Vice President Kamala Harris has tested negative for COVID-19, according to her press secretary.

Harris plans to return to work at the White House on Tuesday.

The vice president had been working from home since she tested positive for the virus last week.

While at the White House, Harris' press secretary said the vice president will follow guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control. The guidelines say a person who is recovering from COVID-19 should wear a well-fitting mask while around others for 10 days.

The vice president was reportedly not experiencing symptoms on the day she tested positive. However, she was treated with Pfizer's Covid-19 antiviral pill, Paxlovid.

Harris is vaccinated and boosted against COVID-19.

BOSTON —

Since the start of the pandemic, Adjoa Anyane Yeboa's day-to-day schedule has changed.

"I was able to find more flexibility in my work life in order to take time and finally take time and do something for me," Yeboa said.

More work from home means more time to make plans for the future. For Yeboa, who's in her mid-30s, that means family planning.

"I've been thinking about egg freezing for a long time and only recently I finally decided to take the leap," Yeboa said.

Fertility experts say egg freezing has spiked about 20% during the pandemic.

"I see so many people settling for their partners or rushing to find somebody and to get engaged and get married because they're beating a clock and I didn't want to have to do that," Yeboa said. " I wanted to do things on my timeline."

Dr. Rachel Ashby, a reproductive endocrinologist and fertility specialist at Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston says there are key COVID-19 reasons more women are making the personal decision to freeze their eggs, including how isolation impacted relationships.

"The pandemic has delayed a lot of social interaction, so for people who were dating and planning on dating and looking for partners," Ashby said. "There were a lot of patients I've seen that were in a long-term relationship with this idea that this person I plan to build a family around, and the relationship did not survive."

There's been more time to think and for many, to turn to science.

The egg freezing process takes about two weeks and involves daily injections of FSH hormones to stimulate the ovaries to grow as many eggs as possible.

Then, the eggs are retrieved and preserved in a lab in subzero temperatures to be used at a later date.

"The biggest thing for women to know is that travel is not easily accomplished because you're coming in every few days, usually at 6:30 to 7 a.m. for bloodwork or ultrasound," Ashby said. "Over that two-week time frame, the follicles go from very small to mature."

Ashby says women who are thinking about doing this should focus on getting all the information first, to see if it makes sense for them.

The process can run anywhere from $5,000 to $10,000 to freeze your eggs.

Ashby says more and more companies are including egg freezing in their health insurance but you should make sure your coverage also includes medication.

She cautions there are no guarantees, so potential patients should ask a lot of questions about fertility and see what's best for them.

Data shows that more men have died of COVID-19 than women.

Between April of 2020 and May of 2021, men accounted for 55% of COVID-19 deaths, Harvard researchers found.

Now a new study is shining light as to what may be helping women better survive the disease.

A study published in the journal, Family Practice, revealed that estrogen may help lower mortality rates among women.

UK researchers looked at women who received hormone replacement therapy six months after they were diagnosed with coronavirus.

The therapy helps restore estrogen levels during menopause.

Researchers found that women who received the therapy had a 78% lower mortality rate, from all diseases stemming from COVID, than women who did not go through the therapy.

SACRAMENTO, Calif. —

Gov. Gavin Newsom has tested positive for COVID-19, just 10 days after receiving his second booster vaccine.

He tweeted his positive test results on Saturday, saying he tested this morning. Newsom had just met with New Zealand's prime minister on Friday in San Francisco's Golden Gate Park. Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern tested positive for the virus earlier in May.

California's governor said he is experiencing mild symptoms and is following health guidelines, including isolating and working remotely.

Newsom's press office said in a statement that he will be in isolation until at least June 2 and until he tests negative.

"Grateful to be vaccinated and for treatments like Paxlovid," Newsom said in a tweet.

He will be getting a prescription for Paxlovid and will start a five-day regimen immediately, according to his press office's statement.

Paxlovid is a treatment for mild-to-moderate symptoms in adults and children ages 12 and older, and is approved by the Food and Drug Administration. California distributes the treatment to some health providers, and has been working to expand access to free Paxlovid treatments through 'test to treat' sites for all those who test positive for COVID-19.

