Surprise: Donald Trump Is Using His Pardons On Child-Killers & Sleazy Republicans

Yesterday it was announced that lame-duck President Donald Trump issued 15 pardons and five commutations, all of which perfectly reflect everything from his long-held grudges against the special counsel’s Russia investigation to his willingness to reward political allies. Made public in a White House statement on Tuesday evening, many of the pardons and commutations bypassed the traditional Justice Department review process and, according to The New York Times, more than half did not meet the department’s consideration criteria.

© Provided by Refinery29 VALDOSTA, GA – DECEMBER 5: President Donald J. Trump holds a victory rally on Saturday, Dec. 5, 2020 in Valdosta, Georgia. The event was hosted by the Republican National Committee and featured Senators David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler. (Photo by Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images)

Among those pardoned were two people who pleaded guilty in Robert S. Mueller’s inquiry into the Trump campaign’s dealings with Russia, three former Republican Congress members convicted of corruption, and four Blackwater guards convicted for their involvement in the killing of Iraqi civilians in 2007.

The Mueller-related pardons effectively nullified many of the legal consequences associated with the investigation into Russian interference during Trump’s 2016 campaign, an investigation that the president has consistently labeled a hoax. Notably among those pardoned on Tuesday is George Papadopoulos, a foreign policy adviser to Trump’s 2016 campaign, who pleaded guilty in 2017 to lying to federal officials during Mueller’s investigation. Trump also pardoned Alex van der Zwaan, a lawyer who pleaded guilty to lying during the investigation as well. Both have served short prison sentences.

Prior to this round of pardons, Trump granted clemency to Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn for twice pleading guilty to lying to the FBI and longtime adviser Roger Stone who was convicted on a series of charges related to the Russia inquiry. Trump reportedly intends to pardon more people caught up in the investigation before his presidency comes to a close.

Chris Collins, Duncan D. Hunter, and Steve Stockman are the three former members of Congress who Trump pardoned. Collins, who has supported Trump since his early campaign days, has been serving a 26-month sentence after conspiring to commit securities fraud and making false statements to the FBI, both of which he pleaded guilty to in 2019. Hunter was all set to serve an 11-month sentence starting next month after he pleaded guilty to one charge of misusing campaign funds. Convicted in 2018 on charges of money laundering and fraud, Stockman was in the middle of a 10-year sentence.

Also among Trump’s list of pardons were four former U.S. service members. While working for Blackwater, a private security firm contracted by the military, they were involved in the 2007 massacre of 17 civilians in Nisour Square in Baghdad. All four were convicted on charges of murder and manslaughter, their youngest victim was nine years old.

It’s not just that Trump has used his pardoning power more aggressively than most presidents, he has also used it more blatantly for personal and political purposes. According to Harvard Law School professor Jack Goldsmith, Trump has pardoned or commuted the sentences of 45 people prior to those announced on Tuesday. Of those 45, 88 percent were people with personal ties to the president or to people who helped further his political goals.

He still has three more weeks in the White House and is expected to issue more pardons before January 20. In that time, it is reportedly likely that he will preemptively pardon personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani as well as his three eldest children and his son-in-law Jared Kushner. Infuriating as all that is, at least we know he can’t pardon himself.

Like what you see? How about some more goodness, right here?

Giuliani Might Really Need Trump To Pardon Him

Why Reality Winner Needs To Be Pardoned By Trump

Trump Is Under Investigation For Pardon Bribery

From biblical times to Trump, false messiahs have doomed societies

The prophet Jeremiah records in excruciating detail the catastrophic events leading to the destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar in 587 BCE.

Jeremiah describes the devastating famine, escalating sense of fear and ominous foreboding that permeated the city despite optimistic oracles issued in the royal court by prophets, who promised divine intercession. Jeremiah warned his listeners not to be deceived by false hopes based on the belief that God would protect his sacred temple and the city in which it stood: “Do not trust in these deceptive words: ‘this is the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord.’”

The people of Jerusalem disregarded Jeremiah’s advice and threw him into a well, threatening even to kill him because his doom-saying weakened morale in the besieged city. Yet, it is Jeremiah’s oracles that the Bible preserves because he was correct: the city was violently destroyed and most of the Judeans either died or were exiled to Babylonia, leaving only a remnant of peasants behind to work the land. This brought the biblical kingdom of Judah to an end.

History teaches that messianic hopes lead to poor outcomes for the societies that embrace them. Yet, they continue to surface — even today, with the elevation of Donald Trump by some to messiah-like status.

© (Gallerie dell'Accademia) ‘Distruzione del tempio di Gerusalemme (Destruction of the Jewish temple in Jerusalem),’ by Italian painter Francesco Hayez (1867)

Divine intervention and predictive failures

The Babylonian conquest is just one example of false hopes for divine intercession leading to ill-fated rebellion and catastrophic defeat. In the year 70 CE, Jerusalem again found itself besieged by a regional superpower demanding political submission.

Josephus, a Jewish historian who survived the war, writes an eye-witness account of the events that led to the second cataclysmic destruction of Jerusalem. He reports that, leading to the Jewish revolt in 66 CE, numerous bandits fomented rebellion against Rome in ways that suggest they had messianic pretensions: one false prophet gathered mobs in the wilderness and led them to the Mount of Olives, promising to breach the city walls.

More poignantly, Josephus narrates the final hours of the Jerusalem temple before it was burned to the ground, when thousands of common people, including women and children, gathered in the temple cloisters because a prophet had predicted that God would deliver them from there. In language choked with emotion, Josephus describes the foolish waste of life that day due to false hopes in divine intercession.

Sixty-five years later, another disastrous rebellion against Rome culminated in brutal conquest, death and slavery for hundreds of thousands of Judeans — leading to the disintegration of Jewish society in Judea for over a century. This failed revolt by a man with messianic pretensions, dubbed “Son-of-a-Star” (Bar Kokhba), resulted in political domination by foreign rulers and the dispersion of the Judean population into foreign lands until the modern era.

Christian messianism has an equally long track record of failed apocalyptic predictions and false prophecies, appearing already in the New Testament: the Gospel of Mark 9:1 and Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians 7:29-31 both anticipate that Jesus will return within their lifetimes to establish the kingdom of God.

The failure of this event and efforts to justify and explain it ultimately led to the founding of a new religion: Christianity.

