#zero covid strategy

[indizombie]

The yuan's slide is yet another example of a currency weakening as a result of the strong dollar. It is also about the very different paths China and the United States are taking in response to economic issues at home. The PBOC has been easing interest rates to revive growth in an economy ravaged by Covid lockdowns, while the US Federal Reserve is moving aggressively in the opposite direction as it tries to control inflation. Such a divergence is not wholly problematic, Joseph Capurso, head of international and sustainable economics at the Commonwealth Bank of Australia said. The fall in the currency's value can actually be helpful for exporters within China, he said, because it would make their goods cheaper and so could increase demand. That said, exports only make up 20% of the Chinese economy these days, so a weak yuan will not turn around fundamental weakness domestically largely caused by Beijing's zero-Covid strategy and a property crisis, said Mr Capurso. A weaker currency can also lead to investors pulling their money out of the country and uncertainty in financial markets - something Chinese officials will want to avoid with the Communist Party Congress coming up next month, when its president Xi Jinping is expected to secure an unprecedented third term in office.

‘Chinese yuan: Currency hits record lows against US dollar’, BBC

[batboyblog]

Things Biden and the Democrats did, this week #21

May 31-June 7 2024

As part of President Biden's goal to bring the number of traffic deaths to zero, the Department of Transportation has sent $480 million in safety grants to all 50 states, DC, and all the US territories. The grants will focus on trucks, buses and other large vehicles. Thanks to DoT safety actions deaths involving heavy vehicles dropped by 8% from 2022 to 2023 and the department wants to keep pushing till the number is 0.

The Departments of Interior and Agriculture announced $2.8 billion plan to protect public land and support local government Conservation Efforts. $1.9 billion will be used to repair and restore national parks and public land, restoring historic sites, as well as Bureau of Indian Education-funded schools. $900 million will go to conservation funding, allowing the government to buy land to protect it. Half the funds will go to the federal government half to state and local governments and for the first time ever a tribal Conservation Land Acquisition program has been set up to allow tribal governments to buy land to protect nature.

The Department of Transportation announced that it had managed to get customers nearly $1 Billion dollars worth of flight reimbursements. The DoT reached an agreement with 3 airlines, Lufthansa, KLM, and South African Airways to pay between them $900 million to passengers effected by Covid related cancellations and delays. This adds to the $4 billion dollars of refunds and reimbursements to airline passengers under the Biden Administration.

The Department of Interior announced $725 million to clean up legacy coal pollution. This is the 3rd pay out from the $11.3 billion dollars President Biden signed into law in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to clean up coal pollution and invest in communities that used to rely on the coal industry. The money will be spent across 22 states and the Navajo Nation. Closing dangerous mine shafts, reclaim unstable slopes, improve water quality by treating acid mine drainage, and restore water supplies damaged by mining.

HUD launches the first of its kind investment program in manufactured homes. Manufactured homes represent a major market for affordable housing and the Biden Administration is the first to offer support to people trying to buy. HUD hopes the program will help 5,000 families and individuals buy their own home over the next 5 years.

The Department of the Interior announced $700 million for long-term water conservation projects across the Lower Colorado River Basin. The Colorado River Basin provides water for more than 40 million people, electric power to 7 US States and is a critical crucial resource for 30 Tribal nations and two Mexican states. The project hopes to save more than 700,000 acre-feet of water in Lake Mead. In the face of climate change causing a historic 23-year drought, there is record low water levels at Lake Powell and Lake Mead. The Biden Administration has moved aggressively to try to protect the Colorado River and make sure there's enough water in the West.

HUD makes $123 million for fighting Youth Homelessness available. This represents the 8th round of investment in Youth Homelessness since 2021 for a total of $440 million so far. The Biden Administration is focusing on innovative answers, like host homes, and kinship care models, with emphasis on creating equitable strategies to assist youth who are most vulnerable, including BIPOC, LGBTQIA+, and youth with disabilities. This is part of the Biden Administration goal of cutting homelessness by 25% by the end of 2025

The Department of Agriculture announced a series of actions to strength Tribal food sovereignty. The USDA will grant tribes in Maine, Alaska, Montana, Nebraska, North Carolina, Oregon and Washington $42 million through the Indigenous Animals Harvesting and Meat Processing Grants to support native animal harvesting. $18 million for projects under the Tribal Forest Protection Act. As well as $2.3 million to support the service of Indigenous foods in school meal programs. The USDA also plans its first ever class of interns specifically focused on Tribal agriculture and food sovereignty. The USDA also plans to host a first ever international trade mission focused on Tribal Nation and Native Hawaiian Community businesses.

Bonus: President Biden, First Lady Jill Biden, and Secretaries of Defense Lloyd Austin and State Antony Blinken traveled to Normandy France to mark the 80th Anniversary of D-Day. They were joined by a handful of surviving veterans of the landings many over 100 years old.

[tieflingkisser]

Biden, CDC silent as North Carolina lawmakers vote to ban masks

Biden's White House has made everyday survival hell for disabled people. Now the last tool in the toolbox is being targeted with zero pushback.

