Tag: Screening

  • U.S. Airport Ebola Screening Remains Active Through July 21: What Returning Travelers Need to Know

    U.S. Airport Ebola Screening Remains Active Through July 21: What Returning Travelers Need to Know

    Enhanced Ebola screening is currently active at three major U.S. international airports, and entry restrictions for travelers from the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Uganda, and South Sudan remain in effect through approximately July 21, 2026. The measures were put in place in response to a growing outbreak of Bundibugyo virus disease — a rare and potentially fatal strain of Ebola for which no approved vaccine or specific treatment exists.

    Travelers who have recently returned from those regions, or who plan to travel there, need to understand what these measures require and what symptoms demand immediate medical attention.


    Why This Matters

    The Bundibugyo strain of Ebola is not the same as the Zaire strain responsible for West Africa’s 2014–2016 epidemic. The FDA-approved Ebola vaccine that provided protection in those prior outbreaks is not considered effective against the Bundibugyo virus. There are no approved countermeasures specific to this strain, which means containment relies on surveillance, contact tracing, isolation, and border screening.

    Case fatality rates for Bundibugyo virus disease in prior outbreaks have ranged from approximately 25% to 50%, according to the CDC — lower than Zaire Ebola but still highly serious. Patients experience fever, vomiting, severe weakness, and in some cases bleeding. Without a vaccine or treatment option, early identification of cases among arriving travelers is critical to preventing domestic spread.

    The World Health Organization has declared this outbreak a Public Health Emergency of International Concern — its highest alert designation.


    What We Know So Far

    The DRC’s Ministry of Health confirmed the Bundibugyo outbreak on May 15, 2026, after laboratory analysis identified Bundibugyo virus in samples from clusters of severe illness and deaths in Ituri Province. The affected health zones — Mongbwalu and Rwampara — are in northeastern DRC near the Ugandan border.

    By mid-June 2026, the DRC had reported 837 confirmed cases and 196 confirmed deaths. Uganda confirmed cases linked to travelers from DRC. South Sudan, which borders both countries, has not confirmed any cases but is included in U.S. entry restrictions due to the geographic risk.

    The U.S. response has been layered:

    As of the most recent CDC update, one American citizen who worked in DRC tested positive for Ebola but has since fully recovered and was released from care. High-risk contacts completed 21-day monitoring without developing symptoms. The CDC assesses the risk to the general U.S. public as low. No cases have been acquired domestically.


    Which Airports Are Conducting Screening

    The CDC and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) are conducting enhanced Ebola screening at three designated airports for travelers arriving from DRC, Uganda, or South Sudan:

    • Washington Dulles International Airport (IAD) — for flights departing affected countries after May 21, 2026
    • Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport (ATL) — for flights after May 22, 2026
    • George Bush Intercontinental Airport, Houston (IAH) — for flights after May 26, 2026

    U.S. citizens and nationals who have been in the affected countries are permitted to return but must enter through one of these designated airports and undergo enhanced public health screening, which may include a health interview, temperature check, and review of symptoms. Travelers without symptoms will receive monitoring instructions and may continue to their final destination.

    According to the U.S. Embassy in DRC, travelers should be prepared for possible flight changes or cancellations when routing through these airports.


    Where the Risk Is Highest

    The active outbreak is concentrated in Ituri Province in northeastern DRC, particularly the Mongbwalu and Rwampara health zones. The CDC notes that the affected areas experience insecurity, population displacement, mining-related movement, and frequent cross-border traffic — all factors that increase transmission risk and complicate outbreak containment.

    In the United States, travelers and healthcare workers who have recently returned from DRC, Uganda, or South Sudan face the primary risk. International humanitarian workers, aid and medical personnel, journalists, researchers, and missionaries are the groups with the highest likelihood of having been in outbreak zones.

    Healthcare facilities in Atlanta, Houston, and the Washington D.C. metropolitan area should maintain heightened awareness given their proximity to the designated screening airports. Emergency departments and infectious disease units in these cities are most likely to encounter a returning traveler who develops symptoms during the 21-day monitoring period.


    What Doctors and Experts Say

    The CDC’s Health Alert Network advisory (HAN 00530) issued May 19, 2026, emphasized that “the risk of spread to the United States is considered low at this time” but called on clinicians to remain vigilant. The agency stated it is working through its country offices and international partners to support disease tracking, contact tracing, laboratory testing, and border health screening.

    The CDC noted a specific challenge with this outbreak: the FDA-approved vaccine (Ervebo) is effective against Zaire ebolavirus — the species responsible for major past outbreaks — but is not considered effective against Bundibugyo virus. The absence of an approved countermeasure for this strain makes infection control and early case detection especially critical.

    WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, in public statements cited across multiple outlets covering the outbreak’s early weeks, acknowledged that the delay in detecting the initial cluster meant response teams were “playing catch-up with a very fast-moving epidemic.” Contact tracing, treatment center establishment, and infection control measures have been scaled up since.

    For healthcare providers seeing patients who have returned from affected regions, the CDC recommends immediately placing potentially symptomatic patients under appropriate infection control precautions and contacting local or state public health departments for guidance on testing and isolation.


    What the Evidence Shows and What It Does Not

    The Bundibugyo virus has caused only two prior recorded outbreaks — Uganda in 2007 and DRC in 2012 — making it less well-studied than Zaire ebolavirus. Prior outbreaks had case fatality rates of approximately 25% to 50%, but that range reflects small sample sizes and variable outbreak conditions.

    Airport screening can identify travelers who are symptomatic at the time of arrival but cannot detect those who are infected but not yet showing symptoms. As the CDC states: “Public health entry screening cannot identify travelers who are infected but not yet showing symptoms.” The incubation period for Ebola is 2 to 21 days. Screening is therefore one component of a multilayered public health response, not a complete safeguard.

    The 21-day post-departure monitoring requirement for returning travelers exists precisely because of this gap.


    Who Faces the Greatest Risk?

    Based on current epidemiological data and CDC guidance, the highest-risk individuals in the United States are:

    • People who have traveled to or from Ituri Province, DRC, within the past 21 days
    • Humanitarian aid workers, healthcare volunteers, and missionary workers returning from DRC or Uganda
    • People who had direct contact with the blood or bodily fluids of a person confirmed or suspected to have Bundibugyo virus disease
    • Healthcare workers who treated or evaluated patients with suspected BVD without full personal protective equipment
    • Individuals who attended funerals or burial ceremonies in affected areas, where transmission risk is historically elevated

    The CDC’s Level 2 Travel Health Notice recommends avoiding nonessential travel to the specific affected provinces in DRC (Ituri, Nord-Kivu, and Sud-Kivu).


    Symptoms and Warning Signs to Watch For

    Anyone who has been in DRC, Uganda, or South Sudan within the past 21 days should monitor themselves carefully for the following symptoms, which may appear between 2 and 21 days after exposure:

    • Sudden onset of fever (often above 101.5°F / 38.6°C)
    • Severe headache
    • Muscle pain and weakness
    • Fatigue
    • Vomiting and diarrhea
    • Stomach pain
    • Unexplained bleeding or bruising (typically a later sign)

    The development of any of these symptoms in a person who has recently returned from an affected region requires immediate action. Do not travel to a hospital or clinic without calling first. Contact your local health department or call 911 and tell the dispatcher about your recent travel and symptoms so that appropriate isolation procedures can be prepared before you arrive.


    What You Can Do Now

    • If you recently returned from DRC, Uganda, or South Sudan, follow your state or local health department’s monitoring instructions for 21 days after your departure date from those countries.
    • Monitor your temperature daily and record any symptoms during the 21-day window.
    • Avoid international and domestic travel during your monitoring period, per CDC recommendations.
    • If you develop any symptoms, do not go directly to a hospital. Call your local health department and inform them of your travel history before seeking care.
    • Register with the Smart Traveler Enrollment Program (STEP) if you are a U.S. citizen in DRC, Uganda, or South Sudan, so the nearest embassy can provide updates and assistance.
    • Healthcare providers who evaluate a returning traveler with fever or other compatible symptoms should immediately implement infection control measures and notify their state health department and the CDC Emergency Operations Center at 770-488-7100.

    Cost and Access: What Patients Should Know

    If a returning traveler is identified as a potential Ebola case, isolation and evaluation will be coordinated by public health authorities. The CDC maintains a network of federal medical stations and Regional Ebola and Special Pathogen Treatment Centers (RESPTCs) capable of safely managing patients with highly infectious diseases.

    For general travelers concerned about health coverage abroad, the U.S. Department of State recommends purchasing travel insurance that includes medical evacuation coverage before traveling to high-risk regions.


    What Happens Next

    The current U.S. entry restriction order expires around July 21, 2026, but may be extended if the outbreak continues to grow. The CDC will assess the epidemiological situation and issue updates as warranted.

    WHO and international partners are working to scale up outbreak response in DRC and Uganda, including contact tracing, treatment access, and community engagement in affected areas. Given that no approved vaccine or specific treatment exists for Bundibugyo virus, containment measures remain the primary line of defense.

    MedicalDaily will follow CDC updates and the WHO outbreak situation report as they are published.


