August 2025-The Epidemiology Monitor

We're not just for epidemiologists anymore!

A monthly update covering people, events, research, and key developments Editor’s Note: After 46 years of publication, changes are coming to the EpiMonitor. The first of these is a deliberate effort on our part to be more inclusive. The EpiMonitor isn't just for epidemiologists anymore! That translates to us providing more content for biostatisticians and other public health professionals. We are also increasing our outreach to bring you more information from outside the United States.

Overall the changes can best be encapsulated in the word "more". In the coming months you'll find more articles and, on average, they'll be longer than what we've been publishing over the last decade.

In a sense this takes us back to our roots as a publication starting out in the 1980s when people were forced to rely on print publications for information. Starting with this issue, you'll also note that there are more job listings available each month and many of those are due to a new partnership that will be officially announced soon.

Speaking of collaborations and new partnerships, you will soon see new authors - some of whom will be very familiar to those of you in the field. As we've stated for the last few years, we are always looking for new content. If you have articles about research projects, new tools & tips, breaking news or people whose career you feel would be of interest to others, please reach out at info@epimonitor.net and we will be happy to work with you. Our team can help you craft your article.

Changes aren't going to be limited to this publication. Our website is undergoing a revamp and we will be bringing back content such as the resources section. In addition you'll soon find new features such as a bookstore, software listings and more.

This month's issue takes a look at the research into long Covid while continuing our look back at the beginning of Covid with articles from our 2020 archives. We also have a fascinating piece on pandemics and hints from a recruiter for those of you who are job searching.

As always, we continue to provide you with our popular monthly word game feature, Notes on People, an overview of what we are reading from the public media, and a listing of upcoming epidemiology events. Ask us about the sponsorship opportunities for these standard features - it offers you great exposure for your event, institution, book or other item of interest to our readers!

Finally, don't miss the Job Bank offerings this month. We have some interesting opportunities.

August 2025

•

Volume Forty Six •

Number Eight

In This Issue -2-

Long Covid Research Roundup

-5-

From Cradle to Contagion

-10-

Recruiter Reflections: Headhunter Edition

-13-

No Last Minute Reprieve for Epi Info™ - Program Sunsets on September 1st

-14-

From the Archives: What We Knew About COVID-19 / Summer 2020

-19-

Monthly Word Game

-20-

What We're Reading

-22-

Notes on People

-26-

Near Term Event Calendar

-28-

Newly Listed Public Health Jobs

-31-

Marketplace - Sponsored Jobs & Events

Did you miss last month’s issue? Read it here: https://tinyurl.com/mr3jwut4 or here: https://tinyurl.com/dh6rv7s2

This month's job sponsors include:

August 2025

•

Volume Forty Six •

Number Eight

Long Covid Research Roundup What Have We Learned Since Last Year?

Authors: Katelyn Jetelina, PhD, MPH Hannah Totte, MPH

went, 26% saw gradual improvement, 19% had no change, and 8% worsened.

NOTE: This article was originally published on August 20, 2025 by Your Local Epidemiologist on Substack.



U.K. data—some of the best available— suggest about 30% of people recover within a year. That still leaves the majority struggling.

Another Covid-19 wave is here. So far, it looks relatively mild. But even “mild” waves bring disruption—missed work, missed school, interrupted vacations—and risk of severe illness, especially for people who aren’t up to date on vaccines.



Only ~2% report complete resolution of symptoms in some studies.

This pattern isn’t unique to Covid. After the original SARS outbreak in 2003, many survivors were still disabled nearly 20 years later.

For patients, the toll is wide-ranging: from brain fog to being bedridden, from repeat hospitalizations to major financial strain. One study found long Covid patients were three times more likely to be hospitalized again compared to with those without it.

And then there’s long Covid.

Five years after it first appeared, hundreds of thousands of Americans are still living with its disabling effects. Progress in research has been slow and frustrating at times, but it has moved forward—study by study, patient by patient. Here’s what the science has revealed in the past year.

The risk has gone way down—but not to zero Measuring long Covid has always been messy.

Definitions vary, the virus keeps changing, and immunity levels shift. Still, the best current estimates suggest about 3–8% of people in the general population have long Covid today.

Note: If you’re new here, we share a long Covid update once or twice a year. This post builds on our last roundup—if you’d like to catch up, you can read that one here.

Encouragingly, the number of new cases is falling.

Why? Mostly because vaccines and prior infections now protect many people from severe disease, which is strongly linked to long Covid risk.

Most people with long Covid haven’t fully recovered While some people gradually get better over time, full recovery is not guaranteed, and for the vast majority of people, symptoms persist or even evolve. For example: 



In one U.S. study of more than 1,000 people with long Covid: about half reported symptoms that came and

Vaccination contributed to an estimated 70% of the decline in one study.

- Long Covid cont'd on page 3

-2-

-Long Covid cont'd from page 2 

Each new variant has brought lower long Covid rates, likely due to rising immunity rather than changes in the virus itself.



Reinfections carry a lower risk than first infections (around 6% vs. 15%).

relief, rehab, and trial-and-error management.

What’s urgently needed are biomarkers—tests that could diagnose and track the disease—and therapies that target its root causes.

That said, several promising randomized clinical trials are underway:

But risk isn’t gone. A recent preprint found that reinfections still increase the likelihood of long Covid compared with never being reinfected.

Put differently: reinfection raises relative risk by 35%, but the absolute increase is about 3 extra cases per 100 people.

Risk isn’t the same for everyone Like Covid-19 itself, long Covid risk varies by group. Women, older adults, and people with underlying conditions remain more vulnerable.

Preexisting asthma and COPD increase risk.



Exposure to air pollution (fine particulate matter) raises risk, with supporting evidence from Spain, Saudi Arabia, and Sweden.



Lower physical fitness is linked to higher risk.



Repurposed anti-inflammatory drugs (already approved for arthritis and lung disease) are being tested across four continents.



A monoclonal antibody, originally designed to prevent Covid infection, is being studied in a randomized, placebo trial as a potential long Covid treatment in Florida.

Research funding: a rocky year

This past year, studies added more detail: 



Funding tells its own story. The Biden administration’s initial investment in 2021 went mostly to observational studies—helpful for understanding the problem but less so for finding treatments. To accelerate progress, Senator Bernie Sanders introduced the Moonshot Act in 2024, proposing $1 billion annually for long Covid research over the next decade. It has yet to move forward.

In late March, the Trump administration rescinded 45 grants to study long Covid, but thanks to quick news coverage and advocacy efforts, the money was restored. However, other funding cuts continue to impact long Covid research and support.

Certain professions—especially healthcare and dental workers—face elevated risk.

The takeaway: risk is uneven, shaped by both biology and environment.

Treatments: still slow, but not stalled

- Long Covid cont'd on page 4

There are still no FDA-approved treatments for long Covid. Care today focuses on symptom

-3-

-Long Covid cont'd from page 3 Long Covid is one of the reasons I still try to avoid getting Covid-19 infections. (That, and the fact that as a working mom, I don’t have the luxury of being knocked out for a week.)

But like many risks in life, long Covid risk isn’t something I can reduce to zero. I think of it the same way I think about driving a car: every trip carries a small but real chance of an accident. I still drive, but I do what I can to lower my risk— seatbelts, airbags, safe driving.

Right now, research suggests the risk of developing long Covid from a single infection is about 2–6%. To put that in perspective: 



Less likely than long Covid o Being struck by lightning in your lifetime: ~1 in 15,000 o Dying in a plane crash: ~1 in 11 million per flight o Being seriously injured in a car accident: ~1 in 700 Similar ballpark o Appendicitis: ~1 in 15 o Needing reconstructive surgery after a dog bite: 1 in 40



More likely than long Covid o Asthma diagnosis: ~1 in 10 o Developing diabetes (cumulative): ~2 in 5

So long Covid isn’t a freak accident like a lightning strike. It’s in the same category as other common medical conditions—serious enough that I don’t want to ignore it, but not inevitable either.

Bottom line Long Covid remains one of the most serious legacies of the pandemic. Risk has decreased over time, but millions still live with symptoms that disrupt their lives. Treatments are not yet here, but the research pipeline is moving, and scientific and political willpower seem to remain strong.