This week, North Carolina Republicans are voting to ban wearing masks in public. The bill passed in the State House easily, was amended and passed in the State Senate, and will next return to the House for a vote on the amended bill. The Republicans also hold a supermajority that could overturn a veto, and killed a Democratic amendment to allow masking for health reasons. Hot on the heels of student encampments demanding that universities divest from weapons’ manufacturers responsible for mass murder in Gaza, Republicans jumped at the chance to criminalize two of their favorite punching bags, leftists and medically vulnerable people. Disabled people and allies have met the news with chagrin, as Republicans carry out the long-predicted next step in their war on medically vulnerable people appearing in public and remaining alive. Unfortunately, as Joe Biden jokes about refusing to put his mask on after a known COVID exposure, and left/labor pundits ignore the topic altogether, “allies” are few and far between. This combination of aggressive targeting and utter lack of solidarity is leaving those who rely on one-way masking to survive more at-risk than ever before.

[...]

Since it became clear (2021-22) that vaccines would not halt COVID transmission, that the virus would quickly mutate around vaccine protection, and that herd immunity would never be achieved, our government and media have worked assiduously to normalize constant reinfections and stigmatize those who object. People who suggest that it is the governments’ role to mitigate disease are painted as annoying and weak, a narrative that came directly from libertarian think tanks. Those who attempt to protect themselves in the face of harsh abandonment are painted as paranoid and mentally ill. What happened in North Carolina today is the unsurprising result of that years-long propaganda campaign. Masks are a critical tool to protect disabled people from COVID, but many people either bought into anti-mask propaganda, or do not think COVID is dangerous. For a leftist- someone who expresses belief in community care and solidarity- being unmasked doesn’t only convey the sentiment “I don’t think I can be disabled by COVID,” it also broadcasts the accusation, “I don’t believe you can be disabled by COVID.” Being unmasked while COVID spreads unmitigated is an insistence on ones’ inalienable right to expose others to COVID without their consent. Meanwhile, the latest CDC Household Pulse Survey found 17 million Americans currently living with Long COVID, and approximately 3 in 10 reporting having had Long COVID symptoms at one point. Viral persistence is currently a leading hypothesis for the development of post-COVID disease, and “persistence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA or particles in multiple tissues for prolonged periods in patients following SARS-CoV-2 infection, particularly in patients with long COVID, is now well documented.” Mounting research shows that every COVID infection significantly damages cognitive function. Research led by Dr. Akiko Iwasaki at Yale School of Medicine continues to find immune dysregulation following COVID, and studies point to a 40% increased risk of developing autoimmune conditions after COVID. And it’s long been established that COVID substantially increases your risk of heart attacks, strokes, and other cardiovascular complications.

[...]

But Democrats continue to stand behind their failed “vaccine-only” strategy (now, without vaccines!) because of the political impossibility of attempting to pivot. Plus, when you’ve had such blinding success mainstreaming far-right beliefs about illness building the immune system and public health being a personal choice, why change horses now?

[covid-safer-hotties]

Also preserved on our archive

By Julia Doubleday

Last week, Jason Gale of Bloomberg put out an excellent piece about post-COVID brain damage, titled “What We Know About Covid’s Impact on Your Brain.”

The piece is broad and draws on dozens of studies to paint a concerning picture of Your Brain on COVID. It’s not the first piece to do so in the mainstream press, but it’s one of a small handful over nearly half a decade. Gale’s piece gathers evidence pointing to increased risks of dementia, Parkinson’s disease, cognitive impairment, worsening of previous psychiatric conditions, and significant drops in IQ.

The piece goes on to mention viral persistence, immune system disruption and blood clots as linked to the cognitive impacts of COVID- all three are key targets of ongoing research into Long COVID. It’s a wonderful summary to help people get a picture of the enormous amount of research pointing to brain damage following COVID.

It also begs the question: why is the public learning potentially life-altering information about a virus they’ve almost certainly contracted multiple times now from the economics section of Bloomberg? (Or from The Gauntlet, for that matter?)

As politicians pushed us all “back to normal”, a common refrain from the top was that we “had the tools” to deal with COVID, and that individuals could now make their own decisions about what sorts of risks they were comfortable taking.

I’ve written at length about the absurdity of attempting to individualize what is a collective problem. What was once a libertarian, far-right wing idea - disease control should be the territory of individuals, not society at large- was first promoted by Republicans, then mainstreamed by liberals in order to paint Biden’s failed vaccine-only herd-immunity strategy as a success.

As we settled into a cycle of endless waves of disease driven by rapidly evolving new variants, our government and public health bodies continued to promote the fantasy that everyone can make their own decisions about whether or not to get infected.

Of course, anyone who does make the “risk assessment” that catching COVID is unsafe for them is functionally shut out of society. It’s hardly a choice freely made, as the social and economic punishments for failing to “return to normal” continue to intensify.

But it wasn’t enough to snatch away free tests, vaccines and COVID treatments, all but eliminate the isolation period for active infections, and push people to view disease control as a personal responsibility. Along with instructing people to make their own “risk assessments” about COVID, our government also downplays, minimizes, and flat out denies the risks of recurrent infections.

For example: COVID causes cognitive damage. That seems like an important piece of information to give the American public while you encourage them to make risk assessments about whether to contract it every year, does it not?

What about parents deciding to send their kids back to schools with zero precautions?

Should they be warned that COVID carries a significant risk of brain damage following infection, before deciding whether it’s a good idea to let their children catch it twice a year?

And if that information is quite deliberately kept from the public by the same bodies failing to provide collective mitigations, are you asking people to make “risk assessments”, or are you just pushing them to catch COVID?

Let’s review what the public has been told about cognitive damage after COVID by the CDC, the President, the administration, and prominent media figures.

