Perceived Risk of Mosquito-Borne Arboviruses in the Continental United States.

The United States experienced local transmission of West Nile Virus (WNV) for the first time in 1999, and Zika Virus (ZIKV) in 2016. These introductions captured the public's attention in varying degrees. The research presented here analyzes the disproportional perception of ZIKV risk compared to WNV transmission risk, by the public and vector control personnel. The risk perception of vector control was measured through purposive sampled interviews (24 interviews in 13 states; May 2020-June 2021), while the public's perception was estimated from news publications (January 2000-December 2020), and Google searches (January 2004-December 2020). Over time, we observed a decrease in the frequency of press reporting and Google searches of both viruses with decreasing annual peaks in the summer. The highest peak of ZIKV news, and searches, surpassed that of WNV. We observed clear differences in the contents of the headlines for both viruses. We propose that the main reason in risk perception differences between the viruses were psychological. Zika infections (mosquito-borne and sexually transmitted) can result in devastating symptoms in fetuses and newborns, observations that frequently appeared in ZIKV-related headlines. Our results highlight the likely influence the news media has on risk perception and the need for public health agencies to play active roles in the conversation, helping disseminate timely and accurate information. Understanding the factors that shape risk perceptions of vector-borne diseases will hopefully lead to better use of resources by providing better guidance.

COVID-19 Among Workers in Meat and Poultry Processing Facilities - 19 States, April 2020.

Congregate work and residential locations are at increased risk for infectious disease transmission including respiratory illness outbreaks. SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), is primarily spread person to person through respiratory droplets. Nationwide, the meat and poultry processing industry, an essential component of the U.S. food infrastructure, employs approximately 500,000 persons, many of whom work in proximity to other workers (1). Because of reports of initial cases of COVID-19, in some meat processing facilities, states were asked to provide aggregated data concerning the number of meat and poultry processing facilities affected by COVID-19 and the number of workers with COVID-19 in these facilities, including COVID-19-related deaths. Qualitative data gathered by CDC during on-site and remote assessments were analyzed and summarized. During April 9-27, aggregate data on COVID-19 cases among 115 meat or poultry processing facilities in 19 states were reported to CDC. Among these facilities, COVID-19 was diagnosed in 4,913 (approximately 3%) workers, and 20 COVID-19-related deaths were reported. Facility barriers to effective prevention and control of COVID-19 included difficulty distancing workers at least 6 feet (2 meters) from one another (2) and in implementing COVID-19-specific disinfection guidelines.* Among workers, socioeconomic challenges might contribute to working while feeling ill, particularly if there are management practices such as bonuses that incentivize attendance. Methods to decrease transmission within the facility include worker symptom screening programs, policies to discourage working while experiencing symptoms compatible with COVID-19, and social distancing by workers. Source control measures (e.g., the use of cloth face covers) as well as increased disinfection of high-touch surfaces are also important means of preventing SARS-CoV-2 exposure. Mitigation efforts to reduce transmission in the community should also be considered. Many of these measures might also reduce asymptomatic and presymptomatic transmission (3). Implementation of these public health strategies will help protect workers from COVID-19 in this industry and assist in preserving the critical meat and poultry production infrastructure (4).

Evaluation of a campaign to reduce consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages in New Jersey.

Obesity is a leading cause of premature death in the U.S., in part due to consumption of sugar sweetened beverages (SSBs). In New Jersey, African Americans, Hispanics, and those of low income have the highest rates of SSB consumption. This study evaluates the impact of NJ Sugarfreed, a campaign designed to reduce sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) consumption across New Jersey. From 12/1/17-9/30/18, we used a collective impact model to create targeted statewide campaigns that reduce SSB consumption among New Jersey residents, with an emphasis on African American and Hispanic low-income mothers/caregivers who are often gatekeepers to children's SSB consumption. Passaic County, New Jersey received a higher dose intervention. Messages were disseminated through social media, partner organizations, and community partnerships. Campaign impact was examined through evaluation surveys and analysis of beverage sales. Baseline and follow-up surveys (n = 800 baseline; n = 782 follow-up) showed positive trends toward decreased soda consumption and increased knowledge about SSBs. Passaic respondents showed a 5% decrease in those who consume 1+ soda per day, compared to a 1% decrease among New Jersey respondents. Analysis of overall SSB beverage sales showed the most pronounced decreases in Passaic (7% decrease) compared to New Jersey (6%). By drawing upon best practices in message development and the use of various platforms for dissemination, combined with community-based participation, we have provided more evidence to support the use of a collective impact model as a way of reducing unhealthy behaviors that impact health disparities.