    The Bottom Line

    Ebola airport screening is active at Dulles, Atlanta, and Houston through at least July 21, 2026. The Bundibugyo strain currently affecting DRC and Uganda has no approved vaccine or treatment, and the outbreak has now surpassed 800 confirmed cases with nearly 200 deaths. The CDC assesses the risk to the general U.S. public as low.

    But low risk does not mean no risk. Travelers who have been in affected regions must monitor themselves for symptoms for 21 full days after departure and must contact health authorities — not walk into an emergency room — if symptoms develop. Following official CDC and state health department guidance is the single most important step returning travelers can take.

    Source link

  • Hidden Gut Virus Inside a Common Bacterium May Double Colon Cancer Risk and Could Become a Future Stool-Based Screening Marker

    Hidden Gut Virus Inside a Common Bacterium May Double Colon Cancer Risk and Could Become a Future Stool-Based Screening Marker

    Hidden viruses in the gut are emerging as a new frontier in cancer research, and the virome may be just as important as bacteria when it comes to colorectal cancer risk. A newly described bacteriophage hiding inside common Bacteroides bacteria has been linked to roughly doubled odds of developing colorectal cancer, and it may one day serve as a non‑invasive stool biomarker for earlier detection.

    This finding is pushing scientists to look beyond bacteria alone and consider how viral communities in the intestine shape health and disease.

    Colorectal Cancer and the Need for Better Screening

    Colorectal cancer starts in the colon or rectum, usually from small polyps that can become malignant over many years.

    Because early stages often cause no symptoms, detection before spread is crucial for survival and treatment success. When found early, colorectal cancer is usually much more treatable and associated with better long‑term outcomes.

    Current screening tools include colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, fecal occult blood tests (FOBT/FIT), and stool DNA tests. Colonoscopy is highly effective but invasive, requires bowel preparation, and can be difficult to access for some people.

    Stool‑based tests are simpler and non‑invasive, but they can miss early cancers or advanced polyps. These limitations drive interest in new stool biomarkers, including those that come from the gut virome, bacteriophages, and specific Bacteroides strains.

    Microbiome, Virome, and Cancer Risk

    Most research on colorectal cancer and the gut has focused on the microbiome, the community of bacteria in the intestine. Studies repeatedly show that certain bacteria, such as Fusobacterium and some Bacteroides species, are more common in people with colorectal cancer than in healthy controls.

    These microbes may promote inflammation, produce toxins, or form biofilms that help tumors develop and escape immune defenses.

    Alongside bacteria, the gut also hosts a rich virome, made up largely of bacteriophages, viruses that infect bacteria, not human cells. Bacteriophages can integrate into bacterial genomes (as prophages) or lyse their hosts. In doing so, they can change which bacteria are present and how they behave.

    A bacterium carrying a particular prophage may produce more toxins, adhere more strongly to the gut lining, or interact differently with the immune system.

    Because of these effects, the virome is now seen as an important factor in colorectal cancer. Distinct bacteriophage patterns have been observed in stool samples from colorectal cancer patients.

    These patterns suggest that certain phages, especially those linked to Bacteroides, could act as both contributors to disease and as stool biomarkers that signal increased risk.

    Bacteroides fragilis and a Hidden Bacteriophage

    Bacteroides is a major bacterial genus in the human colon and plays key roles in digestion and immune development. Among its species, Bacteroides fragilis is widely present in healthy individuals.

    Most strains are harmless or beneficial, but some enterotoxigenic Bacteroides fragilis (ETBF) strains produce toxins that can cause diarrhea and chronic inflammation.

    Recent work has revealed a previously unrecognized bacteriophage integrated into Bacteroides fragilis genomes. In its prophage state, this virus sits quietly inside the bacterial DNA and is not visible as an active infection.

    Using high‑throughput sequencing of bacterial isolates and stool samples, researchers identified a specific viral sequence that appeared far more often in Bacteroides fragilis from people with colorectal cancer than in those without the disease.

    This suggests that the combination of Bacteroides and a particular bacteriophage may matter more than the bacterium alone.

    How Strong Is the Association With Colorectal Cancer?

    Across large international cohorts, individuals with colorectal cancer were about twice as likely to carry this Bacteroides‑associated bacteriophage compared with cancer‑free controls.

    This does not prove that the virus causes cancer, but it signals a strong association worth further study. It raises the possibility that the bacteriophage could affect bacterial virulence, toxin production, or interactions with the gut lining in ways that promote tumor development.

    Mechanistically, researchers suspect that prophage integration might alter gene regulation in Bacteroides fragilis, increase production of inflammatory or genotoxic factors, or encourage biofilm formation on the colon mucosa.

