The tuberculosis outbreak in Kansas is alarming. It's not the biggest in US history though, CDC says
A yearlong outbreak of tuberculosis in the Kansas City, Kansas area has taken local experts aback, even if it does not appear to be the largest outbreak of the disease in U.S. history as a state health official claimed last week.
'We would expect to see a handful of cases every year,' said Dr. Dana Hawkinson, an infectious disease doctor at the University of Kansas Health System. But the high case counts in this outbreak were a 'stark warning,' he said.
The outbreak has killed two people since it started in January 2024, Kansas state health department spokeswoman Jill Bronaugh said. Health officials in Kansas say there is no threat to the general public.
What is tuberculosis?
TB is caused by bacteria that lives in the people's lungs and spreads through the air when they talk, cough or sing. It is very infectious, but only spreads when a person has symptoms.
Once it infects a person, TB can take two forms. In 'active' TB, the person has a long-standing cough and sometimes bloody phlegm, night sweats, fever, weight loss and swollen glands. In 'latent' TB, the bacteria hibernates in the person's lungs or elsewhere in the body. It does not cause symptoms and does not spread to others.
Roughly a quarter of the global population is estimated to have TB, but only about 5% to 10% of those develop symptoms.
How big is the tuberculosis outbreak in Kansas?
As of Jan. 24, 67 people are being treated for active TB, most of them in Wyandotte County, Bronaugh said. Another 79 have latent TB.
The state's provisional 2024 count shows 79 active TB cases and 213 latent cases in the two counties where the outbreak is happening, Wyandotte and Johnson. Not all of those are linked to the outbreak and Bronaugh did not respond to requests for clarification.
The situation is improving, though: 'We are trending in the right direction right now,' Ashley Goss, deputy secretary at the Kansas Department of Health and Environment, told the state Senate's Committee on Public Health and Welfare Jan. 21.
Is the Kansas tuberculosis outbreak the largest in U.S. history?
Kansas health officials called the outbreak 'the largest documented outbreak in U.S. history' since the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention began counting cases in the 1950s.
But a spokesperson for the CDC on Tuesday refuted that claim, noting at least two larger TB outbreaks in recent history. In one, the disease spread through Georgia homeless shelters. Public health workers identified more than 170 active TB cases and more than 400 latent cases from 2015 to 2017. And in 2021, a nationwide outbreak linked to contaminated tissue used in bone transplants sickened 113 patients.
How is tuberculosis treated?
TB is treated with antibiotics over the course of several months. A vaccine is available, but generally not recommended in the U.S. because the risk of infection is low and getting the vaccine can interfere with the test doctors use to diagnose the disease.
TB is a much bigger problem outside of the U.S.
TB is a leading cause of infectious disease death worldwide, and has been on the rise.
In 2023, the bacteria killed 1.25 million people globally and infected 8 million, the highest count since the World Health Organization started keeping track.
While tuberculosis was a much bigger danger in the U.S. in earlier generations, it has been trending back up in recent years. In 2023 there were more than 9,600 cases nationwide, the highest in a decade, according to the CDC.
___ The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute's Science and Educational Media Group and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
New York legislature passes medical aid in dying bill
Jun. 10—ALBANY — The New York state legislature has passed a bill to legalize physician-assisted suicide, a program supporters are calling "medical aid in dying." On Monday evening, with just a few days left for voting for the scheduled legislative session, the state Senate voted to pass its copy of the legislation. The state Assembly passed it earlier this year, and the bill now awaits Gov. Kathleen C. Hochul's decision to sign, veto or amend the legislation. Under the terms of the bill, people with a terminal illness who have an estimated six months or less before their disease will kill them can ask their physician for a prescription for life-ending drugs, which they can take home and consume on their own. The legislation has some protections, requiring a physician to evaluate the patient's ability to make decisions and refer them for psychiatric evaluation if there are questions over capacity. Patients have to make an oral and written request for the life-ending drugs, and the request be witnessed by two adults who are not closely related to the patient or likely to benefit after their death. It also permits medical professionals to recuse themselves from requests for medically assisted suicide, ordering them to refer requests they refuse to other doctors. Supporters of the bill say it will give New Yorkers suffering from terminal illnesses a safe, humane way to end their lives. They point to cases where terminally ill people have chosen to stop eating or drinking or chosen to end their lives in other, not legally sanctioned ways. Opponents of the bill raise concerns over the message it sends to sick people, that they should choose death rather than fight for their health, as well as practical concerns over whether the medication that would be prescribed