Monday, May 18, 2020

Trump pushes 'warp speed' effort on coronavirus vaccine, ignoring lessons from a long-ago drug calamity:
THALIDOMIDE

Jerry Adler Senior Editor,Yahoo News•May 16, 2020


Along with everyone else in the world, President Trump wants a coronavirus vaccine now.

Or, if not now, then “prior to the end of the year,” as he said at the White House on Friday, which Moncef Slaoui, the drug company executive the president tapped to head the effort, called a “very credible” timetable. By historical standards, it is an extraordinarily ambitious goal. Some vaccines have taken a decade or longer to develop, test and manufacture. The most optimistic time by which a coronavirus vaccine might be ready, according to Dr. Anthony Fauci, the leading infectious disease specialist on the president’s coronavirus task force, is 12 to 18 months.

Underscoring his sense of urgency, Trump has compared the vaccine effort to the Manhattan Project to develop an atom bomb during World War II, and dubbed it “Operation Warp Speed.”
President Trump speaks in the Rose Garden on Friday. (Stefani Reynolds/CNP/Bloomberg via Getty images)

Warp speed is an invented term for travel faster than light, which is possible only in the fictional universe of “Star Trek.” Whether it will work for the creating a vaccine for a lethal disease remains to be seen. But there are a few hundred, possibly thousands, of people now in their 60s who are living reminders of the unintended consequences of putting a drug into people’s bodies without adequate testing.

Genetic engineering greatly speeds the process of developing a vaccine. But public health experts are still sorting through how to test it for safety and efficacy. The primary measure of safety, of course, is that a new vaccine doesn’t make people sick, which is easy enough to verify, although it would need to be tried in a large and diverse population to catch possibly rare side effects.

Efficacy is more complicated: Researchers can detect if people inoculated with the vaccine produce antibodies to the coronavirus, but how do they know if they are actually immune from future infection. One way, obviously, is to just watch them and see if they get sick (technically, if they get sick less often, or less severely, than an unvaccinated control group). But that’s a slow process. The other way, which is gaining support among researchers, is a “challenge trial,” in which volunteers receive an inoculation and then are exposed to an infectious dose of the virus — which clearly poses risks of its own. Challenge trials are usually done for diseases that are not as lethal as the coronavirus, or for which other therapies exist.

Quoted in The Hill, Jeffrey Kahn, director of the Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics, said he did not see how an institutional review board that oversees research would approve a human challenge trial for the coronavirus.
 
Children born with malformed limbs getting used to using prostheses, July 1962.(Stan Wayman/The Life Picture Collection via Getty Images)

But Operation Warp Speed is proceeding along numerous tracks simultaneously: the genetic engineering of potential vaccines, testing in animals, trials in humans, and ramping up the production of the syringes, vials and other equipment necessary for mass inoculation. On Friday, Trump said “we’re gearing up” to begin manufacturing vaccines even before one (or more) is approved, so that there will be a stock on hand in advance. “That means they’d better come up with a good vaccine,” he said. “It’s risky, it’s expensive,” but it could cut a year off the time that might otherwise be required to put a vaccine into distribution.

Vaccines, of course, are suspect to a dismayingly large segment of the population, but for other reasons. Many Americans believe that they cause autism in children, an assertion that has been investigated and declared spurious by virtually the entire medical profession. That’s not what this is about.

Trump has boasted frequently about his success in speeding up the approval process for drugs, a move long urged by pharmaceutical companies, which regard it as a costly obstacle to getting their products to market. And in the coronavirus emergency, epidemiologists and bioethics experts generally are going along with steps that could make a vaccine available sooner.

After all, what could go wrong?


The FDA’s website itself holds a possible answer, in the form of a tribute to a now-forgotten hero of bureaucracy, a physician and pharmacologist named Frances Kelsey. In 1960, she joined the FDA, where her job was to review applications for drug approval.

The first application she handled was for a sedative called thalidomide, which was used in the treatment of leprosy and was being marketed to prevent “morning sickness,” the nausea and vomiting that affects some women during pregnancy. The drug company presented data that it said proved its safety. It was already being sold over the counter in other countries.

Kelsey was unconvinced and asked for more data. The company sent in more studies, but she was adamant. Among other red flags, the manufacturer hadn’t proven that thalidomide was safe when taken by pregnant women. This was, of course, a period in American history when government regulations were more commonly referred to as “life-saving” than “job-killing,” and the Eisenhower and Kennedy administrations appear not to have interjected themselves into the debate.
President John F. Kennedy stands with Dr. Frances Kelsey, the medical officer who prevented the sale of the birth defect-causing drug thalidomide in the United States. (Bettmann Archive via Getty images)

A year later, with FDA approval still pending, reports began to circulate of a peculiar, and devastating, syndrome of birth defects among the children of mothers who had taken thalidomide early in their pregnancies. The children, some of whom were miscarried or stillborn, had damage to various organs and, famously, malformed, missing or greatly shortened limbs, in the most severe cases with hands and feet that grew directly out of their torso. Some 10,000 babies were born that way in Germany, Britain and other countries. There were a few dozen cases in the United States, believed to have resulted from a loosely supervised trial, but nothing like the thousands that might otherwise have resulted.