The best protection remains prevention: stay up to date on vaccines, reduce exposure during surges, and care for your overall health. ■ This article was originally printed in Your Local Epidemiologist. To read more content from this source subscribe to Your Local Epidemiologist (YLE): https://tinyurl.com/47494ms4

Do you want to read more content like this? This piece was reprinted from Substack.

YLE can be found here: https://yourlocalepidemiologist.substack.com/ Your Local Epidemiologist (YLE) is founded and operated by Dr. Katelyn Jetelina, MPH PhD—an epidemiologist, wife, and mom of two little girls. YLE reaches more than 305,000 people in over 132 countries with one goal: “Translate” the ever-evolving public health science so that people will be wellequipped to make evidence-based decisions. This newsletter is free to everyone, thanks to the generous support of fellow YLE community members.

To support the effort, subscribe or upgrade your existing subscription: https://yourlocalepidemiologist.substack.com/

From Cradle to Contagion How Baby Booms Turned Viruses into "Wildfires" Author: Bruce Lanphear, MD, MPH NOTE: This article was originally published on July 29, 2025 by Plagues, Pollution & Poverty on Substack.

Adam Kucharski’s July 2023 Substack post yanked me back to my early days in public health—when I first stumbled on the idea of herd immunity. It felt like discovering a secret code: one number that could predict whether an epidemic would fizzle out or explode.

Epidemics are often compared to fire. A disease smoulders until conditions are favorable, then it becomes epidemic… spreading like fire in dry grass. The metaphor stuck—and for good reason. Like fire, a virus needs fuel.

In the early 1900s, epidemic science was still in its infancy. Researchers like John Brownlee blamed outbreaks on the microbe’s “infective power”—its virulence. But others saw a more complex picture.

The Epidemic Triangle In his 1928 Cutter Lecture at Harvard— published decades later— Wade Hampton Frost, the first professor of epidemiology at Johns Hopkins, offered a broader theory.

Epidemics, he said, depend on three factors: the microbe, a susceptible host, and an environment that brings them together.

Remove one, and the chain breaks. “Epidemics would die out,” he said, “for lack of susceptible hosts.”

But how many people had to be immune to a virus like measles to stop its spread?

William Hedrich of the U.S. Public Health Service tackled that question. Studying measles outbreaks in Baltimore from 1900 to 1931, he pieced together estimates of immunity using birth records, school files, case reports, and death registries—flawed and incomplete as they were. He found that measles transmission slowed when 55% of children were immune.

Later studies pushed that number higher—first to 70%, then 76%, 85%, and eventually 95%.

Was Hedrich wrong? Or was herd immunity more complicated than a single number?

In 1971, epidemiologist John Fox issued a warning: “Simple thresholds don’t capture herd immunity in diverse populations.” Percentages matter, he said—but so does where, and among whom, immune individuals live.

"No matter how large the proportion of immunes in the total population,” Fox wrote, “if some pockets of the community, such as low economic neighborhoods, contain a large enough number of susceptibles among whom contacts are frequent, the epidemic potential in these neighborhoods will remain high....”

That truth revealed itself—dramatically —in a later epidemic.

The Measles Mystery of 1989–1990 In the pre-vaccine era, measles was an unavoidable part of childhood. During the baby boom, cases soared—millions of children were infected each year. In the early 1960s, measles was hospitalizing nearly 50,000 Americans annually; hundreds died. It wasn’t until the - Baby cont'd on page 6

-5-

- Baby cont'd from page 5 measles vaccine was licensed in 1963 that the tide began to turn.

worked. Coverage among two-year-olds had held steady—around 65%—for more than a decade. There was no spike in imported cases.

And the now-infamous paper linking MMR to autism hadn’t yet been published.

After a decade of record-low measles cases, the US was hit with a resurgence in 1989 and 1990.

Hospitalizations rose. Children died. It wasn’t a return to the pre-vaccine era, but it was serious enough to launch a national investigation.

So what happened?

The answer was buried in the birth records.

The usual suspects didn’t explain it.

A baby boomlet.

The virus hadn’t changed. The vaccine still

- Baby cont'd on page 7

-6-

- Baby cont'd from page 6

Births surged in the late 1980s, creating a large pocket of infants—too young to be vaccinated— big enough to reignite the fire. The virus didn’t change. The number of susceptible children did.

Infants under one, ineligible for the vaccine, took the hardest hit. Not because parents refused vaccines, but because there were more babies than expected. From 1980 to 1988, infants under 12 months accounted for 8% of measles cases. By 1990, their share had jumped to 17%—the highest ever recorded in that age group.

similar pattern unfolded.

In the 1950s, the baby boom turned polio from a lurking threat into a national crisis. U.S. births surged from 2.3 million in 1933 to 4.3 million in 1957—an 87% increase. That surge created dense pockets of young, susceptible children: perfect fuel for polio.

Each summer, the virus found its spark.

Epidemics flared across North America.

And it wasn’t just infants. The number and density of unprotected preschool and schoolaged children grew, even though vaccination rates stayed flat.

A study in PLOS Biology by Martinez-Bakker and colleagues, showed that polio’s rise wasn’t caused by a more virulent virus or declining hygiene. It was demographic. The baby boom created the critical mass needed for repeated, large-scale outbreaks.

The Polio Paradox

Their study also revealed how silent

Decades before the measles resurgence, a

- Baby cont'd on page 8

-7-

- Baby cont'd from page 7 transmission—virus spread without visible illness—kept the fire smoldering between epidemics. The rhythm of polio wasn’t just shaped by sanitation or climate, it was driven by how many children were waiting to be infected.

The virus hadn’t changed. The population had.

Strategy, Not Simplicity Herd immunity isn’t a magic number. It’s a moving target—shaped by who we are, where we live, how we gather, and how fast new babies are born.

In 19th-century London, smallpox spread through an unbroken chain of newborns and young adults arriving from smaller towns. To stop transmission, most of the population had to be immune. But in smaller towns, outbreaks often fizzled out for lack of fuel—even when fewer than half the population was immune.

The denser the city, the higher the bar for herd immunity.

In Nigeria, short on vaccines, William Foege pioneered ring vaccination: find a case fast, then vaccinate everyone nearby. This approach wiped out smallpox in eastern Nigeria, even with vaccine coverage below 50%. Indeed, while many experts were convinced that 80% immunity was necessary to eliminate smallpox, evidence suggests that both lower population density and higher vaccine coverage interrupted transmission.

National or state vaccination rates miss the point. What matters is where unvaccinated children live—and how closely they interact.

That’s why epidemic potential, a measure of susceptible host density, may be more useful. It captures both the number and the clustering of vulnerable children, giving a clearer view of when and where outbreaks are likely to ignite.

With better tools to map these susceptible pockets we can improve our forecasts. Epidemic potential helps explains why measles rise and fall, even when vaccine rates seem stable. It’s not just about hitting 95%. It’s about knowing where susceptible children are clustered.

An epidemic is choreography: sparks and kindling, index cases and vulnerable hosts, coming together under just the right conditions.

Learn the rhythm, and we can predict not just when outbreaks will end—but why they begin.

A Lifesaving Tool Herd immunity began as a theory. Then it became a strategy. In the battles against smallpox, polio, and measles, it proved to be a lifesaving tool.

We still argue about vaccine effectiveness and breakthrough infections. But the more important question is this: Where are the pockets of dry kindling—the susceptible children—building up?

Because that’s what decides whether the next fire smolders…or explodes.

On The Origins of Herd Immunity After my Substack post on herd immunity, I got a note from David S. Jones, a Harvard medical historian. He reminded me that historians have been debating its origins with as much vigor as epidemiologists’ debate everything else. I wasn’t writing about the early roots of herd immunity at the time—but once he pointed me to them, I couldn’t resist sharing.

David’s article, A History of Herd Immunity, traces the term back to veterinarians. In 1918, - Baby cont'd on page 9

-8-

- Baby cont'd from page 8 George Potter explained it plainly: “Herd immunity is developed by retaining the immune cows, raising the calves, and avoiding the introduction of foreign cattle.”