Newsom is vaccinated and has received two booster shots, his most recent shot was on May 18. Health officials say COVID-19 vaccines won't completely block infection, but that the shots are mainly designed to prevent severe illness.

A California woman who punched a flight attendant in the face during a flight and broke her teeth has been sentenced to 15 months in federal prison.

Vyvianna Quinonez on Tuesday was also ordered by the federal judge in San Diego to pay nearly $26,000 in restitution and a $7,500 fine for the assault on a May 2021 Southwest flight between Sacramento and San Diego. Quinonez is prohibited from flying for three years while she is on supervised release and must participate in anger management classes or counseling.

Quinonez last year pleaded guilty to one count of interference with flight crew members and attendants.

The omicron COVID-19 variant that swept the world in late 2021 and early 2022 is not as likely to cause long COVID in those who get infected, a study released Thursday determined.

The study was published in the Lancet and collected data from thousands of people participating in the Zoe Health Study.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said that long COVID symptoms generally could last weeks or months after infection. Long COVID can cause patients to have difficulty breathing, coughing and general tiredness well after being infected with the virus.

While long COVID symptoms might be less likely with those who are infected with the omicron variant, researchers said the condition’s symptoms remain a concern.

“Omicron appears to cause less severe acute illness than previous variants, at least in vaccinated populations,” the study noted. “However, the potential for large numbers of people to experience long-term symptoms is a major concern, and health and workforce planners need information urgently to appropriately scale resource allocation.”

The CDC noted that unvaccinated people generally face a higher risk of long COVID symptoms.

One caveat to the study is it does not detail the duration of long COVID symptoms, nor does it address the severity of the symptoms.

The study noted that because of the large number of people infected with the omicron variant in late 2021 and early 2022, the number of people suffering from long COVID also increased.

U.S. health officials on Saturday recommended COVID-19 vaccines for infants, toddlers and preschoolers — the last group without the shots.

The head of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announced the decision hours after an advisory panel voted unanimously that vaccines should be made available to children as young as 6 months.

“We know millions of parents and caregivers are eager to get their young children vaccinated, and with today’s decision, they can,” Dr. Rochelle Walensky, the CDC's director, said in a statement.

The shots offer young children protection from hospitalizations, deaths and possible long-term complications that are still not clearly understood, the CDC's advisory panel said earlier.

“We’ve taken a major step forward today,” said Dr. Oliver Brooks, a member of the panel.

While the Food and Drug Administration approves vaccines, it's the CDC that decides who should get them.

The government has been gearing up for the start of the shots early next week, with millions of doses ordered for distribution to doctors, hospitals and community health clinics around the country.

Roughly 18 million kids will be eligible, but it remains to be seen how many will ultimately get the vaccines. Less than a third of children ages 5 to 11 have done so since vaccination opened up to them last November.

Here are some things to know:

What kinds are available?

Two brands — Pfizer and Moderna — got the green light Friday from the FDA. The vaccines use the same technology but are being offered at different dose sizes and number of shots for the youngest kids.

Pfizer’s vaccine is for 6 months through 4 years. The dose is one-tenth of the adult dose, and three shots are needed. The first two are given three weeks apart, and the last at least two months later.

Moderna’s is two shots, each a quarter of its adult dose, given about four weeks apart for kids 6 months through 5. The FDA also approved a third dose, at least a month after the second shot, for kids with immune conditions that make them more vulnerable to serious illness.

Video below: FDA authorizes 1st COVID-19 shots for kids under 5

How well do they work?

In studies, vaccinated youngsters developed levels of virus-fighting antibodies as strong as young adults, suggesting that the kid-size doses protect against coronavirus infections.

However, exactly how well they work is hard to pin down, especially when it comes to the Pfizer vaccine.

Two doses of Moderna appeared to be only about 40% effective at preventing milder infections at a time when the omicron variant was causing most COVID-19 illnesses. Pfizer presented study information suggesting the company saw 80% with its three shots. But the Pfizer data was so limited — and based on such a small number of cases — that experts and federal officials say they don’t feel there is a reliable estimate yet.

Should my little one be vaccinated?

Yes, according to the CDC’s advisers. While COVID-19 has been the most dangerous for older adults, younger people, including children, can also get very sick.