Kelsey later was honored by President John F. Kennedy with the President’s Award for Distinguished Federal Civilian Service. Thalidomide was eventually approved, under restrictions, for use in treating some cancers. The episode led to the Kefauver Harris Amendment to the Food, Drug and Cosmetics Act, which was adopted in 1962 and greatly tightened regulation of the pharmaceutical industry.

Of course, while COVID-19 is a lethal and highly contagious disease, morning sickness, though unpleasant and sometimes debilitating, is not fatal and goes away by itself. So the standards for approving a vaccine or treatment for the coronavirus should be set with that in mind.

Still, it would be nice if Kelsey, who died in 2015, at age 101, was around to take a look at the paperwork. One can hope her successors will do as good a job.

PS CANADA IGNORED HER ADVICE AND DID NOT FOLLOW THE AMERICANS RESULTING IN MANY MORE THALIDOMIDE BABIES IN CANADA THAN IN THE USA
PER POP SIZE
An unforgettable day in May



The eruption of Mount St. Helens on May 18, 1980, did untold damage and sent volcanic ash over B.C., Alberta and even Saskatchewan. Two Canadians who were nearby share their memories of that fateful day.



By Rhianna Schmunk

May 17, 2020

Rosemary Taylor was nearly finished lacing up her hiking boots at a dusty trailhead in southeastern B.C. when the first distant bang rocked the stillness of the morning.

It was just past 8:30 a.m. on May 18, 1980, the peak of the long weekend, the day already warm beneath a sky of perfect blue.

Moments later, a second boom.

"I thought, that's funny on a quiet Sunday holiday morning," said Taylor, who was 39 at the time.

Her group couldn't think of any quarry or mining activity happening in the area. They paid the noise no more attention and carried on with their hike.

When they reached the viewpoint along the trail hours later, they couldn't see a thing. The sky had gone a foggy grey.


       PPE BECAME RARE THEN AS NOW 

THE MASK WAS SELLING FOR $1.50 

More than 600 kilometres away, Catherine Hickson was cutting her camping trip short and hurtling away from the source of the noise.

She was hanging out the passenger side of a green Renault station wagon, looking back at an exploding volcano. A third-year geology student, Hickson took photos and told her husband, who was driving, to keep his eyes forward as they roared away down the logging road.

"The first memory is this unbelievable black, seething cloud expanding and just rushing towards us. That's the indelible memory in my eye sockets," said Hickson.

Catherine Hickson took this photo of the eruption as she and her husband raced away from the volcano's base. (Submitted by Catherine Hickson)

The eruption of Mount St. Helens was the deadliest and most destructive of its kind in American history, leaving nearly 60 people missing or dead and destroying more than 250 homes. A torrential landslide wiped out thousands of acres of Washington state forest, leaving a lifeless wasteland in its wake.

The explosion, which struck 40 years ago on Monday, sent pale grey ash as far as southeastern B.C. and parts of Alberta and Saskatchewan.

I WAS GOING TO THE UNIVERSITY OF LETHBRIDGE AND WE GOT COVERED IN ASH I STILL HAVE A CONTAINER OF IT 
Hickson, who was 25 at the time and living in Vancouver, had been camping about 14 km east of the volcano base that Victoria Day weekend out of sheer curiosity.

Pressure had been building at Mount St. Helens since mid-March, and geologists across the continent were watching closely.

"Here was an eruption taking place basically in our backyard," said Hickson, who is now 65.

She was sitting in her car, admiring the view of the snow-capped peak after a breakfast of bacon and eggs, when the earth growled.

A chunk of the volcano’s northern face slipped away in a massive landslide at 8:32 a.m. Uncorked, the volcano exploded. Rocks, ash, volcanic gas and steam were hurled high into the air at more than 480 km/h.

A mess of volcanic debris began to gush down the mountainside, obliterating anything in its path.

Hickson was on her feet outside the car.

"At first it was incredibly exciting — like, oh my god ... this is it," Hickson said. "But that massive cloud ... it moved out incredibly rapidly."

Archive footage of Mount St. Helens eruption on May 18, 1980
1:07

CBC Archives footage shows the devastation caused by the eruption on May 18, 1980.

Part of the blast cloud surged over the rim of the newly formed crater and barrelled down the side of the volcano, heading east.

"We could see what we knew were mature Douglas firs basically being enveloped underneath the front of this cloud, in this roiling, boiling mass of ash. It was then that we realized that we were in extreme danger," Hickson said.

The couple rounded up their dogs, sprinted back to the Renault and raced south down the logging road.