Even earlier, in 1894, Daniel Elmer Salmon (yes, the man for whom Salmonella is named— though his assistant Theobald Smith discovered the bacteria) used “herd immunity” to describe the collective resistance of animals to disease.

Salmon thought it could be strengthened through good breeding, sanitary conditions, and scientific nutrition.

By the 1920s, British epidemiologists W. W. C. Topley and G. S. Wilson borrowed the idea for humans, framing herd immunity as a way whole communities might become invulnerable to epidemics. Around the same time, Sheldon Dudley studied diphtheria outbreaks in a British boarding school and came closer to what we mean today: the idea that once a certain

percentage of a group is immune, the whole group is protected.

So while herd immunity became famous during COVID-19, its roots run deeper—and quirkier— than most of us knew. Cows, boarding schools, bacteriologists and epidemiologists all played a part. Thanks to David for nudging me down this historical rabbit hole. Herd immunity remains one of my favorite topics, and it turns out the herd itself was there from the very beginning.

■ This article was originally printed on Substack in Plagues, Pollution & Poverty. To read more content from this source subscribe to Plagues, Pollution & Poverty: https://tinyurl.com/ymabpyt7

About the Author: Bruce Lanphear, MD, MPH, a public health physician and professor at Simon Fraser University in Vancouver, has spent 30 years studying how to protect children from lead poisoning and other toxic chemicals. His research helped set federal lead standards and confirmed a sobering truth; no level of lead is safe. To reach a wider audience, he created Little Things Matter, which produces videos on population strategies and the power of prevention. On his Substack, Plagues, Pollutants, and Poverty, he writes about hidden threats to human health and strategies to protect communities. If you care about public health, environmental justice, or the forces driving chronic disease, please subscribe (choose the free option) and join the conversation.

-9-

Recruiter Reflections: "Headhunter" Edition More job hunt advice and demystifying the notorious “headhunter”!

Interviewer: Public Health Hiring Help NOTE: This article was originally published on August 4, 2025 by Public Health Hiring Help on Substack.

Someone on LinkedIn reaches out to you about a job opportunity—what do you do? In the age of AI, scams, and deep fakes, it’s easy to default to ignoring or deleting the message. But what if there was someone on the other end of that message with a real position?

These individuals do exist, and, no, they aren’t trying to scam you! This isn’t to say every random DM on LinkedIn or any other job board is legit—some truly are predatory—but a whole industry exists for outsourcing recruiting. Ever heard of Apex Systems, Beacon Hill, TEKSystems, Insight Global, and other staffing agencies? These companies don’t necessarily help random businesses either—many organizations you’ve heard of, like Fortune 500 companies and government institutions, contract staffing agencies to make their hiring processes more efficient.

One of these recruiters is my lifelong friend who, for the sake of anonymity, we’ll call Kendra. Kendra has worked for two years as a technical staffing specialist for a major staffing agency and focuses primarily on opportunities in the southeastern US. In a nutshell, she sources candidates with experience in data analytics, insights, and modernization for client companies with short- and long-term positions.

Kendra is no stranger to our space, having recruited for many projects across the healthcare space—from health insurance

companies to hospital systems to agencies like the CDC. While she looks for a wide variety of talent, she works mostly with technical staff with experience in coding and data visualization.

We sat down a few days ago to talk tips and tricks for the job hunt and to demystify the enigma that is independent recruiters, also known as “headhunters”.

PHHH: What do you look for when sourcing candidates for client companies?

K: As a recruiter, I am always searching for people to reach to about opportunities, so LinkedIn is an essential tool for my job. LinkedIn acts as a potential candidate’s first impression and what I see really influences whether or not I reach out. Is the info on your LinkedIn accurate and consistent? Is it easily accessible? Is it up to date? Is it specific—can I decipher what you did, when, for who, and with what skills? Same goes for portfolios, personal websites, resumes, cover letters, etc! A solid skills section is key and, again, be specific! For example, can you just use point-and-click PowerBI or can you also do more advanced data manipulations with DAX? PHHH: Okay, so you find a potential candidate—then what?

K: I ask for a resume or CV. In my mind, a resume is the closest thing to talking to someone before an interview. Again, it’s all about first impressions! Although industry standard is the 1 page resume, I personally - Recruiter cont'd on page 11

-10-

- Recruiter cont'd from page 10 prefer to see 2-3 pages with more details than a couple bullet points. Utilize hyperlinks if you need! I want to be the best advocate when submitting your information to the client, and I can’t do that with minimal information about you and your experiences!

PHHH: Seems simple enough! So what are red flags to you as a recruiter? Why might you choose not to reach out to someone or submit them to the client?

K: Carelessness like typos, inconsistencies within their information, etc. Be consistent and make sure everything agrees between your LinkedIn, CV, etc. It’s a first impression thing—if you aren’t thoughtful with creating a clear image of yourself as a candidate, can a company trust that you will be thoughtful with your work as an employee?

Another big problem is nonresponse. Even if you aren’t interested in the opportunity I share with you, still connect with me! What if I have something else that is a good fit for you down the line? My role is to advocate for potential candidates for different client companies—just because I don’t have the right position for you today, doesn’t mean I won’t tomorrow.

PHHH: That makes a lot of sense, but I think it makes a lot of candidates weary, especially when there are now so many scams and predatory accounts on LinkedIn. How can candidates be discerning?

K: Recruiters are real humans! Even behind any use of AI or bots are still humans—we’re just using things to help us do our jobs more efficiently. That being said, there are certainly sketchy accounts out there and potential candidates need to be careful. I have a few guidelines I share with applicants to help keep them and their personal information safe.

THEY AREN’T REAL IF: 1) They are being weird/vague about what they are recruiting for 2) They ask you to send personal information of any kind to a non-company email or number 3) They ask for any kind of compensation 4) They lack updated information on their profile (profile picture, titles, consistent information, etc). Recruiters should practice what we preach!

5) They aren’t willing to or are difficult about scheduling a phone call or Zoom meeting with you to chat about the position 6) They lack clear affiliation with a staffing agency PHHH: This is so helpful! What other advice do you have? What are other common mistakes candidates make?

K: There’s a number of tips I like to share, some more common sense than others, yet they are common mistakes that are made!

1)Read the job description. Like for real. Actually reading the posting word for word helps you distinguish two things. Is applying worth my time? And is this a real posting or a ghost job?

2) Upload your documents—CVs, cover letters, etc— as PDFs, not Word. PDFs keep the formatting you worked so hard to perfect, even in applicant tracking and AI systems.

3) Don’t upload files with unprofessional names.

Yes, we can see those.

- Recruiter cont'd on page 12

-11-

- Recruiter cont'd from page 11 4) Not to keep repeating myself—detail, detail, detail! Be specific and consistent!

5) It’s always a world of who you know— network! Join groups, go to conferences, etc.

Meet people face to face! Don’t just rely on the digital route!

6) Not having a job or having a career break doesn’t mean you aren’t amazing or qualified—don’t let it discourage you! IT WILL COME! Put in the work, be creative!

PHHH: Great! What misconceptions do you encounter as a recruiter? What else should candidates understand about recruiters?

K: A headhunter’s job is to advocate for the folks they’ve found and help them get a job.

Specifically, a good recruiter is people- and

relationship-focused—they want to find the right fit, not just any fit. We truly want to help you!

Additionally, you don’t have to wait for us to find you—look for us too! Reach out! We are happy to help you look and keep you on our radar for opportunities that come our staffing or recruiting agency!

PHHH: Thank you so much for your insights and pulling back the veil on external recruiters. Any last words or advice?

K: Yes! Job hunting for a position that aligns with your skills, goals, and interests can be exhausting and can get the best of us if we don’t take care of ourselves. It’s hard to keep faith in a process that has a lot of rejection, but find places in your life to find moments of joy and moments for yourself!

■

Your Ad Should Be Here Do you have a job, course, conference, book or other resource of interest to the epidemiology community? Advertise with The Epidemiology Monitor and reach 35,000 epidemiologists, biostatisticians, and public health professionals monthly.