Trump the saviour

Most recently, messianic expectations have attached to the figure of Trump, whom a large proportion of white evangelicals herald as a political saviour. Many of them draw a link between Isaiah 45, which describes the Persian king Cyrus the Great as God’s anointed, and the fact that Trump is the 45th president of the United States; this numerical coincidence is viewed as evidence for divine providence.

Even Trump’s moral failings have been assimilated to his messianic identity: Jerry Falwell Jr. compares Trump to King David, who committed adultery, hired a hitman and repented to God following the death of his son who was conceived through this illicit sexual union.

If evangelicals regard Trump as their saviour and the one who will rectify the moral and political imbalance they perceive is afflicting American society, the QAnon movement has taken this doctrine of salvation to the next level: Exploiting human emotion and concern for children, the movement posits a global child sex-trafficking ring run by high level Democrats and the Hollywood elite.

QAnon followers believe that this criminal network controls the U.S. government — menacingly labelled “the Deep State” — and operates with impunity across the globe.

Their conspiratorial mythology centres on Trump, who is acclaimed as the tireless leader, fighting to destroy this evil cabal. QAnon believers anticipate an imminent revelation of the truth, referred to as the Great Awakening, and predict an impending apocalypse cryptically referred to as “the Show.”

Read more: The Church of QAnon: Will conspiracy theories form the basis of a new religious movement?

Trump’s claims to be the “chosen one” and his frequent references to the Deep State explicitly fuel messianic speculation centred on his presidency.

 

Trump’s relentless (albeit futile) attempts to overturn the results of the 2020 U.S. election through unsubstantiated claims that mail-in voting was riddled with fraud exploits the credulity and undying faith of his supporters; they overwhelmingly accept his narrative and have taken to the streets to support his cause.

Trump’s narcissistic undermining of democratic principles, abetted by messianic mythologies and ill-fated expectations for divine intercession, threatens to unravel American society in civil violence and distrust.

Trumpism has all the hallmarks of previous messianic movements: in subordinating reality to mythology, they failed and in the process destroyed the societies they aspired to save.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Kimberly Stratton does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Where is God? 

The COVID-19 pandemic has been a test of faith for believers


OTTAWA — Where is God?   STILL DON'T KNOW AFTER READING THIS

© Provided by The Canadian Press

It is a question Rev. Harrison Ayre finds himself asking and being asked often as the COVID-19 pandemic has left nearly two million dead worldwide; 80 million sickened; families torn apart by death, disease and border closures; economies devastated; and an uncertain year looming ahead.

As a Catholic priest in Nanaimo, B.C., he's among thousands of religious leaders who have worked this year to help their congregations make sense of the pandemic in spiritual terms.

Religions have historically seen disease as divine judgment or punishment: the Old Testament contains a story of plagues against Egyptians for refusing to free the Jews, while one Islamic response to the "Black Death" of the 14th century was to call those who lost their lives martyrs for God.

Judgment is not always a bad thing, Ayre said.

"It is a challenge to return to the heart of things," he said.

"It's not a judgment unto condemnation. It's a judgment to bring us back to fall in love with (God)."

How to do that during a pandemic is both existential and practical.

Physical distancing restrictions have forced faith groups to entirely close their doors or dramatically restrict access to their sanctuaries.

This fall, a coalition of Christian research organizations surveyed 1,269 churches and ministries and found 80 per cent were offering online services.

But that doesn't work for all faiths, said Prof. Sabina Magliocco, who leads the religion program at the University of British Columbia.

For Indigenous faith practice, gathering extended kin for singing, dancing and acts of hospitality has been sharply curtailed by COVID-19 restrictions, she said, and just can't be replicated online.

Also, some don't have access to the technology — often, the same people whose kids have trouble getting online for school: those who live in rural communities with poor internet connectivity and people who can't afford the devices.

The spiritual uplift that comes from attending services in person isn't just about participating in rites and rituals, but also the intangibles, Magliocco said.

The energy of attending Friday sermon at mosque, chanting and dancing with extended family, or just the sights and smells triggered by walking in the door of a house of worship are all elements of connection in their own right.

"There aren't those outside clues, hints that put your mind in that religious place that connect you to community, that connects you to your ancestors — all of that is gone," said Magliocco.

Then there are theological issues.

For observant Jews, using electronics is forbidden on religious days.

Video: Coronavirus: Canada ‘must do everything we can’ to protect Indigenous communities from COVID-19, official says (Global News)

Some found workarounds; during the Jewish high holy days in September, congregations began livestreaming from their synagogues before the holidays began and just left the cameras running.

For Catholics, the fundamental rites known as the sacraments must be done in person. For a time, Ayre heard confession in a parking lot, where parishioners would drive in and roll their windows down a crack to unburden their souls.

For Muslims, the pandemic has meant a renewed emphasis on certain requirements, like ritual purification before prayer, five times a day, said Imam Mohamed Refaat, the president of the Canadian Council of Imams.

Within the Qur’an, there are also teachings from the Prophet Muhammad that directly relate to staying away from places known to be infected with the plague.

While Muslims can and do pray at home, Refaat said the loss of community gatherings and the end of annual trips to the holiest site of Islam, at Mecca in Saudi Arabia, are painful.

For him, the lesson is to value what has been given by God: the ability to talk and travel and do good in the world.

When those blessings are taken away, it is a reminder of their worth, he said.

"When we get ourselves back to normal, then we will recognize that those blessings should be maintained," he said.

"And we should be thankful to our Lord for giving us all these blessings."

What it will take to get back to normal at minimum is a vaccine against the virus that causes COVID-19, most faith groups say.

Convincing their followers to take it will be the next challenge.

Mainstream religious leaders have issued proclamations in support of the vaccine; the first people to get it in Montreal were residents and staff at a Jewish nursing home where dozens have died.

Opposition by religious leaders to vaccines in the past has been based on a number of factors, including what kind of human cells are used in testing and where they are from, and a belief that the divine, and not science, will protect the faithful.

Those voices are already challenging this vaccine, and earlier this month, the role religious leaders can play to quiet them was part of a call between Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and faith leaders.

But the real source of tension on the call wasn't the coming shot in the arm.

It was the shot to the heart religious groups received by being told they didn't qualify as "essential services" during the pandemic, and in turn were subject to tighter restrictions than gyms or bars.

Refaat said while religious groups, health officials and politicians have been talking for months about the balance between protecting people's right to worship and public health, what's missing is an acknowledgment of the central role communal religious life plays.