"It’s terror, pure fear. [Her husband’s] asking me what's happening and, at that point, I thought, that's the end. This eruption is just going to get bigger and bigger and bigger and we're going to be completely enveloped in it."

The couple escaped. It turned out their campsite had been out of the volcano’s reach. They circled back hours later to retrieve the camping equipment they’d abandoned — they were students and gear was expensive — before heading home to Vancouver.

After the explosion, Catherine Hickson returned to the area to assess the damage, at one point standing next to a toppled Douglas fir tree. (Submitted by Catherine Hickson)

Hickson scribbled field notes on scraps of paper in the car during the drive.

At a pit stop late in the afternoon, Hickson called her mother from a payphone to tell her what had happened. The volcano had blown up, Hickson told her, but they were OK and coming home.

Her mother didn’t quite understand until she watched the evening news.

In a subsequent call that night, "my mother gets on the phone and she’s not hysterical but beside herself," said Hickson.

Over on the east coast, 13-year-old Seth Moran was equally transfixed by the news that Sunday.

A self-described "volcano and earthquake nerd," he sat in front of the television in his home in Amherst, Mass., watching his first real-life eruption with equal parts fascination and terror.

Moran grew up to become scientist-in-charge of the U.S. Geological Survey’s Cascades Volcano Observatory, responsible for studying and monitoring volcanoes in the Cascade range of the Pacific northwest.

Moran, now 53, said that over the past 10,000 years, Mount St. Helens has been the most seismically active volcano in the region. It saw a steady eruption period between 1800 and 1857, then a number of smaller eruptions after 1980, most recently in 2004.

If history is an accurate teacher, though, experts don’t expect anything like the 1980 blast to happen again in the near future.
A car more than 10 km northwest of Mount St. Helens' summit lies buried in more than a metre of volcanic ash on May 18, 1980. (U.S. Geological Survey)
A Washington state resident sweeps ash from the roof of his house on May 18, 1980. (U.S. Geological Survey)

"As a general rule with volcanoes, they blow up big and then there’s a long period of time before they erupt big again," he said.

"We don’t actually know what’s cooking down there … [but] St. Helens does go through those cycles of blowing itself up and then rebuilding, and we’re pretty clearly in a rebuilding phase."

Moran said a landslide of the magnitude of 1980 is unlikely because the chunk of the volcano that slid away back then is still missing.



Today, the Mount St. Helens Visitor Centre in Castle Rock, Wash., offers a straight-shot view, through a webcam, into the crater created in 1980. The surrounding landscape has adapted and regrown and a new ecosystem has taken shape, although hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent to mitigate after-effects of the landslide in the nearby Toutle River.

"There’s a lot of regrowth that’s happened, there’s a lot of vegetation, but from the vantage point of the visitor’s centre, it’s still very fresh and very easy to see what happened back in 1980," Moran said.

To mark the 40-year anniversary of the blast, Hickson participated in two webinars this month with researchers and other witnesses, "to spend a few hours reminiscing."
An aerial view of Mount St. Helens in 2006. A chunk of the original volcano is still missing after the 1980 eruption. (AP photo via The Canadian Press)

Like Hickson's mother and teenaged Moran, Rosemary Taylor only learned of the eruption after the evening news aired. That night, two members of her hiking group had gone into town for a meal and returned with the story.

Prior to their trip, "there'd been a bit of discussion that Mount St. Helens was looking a bit dicey ... but who expected those volcanoes to blow up? Come on. They'd been dead for years," said Taylor, now 79.

"Well, dormant," she said, correcting herself. "They're never really dead."


Photos: U.S. Geological Survey; The Associated Press; submitted by Catherine Hickson | Video: CBC Archives | Editing: Andre Mayer


MT ST HELENS BON MOTS


First it expanded, now the volcano is shrinking

Mount St. Helens crater
MOUNT ST HELENS

Shrinking from old age?

Since its 1980 eruption, the summit elevation of Mount St. Helens has decreased. A survey in 1982 gave a measurement of 8,365 feet. However, a lidar survey done in 2009 found the maximum elevation to be 8,330 feet, a full 35 feet lower. The difference in elevation is likely due to erosion and loss of rimrock by collapes of the steep crater-walls, according to the U.S. Geological Survey.


Could the volcano have had a Russian name?

It’s common knowledge that Capt. George Vancouver named Mount St. Helens in 1792 after The 1st Baron of St. Helens, Alleyne FitzHerbert. But who was FitzHerbert, besides being a friend of Vancouver’s? Well, for one thing, he never saw the mountain named after him. But he was well traveled. He was England’s foreign minister to Russia from 1783 to 1788, during the reign of Russian Empress Catherine the Great. He also was foreign minister to Spain from 1790 to 1794. Notably, a lot of the Alaska’s volcanos have Russian names because Russia-sponsored explorers discovered that area startingin the mid 18th century: Davidof, Vsevidof and Veniaminof are among them.