Advertising opportunities exist in this digital publication, on our website and social media pages, and in our Epi-Gram emails.

For more information please contact: Michele Gibson / 770.309.7937 / michele@epimonitor.net -12-

No Last Minute Reprieve for Epi Info™ CDC Officially Sunsets Program - September 1, 2025 Author: Staff As first announced months ago by CDC all support for Epi Info™ will cease effective September 1, 2025. This date coincides with MicroSoft's announcement of the end of support for Windows 10 effective October 14, 2025 and the upcoming end of life for the .Net framework. On August 19, 2025 CDC sent out the following email to Epi Info™ users:

Dear Epi Info™ user, As we previously shared, support for Epi Info™ is being phased out by CDC. After Sept. 1, 2025, CDC will not be providing product development or technical support for Epi Info™. While the desktop tool could be functional after Sept. 1, updates to Windows operating system and .Net framework could interfere with the usability of Epi Info™. We encourage users to act now and move to an alternative software solution.

Resources: For more information, go to Epi Info™ | CDC For updates and timeline, go to Epi Info™ phase out timeline, and FAQs A list of software alternatives to help users research a new solution is attached Please contact our customer support team at epiinfohelp@cdc.gov for questions, concerns, or assistance with the transition Thank you for your understanding and support for our shared mission of equitably protecting people’s health.

Epi Info™ Team epiinfoHelp@cdc.gov

Additional information about the product and the phase-out process can be found here: Epi Info website: https://lnkd.in/gWaTQqJe Phase out Information: https://lnkd.in/gdS5Y6Nz In addition, as we reported last month, there is an ad-hoc group forming to attempt to ensure continuity of the product and explore avenues for preservation. For the Save Epi Info™ Project to succeed they need volunteers and other resources. Information about the progress of their efforts can be found here: https://sites.google.com/view/save-epi-info Individuals or organizations interested in the project can contact the founders here: Save.Epi.Info@gmail.com The EpiMonitor will continue to follow the progress of this group and provide updates as they become available. In the meantime, the evolution at MicroSoft may mean that other software products and tools that have been created over the years may also cease to work.

If you are aware of any please forward the information to: info@epimonitor.net This will allow us to develop a repository of this information for everyone to share. Thank you for your help in this process. ■

-13-

From Our Archives What We Knew About COVID-19 in the Summer of 2020 What it means and why it matters EDITOR'S NOTE: As we have now reached the 5th anniversary of the initial days of our awareness of COVID19, it seemed appropriate to begin looking back at what we knew, when we knew it and how our thoughts evolved over the early months of the pandemic. Accordingly, we will be reprinting our articles from that period over the next few months. We welcome your comments and suggestions about what you would like to see.

Latest Projections Are For Almost 310,000 Deaths In The US By December 1, 2020 Universal Mask Use Could Prevent More Than 50% Of The Anticipated Deaths As evidence for the lack of control of the SARS CoV-2 pandemic in the US, the number of daily deaths is expected to continue climbing from approximately 1,000 per day now to reach approximately 2,000 per day by midNovember.

impose mandates to control transmission. Half of all the 50 states are likely to have to reimpose mandates between now and December 1 not to exceed the already high projected number.

Mask Use

Projections The latest projections from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IMHE) at the University of Washington School of Medicine indicate that an estimated 135,218 additional deaths are projected to occur between midAugust and the beginning of December 2020.

This number would add to the approximately 174,100 COVID deaths that have already occurred in the US as of August 21, 2020. The total projected by December 1 now reaches 309,918, an increase of about 15,000 deaths just since the last projection was released on August 6, 2020.

More than half of the new anticipated deaths or 69,027 could be prevented according to the IMHE with universal use of masks which it defines as 95% of people wearing masks outside their homes. Currently, the IMHE estimates that mask use has held steady at approximately 55% since July but some states are at a higher level of mask use.

A recent survey of states by the Association for the Advancement of Retired Persons (AARP) finds that as of August 4, 2020 34 states or twothirds of state jurisdictions require people to wear face coverings in public. The District of Columbia and Puerto Rico also have such mask orders.

Warning The IMHE warns that the projected number of deaths could be much higher if the states with daily death rates over 8 per million fail to re-

Mask Use Variation According to AARP, State mandates vary in - December cont'd on page 15

-14-

-December cont'd from page 14 details (for example, exemptions for children range in cutoff age from 2 to 12), but broadly speaking, they require masks in indoor public spaces such as restaurants and stores, on public transit and ride-hailing services, and outdoors when unable to maintain 6 feet of distance from others. Exceptions are given for a variety of reasons and conditions. For a list of where each state stands as of mid-August, visit: https://bit.ly/3hmkQGo Mask Effectiveness IMHE estimates from its statistical analysis that mask mandates with no penalties increase mask wearing by about 8 percentage points which increases to 15 percentage points when mandates are accompanied with penalties. No national goal or mask wearing target has been established to try to achieve the maximum

reduction in deaths. The initiative has been left to states to carry out. IMHE indicates that mandated mask use with penalties and/or a concerted public information campaign will be needed to save the estimated 69,027 lives that could be saved over the next three months.

Deadly Cycle The pattern of mask use appears to wax and wane as infections increase or decrease in a particular population. IMHE calls this “a deadly cycle”. According to IMHE Director Christopher Murray, the public’s behavior has a major impact on transmission risk and therefore an impact on the numbers of deaths. “Such efforts to act more cautiously and responsibly will be an important aspect of COVID-19 forecasting and the up-and-down patterns in individual states throughout the coming months and into next year,” according to Murray. ■

Excess Deaths Provide Additional Estimate Of The Burden Of Disease Related To COVID-19 Absence Of Excess Deaths Might Also Be Used As An Indicator That Community Risk Level Has Returned To “Normal” The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is providing provisional counts of weekly deaths from all causes to supplement routinely reported counts of deaths due to COVID-19.

When compared to the expected number of deaths from all causes over recent years, the number of excess deaths can provide another measurement of the overall impact of COVID19. This is useful since COVID-19 related mortality may be undercounted in the routine reporting.

these deaths is showing. As reported in an ongoing NY Times analysis of the CDC data, an estimated 211,500 more people have died than usual in the US from March 15 to Aug. 1 2020.

This analysis adjusts current death records to account for typical reporting lags. The number of deaths from all causes is 56,000 more than the official count of coronavirus deaths for that period. Even later as of mid-August, the official CDC death count from COVID-19 is 171,012, well below the 211,500 figure.

Incomplete Count And that is precisely what an investigation of

- Deaths cont'd on page 16

-15-

-Deaths cont'd from page 15 In looking at the actual number of weekly deaths from all causes in the United States in 2017-2019 before the pandemic, the number of weekly deaths varies by season but the number and pattern is relatively consistent from year to year. For example, during the period April-June of 2019, the number of weekly deaths ranged narrowly from a low of approximately 52,000 to 57,000. In 2020 that weekly number has ranged

more broadly from a low of approximately 59,000 to a high of approximately 79,000 in the spring. Stated differently, the percentage increase of deaths over the threshold (defined as the average expected number of weekly deaths in 2020) ranged from a low of approximately 10% to approximately 40% higher than normal.

The estimated number of deaths from all causes may contain deaths from COVID-19 that were not diagnosed because of lack of testing or misclassified for other reasons. Also, the deaths from all causes would include deaths brought about indirectly by the pandemic virus because of health care shortages, overwhelmed health care systems, or even suicides. The average number of deaths used for comparison in calculating the excess number of deaths does not take into consideration any changes that could have lowered the expected number of deaths because of behavior changes such as lowered risk from less automobile driving.

persons to resume their normal lives by eating in restaurants or going to the gym. Some suggested indicators have been the reported number of cases, the percentage of persons testing positive for SARS-CoV-2, the testing and contact tracing capacity, or the number of hospitalizations for COVID. Each of these has its shortcomings that are difficult to quantify but which affect the reliability of the number as a valid indicator of personal or community risk.

Deaths are definitive and the count is considered relatively complete and so it has perhaps greater reliability as an indicator of the risk of acquiring COVID. When the number of excess deaths falls below the threshold expected, this might be the time to declare an all-clear for the community and resume normal activities.