"The weekly sermon people attend, that gathering of people together, you're charging your battery for the rest of the week. And that charging is big for people of faith," he said,

"It is so essential for them."

Various religious groups in the U.S. have taken governments to court for restricting access to faith gatherings.

The process is only just beginning to play out in Canada; arguments in one case involving a Toronto church claiming COVID-19 restrictions violate charter rights are expected sometime in 2021.

The pandemic has exposed two challenges for the faithful, said Andrew Bennett, the director of the Cardus religious freedom institute and an ordained deacon: What do they need to actually live a religious life? And how much of that requires physically going to church or mosque or synagogue?

The answers may determine what Canada's post-pandemic religious landscape looks like, he said.

"These are challenges that faith communities are going to need to address."

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Dec. 22, 2020.

Stephanie Levitz, The Canadian Press

Special Report-How a British COVID-19 vaccine went from pole position to troubled start

By Steve Stecklow, Andrew MacAskill, Ludwig Burger, Kate Kelland, Emilio Parodi
DECEMBER 24, 2020

LONG READ

LONDON (Reuters) - On June 5, researchers at the University of Oxford quietly made a change to a late-stage clinical trial of their COVID-19 vaccine. In an amendment noted in a document marked CONFIDENTIAL, they said they were adding a new group of participants.



FILE PHOTO: AstraZeneca's logo is reflected in a drop on a syringe needle in this illustration taken November 9, 2020. REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/Illustration/File Photo

The adjustment might seem minor in a large-scale study. But it masked a mistake that would have potentially far-reaching consequences: Many of the United Kingdom trial subjects had inadvertently been given only about a half dose of the vaccine.

The new volunteers would now receive the correct dose. The trial continued.

Much was riding on the Oxford vaccine, a British-led endeavour also involving UK drugs firm AstraZeneca. Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s government was desperate for a success story after its early mishandling of the pandemic contributed to one of the world’s highest death tolls from COVID-19 - around 65,000 by mid-December. The government has secured 100 million doses.

On Nov. 23, Oxford and AstraZeneca delivered positive news. They announced that the regimen of a half dose followed by a full dose booster appeared to be 90% effective in preventing COVID-19. Two full doses scored 62%. Oxford researchers have said they aren’t certain why the half-dose regimen was much more effective.

Johnson called the vaccine team and tweeted his thanks “for their brilliant work.” He went on, “These results are incredibly encouraging and a major step forward in our fight against COVID-19.”

Oxford and AstraZeneca are now hoping for quick authorization by Britain’s regulator. But questions about the trial and the results won’t go away.

Some experts say the dosing discrepancy raises doubts about the robustness of the study’s findings. And they worry about another acknowledged peculiarity of the study: The half-dose regimen wasn’t tested on anyone over 55 - the group considered at high risk from COVID-19. In contrast, a vaccine produced by Pfizer/BioNTech was tested on thousands of people over 65, with an efficacy of 94%.

John Moore, a professor of microbiology and immunology at Weill Cornell Medical College in New York, said there needed to be a better understanding of how the Oxford trial unfolded. “When you get corporate and academic scientists saying different things, it doesn’t give you the impression of confidence in what they’re doing,” he told Reuters. “Was the dosing thing a mistake or not?”

Now a Reuters review of hundreds of pages of clinical trial records, as well as interviews with scientists and industry figures, provides the most detailed account to date of what went wrong with the dosing in the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine study. The review found that Oxford researchers were responsible for what their own clinical trial documents called “a potency miscalculation.”

For Oxford and AstraZeneca, the stakes could not be higher. They hope to produce up to three billion doses of the low-cost vaccine by the end of next year, enough to inoculate much of the world, including many of its poorest inhabitants. For months, scientists at Oxford have been busily promoting the experimental vaccine’s prospects in bullish terms - beginning even before the first human test subjects were injected with the experimental vaccine.

In an interview that appeared on April 11 in Britain’s The Times newspaper, Sarah Gilbert, one of the vaccine’s chief researchers at Oxford, said she was 80% certain her team would be able to produce a successful vaccine, possibly as early as September. That was 12 days before a clinical trial to test its safety began.

Oxford didn’t answer detailed questions for this story, but provided a statement saying the trials have been “conducted under the strict national, ethical and regulatory requirements.” It added that “all trial protocols and trial amendments have been subject to review and approval by the relevant authorities. All safety data have been reviewed regularly” by regulators.

A spokesman for AstraZeneca referred questions about the UK clinical trial to Oxford, which sponsored it. A spokeswoman for Britain’s regulator, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), declined to answer questions about the Oxford/AstraZeneca dosing issue. “Our rolling review is ongoing,” she said, “so this information is currently commercially confidential.”

The UK’s Department of Health and Social Care declined to comment.

AN EXACT SCIENCE

Vaccines are the world’s best hope of ending a pandemic that has claimed more than 1.7 million lives globally. More than 60 COVID-19 vaccine candidates are currently undergoing human trials, according to the World Health Organization.

Vaccines made by Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna have already been authorized for use in some countries, including the United States. They use a relatively new technology called messenger RNA (mRNA) that instructs human cells to produce antigens, a type of protein, that stimulate the immune system. Late-stage clinical trials showed both vaccines appeared to be at least 94% effective. Until the UK approved the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine on Dec. 2, no RNA vaccine had ever received authorization for general use.

The Oxford/AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine employs a more established technique called viral vector. The vaccine uses a bioengineered version of a harmless common-cold virus found in chimpanzees to instruct human cells to make antigens.

On Dec. 8, Oxford published an interim analysis of its trial results and more than 1,100 pages of supplementary documents in the scientific journal The Lancet. These show that measuring the concentration of viral materials can be tricky, and they shed light on the chain of events leading up to the dosing discrepancy.

Viral vectors are typically produced in bioreactors holding up to 2,000 liters, which are then filtered and purified into a concentrated batch of active substance of just a few liters.

“This is not about measuring pencils, pens, bricks, or fixed objects of a given size,” said Lucio Rovati, chief executive of Rottapharm, an Italian biotech company that is trying to develop a different type of vaccine using a genetic fragment. “It’s about live biological products.”

According to the Oxford documents, in May researchers received a vaccine delivery from Italy’s IRBM/Advent — one of the contract manufacturers Oxford enlisted to complement its own vaccine production. The late-stage trial of the Oxford vaccine was about to begin.