Hospitalizations surged during the omicron wave. Since the start of the pandemic, about 480 children under age 5 are counted among the nation’s more than 1 million COVID-19 deaths, federal data show.

“It is worth vaccinating, even though the number of deaths are relatively rare, because these deaths are preventable through vaccination,” said Dr. Matthew Daley, a Kaiser Permanente Colorado researcher who sits on the advisory committee.

Which vaccine should my child get?

Either one, says Dr. Peter Marks, the FDA's vaccine chief.

“Whatever vaccine your health care provider, pediatrician has, that’s what I would give my child,’’ Marks said Friday.

The doses haven't been tested against each other, so experts say there’s no way to tell if one is better.

One consideration: It takes roughly three months to complete the Pfizer three-shot series, but just one month for Moderna's two shots. So families eager to get children protected quickly might want Moderna.

Who's giving the shots?

Pediatricians, other primary care physicians and children’s hospitals are planning to provide the vaccines. Limited drugstores will offer them for at least some of the under-5 group.

U.S. officials expect most shots to take place at pediatricians’ offices. Many parents may be more comfortable getting the vaccine for their kids at their regular doctor, White House COVID-19 coordinator Dr. Ashish Jha said. He predicted the pace of vaccination to be far slower than it was for older populations.

“We’re going see vaccinations ramp up over weeks and even potentially over a couple of months,” Jha said.

Can children get other vaccines at the same time?

It’s common for little kids to get more than one vaccine during a doctor’s visit.

In studies of the Moderna and Pfizer shots in infants and toddlers, other vaccinations were not given at the same time so there is no data on potential side effects when that happens.

But problems have not been identified in older children or adults when COVID-19 shots and other vaccinations were given together, and the CDC is advising that it's safe for younger children as well.

What if my child recently had COVID-19?

About three-quarters of children of all ages are estimated to have been infected at some point. For older ages, the CDC has recommended vaccination anyway to lower the chances of reinfection.

Experts have noted re-infections among previously infected people and say the highest levels of protection occur in those who were both vaccinated and previously infected.

The CDC has said people may consider waiting about three months after an infection to be vaccinated.

___

AP reporter Zeke Miller in Washington contributed.

COVID-19 vaccines for children younger than 5 are rolling out this week. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration and U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention signed off on the shots' safety and efficacy. Like with any vaccine, though, it's possible kids may experience a few side effects.

The safety data from Moderna and Pfizer, vetted by the FDA and CDC, found potential side effects were mostly mild and short-lived.

For parents and caregivers planning to get their little ones vaccinated, pediatricians say there are a few things to watch out for — generally the same effects adults or older children might have experienced after their shots.

Most vaccine side effects are mild, short-lived

"In general, I think the most common side effects from either of the vaccines are still the most common side effects we see from pretty much any child that gets any vaccine," said Dr. Grant Paulsen, the principal site investigator for the Pfizer and the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials for kids 6 months to 11 years old at Cincinnati Children's.

Side effects most commonly included pain at the injection site, and sometimes there was swelling or redness.

"Those are all what I would classify as pretty common side effects that most parents that have taken their children to the doctor to get their various hepatitis and tetanus vaccines and all that kind of stuff were probably pretty used to," Paulsen said.

As far as systemic or body-wide symptoms, the most common was fatigue or sleepiness. Some children had irritability or fussiness, loss of appetite, headache, abdominal pain or discomfort, enlarged lymph nodes, mild diarrhea or vomiting. But everyone got better quickly.

"It's very similar to the side effects we've seen for older kids or for adults. About 24 hours of some kids, you know, they kind of don't feel as well, they feel tired, they don't have the same appetite. But thankfully, there have not been any serious side effects of these vaccines," Dr. Ashish Jha, White House COVID-19 response coordinator said on CBS on Monday. "And again, after giving these vaccines to millions of children, it's really reassuring to know that for young kids these vaccines are exceedingly safe."

Side effects were mild to moderate and were far less frequent with this young age group than with older ages, Paulsen said.

"My big picture for parents is really [that] the side effects should not be alarming," Paulsen said.

Potential for fever

Kids were slightly more prone to get a fever with the Moderna vaccine; it happened with about a quarter of the trial participants, versus less than 10% with Pfizer. Most of the fevers were mild. Less than 1% of all participants in the trial had a fever that reached 104 degrees.