could be a health hazard if not properly stored. They also expressed concerns over the bill's approach to how the death will be recorded. Under the bill's terms, someone who takes advantage of the program would have their cause of death listed as their terminal illness, not the ingestion of life-ending drugs. They also raised concerns over the lack of post-dispensation tracking for the lethal drugs, raising concerns they could be misused. The bill has circulated in Albany for nearly a decade, going most years without a floor vote in either chamber. Just last year, it lacked majority support in the Senate, but a successful lobbying effort this year pushed it to approval in the Assembly and now in the Senate. Debate stretched into Monday evening, with detractors in the Senate expressing concern. Sen. Steven D. Rhoads, R-Nassau, questioned why the bill doesn't include a specific requirement that doctors review a patient's medical records before prescribing the medication. "There is nothing in the bill that requires that," he said during floor debate. But proponents of the bill said it's a meaningful step towards medical autonomy and the right to choose — Senator Brad Hoylman-Sigal, D-Manhattan, the Senate sponsor of the bill, said that some identified gaps in the bill will be filled in the regulation-crafting process with the state Department of Health, which will be tasked with overseeing the implementation and authorization necessary to allow New York doctors and pharmacies to dispense these lethal medications. The lobbying isn't over yet. A major opponent of the bill, the New York State Catholic Conference, took to the halls of the Capitol on Monday in a last-ditch effort to kill the bill's chances in the Senate. Their effort was unsuccessful, but they've continued to push the governor to reject the bill. Sen. Mark C. Walczyk, R-Sackets Harbor, said in a statement that he was sad to see the bill pass. "I have tremendous sympathy for those with terminal illnesses and respect families who face end-of-life decisions," Walczyk said in a statement. "This legislation lacks critical protections for the vulnerable, structurally incentivizes suicide, and devalues human life. We need only look at the examples of states and nations that have promoted this policy. Instead of providing an option for individuals to end their lives, we should focus on improving health care for the vulnerable and enhancing hospice and palliative care for the terminally ill to ensure that every New Yorker has access to compassionate support during their most vulnerable moments, rather than offering a misguided solution that encourages despair."
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
RFK Jr fires entire US vaccine committee
Robert F Kennedy Jr has dismissed all current members of a key federal vaccine advisory panel, accusing them of conflicts of interest. The removal of all 17 experts of the advisory committee on immunisation practices was revealed in a Wall Street Journal op-ed and an official press release. Mr Kennedy, the US health secretary, who has spent two decades amplifying vaccine misinformation, cast the move as essential to restoring public trust, claiming the committee had been compromised by financial ties to pharmaceutical companies. 'Today we are prioritising the restoration of public trust above any specific pro or anti-vaccine agenda,' he said in a statement from the Department of Health and Human Services. 'The public must know that unbiased science – evaluated through a transparent process and insulated from conflicts of interest – guides the recommendations of our health agencies.' In his op-ed, Mr Kennedy claimed the panel was 'plagued with persistent conflicts of interest' and had become 'little more than a rubber stamp for any vaccine'. He added that new members were being considered to replace those ousted, all of whom were appointed under Joe Biden, the former president. Committee members are chosen for their recognised expertise and are required to disclose potential conflicts of interest. 'RFK Jr and the Trump administration are taking a wrecking ball to the programs that keep Americans safe and healthy,' Chuck Schumer, the Senate Democratic leader, said in response. Republican Senator Bill Cassidy, a medical doctor who expressed concern about Mr Kennedy's track record during his Senate nomination but ultimately voted in his favour, wrote on X: 'Of course, now the fear is that the ACIP will be filled up with people who know nothing about vaccines except suspicion. 'I've just spoken with Secretary Kennedy, and I'll continue to talk with him to ensure this is not the case.' The decision drew sharp criticism from Paul Offit, a paediatrician and leading expert on virology and immunology, who served on the panel from 1998 to 2003. 'He believes that anybody who speaks well of vaccines, or recommends vaccines, must be deeply in the pocket of industry,' Mr Offit told AFP. 'He's fixing a problem that doesn't exist.' 'We are witnessing an escalating effort by the administration to silence independent medical expertise and stoke distrust in life-saving vaccines,' added Susan Kressly, president of the American Academy of Paediatrics, in a statement. Once a celebrated environmental lawyer, Kennedy pivoted to public health from the mid-2000s, chairing a non-profit that discouraged routine childhood immunisations and amplified false claims, including the long-debunked theory that the Measles, Mumps and Rubella (MMR) vaccine causes autism. Since taking office, he has curtailed access to Covid shots and continued to raise fears around the MMR vaccine even as the US faces its worst measles outbreak in years, with three reported deaths and more than 1,100 confirmed cases. Experts have warned that the true case count is likely to be far higher. 