Study: Global malnutrition puts more at risk for coronavirus disease

A worker puts cartons of food onto a hand cart at the Campaign Against Hunger food pantry in New York City on April 14. Photo by John Angelillo/UPI | License Photo

May 12 (UPI) -- Malnutrition is making hundreds of millions of people worldwide more vulnerable to the coronavirus disease, a new U.N.-backed audit said Tuesday.

The 2020 Global Nutrition Report, an annual independent assessment of food and nutrition, said most people don't have access to healthy food or can't afford it. Nutrition inequality, it says, threatens the health of about 820 million people.

Such inequality exists globally with more agricultural systems favoring inexpensive and highly processed foods over nutrition.

"Everyone deserves access to healthy, affordable food and quality nutrition care," researchers said in an executive summary. "This access is hindered by deeper inequities that arise from unjust systems and processes that structure everyday living conditions."

Widespread malnutrition has made many even more susceptible to picking up the coronavirus disease, the researchers said.

"The Global Nutrition Report's emphasis on nutritional well-being for all, particularly the most vulnerable, has a heightened significance in the face of this new global threat," they noted. "The need for more equitable, resilient and sustainable food and health systems has never been more urgent."

The study said there's a serious need for a "pro-equity agenda that mainstreams nutrition" among inadequate food and health systems.

"With only five years left to meet the 2025 global nutrition targets, time is running out," the 168-page report states. "We must focus on action where the need is greatest for maximum impact."

The audit said one in nine people globally are hungry -- while one in three are overweight or obese, mostly in wealthier nations.

"New analysis shows that global and national patterns hide inequalities within countries and communities, with vulnerable groups being most affected," it notes. "Underweight persist in the poorest countries with a rate 10 times higher compared to the richest countries. In contrast, overweight and obesity are prevailing in the richest countries, up to five times higher."

NASA climate expert Cynthia Rosenzweig said the report should urge world leaders to address food insecurity.

"It is really a call to action for countries and international organizations, [non-governmental organizations] and the whole system, to create a transformation in the food system," Rosenzweig, of NASA's Goddard Institute of Space Studies, said. "Malnutrition is a threat multiplier. I think it has been ignored that people who are malnourished are likely to have lower immune systems."

Oxfam: Coronavirus cease-fire efforts 'a catastrophic failure'
Oxfam said 2 billion people who live in fragile conflict-affected states are now put at heightened risk due to the pandemic.


A Yemeni child looks on as he waits for the arrival of his relative of Houthi detainees after they were released by Saudi Arabia, outside Sanaa Airport in Sanaa, Yemen, Nov. 28, 2019. Photo by Yahya Arhab/EPA-EFE

May 12 (UPI) -- Efforts by the international community to create a global cease-fire amid the coronavirus pandemic have been "a catastrophic failure," Oxfam International said Tuesday, calling out the U.N. Security Council for not doing enough to broker a resolution.

In a report published Tuesday, the international charitable organization said fighting continues across war-torn countries, undermining global efforts to combat the coronavirus, which has infected more than 4.1 million people and caused more than 280,000 deaths worldwide.


The report comes nearly two months after U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres' appeal for a global cease-fire.

The cease-fire remains unattained due to the U.N. Security Council's "diplomatic failure" to collectively broker a resolution amid the deadlock, it said, and its absence is exasperated by years of weak investment in peace-building and countries continuing to sell weapons for use in war-torn regions.

"We expect leadership from the council as well as many of those countries who say they support a cease-fire, but who nevertheless remain active participants in conflicts around the world conducting military operations, selling arms and supporting third parties," Oxfam Interim Executive Director Jose Maria Vera said in a statement.

On Friday, the United States effectively blocked a vote on a U.N. Security Council resolution for a global cease-fire by refusing to vote -- a move that Oxfam says is emblematic of the council's failure to unite to address the global health crisis.

However, the vote, it said, is only the latest in a plethora of failures that fuel conflict and keep weapons in combatants' hands, which "completely undermine" the world's ability to respond to the virus.

The report highlights nationalism as a cause of this diplomatic failure, stating the pandemic is presenting the world with an era-defining choice of either turning inward or embracing the global community.

"We must use the global cease-fire call as a window of opportunity to address the root causes that continue to drive conflict and inequality and to hold states accountable for their actions (or lack thereof)," the report said.

The organization said some 2 billion people live in fragile conflict-affected states who are now put at heightened risk due to the pandemic. The violence has trapped them in regions with devastated healthcare infrastructure and those who flee are escaping to crowded refugee camps that are conducive to the spread of COVID-19.

The report also states the $1.9 trillion in military spending last year could have paid the United Nation's appeal 280 times over. Last week, the United Nations tripled its humanitarian aid ask from $2 billion to $6.7 billion to help the poorest nations fight the coronavirus.

It cited France and Canada selling arms to Saudi Arabia and Germany recently authorizing the sale of a submarine to Egypt as evidence of the weapons industry continuing amid the pandemic.

"Arms-exporting countries must stop fuelling conflict and instead make every effort to pressure warring parties to agree to a global cease-fire and invest in peace efforts that can bring a meaningful end to conflict," Vera said.

