We evaluated nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT) for Zika virus on whole-blood specimens compared with NAAT on serum and urine specimens among asymptomatic pregnant women during the 2015-2016 Puerto Rico Zika outbreak. Using NAAT, more infections were detected in serum and urine than in whole blood specimens.

OBJECTIVE: Differences in bottled v. tap water intake may provide insights into health disparities, like risk of dental caries and inadequate hydration. We examined differences in plain, tap and bottled water consumption among US adults by sociodemographic characteristics. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis. We used 24 h dietary recall data to test differences in percentage consuming the water sources and mean intake between groups using Wald tests and multiple logistic and linear regression models. SETTING: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), 2007-2014. SUBJECTS: A nationally representative sample of 20 676 adults aged >/=20 years. RESULTS: In 2011-2014, 81.4 (se 0.6) % of adults drank plain water (sum of tap and bottled), 55.2 (se 1.4) % drank tap water and 33.4 (se 1.4) % drank bottled water on a given day. Adjusting for covariates, non-Hispanic (NH) Black and Hispanic adults had 0.44 (95 % CI 0.37, 0.53) and 0.55 (95 % CI 0.45, 0.66) times the odds of consuming tap water, and consumed B=-330 (se 45) ml and B=-180 (se 45) ml less tap water than NH White adults, respectively. NH Black, Hispanic and adults born outside the fifty US states or Washington, DC had 2.20 (95 % CI 1.79, 2.69), 2.37 (95 % CI 1.91, 2.94) and 1.46 (95 % CI 1.19, 1.79) times the odds of consuming bottled water than their NH White and US-born counterparts. In 2007-2010, water filtration was associated with higher odds of drinking plain and tap water. CONCLUSIONS: While most US adults consumed plain water, the source (i.e. tap or bottled) and amount differed by race/Hispanic origin, nativity status and education. Water filters may increase tap water consumption.

BACKGROUND: Adequate water intake is critical to physiologic and cognitive functioning. Although water requirements increase with body size, it remains unclear whether weight status modifies the relation between water intake and hydration status. OBJECTIVE: We examined how the association between water intake and urine osmolality, which is a hydration biomarker, varied by weight status. DESIGN: NHANES cross-sectional data (2009-2012) were analyzed in 9601 nonpregnant adults aged ≥20 y who did not have kidney failure. Weight status was categorized with the use of body mass index on the basis of measured height and weight (underweight or normal weight, overweight, and obesity). Urine osmolality was determined with the use of freezing-point depression osmometry. Hypohydration was classified according to the following age-dependent formula: ≥831 mOsm/kg - [3.4 × (age - 20 y)]. Total water intake was determined with the use of a 24-h dietary recall and was dichotomized as adequate or low on the basis of the Institute of Medicine's adequate intake recommendations for men and women (men: ≥3.7 or <3.7 L; nonlactating women: ≥2.7 or <2.7 L; lactating women: ≥3.8 or <3.8 L for adequate or low intakes, respectively). We tested interactions and conducted linear and log-binomial regressions. RESULTS: Total water intake (P = 0.002), urine osmolality (P < 0.001), and hypohydration prevalence (P < 0.001) all increased with higher weight status. Interactions between weight status and water intake status were significant in linear (P = 0.005) and log-binomial (P = 0.015) models, which were then stratified. The prevalence ratio of hypohydration between subjects with adequate water intake and those with low water intake was 0.56 (95% CI: 0.43, 0.73) in adults who were underweight or normal weight, 0.67 (95% CI: 0.57, 0.79) in adults who were overweight, and 0.78 (95% CI: 0.70, 0.88) in adults who were obese. CONCLUSION: On a population level, obesity modifies the association between water intake and hydration status.

Zika virus is a cause of microcephaly and brain abnormalities (1), and it is the first known mosquito-borne infection to cause congenital anomalies in humans. The establishment of a comprehensive surveillance system to monitor pregnant women with Zika virus infection will provide data to further elucidate the full range of potential outcomes for fetuses and infants of mothers with asymptomatic and symptomatic Zika virus infection during pregnancy. In February 2016, Zika virus disease and congenital Zika virus infections became nationally notifiable conditions in the United States (2). Cases in pregnant women with laboratory evidence of Zika virus infection who have either 1) symptomatic infection or 2) asymptomatic infection with diagnosed complications of pregnancy can be reported as cases of Zika virus disease to ArboNET* (2), CDC's national arboviral diseases surveillance system. Under existing interim guidelines from the Council for State and Territorial Epidemiologists (CSTE), asymptomatic Zika virus infections in pregnant women who do not have known pregnancy complications are not reportable. ArboNET does not currently include pregnancy surveillance information (e.g., gestational age or pregnancy exposures) or pregnancy outcomes. To understand the full impact of infection on the fetus and neonate, other systems are needed for reporting and active monitoring of pregnant women with laboratory evidence of possible Zika virus infection during pregnancy. Thus, in collaboration with state, local, tribal, and territorial health departments, CDC established two surveillance systems to monitor pregnancies and congenital outcomes among women with laboratory evidence of Zika virus infection(dagger) in the United States and territories: 1) the U.S. Zika Pregnancy Registry (USZPR),( section sign) which monitors pregnant women residing in U.S. states and all U.S. territories except Puerto Rico, and 2) the Zika Active Pregnancy Surveillance System (ZAPSS), which monitors pregnant women residing in Puerto Rico. As of May 12, 2016, the surveillance systems were monitoring 157 and 122 pregnant women with laboratory evidence of possible Zika virus infection from participating U.S. states and territories, respectively. Tracking and monitoring clinical presentation of Zika virus infection, all prenatal testing, and adverse consequences of Zika virus infection during pregnancy are critical to better characterize the risk for congenital infection, the performance of prenatal diagnostic testing, and the spectrum of adverse congenital outcomes. These data will improve clinical guidance, inform counseling messages for pregnant women, and facilitate planning for clinical and public health services for affected families.