Excess Deaths As Indicators Much discussion during the pandemic has centered on what indicators might be used to decide that it is safe to open schools or safe for

- Deaths cont'd on page 17

-16-

-Deaths cont'd from page 16 Threat Level Schemes Some health officials such as those in Harris County Texas have attempted to measure community risk levels by publishing a color coded scheme for each level of risk. These levels are #1 Severe Uncontrolled Community Transmission, #2 Significant Uncontrolled Community Transmission, #3 Moderate Controlled Transmission, and #4 Minimal Controlled Transmission. Among the criteria used to establish the different threat levels, there is no mention of excess deaths. The lowest level of risk achievable is described as “minimal controlled transmission”. Such a

minimal risk level may still be unacceptably high for vulnerable individuals 65 or older or persons with pre-existing conditions since even in this scheme persons are advised to leave home only as necessary. These individuals could resume normal lives more safely and more confidently if SARS-CoV-2 circulation was low enough not to be causing any measurable increase in the expected number of deaths. This is potentially important because even with an effective vaccine, SARS-CoV-2 may become an endemic virus and a total halt of viral circulation may not be achievable. The other more frequently used measures of viral activity could also be factored in. ■

Columnist Questions The Basis On Which Epidemiology Colleagues Offer Risk Advice Related To COVID-19 Briana Mezuk, the University of Michigan epidemiologist who writes a column entitled “Ask An Epidemiologist” for Psychology Today (see The Epi Monitor, July 2019 issue) raises questions in her most recent column about the basis on which epidemiologists give advice about risk and reopenings and other COVID related matters. She is especially concerned about advice which requires making judgments about tradeoffs as all risk benefit decisions do.

According to Mezuk, “…the Times did not conduct a survey of expert opinion. It conducted a litmus test of whether you are the type of person who worries about shark attacks whey you go to the beach or worries about a hijacking when you get on a plane. You don’t need any expertise in epidemiology to give a “valid” response to these questions because the responses have little, if anything, to do with the expertise these people have.”

Times Survey Of Epidemiologists

Evaluating Risk Benefit Advice

In her column, Mezuk recalls the New York Times article published earlier last summer which surveyed more than 500 epidemiologists to ask them when they expect to fly, hug and do 18 other everyday activities again. She questions whether the respondents in the Times survey were asked about what tradeoffs they were willing to make to stay safe.

Before judging the value of any risk benefit based advice given by epidemiologists or any other experts for that matter, Mezuk gives a sample of the type of questions she would want to have answers to. These additional questions are designed to evaluate a person’s experience,

-17-

- Risk cont'd on page 18

-Risk cont'd from page 17 how much control they think they have on their own risk, how accurately they think about the true risks, and whether or not they are pessimistic or optimistic about life in general.

These personal and psychological features of an expert’s life are influential in determining what kind of advice is given, especially when data are lacking.

Mezuk concludes there is simply too much

dynamic uncertainty about this pandemic to rely on data alone to make decisions. “The takeaway here is that data is cheap, but information is priceless. What is the difference?

Information empowers your understanding and decision making. Data, especially data without sufficient context, risks impairing it.”

To read the column, visit: https://bit.ly/3hOcl6b ■

Your Ad Should Be Here Do you have a job, course, conference, book or other resource of interest to the epidemiology community? Advertise with The Epidemiology Monitor and reach 35,000 epidemiologists, biostatisticians, and public health professionals monthly.

Advertising opportunities exist in this digital publication, on our website and social media accounts, and in our Epi-Gram emails.

For more information please contact: Michele Gibson / michele@epimonitor.net

-18-

Epi Word Search – July 2025 Back to School Season We know back to school season is incredibly busy for our readers so this month, instead of a long crossword, we are bringing you a short word search. Good luck - don't let the easy words fool you!

For an interactive online version go to: https://tinyurl.com/4cvx7zf4

Words to find: 1. Fellowship 2. Orientation 3. Registration 4. Schedule 5. Student ID 6. Professor 7. Teaching Asst 8. Campus 9. Laboratory 10. Research 11. Scholarship 12. Bookstore 13. Laptop 14. Backpack 15. Meal Plan 16. Wait List 17. Transcript

Sponsor our Monthly Word Game Your Ad Will Appear Here Contact: Michele Gibson / 770.309.7937 michele@epimonitor.net -19-

What We're Reading This Month Editor's Note: All of us are confronted with more material than we can possibly hope to digest each month.

However, that doesn't mean that we should miss some of the articles that appear in the public media on topics of interest to the epi community. The EpiMonitor curates a monthly list of some of the best articles we've encountered in the past month. See something you think others would like to read? Please send us a link at info@epimonitor.net and we'll include it in the next month.

Washington DC Chaos ♦ CDC director pushed out, flood of top resignations follow (NBC News) https://tinyurl.com/rnrj4max ♦ Supreme Court allows Trump to gut DEI-linked NIH grants (The Hill) https://tinyurl.com/4t385975 ♦ We Were Just Getting Started: Grieving the Loss of a Public Health Team (Substack) https://tinyurl.com/3s62h3hd ♦ Draft of major MAHA report calls for more education, less regulation — and offers few policies (STAT) https://tinyurl.com/5ye4j352 ♦ Hundreds of federal health workers say RFK Jr has put Americans in danger (BBC) https://tinyurl.com/shz529rf ♦ After the CDC shooting, federal workers demand more protections from RFK Jr. (NPR) https://tinyurl.com/y2zuvzrd ♦ "Is this the last straw?" Shooting adds to trauma as CDC workers describe projects, careers in limbo. (HealthBeat) https://tinyurl.com/44hz4vch ♦ CDC employees return to work with bullet holes still in the windows more than a week after shooting (NOTUS via AppleNews) https://tinyurl.com/5d2pfhyh ♦ Repealing EPA’s endangerment finding will cause a public health nightmare (The Hill) https://tinyurl.com/ckxaxunt

- Reading cont'd on page 21

-20-

[Type a quote from the document or the summary of an interesting point. You can position the text box anywhere in What Use We're Reading Month - con't from 20 box.] the document. the Text Box Tools tabThis to change the formatting of the pull page quote text

Public Health Topics, cont. ♦ A California Resident Tests Positive for Plague (Time) https://tinyurl.com/2rt4eazy ♦ Why Covid is spreading again this summer (NYT) https://tinyurl.com/yc37x5mx ♦ Chikungunya Cases Surge in Fushan (Daily Mail) https://tinyurl.com/43j5nc3e ♦ Chinese Authorities Mandating Blood Tests, Releasing Lab Mosquitoes to Fight Chikungunya Outbreak (Epoch Times) https://tinyurl.com/4ztevwz3 ♦ 5 dead, 108 sickened in New York City Legionnaires' disease outbreak (USA Today) https://tinyurl.com/y27t99aj ♦ Wildfire Fighters, Unmasked in Toxic Smoke, Are Getting Sick and Dying (NYT) https://tinyurl.com/5yvd3ann ♦ Bird Flu May Be Airborne on Dairy Farms, Scientists Report (NYT) https://tinyurl.com/mvttz92y ♦ Understanding the interplay between epidemiological and social cognitive drivers of behaviour change during the Covid-19 pandemic (Nature) https://tinyurl.com/2xc7xfb9 ♦ A 1990 Measles Outbreak Shows How the Disease Can Roar Back (NYT) https://tinyurl.com/9ffadrjs ♦ ‘Flesh-Eating’ Bacteria Cases Are on the Rise Along the Gulf Coast (Time) https://tinyurl.com/yuctenas

Join EpiMonitor on our Facebook page at: https://bit.ly/2U29gUA on Twitter at: @theEpimonitor

on Instagram at: @epimonitor -21-

Notes on People Do you have news about yourself, a colleague, or a student?

Please help The Epidemiology Monitor keep the community informed by sending relevant news to us at this address for inclusion in our next issue. people@epimonitor.net

Honored: The Virchow Foundation has awarded the Virchow Prize 2025 to Columbia Mailman School Professor Quarraisha Abdool Karim and global child health expert Zulfiqar A. Bhutta. The prize recognizes their pioneering, lifelong leadership in advancing maternal, newborn, and child health equity through community-centered, evidence-based research, particularly in support of some of the world’s most vulnerable populations.