"That was rare, but I feel like if we're not honest with parents, when these things come out, that will be concerning," Paulsen said.

Because fevers were not common, Paulsen does not recommend pre-treating a child by giving them a fever-reducing medicine before the shot.

If the child develops a fever, he said, parents can give ibuprofen or acetaminophen.

"The odds are, most children are just going to do fine and have really minimal problems," he said.

No cases of myocarditis

The scientists who conducted trials on the youngest children were also watching closely to see if any of the children had problems with myocarditis, inflammation of the heart muscle, because there were a handful of cases among older children and adults. In most of those cases, the symptoms went away quickly.

But myocarditis was not found to be a problem in the trials in young children.

"Of course, we have all the mechanisms in place once we start vaccinating kids next week. If we start seeing it, all those bells and whistles will go off and bring our attention to it," said Dr. Claudia Hoyen, director of pediatric infection control at UH Rainbow Babies and Children's Hospital in Cleveland. "But we are not expecting to see that. We didn't really see it in kids who were 5 to 11, either."

'An extra layer of protection'

Because children get severe COVID-19 less frequently than adults, some parents may wonder if they should bother to get their little ones vaccinated. COVID-19, however, has been "quite common" in children, Jha said. He said almost 70% of kids have been infected at some point, but they can always get it again -- and even if it was mild the first time, that doesn't mean it will be the next time.

"Still worth getting the vaccine, it really offers an extra level of protection, an extra layer of protection. What vaccines do is they keep kids out of the hospital, and that's why they are so effective and everybody deserves that protection," Jha said.

Dr. Suchitra Rao says it's important to keep in mind that COVID-19 is now one of the vaccine-preventable diseases with the highest mortality rate.

"If we look at this age group, we will see that Covid has killed more than 200 6-month to 5-year-olds since January of 2020. And if we want to compare that to something like flu, those numbers are actually higher than what we've been seeing annually for all kids under the age of 18 for influenza," said Rao, a pediatric infectious disease specialist at Children's Hospital Colorado.

"We're getting routine vaccines against measles and against pneumococcal disease and meningitis. That this is something that's actually causing more deaths," she added. "Safety in this younger age group is actually quite, quite good and better than other groups, even."

Rao said some parents have asked her if they should be concerned about long-term side effects. She reassures them that if there were any, they would have shown up in the clinical trials.

"The FDA and then the [CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices], and all of these governing groups that make those recommendations really do an excellent job evaluating the safety and the effectiveness and go through all of the manufacturing data of these vaccines, and it's such a rigorous and comprehensive review," Rao said. "I think the fact that it took a little bit longer for the agency to authorize these shots in these younger kids is really telling, because they just had to make absolutely sure since this is such a vulnerable group."

Parent questions welcome

While Dr. Nina Alfieri, a pediatrician at Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children's Hospital of Chicago, has seen a lot of interest in COVID-19 vaccines for the youngest children, she knows parents will want to know about vaccine safety.

This year, Lurie did a survey of 5,000 Chicago parents to find out where they stood on the COVID-19 vaccine. Side effects were among their top concerns.

"It makes sense. You want to make sure what you're doing for your kids is safe," Alfieri said.

Alfieri said she hopes caregivers will be sure to ask their pediatrician questions to ease any worries.

"I really love when families come to me and they tell me they are a little bit unsure, because it gives us an opportunity to really sit down face to face, in a safe environment, and talk about their concerns," she said.

"There's going to be a lot of conversation the next couple of months, and I think all of us pediatricians are ready for it, and we're welcoming this kind of conversation because overall, this is a really exciting time for us. Because finally, this vulnerable and very young age group who has kind of been left out of one of the best protective measures is now going to be eligible to be protected."

Nearly 20 million lives were saved by COVID-19 vaccines during their first year, but even more, deaths could have been prevented if international targets for the shots had been reached, researchers reported Thursday.

On Dec. 8, 2020, a retired shop clerk in England received the first shot in what would become a global vaccination campaign. Over the next 12 months, more than 4.3 billion people around the world lined up for the vaccines.