The shipment, batch K.0011, had undergone the Italian company’s quality check using an established genetic test - quantitative PCR, or qPCR - to determine viral matter per milliliter.

Oxford ran its own analysis for good measure. The university had been using a different method known as spectrophotometry, which measures viral material in liquids based on how much ultraviolet light the viral matter absorbs.



Oxford’s measurement showed that the batch was more potent than the Italian manufacturer had found, the documents show. Oxford trusted its own result and wanted to remain consistent with a measuring tool it had used throughout an earlier trial phase. So it asked Britain’s drugs regulator for permission to reduce the volume of vaccine injected into trial participants from the K.0011 batch. Permission was granted.

“The decisions about dosing were all done in discussion with the regulator. So when we started the trial, we had some discrepancies in the measurement of the concentration of virus in the vaccine,” Andrew Pollard, the Oxford trial’s chief investigator, told Reuters.

A spokeswoman for the regulator declined to discuss when it first became aware of the dosing issue.

“SERENDIPITY”

Trial participants who received shots from the Italian batch displayed milder than normal expected side effects, such as fever and fatigue. AstraZeneca executive vice president Mene Pangalos said the dose was measured incorrectly. “It ended up being half the dose,” he told Reuters. He called the mistake “serendipity,” given that data analysis later indicated the half dose, followed by a full-dose booster shot, was much more effective than two full doses.

He also recently told the BBC: “There is no doubt I think that we would have run the study a little bit differently if we had been doing it from scratch. But ultimately, it is what it is.”

IRBM/Advent told Reuters there was no manufacturing issue with the batch. The company said in a written statement that the measuring mishap was “the result of a change in the testing method” used to confirm the potency of the dose “once the material had been shipped.”

The documents published in The Lancet confirm that the error lay with the Oxford researchers. A common emulsifier, polysorbate 80, used in vaccines to facilitate mixing, had interfered with the ultraviolet-light meter that measures the quantity of viral material, according to the documents. As a result, the vaccine’s viral concentration was overstated and Oxford ended up administering half doses of vaccine, believing they were full doses.

The documents don’t give a detailed timeline, nor do they show that Oxford informed AstraZeneca at the time. But they do show that Oxford contacted the British regulator again, this time seeking approval to change its measuring method to the one used by the Italians, and to figure out how to proceed with a late-stage trial that had begun with participants receiving the wrong dose. The documents don’t provide full details of the communication between Oxford and the regulator.

In early June, the regulator gave the green light to continue injecting people with the half-dose, in an effort to keep the trial as large as possible and to try to speed up the results, according to the analysis published in The Lancet. The regulator also ruled that Oxford must add another test group to receive the full dose, in accordance with its original plan to test the safety and efficacy of full doses.

“We went back and discussed it again with the regulators and agreed with them,” said Pollard, the Oxford study’s chief investigator.

Ultimately, 1,367 trial participants - none of them over 55 - received the half-dose/full-dose regimen. Two full doses were given to 4,440 adult participants, from all age groups.

The MHRA, Britain’s regulator, is expected to decide soon whether to approve the vaccine. The agency is headed by June Raine, a doctor who trained in general medicine at Oxford. The university’s website shows she has made donations, given talks and performed volunteer work for the university’s Somerville College, which she attended.

The MHRA said that before any decision on the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine is made, Raine “will ensure, for complete transparency” her interactions with Oxford as an alumnus are declared. It added that “none of these ties are of a nature that could give rise to a conflict requiring recusal.”

CONTRADICTIONS

Deep within the more than 1,100 pages of supplemental appendices published in The Lancet appeared a description of the dosing discrepancy — “a potency miscalculation.” That admission is contained in a “Statistical Analysis Plan” by Oxford and AstraZeneca dated Nov. 17.

Six days later, Oxford and AstraZeneca announced the interim results of their clinical trials in the UK and in Brazil. “Oxford University breakthrough on global COVID-19 vaccine,” was the headline of an Oxford press release.

AstraZeneca’s news release was more muted. “Two different dosing regimens demonstrated efficacy with one showing a better profile,” it stated.

In interviews about the results with Reuters and the New York Times, AstraZeneca’s Pangalos spoke of “serendipity,” a “useful mistake” and a “dosing error.”

But the firm’s chief executive officer, Pascal Soriot, told Bloomberg: “People call it a mistake — it was not a mistake.” A spokesman for AstraZeneca declined to comment on the statements.

Meanwhile, the two scientists leading Oxford’s development of the vaccine — Sarah Gilbert and Adrian Hill — suggested that the half-dose was not administered by mistake. They didn’t provide evidence. Gilbert, an Oxford vaccinology professor, said it was normal for researchers to look at different dose levels during vaccine trials. “It wasn’t a mix-up in dosing,” she told the Financial Times in an article published on Nov. 27.

A few days later, Hill told Reuters it was a conscious decision by researchers to administer a lower dose. “There had been some confusion suggesting that we didn’t know we were giving a half dose when we gave it — that is really not true,” he said.

Gilbert and Hill together have about a 10% stake in a private biotech firm called Vaccitech that was spun out of Oxford University, according to a filing with
Companies House, the UK’s companies registry, dated Oct. 29. According to a spokeswoman for Vaccitech, the company transferred its rights to the vaccine to Oxford University’s research commercialization arm in exchange for a share of the revenue. “If the vaccine is successful then all shareholders and investors in the company could potentially indirectly benefit,” she wrote in an email.

Hill and Gilbert didn’t respond to detailed questions for this article.

The conflicting explanations of what went wrong have drawn criticism from some experts. “Personally, I can say that I think their vaccine is much better than their communication,” said Guido Rasi, who until last month was executive director of the European Medicines Agency, the European Union’s regulator. He said the agency eventually will evaluate the trial data.

‘AHEAD OF THE WORLD’

For months, the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine was described by officials and in the media as the front-runner in the global race to produce a COVID-19 vaccine.

Britain’s health minister, Matt Hancock, told a press conference in April that Britain was “at the forefront of the global effort” to find a vaccine.

On June 26, the World Health Organization’s chief scientist, Soumya Swaminathan, said at a press conference that Oxford’s vaccine was probably the world’s leading candidate.

Five days later, the then head of Britain’s vaccine procurement program, Kate Bingham, told a parliamentary committee: “Oxford is ahead of the world in that it is the most advanced vaccine anywhere.”

