 0:03:56.280
<v Speaker 1>And again, I mean some of it is common sense

0:03:56.360 --> 0:03:59.119
<v Speaker 1>versus public policy. You know, if you're testing positive, there's

0:03:59.120 --> 0:04:01.400
<v Speaker 1>a chance or contage us. If you can possibly stay

0:04:01.440 --> 0:04:03.360
<v Speaker 1>home and avoid other people, it just seems like the

0:04:03.440 --> 0:04:06.360
<v Speaker 1>sensible thing to do. Not everybody can afford the test

0:04:06.560 --> 0:04:08.920
<v Speaker 1>or can afford to stay home. In those cases, people

0:04:08.920 --> 0:04:11.800
<v Speaker 1>should be really vigilant about wearing a mask until they're

0:04:11.840 --> 0:04:14.560
<v Speaker 1>sure they're not contagious. Yeah, one of the things when

0:04:14.600 --> 0:04:16.800
<v Speaker 1>the paxel it it came out, obviously, right everybody is

0:04:16.839 --> 0:04:19.599
<v Speaker 1>saying it was a huge breakthrough, miraculous that it was

0:04:20.080 --> 0:04:22.960
<v Speaker 1>so effective, right, cutting the risk of hospitalizations and death

0:04:23.000 --> 0:04:26.760
<v Speaker 1>by everybody was way on board. But you know, now

0:04:26.760 --> 0:04:29.000
<v Speaker 1>we have the stories about the rebound. As you said,

0:04:29.000 --> 0:04:32.120
<v Speaker 1>it's happening with people that aren't even taking paxilvid. But

0:04:32.120 --> 0:04:33.680
<v Speaker 1>we're also I tell me, if you've heard of this,

0:04:33.800 --> 0:04:36.839
<v Speaker 1>people are calling a pax leaved mouth, also complaining of

0:04:36.839 --> 0:04:39.760
<v Speaker 1>a like a bitter, metallic taste. Somebody said it was

0:04:39.800 --> 0:04:42.800
<v Speaker 1>like grapefruit mixed with soap that they're getting when when

0:04:42.800 --> 0:04:45.000
<v Speaker 1>they're on the drug. I mean, those kinds of side

0:04:45.000 --> 0:04:47.760
<v Speaker 1>effects are fairly typical with drugs, I think with certain drugs,

0:04:47.760 --> 0:04:50.719
<v Speaker 1>so I'm not surprised by that. And everything you said

0:04:50.760 --> 0:04:53.640
<v Speaker 1>about tax Levid is still true. It's very effective at

0:04:53.640 --> 0:04:56.839
<v Speaker 1>preventing hospitalizations. The real world data seems to be holding

0:04:57.000 --> 0:04:59.160
<v Speaker 1>to be exactly repeating what they saw on the trials,

0:04:59.200 --> 0:05:01.120
<v Speaker 1>So all of that is true. It's still a great

0:05:01.200 --> 0:05:03.520
<v Speaker 1>drug if you're at high risk. I think some of

0:05:03.520 --> 0:05:06.160
<v Speaker 1>the differences that were now so many more people are

0:05:06.200 --> 0:05:08.480
<v Speaker 1>taking it now. You know, it's not just the people

0:05:08.480 --> 0:05:11.120
<v Speaker 1>who are you know, compromised or over or six five

0:05:11.200 --> 0:05:13.760
<v Speaker 1>who are taking it, but even people like you, who

0:05:13.800 --> 0:05:16.320
<v Speaker 1>are mostly healthy who are considering it. So I think

0:05:16.360 --> 0:05:18.480
<v Speaker 1>that maybe some of the explanation is just that so

0:05:18.480 --> 0:05:20.640
<v Speaker 1>many more people are taking it that we're seeing, you know,

0:05:20.680 --> 0:05:23.920
<v Speaker 1>the variation that's typical with with any drug or any situation,

0:05:24.200 --> 0:05:27.440
<v Speaker 1>right exactly, because the administration started those tests to treat

0:05:27.520 --> 0:05:30.200
<v Speaker 1>programs right where you if you get to test any

0:05:30.279 --> 0:05:32.920
<v Speaker 1>test positive, they might send you home immediately with that stuff.

0:05:32.960 --> 0:05:34.480
<v Speaker 1>So you're right, a lot of people are, a lot

0:05:34.520 --> 0:05:36.760
<v Speaker 1>more people are taking it, and we're starting to see

0:05:36.760 --> 0:05:38.760
<v Speaker 1>a little bit more of the real world effects of

0:05:38.800 --> 0:05:41.520
<v Speaker 1>what's going on. And again it's great. I don't want

0:05:41.520 --> 0:05:42.960
<v Speaker 1>to be in a hospital, you know, I mean, I

0:05:42.960 --> 0:05:45.200
<v Speaker 1>think it's terrific if it's saving people from from being

0:05:45.240 --> 0:05:47.880
<v Speaker 1>in the hospital. But the more marginal benefit you get,

0:05:47.960 --> 0:05:49.719
<v Speaker 1>the more of these side effects matter. You know, if

0:05:49.760 --> 0:05:51.960
<v Speaker 1>you weren't gonna end up in a hospital anyway, then

0:05:52.000 --> 0:05:53.960
<v Speaker 1>maybe having allows you taste in your mouth and having

0:05:53.960 --> 0:05:56.920
<v Speaker 1>to isolate for an extra few days the bigger burden.

0:05:57.080 --> 0:05:59.000
<v Speaker 1>And those are just things that we're learning as as

0:05:59.080 --> 0:06:01.160
<v Speaker 1>we see this drug in app action. All right, well,

0:06:01.160 --> 0:06:03.279
<v Speaker 1>we'll keep an eye out for how things develop with

0:06:03.320 --> 0:06:05.200
<v Speaker 1>packs LVID. I know it's helping a lot of people

0:06:05.240 --> 0:06:08.159
<v Speaker 1>still in the long run, as you mentioned. Karen Weintraub,

0:06:08.360 --> 0:06:10.760
<v Speaker 1>health reporter at USA Today, thank you very much for

0:06:10.880 --> 0:06:16.000
<v Speaker 1>joining us. Thank you so much. I'm Oscar Ramirez and

0:06:16.040 --> 0:06:19.240
<v Speaker 1>this has been reopening America. Don't forget the effort. Today's

0:06:19.279 --> 0:06:20.720
<v Speaker 1>big news stories. You can check me out in the

0:06:20.800 --> 0:06:24.080
<v Speaker 1>Daily Dive podcast every mondy through Friday, so follow us

0:06:24.080 --> 0:06:26.680
<v Speaker 1>on iHeart Radio or wherever you get your podcast.