The effort, though marred by persisting inequities, prevented deaths on an unimaginable scale, said Oliver Watson of Imperial College London, who led the new modeling study.

"Catastrophic would be the first word that comes to mind," Watson said of the outcome if vaccines hadn't been available to fight the coronavirus. The findings "quantify just how much worse the pandemic could have been if we did not have these vaccines."

The researchers used data from 185 countries to estimate that vaccines prevented 4.2 million COVID-19 deaths in India, 1.9 million in the United States, 1 million in Brazil, 631,000 in France and 507,000 in the United Kingdom.

An additional 600,000 deaths would have been prevented if the World Health Organization target of 40% vaccination coverage by the end of 2021 had been met, according to the study published Thursday in the journal Lancet Infectious Diseases.

The main finding — 19.8 million COVID-19 deaths were prevented — is based on estimates of how many more deaths than usual occurred during the time period. Using only reported COVID-19 deaths, the same model yielded 14.4 million deaths averted by vaccines.

The London scientists excluded China because of uncertainty around the pandemic's effect on deaths there and its huge population.

The study has other limitations. The researchers did not include how the virus might have mutated differently in the absence of vaccines. And they did not factor in how lockdowns or mask-wearing might have changed if vaccines weren't available.

Another modeling group used a different approach to estimate that 16.3 million COVID-19 deaths were averted by vaccines. That work, by the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation in Seattle, has not been published.

In the real world, people wear masks more often when cases are surging, said the institute's Ali Mokdad, and 2021's delta wave without vaccines would have prompted a major policy response.

"We may disagree on the number as scientists, but we all agree that COVID vaccines saved lots of lives," Mokdad said.

The findings underscore both the achievements and the shortcomings of the vaccination campaign, said Adam Finn of Bristol Medical School in England, who like Mokdad was not involved in the study.

"Although we did pretty well this time — we saved millions and millions of lives — we could have done better and we should do better in the future," Finn said.

Funding came from several groups including the WHO; the UK Medical Research Council; Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance; and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

Newsy is the nation’s only free 24/7 national news network. You can find Newsy using your TV’s digital antenna or stream for free. See all the ways you can watch Newsy here.

The Food and Drug Administration announced Wednesday that state-licensed pharmacists can now prescribe Paxlovid.

The pill, developed by Pfizer, is used to treat mild-to-moderate COVID-19.

“Since Paxlovid must be taken within five days after symptoms begin, authorizing state-licensed pharmacists to prescribe Paxlovid could expand access to timely treatment for some patients who are eligible to receive this drug for the treatment of COVID-19," said Dr. Patrizia Cavazzoni, director for the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. 

People who have tested positive for COVID-19 must provide health records, including laboratory blood work results, when requesting a Paxlovid prescription from a pharmacist.

The patient must also be willing to inform the pharmacist of all the medications they are currently taking to make sure there are no potentially serious interactions with Paxlovid.

The drug is currently authorized for treatment in people 12 years and older, who weigh at least 88 pounds.

The highly transmissible omicron subvariant BA.5 represents at least 65% of new COVID-19 infections in the United States, according to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Infections are rising in most parts of the country, and these numbers are almost certainly an undercount, given how many people are determining their status through home tests that are not reported.

At the same time, many people have lots of summer events planned, including weddings, birthday celebrations and casual get-togethers. What should event organizers keep in mind? How can people think about their own risk in deciding whether to attend and what precautions to follow? What if you have to attend something — for example a work function — but really don't want to bring COVID back to your family? And what about people who have already recovered from an infection — do they still have to worry about reinfection and the risks of illness, including long COVID?

Video above: BA.5 variant leads U.S. cases and sparks concerns about contagiousness

CNN Medical Analyst Dr. Leana Wen, an emergency physician and professor of health policy and management at the George Washington University Milken Institute School of Public Health helped answer these questions. She is also the author of "Lifelines: A Doctor's Journey in the Fight for Public Health."

Why is BA.5 a concern right now?

Dr. Leana Wen: BA.5 is now the dominant variant here in the United States and in many parts of the world. It appears to be the most transmissible variant yet. It also may be partially immune-evasive, meaning that people who have gotten their vaccinations or who have previously had COVID-19 may not have much protection against mild or asymptomatic infection.