The CDC’s twitter account has never tweeted the words “cognitive damage” or “brain damage” in reference to COVID. On March 23, 2023, the CDC twitter account posted its only reference to “brain fog”:

"Common symptoms of Long COVID include fatigue, shortness of breath, fast heartbeat, & brain fog. If several weeks have passed since you had #COVID19 & you still have symptoms that interfere with your daily activities, talk to your doctor."

The current CDC Director, Mandy Cohen, has never tweeted the words “cognitive damage,” “brain damage” or “brain fog.” Neither has former CDC Director Rachelle Walensky.

In interviews, Mandy, like the rest of the administration, likes to keep it vague. Brain damage is certainly not on the talking points menu; no specific outcomes are. We are “living with COVID”. We “have the tools”. She encourages vaccinations and not masks, the tool that can actually prevent infection. In a 2023 media tour about “rebuilding trust” with the public, she repeatedly refers to the pandemic in the past tense although the pandemic is ongoing according to the WHO.

Here’s an interesting one: former White House COVID-19 Response Coordinator Ashish Jha has tweeted about COVID brain damage once: on June 17, 2021, ten months before he joined the administration. He’s since become a prominent minimizer who calls masking “fringe” and downplays post-COVID immune system dysregulation, but here’s what he had to say in June 2021:

"Important study out of UK

Worth your time

Researchers examined brain MRIs of people before and after they got COVID, matched with controls

What did they find?

Substantial loss of grey matter in those who had gotten but recovered from COVID

www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.06.11.21258690v1 "

Wow! Seems like the kind of thing the White House COVID-19 Response Coordinator would want to share with people, rather than never mention again.

And of course, the most subtle propaganda the Administration, fellow politicians, and CDC leaders employ is their refusal to mask or appear to mitigate COVID in any way. If each COVID infection carries a risk of brain damage, surely the Director of the CDC wouldn’t constantly show up in public spaces - including airport terminals- maskless?

The President famously wouldn’t even mask after testing positive for COVID, shortly before dropping out of his re-election campaign. He, certainly, has never talked about COVID’s effects on the brain (if indeed, he’s aware of them), instead using airtime to brag about defeating disease mitigation tools. “The pandemic is over,” he incorrectly stated in the fall of 2022, “if you notice, no one is wearing masks,” he went on to say, correctly identifying his success at stigmatizing COVID prevention.

Perhaps no single outlet is more responsible for the dishonest normalizing of continual COVID reinfections than the New York Times newsletter The Morning in the hands of David Leonhardt. During the mass death event of Omicron Wave 1, Dave was the main party responsible for the “omicron is mild” narrative (a lie) that spread round the world. This February, he “both sides’d” vaccinating children because, quote, “children are extremely unlikely to become seriously ill from Covid”. As recently reported by CBS News, up to 5.8 million kids have Long COVID.

Of course, it’s fantastic that CBS News is reporting on the damage that has been done to children by returning them to classrooms without upgraded ventilation or other mitigations. It would have been better if major media outlets had conveyed this risk before millions of children were disabled.

It’s also great that Bloomberg is reporting about the brain damage that can follow COVID, deep diving the research and putting forward three of the most compelling explanations for Long COVID. But how many people, nearly five years into the crisis, know anything about this topic? How many people who are three, four, five infections in, consented to these risks when they took their masks off?

Who is responsible for this ignorance? Is it not the public health bodies and politicians charged with responding to the virus?

In interviews and speeches, it’s not only cognitive damage that our elected leaders and public health officials fail to mention. President Biden has said the words “Long COVID” a handful of times publicly. Vice President Harris has never said them. Is this not bizarre to anyone who expects the Democratic party to convey scientific facts about the pandemic to the public? Is it not clearly an attempt to hide those harmed by the ongoing “let it rip” strategy from view?

When tens of millions of Americans are disabled by a virus on your watch, never uttering the name of the disease they have is deliberate, and leaves sufferers of Long COVID struggling with stigmatization in their personal lives. By enforcing silence around Long COVID at the top of the Biden Administration, in the CDC, and among media talking heads, the public is encouraged to doubt and dismiss the condition entirely.

If this administration is so certain the public would freely choose to ignore the millions suffering from Long COVID, the risks of infection including brain damage, the high rates of transmission in our communities, and continue to opt out of mitigations and mask wearing, why do they work so hard to hide all of the above?

Why do they, along with most other electeds on the Hill, pretend they have never heard the words Long COVID, refuse to acknowledge the ongoing toll of mass infection, and continue to push testing and data out of reach? Is this the behavior of leaders who are confident that the public has freely chosen to cruelly and deliberately abandon millions of people to long-term chronic illness, and to repeatedly risk joining them?

Or is it the behavior of leaders who know they are on borrowed time, sweeping the ever-growing body of evidence and ever-higher pile of victims under the rug while stubbornly repeating that “nobody is wearing masks”?

Scientists, advocates and reporters face an uphill battle getting information about the risks of repeated COVID infections to the public. It is uphill not because of the lack of studies, resources, victims, or voices, but because those who could do the most good continue to use their platforms to do the most harm. As long as the public receives the message from our leaders that recurrent COVID infections aren’t dangerous, the truth has a high wall of propaganda to hurdle.

Nevertheless, the truth continues to emerge via studies, articles, the people who’ve been harmed, and those who care. It’s unfortunate that our public health officials and politicians will be remembered for hiding the facts about COVID, rather than disseminating them.