What about the lava dome, or should it be lava domes?

What is known as the lava dome is actually two separate domes: The first was created in successive eruptions starting in October 1980 and continuing periodically through 1986. A second dome, which formed during a continuous eruption from 2004-08, formed just to the south of the first dome and eventually merged with it. The summit of the combined lava dome is at 7,155 feet above sea level — nearly 1,200 feet below the summit — and nearly 900 feet above the 1980 crater floor. It is 3,500 feet in diameter at its base. Its estimated volume, 97 million cubic yards, is enough to cover three lanes of freeway 12 feet deep from Seattle to San Francisco. Two earlier lava domes that formed in June and August 1980 were blasted away by subsequent explosive eruptions.

The ashfall myth

It’s amusing when people say they remember the ashfall in the Kelso-Longview area from the eruption on May 18, 1980. But there was none. All of that ash blew eastward, away from Cowlitz County. It wasn’t until the following Sunday, May 25, 1980, that the county got its first — and only — significant ashfall from the volcano. That eruption occurred during an overnight rainstorm, and the coating of wet ash on power substations caused massive power outages throughout the county.


Was that another eruption?

After the mountain blew so catastrophically, it was common for local people during the summers immediately following the eruption to ask whether giant smoke plumes caused by slash burns — giant fires set to clear logging debris and which are now rare — were eruptions on the east. Landscape-scale slash burns now are largely a thing of the past, but you can count on volcanic eruptions being part of Cowlitz County’s future for millennia.

So how many eruptions have there been since 1980?

Too many to count, really. The mountain had erupted steam, ash and gas for two months before the big blow on May 18, 1980, a period in which its north flank swelled five feet a day. Following May 18, five explosive eruptions later that year sent clouds of ash and steam eight or nine miles into the sky on May 25, June 12, July 22, Aug. 7, and Oct. 16. Quiet “dome building” eruptions continued through October 1986. A period of continuous dome-building occurred from 2004-08. The last explosive eruption of any significance occurred on March 19, 1982. For the last 12 years, the mountain has been largely quiet except for periodic earthquake swarms, which geologists interpret as fresh molten rock moving into the volcano to refuel it for its next eruption. And no one knows when, or how big, it will be. But of all Cascade Range volcanoes, scientists consider Mount St. Helens by far the most likely to erupt next. It’s also rated the second most dangerous volcano in the nation by the USGS, but only because so many people live downvalley of Mount Rainier, which is ranked most dangerous.


Why is that big stack of dredge spoils near the mouth of the Toutle River nicknamed Harry’s Mountain?

No, it is not named after Harry Truman, the 84-year-old lodge owner at Spirit Lake who perished along with his cats on the morning of May 18, 1980. It is named after Harry Claterbos, the Astoria-based contractor who dredged that section of the Cowlitz River under a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers contract following the eruption.

So, just how many volcanoes?
Most people know that Mount St. Helens is a volcano on the “Ring of Fire,” a 25,000-mile long, horseshoe-shaped arc that borders the Pacific Ocean. But just how many volcanoes are located along the ring? Mount St. Helens is one of 452 volcanoes on the Ring of Fire, which contains 75% of the world’s active and dormant volcanoes.


Now that’s a lot of debris
The debris avalanche that toppled off the top and side of Mount St. Helens on May 18, 1980 is considered the largest landslide in recorded history. It was about 16 miles long, contained more than 3 biilion cubic yard of debris, has an average depth of more than 100 feet and is about 600 feet deep at its thickest point. But another landslide off the volcano during its so-called Cougar eruptive stage (28,000 to 18,000 years ago) likely was bigger. That one came off the south side of the volcano. It originated near Butte Camp in the southwest part of the present-day mountain and left a deposit 600 to 900 feet thick and 17 miles long. It temporarily dammed the Lewis River, and when that dam broke it caused flooding downstream as far as the Columbia River and filled the lower Lewis River Valley with volcanic debris at least 200 feet thick, according to the USGS.

What you see today

Most of what you see of Mount St. Helens is younger than 3,000 years old, which makes it younger than the pyramids in Egypt. And although the volcano’s eruption on May 18, 1980 was dubbed “a worst case scenario,” an eruption that occurred about 3,600 years ago was four times larger, measured by how much ash got blown into the sky.