Some Oxford scientists did little to dampen the enthusiasm. Asked at the same science and technology parliamentary committee on July 1 whether the world would have to struggle through the coming winter without a vaccine, Gilbert said, “I hope we can improve on those timelines and come to your rescue.”

At the end of July, she alluded to competing vaccine efforts. In an interview on the Royal Society of Biology’s website, she said of the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine: “If this doesn’t work, I don’t think anything will work.”

Her main partner on the project, Hill, was equally bullish. On May 15, he told Reuters the Oxford/AstraZeneca candidate is “almost certainly the best single dose rapid-response vaccine.” He dismissed as “total unknowns” and a “wild card” the vaccines using mRNA technology, such as Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna, which have since published results showing they were both at least 94% effective at preventing COVID-19. The Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine is already being distributed in the millions in the United States and the UK.

“Why would you take a vaccine technology that is new, unproven, maybe quick to manufacture, but expensive to manufacture - and has never been scaled up and has never been shown to protect against anything in humans, and prioritize that in a global emergency?” he asked. “It’s very odd.”

Ian Jones, a professor of virology at Britain’s University of Reading, told Reuters that the plethora of upbeat statements hasn’t benefited the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine candidate.

“I don’t want to take away from the fact everybody has worked very hard and (the vaccine) is fundamentally safe and sound,” he said. “But reporting has always had a slightly nationalistic tone, which I don’t think has been helpful.”

Steve Stecklow, Andrew MacAskill and Kate Kelland reported from London; Ludwig Burger from Frankfurt; and Emilio Parodi from Milan; Additional reporting by Alistair Smout in London and Zeba Siddiqui in Mumbai; editing by Janet McBride

Holy Grail treatment for COVID-19 remains out of reach. But options exist

© David Morrison/Eli Lilly/The Associated Press Monoclonal antibody treatment could help prevent people from developing severe COVID-19. Health Canada has authorized one such treatment from Eli Lilly, pending trial results.

A COVID-19 treatment showing early signs of promise is at risk of being overshadowed by the vaccine rollout.

Monoclonal antibody treatments have been used by doctors in the United States on people like President Donald Trump, who fought COVID-19 in October, and on others in an effort to try to keep people with the coronavirus out of hospital. Health Canada has authorized one such drug from Eli Lilly, pending the results of trials to verify its benefits to patients.

Our immune system naturally makes antibodies to fight off the coronavirus. But it can take several weeks to gain full protection and some patients go downhill too quickly to wait. The aim of giving a one-time monoclonal antibody treatment is to seize a window of opportunity early in the course of COVID-19.

Dr. Srinivas Murthy, an infectious disease physician and a clinical associate professor in pediatrics at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, said a treatment that's simple and works to prevent COVID-19 from becoming severe is "the Holy Grail right now."

"The challenge with any of those treatments is that you have to give it to a lot of people to prevent hospitalizations or severe disease because a lot of people have mild-COVID," Murthy said. "Whatever you give has to be safe and convenient otherwise people won't take it."

© Lindsey Wasson/Reuters Phlebotomist Jenee Wilson talks with Melissa Cruz, an ER technician who recovered from COVID-19, as she donates convalescent plasma for a study. Unlike monoclonal antibodies, convalescent serum includes a range of antibodies.

The two monoclonal antibody treatments at the forefront of COVID-19 studies are Eli Lilly's product, bamlanivimab, and a cocktail from Regeneron Pharmaceuticals that Trump received.

Dr. Saahir Khan, a clinical professor in infectious diseases at the University of Southern California in Los Angeles, is a co-principal investigator of a clinical trial evaluating bamlanivimab.

"The goal of this trial is to find treatment that prevents these patients with what we call mild-to-moderate disease progressing to severe disease that would require hospitalization," Khan said in an interview.

Elderly people and those with underlying medical conditions such as heart disease or diabetes are at a greater risk of developing severe COVID. About 79 million cases have been reported worldwide. And the need for such drugs is especially pressing as the number of cases continues to climb.

"Unfortunately, as bad as it is now, it's almost a foregone conclusion that it's going to get worse for the next month," Khan said.

Vaccines offer hope, but health officials caution they won't be widely available to the general public in Canada for a few months.

In the meantime, effective treatments could help reduce the severity of disease and hospitalization rates, lower death rates and flatten the curve so health systems aren't overwhelmed.

The oldest way to apply antibody treatments is to use the plasma from blood of people who've naturally recovered from COVID-19 and give those antibodies to a patient in need. That's known as convalescent serum or polyclonal antibodies.

But convalescent serum includes a range of antibodies to various infections, such as influenza, as well as the virus that causes COVID-19, called SARS-CoV-2.

Monoclonal antibodies are synthetic, purer than convalescent serum and recognize a specific target, such as the proteins that SARS-CoV-2 uses to make copies of itself.

Before COVID-19 upended lives worldwide, other monoclonal antibody treatments were used to treat rheumatoid arthritis and Crohn's disease, including those with injections given at home using an auto-injector-type device.

For a treatment showing early promise, there hasn't been much pick up of monoclonal antibodies in COVID-19.

UBC's Murthy, who also co-chairs the World Health Organization's clinical research committee on COVID-19, said monoclonal antibodies haven't really been embraced in Canada yet because of access and feasibility questions.

To conduct the trial in southern California for instance, Khan's hospital set up a special tent outside, similar to COVID assessment centres at some Canadian hospitals. The site is staffed by health-care workers wearing full personal protective equipment to minimize the risk of people coming to participate in the trial spreading COVID-19 to any patients or staff.

What's more, current monoclonal antibody treatments for COVID-19 need to be given by infusion, similar to some chemotherapy agents. Khan said it takes an hour for patients to receive the monoclonal antibodies and then staff need to closely monitor them for another hour to check for any allergic reactions.

By mid-December in the U.S., less than 20 per cent of the doses of monoclonal antibodies that the federal government allocated had been used. Red tape, staff shortages, testing delays and skepticism are keeping patients and doctors from using the drugs. Evidence on their effectiveness is also thin so far.

Competition from vaccines

Meanwhile, hospitals and health-care systems in Canada and the U.S. are devoting more attention and resources to the vaccine rollout.

Dr. Donald Vinh, an infectious disease specialist and medical microbiologist at the McGill University Health Centre in Montreal, said monoclonal antibodies could help people with COVID-19 who need to keep their blood levels of oxygen up, while staying out of hospital.