[transmutationisms]

is there a source that you recommend as a go-to for covid news? i want to stay up to date but the leftist friends that i usually go to for health/disability news have started to get conspiracy-minded about covid (but in the opposite direction of right-wingers)

i don't believe there's any single source to rely on and i think that's a risky information strategy in general. i read from a lot of different outlets and treat them all with the same skepticism i would for any other news or commentary. i also specifically have less than zero confidence in current journalistic standards for science communication, so when a point hinges on a technical publication i click through and read, at minimum, the introduction, results, and methods in order to make an informed judgment about whatever analysis is at stake. i don't think covid conspiratorial thinking would be eradicated by giving people a list of vetted acceptable sources because the problem generally begins with an explanatory framework that privileges the fear of powerful sinister individuals over a material analysis of biopolitics and the production of epidemiological knowledge and norms in a capitalist system.

[presidentkamala]

Been getting progressively emotionally hungover from the DNC idk how im going to make it thru tomorrow lmao

I remain baffled by the pundit response - OF COURSE the DNC is "self-indulgent" the audience is DEMS and the goal is to energize the base for the home stretch of the election!!! Like wtf its not a battleground stump speech. Also criticisms of the speakers for their breadth and diversity?????? Like not every speaker is For You so obviously you'll hear some messaging that doesnt "land" BIG TENT BABEY!!! Anyone who isnt a hardcore Politics Watcher is going to be seeing this through clips and tik toks hopefully targeting the messaging that works for THEM which i think is a genius strategy. And ZERO mention of the roll call or the testimonials from REAL PEOPLE which is fascinating bc those were so completely transcendant and affecting.

Also another huge suck on my dick to podsa for having the gall to be snippy about bidenworld sharing how pissed they are w the media like wow you guys have zero self awareness!!

And before we go into night 4, im donating, im volunteering, i still don't feel too hot about our chances but you know what at least we're here to lay it all on the table!!!! This will NOT be 2016 for many reasons but the biggest one for me is that i will be forever haunted by not doing more then and i couldnt do much in 2020 bc of covid. But in 2024 I'm ready to drive down to west virginia and doorknock like i signed up to volunteer in clarksburg and winchester and i hope that all the Posters and Podcasters DO SOMETHING besides flapping their gums this year

[centrally-unplanned]

My perpetual obsession with the ‘low hanging fruit’ of how far away from even basic competence so many states are in the realm of strategy; China is currently ruining the lives of every urban professional in their country with Zero Covid and the US has made precisely zero attempts to poach talent w/ immigration reform & opportunities. A reasonable estimate puts the number of talented people in play right now at the hundreds of thousands, easily, could be a million, and nothing. The aesthetics of racist provincialism > every other consideration, alas.

[foster-the-world]

Another bad pickup

Ugh. Once again I asked the teacher how he did. "He needs a lot of redirection. He mostly does his own thing." Very monotone. Looks very annoyed but maybe i'm reading into it and/or she's just not a person that smiles. I responded with "hopefully the assessment will provide more support for him." She stares at me with a blank face. "We are open to any suggestions for working with him." No response. Another stare with a blank face. Thinking maybe the time was too busy "We are happy to meet another time to come up with some strategies that could help." Another blank stare. It felt so odd. Why would you not respond one way or another? If its too early for a meeting just tell me that. I know he's a high maintenance kid. I'm trying to help/work together.

This morning was the first time he woke up saying he wants to go back to daycare :(

My husband and I discussed and decided I'm not asking anymore questions. I'm getting zero helpful information. I have no idea if the redirection is super difficult/unmanageable or just a normal part of starting school. She's making it obvious she does not want to talk to me. If he has major problems then I assume we will hear about it.

In total the girls have had 7 teachers at this school. We've 100% loved/adored 6 of them. I thought Bee's prek teacher was a little grumpy but maybe because it was covid times and not a big deal at all. Bee loved her so we were happy. And honestly if the girls had a teacher we weren't a fan of we'd mostly not worry about it (assuming no gross negligence, of course). They do well academically and can handle themselves. Now the time Baby boy really needs a strong teacher I don't have a good feeling. It's day four. Hopefully, I am reading her totally wrong. The Assistant teacher is a sweet granny type whose been with the 4k kids for 15 years - so I'll try talking to her. I'm not asking for a deep dive with an educational assessment. I just want to know if my kid is generally happy or driving everyone nuts.

Reminder to myself to stop the spiral worrying - My kid is happy. My kid runs out of school happy to see me. He gives his sisters bear hugs at drop off and pickup. My kid does not care if his teacher doesn't like him. My kid is safe, loved, and will be well taken care of no matter where he ends up this year.

Last night he passed out at the dinner table at 6:30. Then we had to wake him up this morning. I'm not surprised. He's still a really strong napper. This weekend when we didn't wake him up he took a 3.5 hour nap. They do nap at school but its only an hour. Its a good time to adjust for him.

Still diving into all of the special edu school info. Lots to unpack. So much I'm embarrassed to say I didn't now. NYC is the most racially segregated and the most segregated special ed program in the nation. When there is so much evidence which says both of those things are bad for ALL KIDS!

[brondingsloan]

[Image Generated using DALL - E]

Reflecting on the case and the marketing strategies of Corona and Heineken reveals a tale of two varied approaches, each with its unique implications in the competitive landscape of the beer market.