'How can this country have confidence that the people RFK Jr. wants on the advisory committee on immunisation practices are people we can trust?' asked Mr Offit. He recalled that during Donald Trump's first term as US president, several states formed independent vaccine advisory panels after the administration pressured federal health agencies to prematurely approve Covid vaccines ahead of the 2020 election. He warned that kind of fragmentation could happen again. The advisory committee on immunisation practices is scheduled to hold its next meeting at the headquarters of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta from June 25 to June 27. Vaccines for anthrax, Covid, human papillomavirus, influenza, Lyme disease, respiratory syncytial virus, and more are on the agenda. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
Bill to amend medically assisted suicide law draws emotional debate from Maine lawmakers
Jun. 9—AUGUSTA — A proposal to allow doctors to waive the waiting period for terminally ill patients who want to be given life-ending drugs drew an emotional debate from lawmakers in the Maine Senate Monday before it was rejected by one vote. The fate of the bill is unclear after the Senate voted the proposal down 18-17. It passed 74-64 in the House of Representatives last week and faces another round of votes in each chamber before it could be sent to Gov. Janet Mills for her signature. The bill would amend a 2019 law known as the Death with Dignity Act, which legalized physician-assisted suicide in Maine. It allows certain terminally ill patients to have the option to receive life-ending medication so they have control over their death. Maine's law currently requires a 17-day waiting period from when a person requests the medication to when they can receive the prescription. The change under consideration, LD 613, would allow a doctor to waive all or a portion of the waiting period if they determine it would be in the patient's best interest. Mills supported the original Death with Dignity Act, but it's unclear if she would support the change. Spokespeople for the governor did not respond Monday to questions about whether she has taken a position on the bill. The proposal allowing for the waiting period to be waived drew emotional debate from lawmakers who spoke about how they've personally been affected by illness and death. "This is not an abstract issue for me," said Rep. Kathy Javner, R-Chester, who has metastatic breast cancer, during last week's House debate. "I am living this reality and stand before you today, not in despair, but in hope that we can preserve the dignity and meaning of life, even in the shadow of death." Javner, who was against the change, said removing the waiting period would take away the time that families and physicians currently have to reflect and consider alternative options. "Let us not respond to suffering with surrender," Javner said. "Let us respond with compassion, with presence, with resources for pain management, with palliative care, with love." Senate Minority Leader Trey Stewart, R-Presque Isle, talked about his mother, who died at age 50 from colorectal cancer, during Monday's Senate debate. Stewart said his mother "broke out" of hospice care in order to be at home with her family at the end of her life. "I will always be grateful for that extra month we got," Stewart said. "I worry about the scenarios about what if they don't get it right and what opportunities are we forestalling through this," he added. "This was the promise that was made originally with this policy, that there wouldn't be that knee-jerk opportunity because of this protection." Maine is among 10 states and Washington, D.C., where physician-assisted suicide is legal for people with terminal illnesses, according to Death With Dignity, an organization in Portland, Oregon, that advocates for the laws as a means of improving how people with such diagnoses die. Waiting periods for medication vary state to state and can range from one day to more than two weeks, according to Death With Dignity. Some states do allow waiting periods to be waived if the patient is unlikely to survive. Maine's Death with Dignity Act has been used by 218 people since it was enacted, according to Michele Meyer, D-Eliot, the sponsor of LD 613. But another nine people have died during the waiting period because their illnesses progressed too rapidly, Meyer said last week. She said the bill does not change the law's criteria that the patient be terminally ill with a six-month prognosis confirmed by two doctors and that they have the capacity to make informed decisions. "This is simple and straight forward," Meyer said. "It corrects a rare situation that never should have existed in the first place. Some of us will not know the gift of a long, healthy life. ... Medical aid in dying offers decisionally capable adults an option to avoid prolonged suffering." In the Senate Monday, Sen. Tim Nangle, D-Windham, talked about his father's lung cancer and the pain he suffered. Nangle said he didn't know if his father, who lived in another state, would have used the Death with Dignity Act, but he said the option for the time waiver should be there. "This is about their choice," Nangle said. "What do they want to do?" Copy the Story Link
