Featured Post from University of Connecticut

UConn’s Dr. David Banach was one of the first to be vaccinated – let him explain the COVID-19 Vaccine

Dec 16, 2020

3 min

David Banach


The initial doses of the first approved COVID-19 vaccine are here, and health care workers are part of the group that’s getting it first. One of them is Dr. David Banach, UConn Health infectious diseases physician and hospital epidemiologist, who sees the vaccine not only as a major breakthrough in the fight to end the pandemic, but also as an opportunity for his clinical colleagues to lead that effort and set the tone for the rest of the world.



Here are some key facts about the COVID-19 vaccine, with Dr. Banach providing explanations of each:


The COVID-19 vaccine won’t infect you with COVID-19.


“There is no live virus in this vaccine, so you can’t actually get infected with SARS-CoV-2 from the vaccine. What this vaccine has is messenger RNA, which is a little bit of genetic code that allows the body’s natural machinery to make the protein that will generate an immune response."


You may actually want some side effects from the COVID-19 vaccine.


“You might get some soreness at the injection site, maybe some fatigue for a day or two, but that can be a good thing, a sign your body is making that immune response. That’s what is going to protect you in the future if you get exposed to the virus. The data from the clinical trials show the side effects – the soreness, fatigue, in some cases a short-lived fever – occur the first few days afterwards, and the rate of serious side effects is extraordinarily low for this vaccine.”


The vaccine was developed relatively quickly, but not by compromising the scientific process.


“When you look at Operation Warp Speed and how this process moved really quickly, that was really focused on the research and development piece and the manufacturing piece. Importantly, the phase 3 clinical trial was not rushed. This is the same type of clinical trial that we would do for any other vaccine. We followed people for at least two months. The clinical trials were huge, and they had diverse populations. So that part of the whole process wasn’t rushed at all, and that’s the most important part.”


Don’t throw out those masks just yet.


“We know this vaccine prevents people from developing symptomatic and severe COVID infection. I think what we don’t know is the effect it’s going to have on viral transmission, including asymptomatic shedding of virus. For instance, people who get the vaccine might still potentially shed virus, potentially at a lower level. The vaccine will prevent them from actually becoming ill, but vaccinated individuals might still be able to have virus in their nose and their respiratory system.


Immunity from the vaccine is not instantaneous.


“The COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials using the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna mRNA vaccines were designed using a two-dose series in order to generate the optimal level of protection from the vaccine. That’s why getting both doses of the vaccine is essential. Although there is likely some individual variability, immunity may not be optimal until several days after the second dose. The phase 3 clinical trials used a period of at least one-to-two weeks after the second dose as a marker of immunity during which they were able to demonstrate the efficacy of the vaccines in protecting against COVID-19 infection.”


Dr. David Banach is one of the lead experts on COVID-19 in America. He is available to speak with media regarding the vaccination and what the future holds with regards to COVID-19. To book an interview – simply click on his icon and arrange a time now.


Connect with:
David Banach

David Banach

Associate Professor of Medicine Head of Infection Prevention Hospital Epidemiologist

Dr. David Banach is an expert in the field of infectious diseases and epidemiology.

CoronavirusMedicineHealth Care Associated InfectionsInfectious DiseasesInfections in Immunocompromised Patients

You might also like...

Check out some other posts from University of Connecticut

3 min

New study shows alarming rate of potential species extinction due to climate change

