
Got the sniffles? Here's what to know about summer colds, COVID-19 and more
The three may not go together in many people's minds: partly owing to common myths about germs and partly because many viruses really do have lower activity levels in the summer.
But it is possible to get the sniffles — or worse — in the summer. Federal data
released Friday
, for example, shows COVID-19 is trending up in many parts of the country, with emergency department visits up among people of all ages.
Here's what to know about summer viruses.
How much are colds and flu circulating right now?
The number of people seeking medical care for three key illnesses — COVID-19, flu and respiratory syncytial virus, or RSV — is currently low, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Flu is trending down and RSV was steady this week. But COVID-19 is trending up in many mid-Atlantic, southeast, Southern and West Coast states.
The expectation is that COVID-19 will eventually settle into a winter seasonal pattern like other coronaviruses, but the past few years have brought a late summer surge, said Dr. Dean Blumberg, chief of pediatric infectious diseases at University of California Davis Children's Hospital.
Other viruses circulating this time of year include the one that causes 'hand, foot and mouth' disease — which has symptoms similar to a cold, plus sores and rashes — and
norovirus
, sometimes called the stomach flu.
Do viruses spread less in the summer?
Many viruses circulate seasonally, picking up as the weather cools in the fall and winter. So it's true that fewer people get stuffy noses and coughs in the summer — but cold weather itself does not cause colds.
It's not just about seasonality. The other factor is our behavior, experts say. Nice weather means people are opening windows and gathering outside where it's harder for germs to spread.
But respiratory viruses are still around. When the weather gets too hot and everyone heads inside for the air conditioning, doctors say they start seeing more sickness. In places where it gets really hot for a long time, summer can be cold season in its own right.
'I grew up on the East Coast and everybody gets sick in the winter,' said Dr. Frank LoVecchio, an emergency room doctor and Arizona State University researcher. 'A lot of people get sick in the summer here. Why is that? Because you spend more time indoors.'
Should you get another COVID-19 booster now?
For people who are otherwise healthy, timing is a key consideration to getting any vaccine. You want to get it a few weeks before that big trip or wedding, if that's the reason for getting boosted, doctors say. But, for most people, it may be worth waiting until the fall in anticipation of winter cases of COVID-19 really tick up.
'You want to be fully protected at the time that it's most important for you,' said Dr. Costi Sifri, of the University of Virginia Health System.
People at higher risk of complications should always talk with their doctor about what is best for them, Sifri added. Older adults and those with weak immune systems may need more boosters than others, he said.
Are more younger kids getting sick with COVID-19?
Last week, the CDC noted emergency room visits among children younger than 4 were rising. That makes sense, Blumberg said, because many young kids are getting it for the first time or are unvaccinated.
Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
said in May
that the shots would no longer be recommended for healthy kids, a decision that health experts have said lacks scientific basis. The American Academy of Pediatrics
still endorses COVID-19 shots
for children older than 6 months.
How else can I lower my risk?
The same things that help prevent colds, flu and COVID any other time of the year work in the summer, doctors say.
Spend time outside when you can, wash your hands, wear a mask. And if you're sick, stay home.
___
The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute's Department of Science Education and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
Are you hot, fit and tan? Get ready for liberals to label you a MAGA fanatic.
Since President Donald Trump's return to the White House, I've noticed a steady stream of rhetoric that attempts to make health and fitness partisan. It's the heart of summer, and the days are long and toasty. Beaches on the coasts (or Lake Michigan, closer to where I live) are packed and clothing is minimal. Some people look good showing extra skin. Most of them don't. The reality is that more than 70% of Americans are overweight or obese, and the trend has been moving rapidly in the wrong direction, leading to a plethora of preventable health problems and costs associated with them. It's concerning, and the effort to combat obesity should be something we can all agree on. Sadly, it's not. Since President Donald Trump's return to the White House, I've noticed a steady stream of rhetoric that attempts to make health and fitness partisan. If you're fit and enjoy working out (or even sport a tan), chances are there's a progressive who will eye you with suspicion of being MAGA. Sydney Sweeney's jeans ad triggers liberals. She looks good. They don't. | Opinion It's an extreme example of the 'if-Trump-is-for-it, we-must-be-adamantly-against-it' mentality that has infected the left. To borrow a phrase from former Democratic vice presidential contender Tim Walz, it's weird. Trump wants kids to be more fit. Why is that a negative? Trump brought physical fitness into the limelight on July 31 by signing an executive order reestablishing the Presidential Fitness Test for America's public school students. The test had been around for decades until the 2012-13 school year, when President Barack Obama replaced it. The order states: 'We must address the threat to the vitality and longevity of our country that is posed by America's declining health and physical fitness. For far too long, the physical and mental health of the American people has been neglected.' The rise in obesity and the decline in health is especially disheartening when it comes to the country's kids. According to a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2024 report, about 20% of children are obese (2 in 5 adults are obese). That's a sharp increase from when childhood obesity rates were 5% in the 1970s. Not only is this a national health concern, it's a national security one, as Trump acknowledges in his executive order. The CDC report found that only 2 in 5 young adults are weight-eligible and active enough to serve in the military. 'The military has experienced increasing difficulty in recruiting soldiers as a result of physical inactivity, obesity, and malnutrition among our nation's youth,' retired Army Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling said in the report. Yet, Trump's commonsense approach to boost fitness was met with consternation among media progressives. 