As I read the case- I kept comparing the dynamic nature of advertising and selling beer in the US. Having grown up in India- the nature of ads from alcohol companies were very different. My reflection highlights some of the areas where regulatory frameworks lead to innovative marketing tactics such as surrogate advertising.

Finally- I could not help but wonder what the impact of the pandemic was on a brand like Corona (for obvious reasons). I remember listening to a podcast back in the day about the ultimate positive effect the pandemic had on beer consumption in the US, and my final point covers that.

Corona and Heineken's Divergent Paths Corona’s growth in the U.S. market, challenging Heineken's long-standing dominance, serves as an example of how brand imagery and lifestyle alignment can reshape market dynamics. While Heineken has promoted its brand as a premium quality, heritage, and sophisticated one, Corona adopted a different strategy. Its marketing campaigns evoked a sense of relaxation, escapism, and the simple pleasures of life, epitomized by the iconic image of a lime-wedged bottle on a sun-drenched beach.

The Indian Context: Surrogate Marketing Turning to the Indian market, where direct advertising of alcoholic beverages is prohibited, brands have resorted to surrogate marketing to make their presence felt in the consumers' minds. Companies promote products that share the brand name with the alcoholic beverage, such as music CDs, water, or even airlines, thereby maintaining brand recall.

For long, some of the funniest and most memorable ads, usually came from such brands. This strategy, while requiring creativity and indirect messaging, highlights the complex interplay between regulatory environments and marketing innovation, allowing brands to build a presence in a market with strict advertising restrictions. (Alcohol brand selling "Music CDs": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9zhozmQCDYg&pp=ygUdbWVuIHdpbGwgYmUgbWVuIGltcGVyaWFsIGJsdWU%3D)

Lately, many brands have launched zero-alcohol products, using these as surrogates to gain market popularity. Heineken was definitely the winner in the Indian market – from my recollection, I never saw a Corona ad.

Any publicity is good publicity? - True for Corona!

The COVID-19 pandemic presented unique challenges particularly for a brand like Corona, given the unfortunate name association. Despite initial setbacks and market confusion (with rumors rife with association to the virus), Corona's marketing strategy demonstrated resilience and adaptability. Research suggested that the brand's visibility and consumer loyalty contributed to this growth, with each new COVID-19 case seemingly boosting Corona's sales by $5.30 weekly compared to other major beer brands. The article mentioned that Corona beer gained "accidental popularity" due to its name's association with the coronavirus, driving increased attention and sales during the pandemic​. Link to article: https://www.marketplace.org/2022/12/30/how-did-the-pandemic-affect-the-corona-beer-brand/

[postleft]

western media when china does zero covid: this is evil, cruel, oppressive, tyrannical, authoritarian, anti-democratic, anti-liberty, anti-freedom, baby-killing,

western media when china changes their covid strategy: good job you stupid communists now chinese people might get covid. idiots.

[panicinthestudio]

Protesters in China demand Xi Jinping step down, November 27, 2022

Unrest is growing in China over the country's strict COVID-19 measures. Fresh protests have broken out in major cities, with hundreds rallying at Beijing's elite Tsing-hua University, chanting 'we want freedom.' Many also held up blank sheets of paper in a symbolic protest against state censorship. More demonstrations have also been reported in Shanghai, following clashes with police overnight. Public anger has flared after a deadly apartment block fire, with many blaming an ongoing lockdown for hampering rescue efforts. Chinese officials have defended their zero-covid policy, despite the growing public backlash.

Deutsche Welle

Further reading:

AFP, via HKFP: Protests in Shanghai as anger mounts over China’s zero-Covid policy, November 27, 2022

BBC: China Covid: Protesters openly urge Xi to resign over China Covid curbs, November 27, 2022

The Guardian: Anti-lockdown protests spread in China as anger rises over zero-Covid strategy, November 27, 2022

Reuters: Blank sheets of paper become symbol of defiance in China protests, November 27, 2022

[argumate]

Chinese local governments have vowed to rectify problems and put into practice more scientific and precise anti-epidemic measures, after national authorities on Saturday reiterated China's adherence to the dynamic zero-COVID strategy but criticized excessive and inappropriate anti-epidemic measures in some localities.

officials are punished for covid outbreaks but also punished for anything that makes zero covid policy look bad, a difficult situation to be in.

[eaglesnick]

“Compassion is the basis of morality.” ― Arthur Schopenhauer

Helen MacNamara, revealed at the UK Covid inquiry yesterday that after speaking with Department of Health officials 10 days before lockdown, Boris Johnson and his cronies in government had “no plan” for the pandemic.

We now know this was because Johnson and his government were following a policy of herd immunity, whereby the weak, elderly and sick were to be allowed to become infected and die.

Realising that Johnson had no plans to counteract the pandemic Ms MacNamara said:

"It was a very, very scary experience. I felt that it wasn't in any doubt in my mind at that point that we were heading for a total disaster.” 

Knowing that disaster was coming she warned senior officials and Johnson’s chief of staff that:

 "we are going to kill thousands of people".

And of course that is exactly what happened, leading to this damning headline:

“UK now has the highest Covid death rate in the world. Nearly 1000 people are dying each day on average in the UK. Meanwhile, New Zealand has not recorded a single death since September.” (Independent: 25/01/21)

Johnson’s excuse for being prepared to let tens of thousands of elderly Brits die from Covid-19 was to “protect the economy".