A recent study authored by the University of Connecticut's Mark Urban found that close to one third of species across the globe would be at risk of extinction by the end of the century if greenhouse gases continue to increase at current levels. His study, published in the journal Science, looked at more than three decades of biodiversity and climate change research. The findings are alarming. The study found that if global temperatures rise to 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit (1.5 degrees Celsius) above the pre-industrial average temperature, exceeding the target of the Paris Agreement, extinctions would rapidly accelerate — especially for amphibians; species in mountain, island and freshwater ecosystems; and species in South America, Australia and New Zealand. Earth has already warmed about 1.8 F (1 C) since the Industrial Revolution. Climate change causes shifts in temperatures and precipitation patterns, altering habitats and species interactions. For instance, warmer temperatures have caused monarch butterfly migration to mismatch with the blooming of plants they pollinate. Many animal and plant species are shifting their ranges to higher latitudes or elevations to follow more favorable temperatures. While some species might adapt or migrate in response to changing environmental conditions, some can't survive the drastic environmental changes, resulting in population declines and sometimes extinction. Global assessments have predicted rising extinction risks for over a million species, but scientists have not clearly understood how exactly this growing risk is linked to climate change. The new study, published Thursday (Dec. 5) in the journal Science, analyzed over 30 years of biodiversity and climate change research, encompassing over 450 studies of most known species. If greenhouse gas emissions are managed in accordance with the Paris Agreement, nearly 1 in 50 species worldwide — an estimated 180,000 species — will be at risk of extinction by 2100. When the climate model's temperature is increased to a 4.9 F (2.7 C) rise, which is predicted under current international emissions commitments, 1 in 20 species around the world would be at risk of extinction. Hypothetical warming beyond this point makes the number of species at risk rise sharply: 14.9% of species were at risk of extinction under a 7.7 F (4.3 C) warming scenario, which assumes high greenhouse gas emissions. And 29.7% of all species would be at risk of extinction under a 9.7 F (5.4 C) warming scenario, a high estimate, but one that is possible given current emissions trends. The increase in the number of species at risk increases steeply beyond the 1.5 C warming target, study author Mark Urban, a biologist at the University of Connecticut told Live Science. "If we keep global warming to below 1.5 C, in accordance with the Paris Agreement, then the [extinction] risk from today to 1.5 C is not a large increase," Urban said. But at a 2.7 C rise, the trajectory accelerates. Species in South America, Australia and New Zealand face the greatest threats. Amphibians are the most threatened because amphibians' life cycles depend heavily on weather, and are highly sensitive to shifting rainfall patterns and drought, Urban said. Mountain, island and freshwater ecosystems have the most at-risk species, likely because these isolated environments are surrounded by inhospitable habitats for their species, making it difficult or impossible for them to migrate and seek more favorable climates, he added. Limiting greenhouse gas emissions can slow warming and halt these growing extinction risks, but understanding which species and ecosystems are most affected by climate change can also help target conservation efforts where they're needed most. Urban hopes the results have an impact on policymakers. "The main message for policymakers is that this relationship is much more certain," Urban said. "There's no longer the excuse to do nothing because these impacts are uncertain."  December 5, 2024 - Live Science This is an important topic, and if you're a journalist looking to learn more, we can help. Mark Urban is an international award-winning scientist; a professor of ecology and evolutionary biology and the Arden Chair Ecology & Evolutionary Biology at UConn; and a global expert on climate change impacts on nature. He is available to speak with media - simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today.

3 min

Moths in the Mojave, with UConn's David Wagner

Did you know that there are approximately 180,000 moth and butterfly species living in California’s Mojave Desert? Moths, the winged insects famous for eating sweaters and flocking to lights at night, are a mysterious and captivating species for entomologists like UConn's David Wagner. He was part of a research study that was documented recently in The Washington Post. Each night in the desert, vast clouds of sphinx moths, some spanning the palm of your hand, speed between night-blooming flowers, sipping nectar. Ethmia, tiny black moths with spots shaped like musical notes, emerge from the dark like fairies. Thousands of geometrid moths, no bigger than your fingernail, slip by cloaked in desert hues from rusty reds to pale green. To witness them, I traveled deep into the Mojave Desert this spring with a team from the California Academy of Sciences working to ensure the survival of lepidoptera. For two days, we beat bushes, placed traps and collected thousands of moths to see what lives there — and what can be saved. Moths have inhabited our planet for at least 200 million years. But the conservation status of about 99 percent of moth species remains unknown. Some, like sphinx moths, remain abundant. Many others are probably being pushed to the brink by development, land-use changes, pesticides and pollution, and rising temperatures. “It’s not this unseen force,” says David Wagner, an entomologist at the University of Connecticut. “It’s humans.” Over two nights in the desert, I discovered just how easy it is to fall in love with an unloved insect. And why “mothing” may be the best way to discover the miracle of biodiversity in your own backyard. On the arid western edge of the Mojave, where the desert floor rises to meet the San Bernardino Mountains, sits the 306-acre Burns Piñon Ridge Reserve. We venture out in the morning with beating sticks. Hitting the branches of small oaks and rabbitbrush deposits a treasure trove of insect life into collectors made out of fabric: Crane flies, green lacewings, spiders, walking sticks and caterpillars that will one day grow into moths. Wagner and Chris Grinter, an entomologist and collection manager at the California Academy of Sciences, will catalogue the most interesting ones. The academy houses a collection of 18 million insects, 700,000 of which are butterflies and moth specimens. Many are still waiting for scientists to identify and name them. The plight of moths and caterpillars has fascinated Wagner since childhood. After 20 years, he is no less enthusiastic — or worried. Wagner traveled to Burns Piñon to help finish his magnum opus, the successor to his 500-page guide to eastern North America’s caterpillars. The guide for the west will probably run more than 1,500 pages, a testament to the region’s remarkable biodiversity. As the sun sets, the mood is anticipatory. We head out into the desert to set our traps and see what moths we’ll discover. “The nice thing,” says Grinter, “is moths will come to you.”  The article is an amazing read - and the link is above. And if you are interested in knowing more about moths, insects, or the fascinating field of entomology, then let us help. Dr. David Wagner is an expert in caterpillars, butterflies, moths, and insect conservation, and he's commented extensively on the current decline of insects worldwide. Click his icon to arrange an interview today.