Related stories

Washington state residents rattled by Mount St. Helens tremors


Over the volcano
Warning signs emerge from the shrinking glacier atop B.C.'s Mount Meage
https://newsinteractives.cbc.ca/longform/mount-meager-eruption-risk





Climate change could wake up Canada's dormant volcanoes


Volcano tourism: Bad idea or a worthy risk-taking adventure



Autopsies reveal many Mount St. Helens victims suffocated

By
JAN ZIEGLER

BOSTON -- Most of the 35 known victims of Mount St. Helens' May 1980 eruption died within minutes from inhaling volcanic ash, and others were 'dried and baked' to death by the blazing heat, autopsy results revealed today.
'The first autopsies were a step into the unknown,' pathologists and medical examiners reported in the New England Journal of Medicine. 'We were unable to find previous references to this type of death in the medical literature, and we had little idea of what to expect.'
The 25 bodies examined were found between 4 to 17 miles from the mountain near Vancouver, Wash., where more than 13 billion gallons of superheated water burst forth as steam on May 18, 1980, carrying fiery volcanic gases and particles into surrounding residential areas.
'The most common cause of death was asphyxia by inhalation of volcanic ash. Seventeen of the deaths were attributed to this cause, and in two more it was contributory,' the examiners said.
The eruption killed at least 62 people who had been camping or sightseeing around the base of the mountain. Thirty-five bodies have been recovered and 27 people are listed as missing and presumed dead.
Many victims were found buried to knees, waist or shoulders in ash. Others weretrapped in vehicles covered by volcanic dust.
The post-mortems were conducted by the King County Medical Examiner's Office in Seattle, Wash., the University of Washington, the University of Oregon and Oregon State Medical Examiner's Office in Portland, Ore.
'The first impression was the all-pervading gray, gritty ash that covered the bodies and their clothing. When incisions were made, the ash dulled scalpel blades within the first few inches.'
The researchers said the ash plugged the lungs of asphyxiation victims in most cases and most of the victims' hands were mummified because of the extreme heat.
Burns accounted for three deaths and contributed to two more. The burns, however, were different from those seen in a fire, the researchers said. The victims, exposed to hot volcanic gases, were 'dried and baked' down to their internal organs.
Three more victims died of other causes, such as being struck by a tree limb, the examiners said.
The examiners said death by asphyxiation probably occurred within minutes -- although there appeared to be time to escape before the ash cloud enveloped the area.
The examiners said it was possible use of disposable dust masks - common after the eruption -- or adequate shelter could have saved lives during the volcano's activity.
But it said, 'For those who were at Spirit Lake at the base of the volcano, one cannot imagine reasonable protective easures.'






Sunday, May 17, 2020


A Sitting President, Riling the Nation During a Crisis
Alexander Burns, Maggie Haberman, Jonathan Martin and Nick Corasaniti,
The New York Times•May 17, 2020
 
President Donald Trump speaks to reporters as he departs the South Lawn of the White House in Washington, on May 5, 2020. (Al Drago/The New York Times)

Even by President Donald Trump’s standards, it was a rampage: He attacked a government whistleblower who was telling Congress that the coronavirus pandemic had been mismanaged. He criticized the governor of Pennsylvania, who has resisted reopening businesses. He railed against former President Barack Obama, linking him to a conspiracy theory and demanding he answer questions before the Senate about the federal investigation of Michael Flynn.

And Trump lashed out at Joe Biden, his Democratic challenger. In an interview with a supportive columnist, Trump smeared Biden as a doddering candidate who “doesn’t know he’s alive.” The caustic attack coincided with a barrage of digital ads from Trump’s campaign mocking Biden for verbal miscues and implying that he is in mental decline.

That was all on Thursday.

Far from a one-day onslaught, it was a climactic moment in a weeklong lurch by Tru​mp back to ​​the darkest tactics that defined his rise to political power​. Even those who have grown used to Trump’s conduct in office may have found themselves newly alarmed by the grim spectacle of a sitting president deliberately stoking the country’s divisions and pursuing personal vendettas in the midst of a crisis that has Americans fearing for their lives and livelihoods.

Since well before he became president, Trump’s appetite for conflict has defined him as a public figure. But in recent days he has practiced that approach with new intensity, signaling both the depths of his election-year distress and his determination to blast open a path to a second term, even at the cost of further riling a country in deep anguish.

His electoral path has narrowed rapidly since the onset of the pandemic as the growth-and-prosperity theme of his campaign disintegrated. In private, Trump has been plainly aggrieved at the loss of his central argument for reelection. “They wiped out my economy!” he has said to aides, according to people briefed on the remarks.

It is unclear whether he has been referring to China, where the virus originated, or health experts who have urged widespread lockdowns, but his frustration and determination to place blame elsewhere have been emphatic.

Ken Goldstein, a professor of politics at the University of San Francisco, said that Trump and his campaign were going on the offensive in nasty ways in an attempt to shift the attention of the public away from him and onto other targets, and ultimately onto Biden.

“If this election is about Trump, he probably loses,” Goldstein said. “Trump’s only hope is to make the election about Biden.”

A number of Republican operatives believe Biden’s advantage is soft and that his penchant for gaffes will at least make the race more competitive than it would otherwise be amid a pandemic and an incipient economic depression.

“We have a very good story to tell on him, and we’ve got to do it,” Corry Bliss, a Republican strategist, said of the negative narrative his party aims to generate about Biden.