However, vaccination does protect against severe illness. People who are unvaccinated should get vaccinated, and those not yet boosted should do so. Being up to date on vaccines will help to protect you from the potentially severe consequences due to COVID-19, which ultimately is the goal of vaccination.

The reason it's a concern now is that there are high levels in many parts of the country. In areas with a lot of circulating virus, with such a transmissible pathogen, one's chances of catching COVID-19 are high.

Does that mean people should cancel in-person events?

Wen: After two and a half years of the pandemic, I don't think it's reasonable to ask that people continue to forgo weddings, birthday parties and other get-togethers. A lot of people have decided that as long as they are unlikely to become severely ill from COVID-19, they will not take precautions to avoid it.

On the other hand, a lot of people still really want to avoid COVID-19. Event organizers should take into account the wishes of those gathering.

What are some things people can do if they are organizing a get-together?

Wen: First is recognizing that any time people are gathering, especially indoors, there will be a risk of coronavirus transmission. This is especially true with a very contagious virus, and when there is so much virus around us. It's not realistic to set the expectation that no one could get coronavirus at the event, though you should try to reduce risk.

Some ways to do that include, first and foremost, trying to have the gathering outdoors. We have said this throughout the pandemic, and it remains true now that outdoors is much safer than indoors. Coronavirus is airborne, and the more air circulation you have, the better.

Ventilation also matters. A partial indoor/outdoor space where there is good air circulation will be better than one that's entirely enclosed. And one with open windows and doors and lots of spacing will be lower risk than a small, enclosed room with everyone crowded together.

Video above: Doctor talks about omicron BA.5 variant

If organizers want to reduce risk further, they could ask that everyone take a home rapid test just prior to the event. Rapid tests aren't perfect, but they are very good at detecting if someone has enough virus at that point in time that they could infect others. Providing testing at the door is an additional safeguard, in case not everyone has access to testing beforehand.

Of course, masks can also reduce virus transmission. At this point in the pandemic, it may be difficult to get people to keep masks on when most places no longer require them. I think it's more realistic to plan for an outdoor event, and, if it has to be indoors, to ask for testing instead of required masks (though masks should, of course, be an option for those who want additional protection).

What's your advice for immunocompromised individuals or folks who just really want to avoid contracting COVID-19?

Wen: When you are invited to an event, find out what precautions the organizer is taking and then gauge risks accordingly. An outdoor event, or at least one where you could stay outdoors the entire time, is quite low risk. An indoor event that requires either testing or masks is also lower risk.

What about crowded indoor events that don't require testing and masks? One-way masking with a high-quality mask — N95 or equivalent — remains protective, but your mask must be well fitting and you must keep it on the entire time. If you go, consider eating beforehand and taking off your mask only when outdoors or in a place where you are by yourself.

At the end of the day, there is no clear answer to whether you should go — it depends on how much you want to avoid Covid-19 versus the benefit you would derive from attending.

If someone has had COVID-19, do they need to worry about reinfection? What do we know about the risk of long COVID with reinfection?

Wen: Reinfection is certainly possible. Those who had pre-omicron variants like delta or alpha are susceptible to reinfection with omicron subvariants. We are even seeing reinfections with people who had the original omicron variant and are now getting BA.5.

The chance of reinfection within the first two or three months following the initial infection is pretty low but increases after that. People previously infected benefit from vaccination and boosting, which further decreases their chance of both severe illness and infection.

There is a new study, posted online but not yet peer-reviewed, that shows those with reinfection are at higher risk for long COVID and other potential consequences with each infection. These results could well prompt some people to say they want to avoid reinfection as much as possible.

A lot of people are having to travel for conferences, meetings and other work functions. What's your advice if they don't want to bring COVID-19 back to their families?

Wen: There are two options. One is to try to reduce their risk while traveling and at these functions as much as possible, including limiting time indoors with others, masking during all indoor interactions, and avoiding indoor events with food and drink -- or at least keeping a mask on during these functions and eating and drinking separately elsewhere.

The second option is to assume that you will be exposed and could contract COVID-19 during these work functions, then quarantine yourself and test before interacting with family members. Not everyone is able to do this — perhaps they have young children or other family responsibilities — but that is another option that may be right for some people.