Ironically, the New Zealand strategy of total lockdown and zero tolerance of Covid-19 was not only described as “one of the worlds most successful” with regard to saving lives - actually increasing life expectancy during this period - but with regard to the economy:

“Protecting public health has been good for protecting the economy, resulting in relatively good economic growth and low unemployment." (Guardian: 05/04/22)

If only we had been blessed with such humane, insightful and caring politicians.

[covid-safer-hotties]

Long COVID symptom severity varies widely by age, gender, and socioeconomic status - Published Sept 2, 2024

By Dr. Sushama R. Chaphalkar, PhD.

In a recent study published in the journal JRSM Open, researchers analyze self-reported symptoms of long coronavirus disease 2019 (LC) from individuals using a healthcare app to examine the potential impact of demographic factors on the severity of symptoms. The researchers found that LC symptom severity varied significantly by age, gender, race, education, and socioeconomic status.

Research highlights the urgent need for targeted interventions as age, gender, and social factors play a crucial role in the intensity of long COVID symptoms. What factors increase the risk of long COVID? Several months after recovering from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), patients with LC may continue to suffer from numerous symptoms, some of which include fatigue, brain fog, and chest pain. The prevalence of LC varies, with estimates ranging from 10-30% in non-hospitalized cases to 50-70% in hospitalized patients.

Although several digital health interventions (DHIs) and applications have been developed to monitor acute symptoms of COVID-19, few have been designed to track long-term symptoms of the disease. One DHI called "Living With COVID Recovery" (LWCR) was initiated to help individuals manage LC by self-reporting symptoms and tracking their intensity. However, there remains a lack of evidence on the risk factors, characteristics, and predictors of LC, thereby limiting the accurate identification of high-risk patients to target preventive strategies.

About the study In the present study, researchers investigate the prevalence and intensity of self-reported LC symptoms to analyze their potential relationship with demographic factors to inform targeted interventions and management strategies. To this end, LWCR was used to monitor and analyze self-reported LC symptoms from individuals in 31 LC clinics throughout England and Wales.

The study included 1,008 participants who reported 1,604 unique symptoms. All patients provided informed consent for the use of their anonymized data for research.

Multiple linear regression analysis was used to explore the relationship between symptom intensity and factors such as time since registration, age, ethnicity, education, gender, and socioeconomic status through indices of multiple deprivation (IMD) on a scale of one to 10.

Education was classified into four levels denoted as NVQ 1-2, NVQ 3, NVQ 4, and NVQ 5, which reflected those who were least educated at A level, degree level, and postgraduate level, respectively. The intensity of symptoms was measured on a scale from zero to 10, with zero being the lowest and 10 the highest intensity. Descriptive statistics identified variations in symptom intensity across different demographic groups.

Study findings Although 23% of patients experienced symptoms only once, 77% experienced symptoms multiple times. Corroborating with existing literature, the most prevalent symptoms included pain, neuropsychological issues, fatigue, and dyspnea, which affected 26.5%, 18.4%, 14.3%, and 7.4% of the cohort, respectively. Symptoms such as palpitations, light-headedness, insomnia, cough, diarrhea, and tinnitus were less prevalent.

Fifteen most prevalent LC symptoms. Multiple linear regression analysis revealed that symptom intensity was significantly associated with age, gender, ethnicity, education, and IMD decile. More specifically, individuals 68 years of age and older reported higher symptom intensity by 32.5% and 86%, respectively. These findings align with existing literature that highlights the increased risk of LC symptoms with age, which may be due to weakened immunity or the presence of comorbidities. Thus, they emphasize the need for targeted interventions for this population.

Females also reported higher symptom intensity than males, by 9.2%. Non-White individuals experienced higher symptom intensity by 23.5% as compared to White individuals.

Individuals with higher education levels reported up to 47% reduced symptom intensity as compared to those with lower education levels. Higher IMD deciles, which reflect less deprived areas, were associated with lower symptom intensity; however, no significant association was observed between the number of symptoms reported and the IMD decile.

Regression results with 95% confidence interval. Note: For age, the base group is people in the age category 18–27. For IMD, the base group is people from IMD decile 1. For education, the base group is people who left school before A-level (NVQ 1–2). A significant positive association was observed between symptom intensity and the duration between registration on the app and initial symptom reporting. This finding suggests individuals may become more aware of their symptoms or that worsening symptoms prompt reporting.

Some limitations of the current study include the lack of data on comorbidities, hospitalization, and vaccine status. There is also a potential for bias against individuals lacking technological proficiency or access, which may affect the sample's representativeness, particularly for older, socioeconomically disadvantaged, or non-English-speaking individuals. Excluding patients with severe symptoms or those who were ineligible for the app may also skew the findings.

Conclusions There remains an urgent need to develop targeted interventions to address the severity of LC in relation to age, ethnicity, and socioeconomic factors. LC treatment should prioritize prevalent symptoms like pain, neuropsychological issues, fatigue, and dyspnea while also considering other possible symptoms. Furthermore, sustained support for LC clinics is essential to effectively manage the wide range of symptoms and complexities associated with LC and improve public health outcomes in the post-pandemic era.

Journal reference:

Sunkersing, D., Goodfellow, H., Mu, Y., et al. (2024). Long COVID symptoms and demographic associations: A retrospective case series study using healthcare application data. JRSM Open 15(7). doi:10.1177/20542704241274292.

journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/20542704241274292

[marveltrumpshate]

This year continued to be A Lot and we decided to ensure that there were charities that directly addressed current events. Folded into this post are groups that work for aid targeting every natural disaster and man-made one, climate change, the ongoing COVID pandemic, and more. If you're looking for an organization that directly addresses any of those, this is your spotlight post.