Still, Trump’s behavior has rattled even some supportive Republicans, who believe it is likely to backfire and possibly cost them the Senate as well as the White House. It has also further alarmed Democrats, who have long warned that Trump would be willing to use every lever of presidential power and deploy even the most unscrupulous campaign tactics to capture a second term.

In many respects Trump’s approach to the 2020 election looks like a crude approximation of the way he waged the 2016 campaign against Hillary Clinton, attacking her personal ethics, often in false or exaggerated terms; taking Clinton’s admitted errors and distorting them with the help of online disinformation merchants; and making wild claims about her physical health and mental capacity for the job. Given that the 2016 campaign — the only one Trump has ever run — ended in a razor-thin victory for him, it is perhaps not surprising that the president would attempt a kind of sequel in 2020.

But there are vitally important differences between 2016 and 2020, ones that amplify the risks involved both for Trump and for the country he is vying to lead.

He is running against an opponent in Biden who, despite his vulnerabilities, has not faced decades of personal vilification as Clinton did before running for president. And unlike 2016, Trump has a governing record to defend — one that currently involves presiding over a pandemic that has claimed more than 80,000 American lives — and he may not find it easy to change the subject with incendiary distractions.

Yet with the responsibility to govern also comes great power, and Trump has instruments available to him in 2020 that he did not have as a candidate four years ago — tools like a politically supportive attorney general, a Republican-controlled Senate determined to defend him and a vastly better financed campaign apparatus that has been constructed with the defining purpose of destroying his opponent’s reputation.

His attacks over the last week on Obama have showcased Trump’s persistent determination to weaponize those tools to bolster a favorite political narrative, one that distorts the facts about Flynn, the president’s former national security adviser, in order to spin sinister implications about the previous administration.

But Trump also appears to genuinely believe many of the conspiratorial claims he makes, people close to him say, and his anger at Obama is informed less by political strategy than by an unbending — and unsubstantiated — belief that the former president was personally involved in a plot against him.

This weekend, Trump will huddle with some of his conservative allies in the House at Camp David, where they are expected to discuss the efforts — entirely fruitless up to this point — to prove Obama was involved in a conspiracy.

Of all Trump’s efforts, this one may be among the least concerning to Democrats, given Obama’s strong popularity and the degree to which Trump’s claims of an “Obamagate” scandal have been confined so far to the usual echo chambers of Fox News and right-wing social media. As he did in 2016, Trump is trying to force other outlets to cover the matter through repetition on his Twitter feed.

Democratic anxiety about the president’s attacks on Biden runs higher. But in general Biden’s advisers have professed confidence that the severity of the country’s problems will make it difficult for Trump to retake control of the campaign and that Biden’s fundamental political strengths make him well positioned to survive a campaign of attempted character assassination.

On a conference call with reporters Friday, Mike Donilon, one of Biden’s closest advisers, said Trump was transparently engaged in “an all-out effort to take people away from what they’re living through.”

“I think that’s going to be real hard to do because the country has really been rocked,” Donilon said. “And where the president has succeeded in the past in terms of throwing up lots of distractions and smoke screens and trying to move the debate to other questions, I don’t think he’s going to succeed here.”

The president has been grumbling about his own campaign and this week complained to allies that he had not significantly outraised Biden in April, according to a Republican who spoke with Trump.

Still, Trump’s political operation has moved over the last month to devise a plan for tearing down Biden, who does not inspire great enthusiasm in voters but is held in higher esteem by most than the incumbent president. The result has been a blizzard of negative digital and television ads battering Biden on a range of subjects in a way that suggests Trump’s advisers have not yet settled on a primary line of attack.

The campaign’s ads on Facebook are as relentless as they are varied, as if plucked from a vintage Trump rally rant: Some make unfounded inferences about Biden’s mental state, saying “geriatric health is no laughing matter.” Others paint the presumptive Democratic nominee as “China’s puppet,” highlighting statements that Biden made when he was vice president, like, “China is not our enemy.” Still others stick to traditional themes of illegal immigration.

Over the last week, the Trump campaign has spent at least $880,000 on Facebook ads attacking Biden.

Yet there are persistent doubts even within Trump’s political circle that an overwhelmingly negative campaign can be successful in 2020, particularly when many voters are likely to be looking for a combination of optimism, empathy and steady leadership at a moment of crisis unlike any in living memory. And the more Trump lashes out — at Biden and others — the more he may cement in place the reservations of voters who are accustomed to seeing presidents react with resolute calm in difficult situations.

Private Republican polling has shown Trump slipping well behind Biden in a number of key states. Perhaps just as troubling for Trump, it has raised questions about whether his efforts to tar Biden are making any headway.