© Brendan McDermid/Reuters An employee works in a lab at the Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Westchester campus in Tarrytown, New York. The company's monoclonal antibody cocktail was one of the treatments for COVID-19 that U.S. President Donald Trump received.

Vinh, who advises the federal government's COVID-19 Therapeutics Task Force, said to his knowledge, monoclonal antibodies aren't being used in Canada to treat COVID. In contrast, Pfizer-BioNtech's vaccine is going into arms across the country.

"These vaccines are extremely effective in stimulating people to produce polyantibodies that protect you against COVID," Vinh said.

Matthew Miller, an associate professor at the Institute for Infectious Disease Research at McMaster University in Hamilton, about 70 kilometres southwest of Toronto, said logistical and economic issues are hindering the use of monoclonal antibodies to treat COVID-19.

Before the treatments can be given, people need to be diagnosed with COVID-19 quickly, Miller said. And he estimated monoclonal antibodies are about 1,000 times more expensive than a vaccine.

The U.S. has paid $1,250 US per dose for 950,000 doses of Lilly's bamlanivimab. Eli Lilly Canada signed an agreement with the federal government to supply 26,000 initial doses of bamlanivimab, also at $1,250 per dose, between December 2020 and February 2021, pending the results of trials to verify its clinical benefits.

To maximize the potential of monoclonal antibodies and to take advantage of when they work best, Miller suggested using them to prevent infection, rather than treat it.

"The sort of obvious settings where these would be really useful is nursing homes, because obviously those people are at a really high risk of dying and that population is usually a population that's quite hard to vaccinate," Miller said.

Other people who could potentially receive the preventive option include employees at meat-packing plants with outbreaks, or households with confirmed COVID-19 cases.

The impact of the coronavirus pandemic on global gender equality - As Equals

© CNN/Photo Illustration/ AFP via Getty Images/G Smith

Bella says her unplanned pregnancy made her mother so furious that she beat her.

She had no idea that the 19-year-old had begun exchanging sex for cash in order to help pay for food for her three younger siblings and two cousins, who live together in a one-room house in a waterfront slum community in Mombasa, Kenya. When Bella came home with rice and other ingredients for dinner at the end of the day, she didn't explain how she had bought them.

"The pandemic broke down the economy, especially for my area. So I had to help in one way or another with expenses," said Bella over WhatsApp. The teen asked that her name be changed to protect her identity.

Before the pandemic, Bella was a sophomore at a high school in the city, where she was an avid history student and enjoyed playing table tennis with friends during breaks between classes. But in March, as Covid-19 spread, Kenya shut down and so did the schools.

Unable to continue her studies remotely due to a lack of electricity and internet access, and with her mother's income from selling vegetables on the street slashed, Bella began washing clothes to help supplement the family's income.

When one of her customers who was much older pressured her for sex, saying he would pay 1,000 Kenyan shillings ($9) or 1,500 shillings ($13) for unprotected sex -- triple what he was paying her for doing his laundry -- she felt like she couldn't say no. After he found out she was pregnant, he disappeared.

"The pandemic played the biggest role in me getting this pregnancy right now, because if the pandemic was not here, I would have been in school. Like this washing clothes, and all that stuff, meeting that man, it wouldn't have happened," said Bella, who is currently receiving social support and cash transfers through ActionAid, an international campaign group. She supplements this with odd jobs and laundry work.

Now three months pregnant, Bella said she won't be able to resume her education when Kenya's schools fully reopen in January -- a friend of her mother's, who had been helping to pay her fees, withdrew her support.

The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) estimates that nearly 24 million children and adolescents, including 11 million girls and young women like Bella, may drop out of education next year due to the pandemic's economic impact alone (130 million girls were already out of school, according to the agency). That reality not only threatens to roll back decades of progress made toward gender equality, but also puts girls around the globe at risk of child labor, teen pregnancy, forced marriage and violence, experts say.

"It's a kind of vicious cycle," said Stefania Giannini, UNESCO's assistant director-general for education, noting that girls who have become pregnant during lockdowns are not only less likely to return to school, policies and practices in some countries specifically prohibit their participation in education. Adolescent pregnancy during the pandemic threatens to block one million girls from education just in sub-Saharan Africa, according to a report by World Vision, a member of UNESCO's Covid-19 Global Education Coalition.

For many girls, school is not only a place of learning and a pathway to a brighter future, Gianni adds, it's also a lifeline -- offering vital nutrition services, menstrual hygiene management, sexual health information and social support.

Previous crises have proven that girls are the first to be pulled from the classroom and the last to return. When the Ebola outbreak prompted school closures in West Africa from 2014 to 2016, girls faced increased poverty, child labor and teen pregnancy, preventing them in some cases from resuming their studies, reports by UNICEF, Save the Children and UNDP have shown.

In Sierra Leone, teen pregnancy more than doubled to 14,000, according to UNICEF. And many girls in the country never returned to the classroom, partly because of a recently overturned policy barring pregnant girls from going to school, Plan International reported. Enrollment dropped by 16 percentage points in Sierra Leone communities most impacted, per a working paper published by World Bank.

Using data on school dropouts from the Ebola epidemic in Sierra Leone, the Malala Fund estimated that 20 million more secondary school-aged girls could remain out of the classroom long after the coronavirus pandemic has passed.

The repercussions of the Covid-19 pandemic on girls could be felt for generations.

Earlier this year, UNFPA projected that lockdowns lasting at least six months could lead to an estimated 7 million additional unintended pregnancies and 31 million cases of gender-based violence, as well as 13 million child marriages and 2 million female genital mutilation cases over the next decade.

Covid-19 will also push 47 million more women and girls into poverty, according to an analysis commissioned by UN Women and UNDP, which estimates that around 435 million women and girls will be living on less than $1.90 a day by 2021. According to the report, the number of women and girls living in extreme poverty won't return to pre-pandemic levels until 2030.

"With the impact of Covid we're seeing a very quick and dramatic retreat of the progress we've made on gender equality," Julia Sánchez, secretary general of ActionAid, said, highlight issues where advocates have made strides in recent years, like in putting a stop to genital mutilation.

"All of a sudden it's like we've all turned our backs and we're starting to walk in the opposite direction."

In an ActionAid survey of 1,219 women mostly aged 18 to 30 in urban areas of India, Ghana, Kenya and South Africa, only about 22% of those who were studying said they were able to continue their education remotely. But the survey was limited by the fact that young women were interviewed based on their willingness and availability to respond -- only about 25% were currently in some form of education.