3 min

Every Voice and Vote Matters

It's the right of every citizen - and with a presidential election less than two weeks away, a team of social workers from UConn are working to make sure every voice is heard as the U.S. choses a new leader on Nov. 5. Voting Is Social Work - a campaign led by Tanya Rhodes Smith, director of the Nancy A. Humphreys Institute for Political Social Work at the UConn School of Social Work - is getting a lot of attention for its work engaging social workers to help empower some of the most vulnerable and disenfranchised groups to get registered and cast their ballots in local elections. “Voting is complicated, and it’s intimidating, especially for vulnerable populations, like the unhoused, the formerly incarcerated, or those living in congregate care,” says Rhodes Smith. “We know that being a non-voter is a very isolating space, because voting is highly relational. Campaigns generally ignore non-voters— you don’t get campaign materials, or someone knocking on your door. Information on candidates in state and local elections in communities with low turnout can be very hard to find or even nonexistent.” That’s where social workers, explains Rhodes Smith, can play an important role in helping disenfranchised voters understand their rights – and register to vote. Money, Power, and Resources As co-founders since 2015, UConn’s Humphreys Institute has been the institutional home for Voting Is Social Work. Also known as the National Social Work Voter Mobilization Campaign, Voting Is Social Work supports nonpartisan voter engagement as central to social work’s mission, ethical mandate, and impact. “We’ve always believed that social work has the power to transform democracy,” says Rhodes Smith, “and we believe every social worker – and social service agency – should include nonpartisan voter engagement into their practice and work. Because we reach non-voters – those who are least likely to vote.” October 16 - UConn Today It's an initiative catching attention across the country. Research has linked voting to higher earning and education, better health outcomes, and lower rates of recidivism. But education is key, particularly for individuals with special circumstances, like the formerly incarcerated, people living in congregate care, and the unhoused. Homelessness comes with a new, unique set of challenges during an election cycle. However, homeless residents have protections, including voting rights. Nationwide, only 10% of unhoused people vote each year, according to the Institute of Political Social Work at the University of Connecticut. Many social workers in Connecticut are working to educate unhoused residents about their voting rights, according to UConn Social Work professor Tanya Rhodes Smith, director of the Nancy A. Humphreys Institute for Political Social Work. “When you ask somebody if they would like to check their voter registration, they may say, ‘I'm not eligible,’ or ‘I've never voted,’ and that's really important information for you to know,” Rhodes Smith said. “It really tells a story about them.” About 60% of eligible voters turnout in presidential election years, but increasing voting rates is important for local elections as well, Rhodes Smith said. “When you have 10% to 15% [voter turnout], that's not an accountable government, that's a government that's accountable to the 10% to 15%,” Rhodes Smith said. “We've seen it over and over in Bridgeport, that nothing changes because that turnout rate doesn't go up, and so there is no accountability when you have an unhealthy democracy.” October 10 - WNPR Looking to know more about this important work? If so, let us help. Tanya Rhodes Smith specializes in policy development, nonprofit administration, voter engagement and legislative advocacy. She's available to speak with media about this important topic - simply click on her icon now to arrange an interview.

View all posts
Powered by