Honored: The Frank A. Calderone Prize in Public Health—the field’s highest honor—was awarded to Jonathan Samet for his transformative work on air pollution and tobacco control. Dr. Samet is a pulmonary physician and epidemiologist who served as dean of the Colorado School of Public Health. He was also the chair of the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee of the Environmental Protection Agency, as well as the Tobacco Products Scientific Advisory Committee of the Food and Drug Administration.

Honored: Anne E. Goldfeld, MD, of Harvard Medical School and Boston Children’s Hospital, will receive the 2025 NFID Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter Humanitarian Award in recognition of her groundbreaking contributions as a physician-scientist and humanitarian who has focused on changing the course of 2 of the deadliest epidemics of our time: tuberculosis (TB) and HIV/AIDS.

Honored: Rino Rappuoli, PhD, of the Fondazione Biotecnopolo di Siena, will receive the 2025 NFID Maxwell Finland Award for Scientific Achievement, in recognition of his work as an innovator, scientist, and a leader in the field of microbial pathogenesis and vaccine development which has had a tremendous impact on public health. Over the past 40 years, Rappuoli has led major breakthroughs that have transformed how vaccines are developed. His work includes developing revolutionary technologies to help develop safer and more effective vaccines for diseases including Hib disease (Haemophilus influenzae type b), influenza (flu), pneumococcal disease, and whooping cough (pertussis).

-22-

Notes on People, con’t from page 22 Do you have news about yourself, a colleague, or a student?

Please help The Epidemiology Monitor keep the community informed by sending relevant news to us at this address for inclusion in our next issue. people@epimonitor.net

Honored: Patricia N. Whitley-Williams, MD, recently retired from Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, will receive the 2025 John P. Utz Leadership Award in recognition of her longstanding service to NFID and her unwavering commitment to advancing health equity and community engagement in vaccine research and communication. A nationally respected pediatric infectious disease expert, Whitley-Williams has served NFID in numerous leadership roles, including as past president. An active member of the Pediatric Section and the Vaccine Advisory Committee of the National Medical Association, she has been an advocate for updating physicians from communities of color and promoting immunizations in marginalized communities.

Honored: Dr. Perry N. Halkitis is an infectious disease epidemiologist, applied statistician, and public health psychologist who was recently honored with the IAPHS leadership award. He conducts this work through his research, teaching, and activism. Dr. Halkitis is currently Dean, Hunterdon Professor of Public Health & Health Equity, and Distinguished Professor of Biostatistics & Epidemiology at the Rutgers School of Public Health, as well as the founder and Director of the Center for Health, Identity, Behavior & Prevention Studies.

Honored: IAPHS has announced that Zinzi Bailey has won this year's Health Equity Award. She is a social epidemiologist focused on cancer health disparities, as well as the health impacts of and policy solutions for structural and institutional discrimination, especially at the intersection of public health and criminal justice. She is also interested in the use of data and indicators in equitable policy and management. She is currently an Associate Professor in the Division of Epidemiology & Community Health at the University of Minnesota School of Public Health. Zinzi serves as the Director of the Interdisciplinary Research Leaders program, a member of the IRL Research Team, and co-chair of the IRL Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Taskforce.

-23-

Notes on People, con’t from page 23 Do you have news about yourself, a colleague, or a student?

Please help The Epidemiology Monitor keep the community informed by sending relevant news to us at this address for inclusion in our next issue. people@epimonitor.net

Honored: The University of Minnesota has announced that the 2025 Gaylord Anderson Leadership Award winner is Joseph Su, PhD, MPH, a Professor of Epidemiology and Inaugural Associate Dean for Academic Affairs at the Peter O’Donnell Jr. School of Public Health at UT Southwestern. He is also a codirector of the Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center Office of Training and Education. He received his PhD in nutritional epidemiology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and his MPH in public health nutrition at the University of Minnesota. He earned his undergraduate degree in nutritional sciences at the University of Minnesota and training in chemistry at ChungYuan University in Taiwan.

Honored: David Gunderman, PhD, an Indiana University School of Medicine student in the Class of 2026 and president of the Medical Student Council, was chosen for the United States Public Health Service's prestigious 2025 Excellence in Public Health Award.

This honor recognizes medical and pharmacy students who have made meaningful contributions to public health — particularly in advancing the goals of Healthy People 2030 and the Surgeon General’s priorities. Awardees are also recognized for their demonstrated leadership and dedication in promoting wellness and healthy communities.

Named: Tulane University has announced that Dr. Richard MacLehose has been named chair of the Department of Epidemiology at the Celia Scott Weatherhead School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine at Tulane University. MacLehose will assume the role effective July 1, 2025, and his hiring follows an extensive national search to fill the role. MacLehose joins Tulane after 17 years at the University of Minnesota School of Public Health, where he served as assistant, associate, and then full professor in the Division of Epidemiology and Community Health. As an epidemiologist and biostatistician, he has extensive experience designing and implementing epidemiologic studies and developing novel methods in Bayesian statistics, bias analysis, and causal inference. He has also authored the textbook "Applying Quantitative Bias Analysis to Epidemiologic Data."

-24-

Notes on People, con’t from page 24 Do you have news about yourself, a colleague, or a student?

Please help The Epidemiology Monitor keep the community informed by sending relevant news to us at this address for inclusion in our next issue. people@epimonitor.net

Passed: Haroutune Armenian, Professor Emeritus in the Department of Epidemiology at Johns Hopkins passed away July 15, 2025. Harout received his medical training from the American University of Beirut in Lebanon before embarking on a distinguished career in public health that began with an MPH and DrPH from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

He joined the faculty of the American University of Beirut in 1974 and became a member of our [Johns Hopkins] community in the Department of Epidemiology in 1986. During his tenure at the School of Public Health, Harout held several vital roles. He served as the Deputy Chair of Epidemiology from 1988 to 1993, Director of the MPH program from 1989 to 1996 and Interim Chair of the Department of Epidemiology from 1993 to 1994. Harout was the founding Dean and President of the American University of Armenia and played a pivotal role in the success of its School of Public Health. Additionally, he served as Dean of the Faculty of Health Sciences at the American University of Beirut, Associate Dean of Academic Programs at the UCLA Fielding School of Public Health, and Chair of the Department of Epidemiology, Public Health and Environment at King Saud University, Riyadh. Harout also served as editor-inchief of Epidemiologic Reviews from 1989 to 2004. https://tinyurl.com/mr4cwc85

Passed: Sir David Nabarro, who was one of 6 Special envoys for the UN and the World Health Organization in the Covid battle, has passed at his residence in France on July 25, 2025. Nabarro worked as a medical officer in North Iraq for Save the Children, before working as a junior NHS doctor in Northampton and Oxford. From 1976 to 1978, Nabarro worked for Save the Children Fund as Medical Officer in Dhankuta, Nepal. Later, he did an M.Sc in Nutrition and became a lecturer at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. In 1982, he became Regional Manager for Save the Children Fund in South Asia, based in Kathmandu. In 1985 he joined the Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine as senior lecturer in International Community Health and helped Professor Ken Newell to set up a Master's course in Community Health.

Among his other awards and recognitions for his life of service, Nabarro was appointed Commander of the Order of the British Empire (CBE) in 1992 for services to international public health and Knight Commander of the Order of St Michael and St George (KCMG) in the 2023 New Year Honours for services to global health.

-25-

Near Term Epidemiology Event Calendar Every December The Epidemiology Monitor dedicates that issue to a calendar of events for the upcoming year. However that often means we don't have full information for events later in the upcoming year. Thus an online copy exists on our website that is updated regularly.

To view the full year please go to: http://www.epimonitor.net/Events The events that we are aware of for the next month follow below.