For more information on donation methods and accepted currencies, please refer to our list of organizations page.

Center for Reproductive Rights

The Center for Reproductive Rights is the only global legal advocacy organization dedicated to ensuring reproductive rights are protected in law as fundamental human rights for the dignity, equality, health, and well-being of every person. With local partners across five continents, they have secured legal victories before national courts, UN Committees, and regional human rights bodies on issues such as access to life-saving obstetrics care, contraception, maternal health, and safe abortion services and the prevention of forced sterilization and child marriage.

Clean Air Task Force

As we've seen for a long time now but especially this year with constant natural disasters and alarming news from all over the world, climate change is real and we need to do something about it. Over the past 25 years, CATF, a group of climate and energy experts who think outside the box to solve the climate crisis, has pushed for technology innovations, legal advocacy, research, and policy changes. Their goal is to achieve a zero-emissions, high-energy planet at an affordable cost.

Coalition for Rainforest Nations

Boasting a voluntary membership of over 50 rainforest nations, CORN provides a single voice to countries that didn’t cause the climate emergency but nevertheless feel the brunt of it daily. CORN originated the global conservation mechanism Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD+) to stop deforestation. REDD+ was successfully mandated in the Paris Climate Agreement (2015) and covers 90% of the world’s tropical rainforests.

International Rescue Committee

Founded in 1933, the IRC is a long-standing trusted partner in supporting those whose lives have been upended by sudden violence, political or natural. Their main fundraising focuses right now are Pakistan and Ukraine, but they are no stranger to areas of disaster throughout the world as they currently work in 40 countries. The IRC provides emergency aid and long-term assistance, including refugee settlement, and focuses on health, education, economic well-being, empowerment, and safety.

Médecins Sans Frontières/Doctors Without Borders (MSF)

Odds are you’ve heard of MSF, the global organization that sends trained medical professionals to the places they’re needed most. MSF has been working globally for nearly 40 years, providing medical assistance to people affected by conflict, epidemics, disasters, or exclusion from healthcare—no matter what. They’re guided by principles of independence, impartiality, and neutrality to global political policies or movements.

National Asian Pacific American Women's Forum

NAPAWF is the only organization focused on building a movement for social, political, and economic change for Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) women and girls. Their work focuses on policy and structural change, organizing and civic engagement, and legal advocacy and judicial strategy. They also tackle reproductive health and rights, economic justice, and immigration and racial justice.

National Network of Abortion Funds

The National Network of Abortion Funds builds power with members to remove financial and logistical barriers to abortion access by centering people who have abortions and organizing at the intersections of racial, economic, and reproductive justice. They provide their grassroots base of over 80 autonomous, diverse organizations/abortion funds with leadership development, infrastructure support, and technical assistance. Some fund procedures while others cover abortion pills, transportation, lodging, childcare, doula services, and other forms of support.

National Resource Defense Council

"We believe the world’s children should inherit a planet that will sustain them as it has sustained us. NRDC works to ensure the rights of all people to the air, the water and the wild, and to prevent special interests from undermining public interests." Since 1970, the NRDC has been a leader in legal advocacy for climate justice. They work with a staff of about 700 lawyers, scientists, and policy experts to reduce pollution and protect natural resources nationally and internationally.

Partners In Health

Founded by Paul Farmer when he was still in medical school, PIH is committed to bringing exceptional health care to every corner of the planet. PIH also works to provide access to food, transportation, housing, and other key components of healing to the most vulnerable. Their work started in Haiti but has expanded rapidly across the globe.

RIP Medical Debt

Over 100 million Americans (one in three) are struggling with paying off medical bills. COVID has only added to those numbers, putting people under significant financial burden and emotional distress. This organization buys up medical debt in order to forgive it with no tax consequences to donors or recipients. Donate just $1 and you wipe out $100 of someone's medical debt, $100 to get rid of $10,000 in debt, and so on—the ripple effect is real. Through their work, RIP Medical Help not only helps with financial relief but also brings attention to the need for a more compassionate, transparent, equitable, and affordable healthcare system.

The Solutions Project

Using grants and donations, The Solutions Project empowers grassroots leaders to build solutions, funding, and influence for the communities most affected by the climate crisis. They also provide media training and networking and leverage influencer and media relationships for their grantees. Due to the lack of representation of communities directly impacted by climate change, they aim to invest 95% of their resources to front line leaders of color and at least 80% to organizations led by women and gender nonconforming people. If The Solutions Project sounds familiar to you, it might be because Mark Ruffalo is one of the founders and he and Don Cheadle are among the board of directors!

World Central Kitchen

Started by Chef José Andrés, WCK makes sure that people are fed in the wake of natural disasters. Their programs advance human and environmental health, offer access to professional culinary training, create jobs, and improve food security. WCK also teaches food safety and cooking classes to native people who live where disasters have occurred, so they may open restaurants and support the local economy more permanently. Their current focuses are partnering with restaurants, one of the hardest-hit industries, through the pandemic (here and here) and assisting those affected by Hurricane Ian, Hurricane Fiona, floods in Pakistan, and the war in Ukraine.