President Joe Biden tested positive for COVID-19 for the second straight day, in what appears to be a rare case of "rebound" following treatment with an anti-viral drug.In a letter noting the positive test, Dr. Kevin O'Connor, the White House physician, said Sunday that the president "continues to feel well" and will keep on working from the executive residence while he isolates.Biden tested positive on Saturday, requiring him to cancel travel and in-person events as he isolates for at least five days in accordance with Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines.After initially testing positive on July 21, Biden, 79, was treated with the anti-viral drug Paxlovid. He tested negative for the virus this past Tuesday and Wednesday, clearing him to leave isolation while wearing a mask indoors.Research suggests that a minority of those prescribed Paxlovid experience a rebound case of the virus. The fact that a rebound rather than a reinfection possibly occurred is a positive sign for Biden's health once he's clear of the disease."The fact that the president has cleared his illness and doesn't have symptoms is a good sign and makes it less likely he will develop long COVID," said Dr. Albert Ho, an infectious disease specialist at Yale University's school of public health.

WASHINGTON (AP) — With inflation raging near its highest level in four decades, Congress is poised to approve President Joe Biden's signature Inflation Reduction Act. Its title raises a tantalizing question: Will the measure actually tame the price spikes that have inflicted hardships on American households?

Economic analyses of the proposal suggest that the answer is likely no — not anytime soon, anyway.

The legislation, which is headed for final approval Friday in the House and will then be signed into law, won't directly address some of the main drivers of surging prices — from gas and food to rents and restaurant meals.

Still, the bill could save money for some Americans by lessening the cost of prescription drugs for the elderly, extending health insurance subsidies and reducing energy prices. It would also modestly cut the government's budget deficit, which might slightly lower inflation by the end of this decade.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office concluded last week that the changes would have a "negligible" impact on inflation this year and next. And the University of Pennsylvania's Penn Wharton Budget Model concluded that, over the next decade, "the impact on inflation is statistically indistinguishable from zero."

Such forecasts also undercut the arguments that some Republicans, such as House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy have made, that the bill would "cause inflation," as McCarthy said in a speech on the House floor last month.

Biden himself, in speaking of the legislation's effect on inflation, has cautiously referred to potentially lower prices in individual categories rather than to lower inflation as a whole. This week, the president said the bill would "bring down the cost of prescription drugs, health insurance premiums and energy costs."

At the same time, the White House has trumpeted a letter signed by more than 120 economists, including several Novel Prize winners and former Treasury secretaries, that asserts that the bill's reduction in the government's budget deficit — by an estimated $300 billion over the next decade, according to the CBO — would put "downward pressure on inflation."

In theory, lower deficits can reduce inflation. That's because lower government spending or higher taxes, which help shrink the deficit, reduce demand in the economy, thereby easing pressure on companies to raise prices.

Jason Furman, a Harvard economist who served as a top economic adviser in the Obama administration, wrote in an opinion column for The Wall Street Journal: "Deficit reduction is almost always inflation-reducing."

Yet Douglas Holtz-Eakin, who was a top economic adviser to President George W. Bush and later a director of the CBO, noted that the lower deficits won't kick in until five years from now and won't be very large over the next decade considering the size of the economy.

"$30 billion a year in a $21 trillion economy isn't going to move the needle," Holtz-Eakin said, referring to the estimated amount of deficit reduction spread over 10 years.

He also noted that Congress has recently passed other legislation to subsidize semiconductor production in the U.S. and expand veterans' health care, and suggested that those laws will spend more than the Inflation Reduction Act will save.

In addition, Kent Smetters, director of the Penn Wharton Budget Model, said the bill's health care subsidies could send inflation up. The legislation would spend $70 billion over a decade to extend tax credits to help 13 million Americans pay for health insurance under the Affordable Care Act.

Those subsidies would free up money for recipients to spend elsewhere, potentially increasing inflation, although Smetters said he thought the effect would likely be very small.

While the bill could have the benefit of increasing the savings of millions of households on pharmaceutical and energy costs, it's unlikely to have much effect on overall inflation. Prescription drugs account for only 1% of the spending in the U.S. consumer price index; spending on electricity and natural gas makes up just 3.6%.