September 2025 September 1-2 Type: Conference Web: https://tinyurl.com/y3zt9wtk Title: IGES 2025 Sponsor: International Genetic Epi Society Location: Cologne, Germany August 1-5 Type: Short Course Web: https://tinyurl.com/4hjudfe6 Title: Genetic Analysis of Population-based Association Studies Sponsor: Wellcome Connecting Science Location: Hinxton, England September 7-10 Type: Conference Title: 19th Vaccine Congress Sponsor: Elsevier Location: Kyoto, Japan

Web:

https://bit.ly/3huUxTC

September 7-10 Type: Conference Web: https://tinyurl.com/4tnmnvyn Title: American College of Epidemiology Annual Conference Sponsor: ACE Location: Pasadena, CA September 8-10 Type: Conference Web: https://tinyurl.com/yc68csnx Title: Global Summit on Public Health and Preventive Medicine (GSPHPM2025) Sponsor: The Scientistt Location: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia September 8-11 Type: Conference Title: 2025 IAPHS Conference Sponsor: IAPHS Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Web:

https://bit.ly/2pNWzQF

September 10-11 Type: Conference Web: https://tinyurl.com/mr9cxm26 Title: Swiss Public Health Conference 2025 Sponsor: Swiss Public Health Location: Lugano, Switzerland September 15-17 Type: Workshop Title: 12th Microbial Bioinformatics Hackathon Sponsor: ESCMID Location: Porto, Portugal

Web:

https://tinyurl.com/32xmz5dv

September 16-18 Type: Conference Web: https://tinyurl.com/2n2rvrbu Title: 2025 Public Health Law Conference Sponsor: Network for Public Health Law Location: Renton, WA

-26-

September 2025 continued September 17-19 Type: Conference Web: https://tinyurl.com/4tjvptc7 Title: Tennessee Public Health Association 2025 Annual Conference Sponsor: TPHA Location: Murfreesboro, TN September 17-19 Type: Conference Web: Title: ECVPH AGM & Annual Scientific Conference 2025 Sponsor: ECVPH Location: Messina, Italy

https://tinyurl.com/528kf6ux

September 23-24 Type: Conference Web: https://tinyurl.com/mryn44sk Title: 8th Intl Conference on Public Health, Well-being and Healthcare Management Sponsor: Conference Series Location: Paris, France September TBD Type: Conference Web: https://tinyurl.com/rxykuhmw Title: 22nd Biennial Congress - EPA Section of Epidemiology & Social Psychiatry Sponsor: European Psychiatric Association Location: September TBD Type: Conference Web: Title: 2025 CityMatCH Leadership & MCH Epi Conference Sponsor: CityMatch Location:

https://tinyurl.com/yrtr7d6x

October 2025 October 5-9 Type: Conference Web: https://tinyurl.com/2e3kt9zd Title: 65th ISI World Statistics Congress Sponsor: International Biometric Society Location: The Hague October 12-14 Type: Conference Web: https://tinyurl.com/5n9ad3uy Title: AHIMA 2025 Conference Sponsor: American Health Information Management Association Location: Minneapolis, MN October 14-18 Type: Conference Web: https://tinyurl.com/4yjxtumy Title: American Society for Human Genetics 2025 Annual Meeting Sponsor: ASHG Location: Boston, MA October 19-22 Type: Conference Title: ISPE Annual Conference Sponsor: Multiple Location: Atlanta, GA

Web:

October 23-25 Type: Conference Web: Title: 5th International Vaccines Conference Sponsor: Magnus Group Location: Orlando, FL & Virtual

-27-

https://bit.ly/3uYKFES

https://tinyurl.com/muyzzc9t

Open Public Health Positions The list below has been compiled by Public Health Hiring Help the new Substack column that has been created to help individuals in the public health community find positions in the midst of the What means andimpacting why it matters chaositthat is now governmental agencies and grant recipients. This list represents the most current positions PHHH has been able to identify. We thank PHHH for their permission to reprint these listings.

Privia Health, Population Health Associate (Rockville, MD) $60-73k + benefits, Bachelor’s min, Master’s preferred Numerator, Survey Research Analyst (Remote) $54-70k + benefits, Bachelor’s min Jefferson County, Community Relations and Mobilization Strategist (Lakewood, CO) $78k + benefits, Bachelor’s min, Master’s preferred Orange County, Street Outreach Specialist (Hillsborough, NC) $50-55k + benefits, Bachelor’s min, Master’s preferred WaterAid, Health Specialist (Dhaka, Bangladesh) Not listed + benefits, Master’s min Our Future Health, User Researcher (London, UK) $54k + benefits, Master’s min NC State Univ, Interpersonal Violence Response Coordinator (Raleigh, NC) $52k + benefits, Bachelor’s min Klamath County, Public Health Epidemiologist (Klamath Falls, OR) $60-76k + benefits, Bachelor’s min, Master’s preferred Klamath County, Public Health Program Coordinator (Klamath Falls, OR) $54-69k + benefits, Bachelor’s min Klamath County, Public Health Targeted Airshed Grant Program Coordinator (Klamath Falls, OR) $54-72k + benefits, Bachelor’s min Ferguson, Sustainability Reporting Analyst (Newport News, VA) $58-93k + benefits, Bachelor’s min Centene Corporation, Data Analyst III (Remote) $69-124k + benefits, Bachelor’s min, Master’s preferred

-28-

Open Public Health Positions GA Dept of Health, Epidemiologist II (Atlanta, GA) $66k + benefits, Bachelor’s min, Master’s preferred What it means and why it matters Davidson County, Communicable Disease Investigator (Nashville, TN) Not listed + benefits, Bachelor’s min State of NE, Occupational Health Epidemiologist II (Lincoln, NE) $71k + benefits, Bachelor’s min, Master’s preferred State of NE, Community Health Program Coordinator (Lincoln, NE) $54k + benefits, Bachelor’s min, Master’s preferred State of OK, Medical Marijuana Epidemiologist (Oklahoma City, OK) $75-85k + benefits, Master’s min MN Dept of Health, Data and Evaluation Specialist (St. Paul, MN) $66-114k + benefits, Bachelor’s min, Master’s preferred Louisville Metro Government, Community Health Specialist (Louisville, KY) Not listed + benefits, Bachelor’s min State of FL, Environmental Epidemiologist (Ft. Lauderdale, FL) $55k + benefits, Bachelor’s min, Master’s preferred Bear River Health Department, Health Educator (Logan, UT) Not listed + benefits, Bachelor’s min State of MO, Program Specialist (Jefferson City, MO) Not listed + benefits, Bachelor’s min CO Dept of Health, Occupational Health Surveillance Epidemiologist (Denver, CO) Not listed + benefits, Master’s min County of Riverside, EH Specialist I/II/III (Riverside, CA) $61-101k + benefits, Bachelor’s min, Master’s preferred Genesee County, Community Health Analyst (Flint, MI) $63-81k + benefits, Master’s min Tompkins County, Public Health Preparedness Coordinator (Ithaca, NY) $72-78k + benefits, Bachelor’s min

-29-

Open Public Health Intern Positions PATH, Program Associate Intern Public Health Alignment: GH What it means and why it matters CSIS, Southeast Asia Program Intern Public Health Alignment: GH CSIS, Global Health Policy Center Intern Public Health Alignment: GH, HPM CSIS, Congressional and Government Affairs Intern Public Health Alignment: HPM Sabin Vaccine Institute, Program and Portfolio Management Intern Public Health Alignment: HPM, GH Malaria No More, Communications Intern Public Health Alignment: BSHES, HPM, GH Health Research Incorporated, Data Analyst Intern Public Health Alignment: EPI Excellus BCBS, Health Equity Intern Public Health Alignment: BSHES, GH, HPM Nova Scotia Health, One Person One Record Intern Public Health Alignment: HPM, BIOS, EPI Healthcare Outcomes Performance Co, Administrative Intern Public Health Alignment: HPM Phoenix Children's, Biostatistics Intern Public Health Alignment: BIOS, EPI Merck, Study Management Intern Public Health Alignment: EPI Mass General Brigham, Science Writing Intern Public Health Alignment: BSHES Earthjustice, Community-Centered Advocacy Intern Public Health Alignment: EH, GH, HPM

-30-

Multiple Open-Rank Faculty - Epidemiology The O’Donnell School of Public Health and the O’Donnell Brain Institute at UT Southwestern Medical Center Dallas, TX are seeking exceptional epidemiologist candidates for multiple tenured or tenure-track faculty positions preferably at the associate or full professor level. Both the School and the Brain Institute are undergoing significant expansions, and an outstanding startup package, along with opportunities for program development, will be provided.