Out of school and facing extreme economic insecurity, many of the girls surveyed said they were forced to take on a bigger burden of unpaid care and domestic work, found themselves unable to access life-saving sexual health and reproductive services -- including birth control -- and were more vulnerable to gender-based violence.

Reported incidents of violence were particularly high in Kenya (76%), where young women surveyed repeatedly mentioned sexual abuse and early pregnancies. Echoing Bella's story, several girls and young women who were out of school told surveyors they were forced to exchange sex for money out of financial desperation, ActionAid wrote.

Like many other countries on the African continent, Kenya has committed to closing the gap on exclusion in education, providing all children access by 2030. But the scattershot approach to tackling teen pregnancy -- an issue before the pandemic hit -- has been criticized by campaign groups like Human Rights Watch. In July, Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta ordered an investigation into rising reports of violence against women and girls, noting that teen pregnancies had escalated during the pandemic.

Frustrated advocates say cuts to foreign aid by donor countries, like the United Kingdom, amid a wave of Covid-induced austerity measures will have devastating impacts on girls' education and leave them without the safety net that school offers. They warn that failing to place women and girls at the center of recovery plans comes at a steep cost to economic growth, especially when faced with one of the deepest recessions since World War II.

A World Bank report, released in partnership with the Malala Fund in 2018, showed that limited educational opportunities for women and girls who complete secondary school could cost the global economy between $15 trillion and $30 trillion.

"Governments are under the squeeze because aid is going to be cut, because revenues are going down because of the economic effects of Covid, and also because there are greater demands in the health sector," Lucia Fry, director of research and policy at the Malala Fund, said. "In some cases, not all, countries are actually diverting funds away from education at this time of great need."

A number of advocacy groups are calling on governments to maintain the priority that they've given to education, while simultaneously looking to the international community to provide fiscal stimulus in the form of debt relief and emergency aid. Longer term, they're looking at reforms in things like the international tax system so that countries can keep more of the revenues that they have for public services.

In the meantime, teenagers like Bella are having to shift their expectations from a future in school to one at home.

"It has been so hard for me. I lack words to explain how I feel," Bella said.

"Going back to school won't be possible ... and my baby's coming soon."

US layoffs remain elevated as 803,000 seek jobless aid


WASHINGTON — The number of Americans seeking unemployment benefits fell by 89,000 last week to a still-elevated 803,000, evidence that the job market remains under stress nine months after the coronavirus outbreak sent the U.S. economy into recession and caused millions of layoffs.

© Provided by The Canadian Press

The latest figure, released Wednesday by the Labor Department, shows that many employers are still cutting jobs as the pandemic tightens business restrictions and leads many consumers to stay home. Before the virus struck, jobless claims typically numbered around 225,000 a week before shooting up to 6.9 million in early spring when the virus — and efforts to contain it — flattened the economy. The pace of layoffs has since declined but remains historically high in the face of the resurgence of COVID-19 cases.

“The fact that more than nine months into the crisis, initial claims are still running at such a high level is, in absolute terms, bad news,” Joshua Shapiro, chief U.S. economist at the economic consulting firm Maria Fiorini Ramirez Inc., wrote in a research note. “With the pandemic again worsening, it is likely that claims will remain quite elevated for some time.’’

The latest data on unemployment claims came on the same day that the government reported that consumer spending — the principal driver of the economy — fell in November for the first time since April. The 0.4% drop, coming in the midst of the crucial holiday shopping season, added to concerns that weak consumer spending will slow the economy in coming months. Economists suggested that the viral crisis, combined with diminished income and colder weather, likely led Americans to pull back in November.

Also on Wednesday, the government said that sales of new single-family homes sank 11% from October to November, though purchases remain up nearly 21% from a year ago. Boosted by rock-bottom mortgage rates, housing has proved resilient since the health crisis erupted last spring.

Another report Wednesday showed that orders to U.S. factories for high-cost manufactured goods rose a moderate 0.9% in November, with a key category that tracks business investment plans showing a gain. The rise in orders for durable goods, which are items that are expected to last at least three years, followed even stronger gains in recent months. The pace of orders has now nearly regained its pre-pandemic level.

In its report on applications for unemployment aid, the government said the total number of people who are receiving traditional state benefits fell to 5.3 million for the week that ended Dec. 12 from a week earlier. That figure had peaked in early May at nearly 23 million. The steady decline since then means that some unemployed Americans are finding work and no longer receiving aid. But it also indicates that many of the unemployed have used up their state benefits, which typically expire after six months.

Millions more jobless Americans are now collecting checks under two federal programs that were created in March to ease the economic pain inflicted by the pandemic. Those programs had been set to expire the day after Christmas. On Monday, Congress agreed to extend them as part of a $900 billion pandemic rescue package.

On Tuesday night, though, President Donald Trump suddenly raised doubts about that aid and other federal money by attacking Congress' rescue package as inadequate and suggesting that he might not sign it into law.

The supplemental federal jobless benefit in Congress’ new measure has been set at $300 a week — only half the amount provided in March — and will expire in 11 weeks. A separate benefits program for jobless people who have exhausted their regular state aid and another benefits program for self-employed and gig workers will also be extended only until early spring, well before the economy will likely have fully recovered.

A tentative economic recovery from the springtime collapse has been faltering in the face of a resurgence of COVID-19 cases: An average of more than 200,000 confirmed cases a day, up from fewer than 35,000 in early September. Hiring in November slowed for a fifth straight month, with employers adding the fewest jobs since April. Nearly 10 million of the 22 million people who lost jobs when the pandemic hit in the spring are still unemployed.

According to the data firm Womply, closings are rising in some hard-hit businesses. For example, 42% of bars were closed as of Dec. 16, up from 33% at the start of November. Over the same period, closures rose from 25% to 29% at restaurants and from 27% to 35% at salons and other health and beauty shops.

The number of jobless people who are collecting aid from one of the two federal extended-benefit programs — the Pandemic Unemployment Assistance program, which offers coverage to gig workers and others who don’t qualify for traditional benefits — rose by nearly 27,000 to 9.3 million in the week that ended Dec. 5.

The number of people receiving aid under the second program — the Pandemic Emergency Unemployment Compensation program, which provides federal jobless benefits to people who have exhausted their state aid — fell by nearly 8,200 to 4.8 million.

All told, 20.4 million people are now receiving some type of unemployment benefits. (Figures for the two pandemic-related programs aren’t adjusted for seasonal variations.)