Last month, a poll commissioned by the Republican National Committee tested roughly 20 lines of attack against Biden, ranging from the private business activities of his son, Hunter Biden, to whether Biden has “lost” a step, a reference to mental acuity. None of the lines of attack significantly moved voter sentiment, according to two people briefed on the results. There were some lines of attack that had potential, one of the people briefed on the results said, but they were more traditional Republican broadsides about issues like taxes.

Trump has also been warned by Republican veterans that his efforts to define Biden in negative terms so far have been slow or ineffective. At a meeting with political advisers this week that included Karl Rove, the top strategist for former President George W. Bush, Rove warned Trump that he had fallen behind in the task of damaging Biden, people familiar with the meeting said.

Part of the challenge, though, is that Trump constantly undermines his own team’s strategy, in ways big and small. While he finally stopped doing his daily press briefings, after weeks of pleading from his allies, he still makes comments on Twitter or to reporters nearly every day that hand Democrats fodder and make Republicans squirm.

In addition to his attacks against Obama, he separated himself from the highly popular Dr. Anthony Fauci, downplayed the importance of testing and has refused to wear a mask. And Trump’s appetite for conspiracy theories is often embarrassing to his party: Several times in recent weeks, he has falsely accused a prominent television host of murder and called for a “cold case” investigation.

The president also routinely misses even the political opportunities his advisers deliberately tee up for him.

When Trump was visiting Pennsylvania this week, for instance, his team scheduled a friendly interview in the hope that he would make the case that Biden would undermine fracking, an important industry in Pennsylvania. But Trump made no mention of fracking and instead attacked Biden’s mental condition and called wind power a “disaster” that “kills all the birds.”

“He’s come back down because that’s where his natural state is,” said Terry Nelson, a Republican strategist, referring to Trump’s slide in the polls after a short-lived bump in March. “Because he’s not in position to rally the country in a way a president traditionally would in a situation like this.”

This article originally appeared in The New York Times.

© 2020 The New York Times Company



Four species of Elvis worm identified on the deep sea floor

by Bob Yirka , Phys.org 

MAY 15, 2020 REPORT

Credit: ZooKeys (2020). DOI: 10.3897/zookeys.932.48532

A team of researchers from the University of California and CNRS-Sorbonne Université has identified four species of deep-sea worms that until now have been referred to as Elvis worms. In their paper published in the journal ZooKeys, the group describes the worms, how they were named, and some odd behavior they managed to capture on video.


The researchers described the worms as a few among many that they have been collecting from the seabed over a period of years. Known officially as scale worms, the team had taken to describing them collectively as Elvis worms because their iridescent plated covered shells reminded them of Elvis's sequined jumpsuits. It was only recently that they used genetics to distinguish between four of the most common. In so doing, they formally identified four species: Peinaleopolynoe goffrediae, P. mineoi, P. orphanage and P. elvisi—the first was named in honor of a noted marine biologist, the second after the father of one of the researchers, the man who paid for the research effort, the third was named for a noted geobiologist and the fourth for the famous singer. All four live on the seafloor at depths of 3,000 feet. Several specimens of each species were collected from the bottom of the ocean using a remotely operated vehicle, allowing the team to study the worms in their lab. In the wild, the worms tend to gather around dead whale carcasses or other organic matter as a source of food.

The researchers noted that the worms live in water that is too deep for light to penetrate, thus, other creatures that may live down there with them would not be able to see their shiny, purple, blue and pink iridescent shells, nor would they be able to see each other—they have no eyes. This raises the question of why have a colorful shell. The researchers were not able to answer that question, but suggest that there may be specialty bioluminescent creatures that seek them out. They also note that they were puzzled by notches on the worms' shells until they captured video of two of them fighting, which included dancing jigs in-between dashing over to take a bite out of an opponent's shell.



Explore further  Your sushi may serve up parasitic worms

More information: Avery S. Hatch et al. Hungry scale worms: Phylogenetics of Peinaleopolynoe (Polynoidae, Annelida), with four new species, ZooKeys (2020). DOI: 10.3897/zookeys.932.48532

Journal information: ZooKeys


© 2020 Science X Network

Virus 'eminently capable' of spreading through speech: study






LANGUAGE IS A VIRUS

SARS-CoV-2 AKA 2019-nCoV DNA CODE
This scanning electron microscope image shows SARS-CoV-2 (yellow)—also known as 2019-nCoV, the virus that causes COVID-19—isolated from a patient, emerging from the surface of cells (blue/pink) cultured in the lab. Credit: NIAID-RML

Microdroplets generated by speech can remain suspended in the air in an enclosed space for more than ten minutes, a study published Wednesday showed, underscoring their likely role in spreading COVID-19.



Researchers at the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) had a person loudly repeat the phrase "Stay healthy" for 25 seconds inside a closed box.

A laser projected into the box illuminated droplets, allowing them to be seen and counted.

They stayed in the air for an average of 12 minutes, the study published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) showed.