We encourage applications from exceptional scholars with a national reputation in epidemiological and population research on Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias, stroke and cerebrovascular disorders, Parkinson’s disease, or other neurological disorders. Qualified candidates should hold a doctoral degree (Ph.D., D.Sc., Dr.PH., or equivalent) in Epidemiology or an MD with additional training in Epidemiology or Clinical Investigation (M.S., M.P.H., MSc., or Ph.D.). Candidates must demonstrate a successful, impactful research career with a strong record of securing external funding (e.g., NIH, CDC, AHRQ, PCORI, etc.). Experience in academic leadership, program development, teaching, and fostering multidisciplinary collaboration is highly desired.

OPEN RANK FACULTY - EPIDEMIOLOGY DEPARTMENT Appointment rank will be commensurate with academic accomplishment and experience. Consideration may be given to applicants seeking less than a full-time schedule.

Candidate Requirements: ♦

Ph.D., M.D., Sc.D., DrPH, or equivalent doctoral degree in a relevant discipline

♦

Demonstrated ability to conduct scholarly research and capacity to obtain peer-reviewed funding

♦

Highly self-motivated individual, enthusiastic about scientific discovery and able to collaborate closely and effectively with other members of multidisciplinary research teams

♦

Desire to partner with healthcare systems, public health agencies, and/or community organizations to conduct research aimed at enhancing the health of the people of Texas and beyond

Apply Here: https://tinyurl.com/4yt4ytjd

OPEN RANK FACULTY - EPIDEMIOLOGY BRAIN HEALTH RESEARCH Appointment rank will be commensurate with academic accomplishment and experience. Consideration may be given to applicants seeking less than a full-time schedule.

Candidate Requirements ♦

Ph.D., D.Sc., Dr.PH., or equivalent in Epidemiology or an MD with additional training in Epidemiology or Clinical Investigation (M.S., M.P.H., or Ph.D.)

♦

Candidates must demonstrate a successful, impactful research career with a strong record of securing external funding (e.g., NIH, CDC, AHRQ, PCORI, etc.).

♦

Experience in academic leadership, program development, teaching, and fostering multidisciplinary collaboration is highly desired.

Apply Here: https://tinyurl.com/3rdj676f More Information Available Here: https://epimonitor.net/2025-3972-Epidemiology-Job-Opening.htm

CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE EPIDEMIOLOGY AND PREVENTION POSTDOCTORAL FELLOWSHIP The Division of Epidemiology & Community Health of the University of Minnesota has a current opening and is seeking candidates for a postdoctoral training fellowship in cardiovascular disease epidemiology and prevention.

Fellowship Experience Training emphasizes research methods in the epidemiology and prevention of cardiovascular disease. Training can include formal coursework in epidemiology, biostatistics, clinical research, nutrition, physiology, data science, and behavioral science.

Graduates gain competency in designing, administering, and analyzing cardiovascular population studies or preventive programs. The Division provides a rich and collaborative environment for the investigation of cardiovascular disease and related areas, in one of the largest Academic Health Centers in the U.S. Current Division research in cardiovascular epidemiology includes a robust blend of observational studies (e.g., ARIC, MESA, CARDIA, DISCOVERY), pharmacoepidemiology and interventional investigations (e.g., mGlide hypertension control RCT, Stand & Move at Work group randomized trial) aimed at improving public health and engaging a multidisciplinary integration of epidemiology, biology and behavioral science.

Benefits The program provides a stipend, tuition and fees for an MS or MPH degree, if desired, during the fellowship. This paid 2-3 year fellowship is sponsored by the National Institutes of Health.

Eligibility Candidates must have either an MD or a PhD degree and must be either a U.S. citizen or have permanent residency status.

Apply Interested applicants will complete an online application https://tinyurl.com/4e7yzp4c Questions, please contact: Jim Pankow, PhD, MPH panko001@umn.edu or Pamela Lutsey, PhD, MPH lutsey@umn.edu Co-Directors of CVD Epi Training Program

-30-41-

Tenured: Professor & Department Head The School of Public Health at Texas A&M University invites applications for consideration as Department Head and Professor (Tenured) for the Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics. Located in College Station, TX on the flagship campus of the Texas A&M University System, the CEPH-accredited School of Public Health (SPH) has over 95 faculty across four distinct departments. Texas A&M University, a land-, sea-, and space-grant institution, was the state’s first public institution of higher learning, is a member of the prestigious Association of American Universities (AAU) and boasts world-class resources. The School of Public Health is currently ranked #1 in Texas and 27/219 by U.S. News & World Report and has the 5th largest student enrollment in the nation. The school has had record external funding growth over the past five years. This full-time, 9-month, hard-money-supported appointment would start Summer 2026, although this date is flexible.

The next department head will have the opportunity to build on the department’s strong foundation and craft a vision that will continue to foster scientific discovery and scholarly excellence. We seek a faculty-centered, student-supportive leader who will actively cultivate a dynamic environment in which all faculty, staff, and students will thrive.

The successful applicant will be an innovative thinker with a strategic vision for guiding the department to a higher level of excellence and who can communicate this vision to a constituency that includes academia, government, industry, and current and former students. The candidate must have notable accomplishments and experience in academic leadership, research, teaching, and scholarship.

Applicants can apply at https://apply.interfolio.com/167473 Please provide: (1) curriculum vitae, (2) cover letter outlining managerial and leadership philosophy, managerial and leadership experience, and managerial and leadership preparation to head a Department, (3) personal statement including philosophy and plans for research and teaching. Additionally, please provide a list of five (5) references; references will be contacted only if you are selected for an interview.

Questions regarding this academic leadership opportunity may be sent to Dr. Eric Wilson, Assistant Dean for Accountability and Strategic Initiatives, at eric.wilson@tamu.edu . You may also contact the Search Chair, Dr. Adam E. Barry (aebarry@tamu.edu).

Equal Opportunity/Veterans/Disability Employer.

More Information: https://tinyurl.com/ye7jmm9c

YLE can be found here: https://yourlocalepidemiologist.substack.com/

Your Local Epidemiologist (YLE) is founded and operated by Dr. Katelyn Jetelina, MPH PhD—an epidemiologist, wife, and mom of two little girls. YLE reaches more than 305,000 people in over 132 countries with one goal: “Translate” the ever-evolving public health science so that people will be well-equipped to make evidence-based decisions. This newsletter is free to everyone, thanks to the generous support of fellow YLE community members.

To support the effort, subscribe or upgrade your existing subscription: https://yourlocalepidemiologist.substack.com/

The Epidemiology Monitor ISSN (2833-1710) is published monthly by Monitor Publishing & Communications, Inc. Mailing Address 663 Landing Drive Aiken, SC 29801

Operations Michele Gibson Operations Manager michele@epimonitor.net

Advertising Sales Michele Gibson sales@epimonitor.net

The Epidemiology Monitor in a Digital Version is available FREE to subscribers The Epidemiology Monitor is available exclusively online in the same familiar print format subscribers were accustomed to, and they can read through the publication on their electronic devices in the same manner they did with the print version. In addition, you can download and save copies of The Epidemiology Monitor for easy future access.

This digital publication format provides: Advertising Rates All ads listed below also include a banner ad on our website and in our EpiGram emails.

Full Page $1,315 7.5”w x 10” h Half Page $985 7.5”w x 4.75” h

► Easier access to information that is more timely ► Publication alerts via email ► Embedded hot links in articles ► Full color advertising ► Wider circulation for advertisers SUBSCRIBE FOR FREE TODAY AT:

Website Ad $545 / mo.

Includes a banner ad in our EpiGram emails

http://epimonitor.net/Subscribe.htm

Multi-month discounts available upon request.

Contact Us The Epidemiology Monitor info@epimonitor.net

-44-