[mariacallous]

China’s economy is limping back to life after President Xi Jinping’s ill-fated “zero covid” decree, but there is one big victim: the country’s efforts to tackle climate change. China’s carbon emissions recently recorded their largest annual jump and are on track to reach an all-time high. Fueled by new Chinese Communist Party (CCP) language that posits coal as the mainstay of the energy system, domestic production and consumption have ticked up. As has approval of new coal-fired power stations.

Xi’s signature “dual carbon” goals—for China to peak emissions before 2030, and to reach carbon neutrality by 2060—are not yet at risk. But that’s only because of Beijing’s preponderance for setting its climate targets so low to begin with. However, the cost of China now meeting these goals is only going up, and the room for them to do more is shrinking.

The problem is that for the CCP leadership the only thing that matters at present is ensuring a short-term economic bump. Xi’s modest annual growth target of 5 percent must be achieved at all costs. That’s why if we are to have any hope of stopping runaway climate change in time, the West needs a strategy that is as much about climate sticks as it is about carrots. It’s about time we see climate inaction on the same par as human rights abuses or even incursions to international peace and security.

By far the biggest stick available to the west is implementing new green tariffs. These tariffs would increase the cost to China of exporting carbon intensive goods such as cement, steel and aluminum to regions like the European Union where local manufacturers are already subject to strict regulations on their own pollution. For the first time, it would mean a direct hip pocket cost for climate inaction on the Chinese trade balance sheet. It would help force Chinese manufacturers to adapt to lower polluting methods.

In October, the European Union will begin implementing a “carbon border adjustment mechanism” (CBAM), due to be fully operationally in its coverage by 2026. In the United States, both Republicans and Democrats have already taken steps to prepare for a similar scheme. A bill to calculate the emissions intensity of industrial materials produced domestically was recently passed, and there is a possibility of a follow-up to the CHIPS and Science Act or a new standalone “Foreign Pollution Act” bill will put in place the cornerstone of a future scheme—though that is still some time away. In the meantime, the United States and the European Union are also negotiating a green steel deal that will be an important placeholder by individually placing some tariffs on China absent a wider scheme.

The Middle Kingdom hates the idea of green tariffs. For them, trade and climate should never be discussed in the same sentence. It’s easy to see why. Deloitte estimates China will be the most exposed market (behind Russia) to the EU’s new scheme, with €6.5 billion of trade from China affected to begin with. The United Kingdom and Canada are also considering similar schemes. Persuading others like South Korea and Japan—which already have or are implementing domestic carbon markets—to follow suit would help tighten the screws on Beijing by covering over a quarter of their export market. Just as important will be getting developing countries like South Africa (and perhaps even India over time) to also do so to avoid fragmenting the global trade environment they already complain of.

It’s crucial these countries can not only come together, but that they then stick together. When dealing with China, it is always better to move in packs. Unfortunately, Brussels has a propensity for wanting to play the good cop with China to Washington’s bad cop. For instance, a recent commitment by the EU to “better understand and address China’s concerns” with their scheme has raised eyebrows.

Diplomacy therefore still matters. It can also show the foreign policy hard heads in Beijing who continue to set the small playing field for China’s international climate agenda, that this issue is fundamental to China’s global standing and not one that cannot be geopolitically horse traded. Given his proclivity for the opposite, Wang Yi’s return as foreign minister has likely made that job harder in recent weeks.

The bottom line is the world is running out of time for dialogue alone to solve the climate crisis. In May, the World Meteorological Organization said that by 2027 we were more likely than not to breach the 1.5 degrees Celsius temperature limit, widely considered by scientists to be a climate tipping point.

Yet in the face of this, Xi is only standing firm. During a recent visit by U.S. climate envoy John Kerry, Xi defended the pace and intensity of China’s actions, which he said “should and must be” determined free of outside interference. And while the resumption of climate talks between the United States and China is a welcome step forward in the geopolitical milieu of the broader relationship, Beijing clearly feels it owes nothing more to Washington.

It’s time get tougher. For the last decade or more, the cornerstone of the West’s approach to China on climate change has simply been to encourage the country to play a part in combatting it. That has had some impact. In 2009, China was prepared to walk away from a proposed global deal in Copenhagen that posited developed and developing countries should be treated the same. But by 2014, China stood alongside the United States and put forward its own plan to reduce emissions that helped pave the way for the Paris Agreement. A shifting domestic zeitgeist as air pollution in Chinese cities, and a greater awareness of the impacts of climate change taking hold was far more consequential for changing the attitude of the CCP leadership. The west needs to help that shifting domestic sentiment along.

For its part, China would say its installed more renewable energy last year and sold more electric vehicles than the rest of the world combined. China is also on track to double its goal for installed solar and wind capacity this decade. But absent a more concerted effort by Beijing, none of this is likely to matter much. More than two-thirds of the world’s installed coal-fired power capacity will soon be in China, if over 300 mooted new plants are built. By the middle of the century, China will also overtake the United States as the world’s largest historical emitter. This will remove its bifurcated defense against responsibility that because it did not cause the issue, it has no responsibility for fixing it.

If the West can move quickly to implement new green tariffs, it won’t take us long to know if they have been effective. In 2025, China along with the rest of the world will be required to set new targets to reduce emissions for a decade ahead. For its part, the United States will be under particular pressure to take a big step up from its goal of a 50 percent to 52 percent emissions reduction by 2030, buoyed by the Inflation Reduction Act’s new measures. Having finally peaked emissions at the end of this decade, the key question for China will be whether they can put them into structural decline. If it doesn’t, the consequences will be felt by us all.