Survival of Staphylococcus Aureus on the Outer Shell of Fire Fighter Turnout Gear After Sanitation in a Commercial Washer/extractor

Background: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus contamination on surfaces including turnout gear had been found throughout a number of fire stations. As such, the outer shell barrier of turnout gear jackets may be an indirect transmission source and proper disinfection is essential to reduce the risk of exposure to fire fighters. Cleaning practices vary considerably among fire stations, and a method to assess disinfection of gear washed in commercial washer/extractors is needed. Methods: Swatches (1 in. × 1.5 in.) of the outer shell fabrics, Gemini™, Advance™, and Pioneer™, of turnout gear were inoculated with S. aureus, and washed with an Environmental Protection Agency-registered sanitizer commonly used to wash turnout gear. To initially assess the sanitizer, inoculated swatches were washed in small tubes according to the American Society for Testing Materials E2274 Protocol for evaluating laundry sanitizers. Inoculated swatches were also pinned to turnout gear jackets and washed in a Milnor commercial washer/extractor. Viable S. aureus that remained attached to fabric swatches after washing were recovered and quantified. Scanning Electron Microscopy was used to characterize the stages of S. aureus biofilm formation on the swatches that can result in resistance to disinfection. Results: Disinfection in small tubes for only 10 s reduced the viability of S. aureus on Gemini™, Advance™, and Pioneer™ by 73, 99, and 100%, respectively. In contrast, disinfection of S. aureus-contaminated Gemini™ swatches pinned to turnout gear and washed in the washer/extractor was 99.7% effective. Scanning Electron Microscopy showed that biofilm formation begins as early as 5 h after attachment of S. aureus. Conclusion: This sanitizer and, likely, others containing the anti-microbial agent didecyl dimethyl ammonium chloride, is an effective disinfectant of S. aureus. Inclusion of contaminated outer shell swatches in the wash cycle affords a simple and quantitative method to assess sanitization of gear by commercial gear cleaning facilities. This methodology can be extended to assess for other bacterial contaminants. Sanitizer-resistant strains will continue to pose problems, and biofilm formation may affect the cleanliness of the washed turnout gear. Our methodology for assessing effectiveness of disinfection may help reduce the occupational exposure to fire fighters from bacterial contaminants

Weighing the Costs and Benefits of Mexican Immigration: The Mexican-American Perspective

Survey research posits that Mexican Americans' perceptions of the costs and benefits of immigration drive their opinions about immigration, but this research does not provide a clear picture of how Mexican Americans calculate these costs and benefits. This article aims to understand the processes that explain how Mexican Americans calculate the costs and benefits of Mexican immigration. Copyright (c) 2007 by the Southwestern Social Science Association.

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Summary: Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health