'Trump is reviving an outdated and problematic practice for American schoolkids,' proclaimed MSNBC. 'Generations of Americans who struggled to complete a pull-up in front of their classmates winced as President Trump announced that he was reinstating the annual assessment,' The New York Times opined. Opinion: Trump is racking up GOP wins no one else could. What do Never Trumpers say now? Doing Pilates does not make you an authoritarian. Nor does having a tan. Leftists also have thoughts about fitness for adults and what it says about conservatism. Earlier this year, fitness influencer MaryBeth Monaco-Vavrik posted a video that went viral connecting the 'popularization of Pilates & running instead of strength training … and the rise of extreme American authoritarianism.' She also equated conservatism with 'smaller bodies.' Leno's right: Colbert got canned because Americans are tired of left's lectures | Opinion Men, on the other hand, must avoid looking too manly and the trap of toxic masculinity and the "manosphere," which liberals tell us have flourished under Trump. For instance, actor Sacha Baron Cohen's appearance on the August cover of Men's Fitness UK sparked criticism over his newly chiseled body. One headline said his physique 'is repellent to most women.' (It must be because I'm a conservative woman, but I found Baron Cohen's new look the opposite of repellent.) In 2024, a columnist in The Guardian warned, 'There is a dark side to wellness, which I always, for shorthand, thought of as political: getting fit makes you more rightwing.' And now, enjoying sunshine and getting a tan could mark you as a MAGA fanatic. After all, Trump and his health secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., sport a perennial bronze shade. As The Atlantic recently observed: 'Tanning is back. Only this time, it's not just about looking good − it's about embracing an entire ideology.' I'd wager the vast majority of people who are fit and spend time outdoors do so because they know it's beneficial for their health and simply enjoy it. It has nothing to do with Trump or how they vote. Progressives trying to demonize fitness to "get back" at Trump are hurting themselves − and the next generations of Americans. Ingrid Jacques is a columnist at USA TODAY. Contact her at ijacques@ or on X: @Ingrid_Jacques


Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
Six More States Ban Junk Food From SNAP Benefits
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Six more states have banned junk food purchases from being bought with Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has announced. West Virginia, Florida, Colorado, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas have all had new waivers approved that allow each state to modify what can and can't be bought using food benefits. Across all of these states, the change will impact approximately 8.5 million people. It brings the total number of states banning junk purchases to 12, following similar waiver approvals earlier this year for Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Nebraska and Utah. Why It Matters SNAP benefits, also known as "food stamps," are paid to low- and no-income households across the U.S. that would otherwise struggle to afford groceries. Across the country, more than 40 million people receive the allowance. A customer shops for produce at an H-E-B grocery store on February 12, 2025, in Austin, Texas. A customer shops for produce at an H-E-B grocery store on February 12, 2025, in Austin, Texas. Brandon Bell/GETTY What To Know A waiver grants flexibility by modifying specific USDA program rules, enabling states to administer the SNAP program in different ways. Various states currently have SNAP waivers in place, and they were widely implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic to help Americans get better access to food benefits. The new waivers, while different for each state, mean that starting in 2026 certain types of foods can no longer be bought using electronic benefit transfer cards, which are loaded every month with payments to spend in participating grocery providers across the country. Junk food generally refers to foods that have lots of calories, particularly those high in macronutrients such as sugar and fat, but little nutritional value. In Texas, the ban will cover soda, energy drinks, candy, and prepared desserts, while in Louisiana, soft drinks, energy drinks, and candy will be banned. Some of the waivers are less restrictive: in Colorado and West Virginia, only soft drinks will no longer be eligible for purchase. The push to tighten rules around unhealthy purchases has been led by Republican states, with Colorado being the only Democratic state to join the throng. Proponents of limiting SNAP purchases have argued removing unhealthy foods from the program will improve health outcomes, while others have argued that it controls how America's poorest eat and fails to address wider problems regarding access to affordable, healthy food. What People Are Saying Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy: "For years, SNAP has used taxpayer dollars to fund soda and candy—products that fuel America's diabetes and chronic disease epidemics. "These waivers help put real food back at the center of the program and empower states to lead the charge in protecting public health. I thank the governors who have stepped up to request waivers, and I encourage others to follow their lead. This is how we Make America Healthy Again." Texas Governor Greg Abbott: "To ensure the health and well-being of Texans, we must promote better, healthier food habits. Earlier this year, I requested a waiver from the USDA to ensure SNAP benefits cannot be used to purchase junk food. "I applaud [Agriculture] Secretary [Brooke L.] Rollins and the Trump Administration for their approval of this waiver to support and promote healthy eating habits. The state of Texas will continue to consider innovative ways for Texans to lead healthy and productive lives." Kavelle Christie, a health policy and advocacy expert and director at the Center for Regulatory Policy and Health Innovation, previously told Newsweek: "The issue isn't about individuals misusing their benefits, but their limited choices. In many rural areas and food deserts, convenience stores and fast-food chains are often the only available options. "For many families, fresh produce and healthy meals are luxuries that are unattainable, not because they do not want these foods, but because they are unavailable or too expensive." A food desert refers to an area, usually a low-income community, where residents have limited access to affordable and nutritious food, particularly fresh fruits and vegetables. What Happens Next Each of the waivers will go into effect in 2026, meaning there will be no immediate changes for SNAP beneficiaries across the impacted states for now. Most come into effect early next year.