Starting in 2025, the act will cap the amount Medicare recipients would pay for their prescription drugs at $2,000 a year. It will authorize Medicare to negotiate the cost of some high-priced pharmaceuticals — a long-sought goal that President Donald Trump had also floated. It would also limit Medicare recipients' out-of-pocket costs for insulin at $35 a month. Insulin prescriptions averaged $54 in 2020, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation.

"This is a historic change," said Leigh Purvis, director of health care costs at the AARP Public Policy Institute. "This is allowing Medicare to protect beneficiaries from high drug prices in a way that was not there before."

A study by Kaiser found that in 2019, 1.2 million Medicare recipients spent an average of $3,216 on drug prescriptions. Purvis said recipients who use the most expensive drugs can spend as much as $10,000 or $15,000 a year.

The legislation authorizes Medicare to negotiate prices of 10 expensive pharmaceuticals, starting next year, though the results won't take effect until 2026. Up to 60 drugs could be subject to negotiation by 2029.

Holtz-Eakin argued that while the provision may lower the cost of some Medicare drugs, it would discourage the development of new drugs or reduce new venture capital investment in start-up pharmaceutical companies.

The Inflation Reduction Act's energy provisions could also create savings, though the amounts are likely to be much smaller.

The bill will provide a $7,500 tax credit for new purchases of electric vehicles, though most EVs won't qualify because the legislation requires them to include batteries with U.S. materials.

And the legislation also significantly expands a tax credit for homeowners who invest in energy-efficient equipment, from a one-time $500 credit to $1,200 that a homeowner could claim each year. Vincent Barnes, senior vice president for policy at the Alliance to Save Energy, said this would allow homeowners to make new energy-efficient investments over several years.

But for all Americans, including those who aren't homeowners, the impact will likely be limited. The Rhodium Group estimates that by 2030 the bill's provisions will save households an average of up to $112 a year as gas and electricity becomes cheaper as more Americans drive EVs and houses become more energy- efficient.

Hide Transcript
Show Transcript

do you ever get used to the smell? And I guess the answer is no. The waste water comes in every day from almost two million people. But you know it's part of the job and you know so we we learn to live with it across Minneapolis ST paul and 66 suburbs. This wastewater right here. The trash of the sand has already been filtered out. Yes. You just take this much and bring it to the lab. This looks pretty clean to me. Well it's been treated but there's some stuff floating around in there. What is that? Right. We think that fibers from toilet paper is what I think Principal research scientist steve Barlow walked us through the complicated process of treating flooding, binding rinsing. I have two different wash buffers, heating, spinning. We'll just spin it for *** minute here and more to get one little drop of RNA. That's it. That's where all the RNA is. So this is what gets sent off to the you that's correct. How many viruses could you detect in our wastewater? Oh that's *** good question. I mean how many are there? We could probably detect them all. So flu flu polio monkey pox SARS Rsv In fact, steve paused our interview. Could I take one moment to get *** time sensitive monkeypox control into the freezer does it work the same way to look for Covid and to look for monkeypox. It's similar but it's not the same. Monkeypox is *** DNA virus. So we're looking for D. N. ***. But in Covid we're looking for RNA. That's correct. What do you see the potential for wastewater testing? Its enormous I don't think any of us really understood how much of *** resource waste water is the secrets this water holds. You have to dig to find them. They don't give it up easily.

How wastewater is tested for viruses such as monkeypox and COVID-19

Updated: 6:20 AM EDT Aug 20, 2022

University of Minnesota researchers started testing wastewater for monkeypox. It comes after they've checked it for coronavirus levels for more than two years now.Metro Plant Principal Research Scientist Steve Balogh studies the wastewater that comes in everyday from almost 2 million people."I don't think any of us really understood how much of a resource (testing) wastewater is," said Balogh. Learn more in the video above

University of Minnesota researchers started testing wastewater for monkeypox. It comes after they've checked it for coronavirus levels for more than two years now.

Metro Plant Principal Research Scientist Steve Balogh studies the wastewater that comes in everyday from almost 2 million people.

"I don't think any of us really understood how much of a resource (testing) wastewater is," said Balogh.

Learn more in the video above