States and cities have been increasingly issuing mask mandates, limiting the size of gatherings, restricting or banning restaurant dining, closing gyms or reducing the hours and capacity of bars, stores and other businesses, all of which has slowed economic activity. With vaccines now beginning to be gradually distributed, though, optimism is rising about 2021.

Months from now, economists say, the widespread distribution and use of the vaccines could potentially unleash a robust economic rebound as the virus is quashed, businesses reopen, hiring picks up and consumers spend freely again.

Until then, the limited aid Congress has agreed to won’t likely be sufficient to stave off hardships for many households and small companies, especially if lawmakers balk at enacting further aid early next year. And a widening financial gap between the affluent and disadvantaged households will likely worsen.

“Recession risks are very high,? said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics. “I do think the economy’s going to start losing some jobs here. Unemployment will probably go higher. The only thing that will save us from recession is that $900 billion fiscal rescue package.

____

AP journalist Julie Walker in New York contributed to this report.

Paul Wiseman, The Associated Press

Millions of U.S. vaccine doses sit on ice, 

putting 2020 goal in doubt


By Rebecca Spalding, Carl O’Donnell

(Reuters) -Millions of COVID-19 vaccines are sitting unused in U.S. hospitals and elsewhere a week into the massive inoculation campaign, putting the government’s target for 20 million vaccinations this month in doubt.

As of Wednesday morning, only 1 million shots of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine had been given, about one-third of the first shipment sent last week. Over 9.5 million doses of vaccines, including Moderna’s, have now been sent to states, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

While hospitals have started giving out Moderna’s vaccine, the CDC has not yet reported that data and there may be a lag in reporting shots given of both the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines.

The slow pace has barely picked up from the first week when 614,000 shots were given although nearly 2.9 million were shipped.

Hospitals said the first COVID-19 vaccinations started slowly last Monday as they navigated preparing the previously frozen shots for use, finding employees to run the vaccination clinics, and ensuring proper social distancing both before and after vaccination. Some said they did only about 100 shots the first day.

They were contending with a COVID-19 surge, as cases around the United States surpassed 18 million with 323,000 deaths. (Graphic: tmsnrt.rs/34pvUyi)

The Trump administration promised to vaccinate 20 million by the end of the year while providing little funding to achieve the goal.

That’s nine days to give out nearly 19 million shots or over 2 million people vaccinated a day including on Christmas Day.

Almost 5.9 million doses of Moderna Inc’s vaccine should go out this week and an additional 2 million doses from Pfizer and partner BioNTech.

“The commitment that we can make is to make vaccine doses available,” U.S. Operation Warp Speed chief adviser Dr. Moncef Slaoui said on a Wednesday press call. He noted the rate of people getting a shot in their arm is “slower than we thought it would be.”

Two more vaccines may be approved in February from Johnson & Johnson Inc and AstraZeneca Plc.

The government’s goal is 100 million Pfizer and Moderna shots in arms by March 1.

Operation Warp Speed’s General Gustave Perna, who is leading the vaccine distribution effort, on Monday said that the CDC data reflects a reporting lag and that the number of vaccinations will catch up as time goes on.

The CDC said its data may also reflect a lag between vaccine dosing and state reporting. Most nursing home vaccinations only began in mass this week, and the CDC data does not specify how many doses from the first shipment were being held by states for that group.

STAFF STRETCHED THIN

Margaret Mary Health, a 25-bed rural hospital in Indiana, built a drive-thru vaccination clinic at a local fire station and one at a local recreation center to vaccinate healthcare workers in the surrounding counties, according to Chief Executive Officer Tim Putnam.

Putnam, who has done traffic control at the clinic’s drive-thru, said they have used about 400 of 1,100 doses received.

“We’re asking for volunteers from our staff, volunteers from the local community college to step in and build this process from the ground up,” he said.

Some of the largest U.S. hospitals inoculated more than 1,000 people per day, having done dry runs of the vaccine delivery and rollout.

Vermont, Delaware and Idaho were among states that confirmed their states had given only thousands of doses - a fraction of those available to them - during the first week.

Jason Schwartz, assistant professor of health policy at Yale School of Public Health, described the initial tally as “discouraging” and said “the challenges of getting vaccines out as quickly as we’re able to manufacture them will only grow.”
Johnson & Johnson’s one-shot vaccine could speed deployment because it requires a conventional refrigerator and has no specialized procedures to thaw out and administer, said Claire Hannan, executive director of the Association for Immunization Managers trade group. AstraZeneca’s two dose vaccine also can be stored in a refrigerator.

“When it’s refrigerator-stable and a one-dose regimen, it can’t get any easier than that,” Hannan said.

HOSPITALS START SLOWLY BUT SPEED UP

Dr. Saul Weingart, the chief medical officer of Tufts Medical Center in Boston, said the hospital had given about 750 doses of the around 3,000 available as of Friday. It started with 100 shots per day and worked up to about 450, he said.

He said experts at the hospital modeled that giving Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine would take 10 minutes, about two to three times as long as a flu shot, due to the procedures needed because the vaccine is stored in a deep freeze. Patients need to socially distance before and after being given the vaccine and be monitored for allergic reactions.

The United States gives 170 million flu vaccinations each year within a few months, but for the COVID-19 pandemic, the United States must give about three times that number of shots - the Pfizer and Moderna shots are two doses - to reach most Americans by July. At its current pace, the U.S. appears to have the capacity to administer less than a third of the shots that are shipped in a given week, underscoring the gap.

A spokesperson for Houston Methodist, a hospital in Houston, Texas, said it had given 8,300 employees the vaccine as of Monday with about 7,000 doses left from the first shipment.

The University of Southern California’s Keck Medicine medical school has vaccinated over 3,000 employees and said it will take six weeks for everyone, similar to its flu vaccination schedule.

States and health departments need federal money to hire staff, from data center workers to track inoculations to call center employees to field questions, said Adriane Casalotti, chief of government and public affairs of the National Association of County and City Health Officials.

The U.S. Congress’s current coronavirus aid package sets aside more than $8 billion for vaccine distribution but is delayed.

“You can’t hire someone in December and train them up if you don’t know you can pay them in January,” Casalotti said.

Reporting by Rebecca Spalding and Carl O’Donnell; additional reporting by Deena Beasley in Los Angeles; Editing by Caroline Humer and Lisa Shumaker