Boston Globe
2 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Congress should reauthorize Hospital-at-Home
Advertisement Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up The Congressional Budget Office scored the Hospital-at-Home Program as Advertisement But these programs are at risk if Congress doesn't act. That's because the at-home experiment was only possible because in 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services issued a waiver requiring Medicare to reimburse for Hospital-at-Home care at the same rate as inpatient care. The waiver also let states reimburse via Medicaid, and Massachusetts is one of around a dozen states where Medicaid pays the same rate for at-home and inpatient care, according to the American Hospital Association. The waiver was extended in 2022 and 2024. Federal regulators have approved Hospital-at-Home programs Now, though, the waiver is set to expire Sept. 30, unless Congress approves a Constantinos Michaelidis, medical director of Hospital at Home at UMass Memorial Health, said UMass started the program in August 2021 when patients were waiting hours for a hospital bed. Since then, around 3,600 patients have been cared for at home after presenting at one of three hospitals. According to data provided by UMass Memorial, compared to patients using its brick-and-mortar hospitals, Hospital-at-Home patients had 60 to 70 percent lower mortality, 15 to 30 percent higher patient satisfaction, 5 to 15 percent fewer readmissions, and 80 to 90 percent fewer transfers to skilled nursing facilities after discharge. Michaelidis said he wants to eventually offer Hospital-at-Home throughout the system, and a five-year extension would provide the financial certainty to expand. 'These programs take a lot of money to get off the ground,' Michaelidis said. 'We need Congress to make sure if we spend $3 million expanding the program, it won't go away in two months.' Advertisement A similar calculation is underway at Beth Israel Lahey Health, which started offering Hospital-at-Home in August 2023 at Lahey Hospital and Medical Center. The program has grown gradually, as specialists in different fields established protocols for who can be served at home. It now admits around 100 patients a month, and the hospital recently started offering physical therapy virtually to at-home patients. Sue Stempek, vice president of BILH Hospital at Home, said the system is considering expanding the program to additional hospitals, and a long-term waiver would allow for growth and for research studies to evaluate the model's effectiveness. An open question is the cost impact. Today in Massachusetts, some commercial insurers pay inpatient rates; some pay less. Lora Pellegrini, president of the Massachusetts Association of Health Plans, said some insurers balk at paying inpatient rates when home care doesn't have the same overhead costs. But hospital officials say start-up costs are hefty for staff, equipment, and technology. South Shore Health closed its Hospital-at-Home program May 17, after 11 months. Chief of Medicine Jason Tracy said participants loved the program. But it took time for patients and clinicians to adjust to the idea, and when serving only five or six patients a day, the program lost millions of dollars. 'In this environment, you have to put your resources toward stronger financially performing programs that have greater patient demand,' Tracy said. There are efficiencies in bigger hospital systems. Mass General Brigham has treated over 7,000 patients since January 2022 in Hospital-at-Home programs run through five hospitals. The health system saved 35,000 'bed days,' a measure of how many days inpatient beds would have been filled by those patients. Advertisement Heather O'Sullivan, MGB's president of Healthcare at Home, said the program has expanded to new patient populations — like those in post-operative recovery — and the federal waiver lets the hospital scale up knowing it can recoup costs. Without the waiver, O'Sullivan worried that all but the largest health systems would be unable to make those investments. Congress should also ask federal regulators to study the costs associated with Hospital-at-Home, to determine whether insurance should continue to pay the same as for inpatient care or whether home hospital can achieve cost savings. The need to study costs shouldn't prevent Congress from reauthorizing the waiver for five years, though. Hospital-at-Home provides the care patients want with improved health outcomes, while preserving beds for patients who need inpatient care. That's a win-win-win. Editorials represent the views of the Boston Globe Editorial Board. Follow us