    Even if the virus itself is not directly oncogenic, it may mark a broader virome and microbiome shift that creates a more cancer‑prone environment. From a screening perspective, this kind of consistent association is valuable, because a reliable marker can help identify people at higher risk.

    Virome-Based Stool Biomarkers: A New Screening Frontier

    Stool is an ideal medium for non‑invasive testing because it contains DNA and RNA from bacteria, viruses, and the host. Traditional stool tests for colorectal cancer look for blood or human DNA mutations.

    Microbiome‑based approaches add information about bacterial composition. Virome‑based testing extends this by targeting bacteriophages and other gut viruses as additional indicators.

    Bacteriophages are attractive stool biomarkers because they are abundant and often highly specific to their bacterial hosts. A virome‑focused assay could, in principle, detect the Bacteroides‑associated bacteriophage linked to colorectal cancer.

    This could be done with broad metagenomic sequencing or with targeted PCR approaches that look specifically for the viral sequence.

    In real‑world use, such a viral marker would likely be combined with bacterial, human DNA, and blood‑based markers in a multi‑parameter stool test, improving sensitivity for early disease while maintaining acceptable false‑positive rates.

    Before any virome‑based stool biomarker becomes part of standard care, it must be validated in large prospective studies, tested across diverse populations, and shown to be cost‑effective and practical in routine clinics. Laboratory methods will need standardization, and regulatory approval will be required.

    Virome-Driven Advances in Colorectal Cancer Prevention

    The emerging link between the gut virome, specific bacteriophages, Bacteroides, and colorectal cancer underscores how complex the intestinal ecosystem is. As research continues, virome‑based stool biomarkers may complement colonoscopy and existing stool tests, offering more personalized and less invasive screening options.

    If the Bacteroides‑associated bacteriophage consistently identifies individuals at higher risk, an accessible stool biomarker built around this virome signal could help detect colorectal cancer earlier and guide timely prevention and treatment.

    Frequently Asked Questions

    1. Can changing my diet modify the gut virome and possibly affect colorectal cancer risk?

    A diet rich in fiber, fruits, and vegetables can shift both the microbiome and virome toward more diverse, stable communities, which is generally associated with lower inflammation and may indirectly reduce colorectal cancer risk.

    2. Is it possible to remove harmful bacteriophages like the one in Bacteroides with probiotics?

    Current probiotics mainly influence bacteria, not specific bacteriophages; while they might alter the overall ecosystem, there is no evidence yet that standard probiotic products selectively remove this Bacteroides‑associated virus.

    3. Could antibiotics help by eliminating Bacteroides strains carrying cancer‑linked bacteriophages?

    Broad antibiotics can reduce Bacteroides and associated phages, but they also disrupt beneficial microbes and may harm long‑term gut health, so they are not considered a targeted or preventive strategy for colorectal cancer.

    4. Are at-home microbiome tests able to detect virome patterns linked to colorectal cancer?

    Most consumer microbiome kits focus on bacterial DNA and do not comprehensively profile the virome, so they cannot reliably detect cancer‑associated bacteriophage signatures at this time.



    Originally published on Science Times

    Source link

  • GDM screening & nutrition updates

    GDM screening & nutrition updates


    With new gestational diabetes guidelines released this year, it’s the perfect time to brush up on the latest evidence and explore what’s changing for dietitians in pregnancy care. In this episode, Accredited Practising Dietitian and researcher, Purva Gulyani, joins us to unpack the updates, dispel common myths and share practical, culturally inclusive strategies to support women through pregnancy.

    Hosted by Brooke Delfino

    Biography

    Purva Gulyani is an Accredited Practising Dietitian, researcher, PhD Candidate at La Trobe University and Director of Diet Yumm, with over 18 years of clinical and community nutrition experience across India and Australia.  Purva is passionate about simplifying nutrition, prevention-focused care, and advocating for culturally safe, evidence-based practice.

     


    In this episode, we discuss:

    • Key changes in the 2025 gestational diabetes guidelines
    • Evidence-based dietary strategies for management
    • Common misconceptions and how to address them
    • How to provide culturally inclusive nutrition advice


    Additional resources

    Connect with Purva at dietyumm.com or on  LinkedIn

    Click here to learn more about the updated recommendations for the screening, diagnosis and classification of gestational diabetes


    Additional reading:


    The content, products and/or services referred to in this podcast are intended for Health Care Professionals only and are not, and are not intended to be, medical advice, which should be tailored to your individual circumstances. The content is for your information only, and we advise that you exercise your own judgement before deciding to use the information provided. Professional medical advice should be obtained before taking action. The reference to particular products and/or services in this episode does not constitute any form of endorsement. Please see  here  for terms and conditions.


    Source link