Taking into account the known concentration of coronavirus in saliva, scientists estimated that each minute of loudly speaking can generate more than 1,000 virus-containing droplets capable of remaining airborne for eight minutes or more in a closed space.

"This direct visualization demonstrates how normal speech generates airborne droplets that can remain suspended for tens of minutes or longer and are eminently capable of transmitting disease in confined spaces," the researchers conclude.

The same team had observed that speaking less loudly generates fewer droplets, in a work published in the New England Journal of Medicine in April.

If the level of infectiousness of COVID-19 through speech can be confirmed, it could give a scientific boost to recommendations in many countries to wear a face mask, and help explain the virus's rapid spread.


Explore further

Study finds breathing and talking contribute to COVID-19 spread

More information: Valentyn Stadnytskyi et al. The airborne lifetime of small speech droplets and their potential importance in SARS-CoV-2 transmission, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (2020). DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2006874117


Journal information: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , New England Journal of Medicine

© 2020 AFP


AFTER CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC WE WILL ALL SPEAK IN SIGN LANGUAGE 
May 10, 2018 - BSL and American Sign Language are not even in the same language ... 250 certified sign language interpreters, and between 1.8 million and ...

Continuously active surface disinfectants may provide additional barrier against the spread of viruses



A technician is pictured in 2018 applying Allied BioScience's first generation antimicrobial coating product
A technician is pictured in 2018 applying Allied BioScience's first generation antimicrobial coating product
In the battle to slow or prevent the transmission of viruses, such as the novel coronavirus, continuously active disinfectants could provide a new line of defense, according to a recent University of Arizona study released on the health sciences preprint server MedRxiv.

While disinfecting high-contact surfaces is an important practice to prevent the spread of pathogens, these surfaces can be easily re-contaminated after the use of conventional surface disinfectants. Alternatively, continuously active disinfectants work to actively kill microorganisms and provide continued protection over an extended period of time.
"During the course of respiratory illnesses such as COVID-19, aerosols released during sneezing and coughing contain  that will eventually settle onto various surfaces," said Luisa Ikner, associate research professor in the Department of Environmental Science and lead author of the study. "Factors including temperature, humidity and surface type can affect how long viruses such as SARS-CoV-2 will remain infectious after surface deposition."
"The only tools we have currently in reducing the environmental spread of viruses via surfaces are hand sanitizer, hand washing and the disinfection of surfaces," said Charles Gerba, a microbiologist and professor of environmental science in the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences. "This technology creates a new barrier in controlling the spread of viruses in indoor environments."
Gerba and his research team designed and conducted the study—which was funded by Allied BioScience, a company that manufactures antimicrobial surface coatings—to evaluate continuously active antimicrobial technology and its potential use against the transmission of viruses.
"We evaluated this technology by testing a modified antimicrobial coating against the human coronavirus 229E, which is one of the viruses that causes the common cold," Gerba said. "Even two weeks after the coating was applied, it was capable of killing more than 99.9% of the coronaviruses within two hours."
Human coronavirus 229E is similar in structure and genetics to SARS-CoV-2 but causes only mild respiratory symptoms. It can therefore be safely used as a model for SARS-CoV-2 to evaluate antiviral chemistries. The results from these experiments may provide new opportunities for controlling the environmental transmission of COVID-19.
"The standard practice of surface disinfection using liquid-based chemistries according to product label instructions can render many viruses—including the coronaviruses—noninfectious," Ikner said. "In contrast, high-touch surfaces treated with continuously active disinfectants are hostile environments to infectious viruses upon contact and demonstrate increasing effectiveness over time."
Continuously active disinfectant technology has been around for almost a decade but has been focused primarily on controlling hospital-acquired bacterial infections, such as invasive methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, or MRSA.
UArizona researchers from the Mel and Enid Zuckerman College of Public Health investigated the impact of antimicrobial surface coatings in reducing health care-associated infections in two urban hospitals. The results of that study were published in October and found a 36% reduction in hospital-acquired infections with the use of a continually active antimicrobial.
"As communities are reopening after weeks of stay-at-home restrictions, there is significant interest in minimizing surface contamination and the indirect spread of viruses," Gerba said.
Previous research on the environmental spread of viruses through contaminated surfaces modeled the spread of germs and the risk of infection in an office workplace. In that study, a contaminated push-plate door at the entrance of an office building led to the contamination of 51% of commonly touched surfaces and 38% of office workers' hands within just four hours. With the use of disinfecting wipes, environmental contamination was reduced to 5% of surfaces and 11% of workers' hands.
"Antimicrobial coatings could provide an additional means of protection, reducing the spread of coronaviruses in indoor environments and public places where there is continuous contamination," Gerba said. "We're evaluating a number of products right now and believe it may be the next major breakthrough.

I HAVE POSTED ANOTHER VERSION OF THIS EARLIER IN MY BLOG FROM ANOTHER SOURCE