Most Americans stayed home before government COVID-19 mandates
By Alan Mozes, HealthDay News


Pedestrian and automobile traffic in Times Square remains almost non existent in New York City on Monday, roughly two months after spread of the novel coronavirus forced businesses to close and people to practice social distancing. Photo by John Angelillo/UPI | License Photo

Most Americans voluntarily stayed at home during the early days of the COVID-19 tsunami, before states began issuing official "shelter-in-place" orders, new research indicates.

Why? Because statewide emergency declarations coupled with news -- of first infections, first fatalities and school closures -- were motivation enough to get folks to stay home. This was more motivating than quarantine mandates imposed weeks later, say investigators.

The findings follow a review of U.S. cellphone signal patterns from early March through much of April. The data generated by more than 20 million smartphones a day across all 50 states illustrated how much or how little users were moving about on a daily basis. That information was then stacked up against a timeline of state and local policy decisions.

Since March, "mobility fell substantially in all states. Even ones that have not adopted major distancing mandates," said study lead author Sumedha Gupta, an assistant professor of economics at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis.

That, she said, is because, even without stay-at-home requirements, people responded almost immediately to the alarming information they were getting.

"There is little evidence that stay-at-home mandates induced distancing," said Gupta. Instead, it appears that "early and information-focused actions have had bigger effects."

The findings, which have not been peer-reviewed, should be considered preliminary. They appear in a "working paper" published recently by the nonprofit National Bureau of Economic Research.

The team compiled a list of policy "events" as they unfolded. In most states that trajectory began with a series of emergency declarations, including a State of Emergency, a Public Health Emergency, or a Public Health Disaster.

By March 16, all 50 states had enacted these measures, although they did not specifically impose restrictions on movement. But they often overlapped with news reports of the first local cases and deaths, and likely "conveyed the seriousness of the situation to the population," the researchers said.

School closures were typically put in place a bit later, although 48 states had made the move by April 7.

RELATED Oxfam: Coronavirus cease-fire efforts 'a catastrophic failure'

By contrast, state and county stay-at-home orders were usually the last to be issued, although they were the measures that most directly addressed mobility. By mid-April, 45 states, or communities within states, had taken this step, with the exception of Arkansas, Iowa, Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota.

These developments were then aligned with publicly available cellphone data obtained from sources such as Apple Mobility, Google Mobility, SafeGraph, and PlaceIQ. The information was used to track movement outside the home during the 20 days before and after each policy was enacted.

The conclusion: Mobility fell hard and fell early, before the passage of mitigation policies. And that meant that by the time shelter-in-place orders had been declared they had almost no appreciable impact, the team said.

Specifically, Gupta's team determined that roughly 55 percent of the decisions people made to stay at home were attributable to emergency declarations issued in March. The rest were likely a function of individuals choosing to limit their movement based on news and information they received, rather than edicts.

Still, Gupta cautioned that as quarantine fatigue grows, the influence of news could wane.

"Over time, individuals may be less inclined to continue to restrict their mobility and interactions," Gupta said. So it's possible that as the pandemic continues to unfold, government leadership coupled with safety mandates and enforcement may become more critical, not less.

That thought was echoed by retired Brigadier Gen. Thomas Kolditz, founding director of Rice University's Doerr Institute for New Leaders in Houston.

"For most of the past 20 years, polls by Gallup and others show that people trust local government more than state government," he noted, "and local conditions tend to dictate localized behaviors. People make judgments about what's happening around them."

The problem, however, is that people can "vary widely in terms of personal discipline and resilience," Kolditz observed. And as steps are taken toward an economic restart, "reopening guidance has been so complex that the likelihood of a disciplined reopening is very low," he added.

All of this means that statewide guidance, in coordination with local leadership, will have a key role to play, Kolditz believes. "Without coordinated state guidance, states are likely to experience increasingly negative aspects of both staying at home and reopening," he said.

More information

There's more about sheltering in place at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Copyright 2020 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

Texas AG calls on local officials to fix 'unlawful' coronavirus orders

May 13 (UPI) -- Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has warned local officials that orders mandating face masks be worn and other emergency measures aimed at stemming the spread of the coronavirus are unlawful.

RELATED Top Navy, National Guard officials in self-quarantine after COVID-19 exposure

https://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2020/05/13/Texas-AG-calls-on-local-officials-to-fix-unlawful-coronavirus-orders/9961589344341/?sl=18

German 3D printing buffs pitch in with virus-fighting network

AFP / Yann Schreiber3D printers have been used in many parts of the world to quickly help build protective gear for medical personnel

The high-ceilinged workshop in Darmstadt is usually open to anyone -- from hobbyists trying new machinery or techniques to high-tech startup workers tinkering with prototypes.

During the coronavirus pandemic, it has been turned into a hub for dropping off plastic parts made at home by volunteers and used to assemble face shields they are sending to health workers across Germany and even as far off as a refugee camp in Greece.

The so-called German MakerVsVirus network -- extending into Austria and Switzerland thanks to the shared language -- gathers about 7,000 enthusiasts who are using their own 3D printers or other gadgets to produce much-coveted medical gear.

With medical workers worldwide scrambling for protective shields, masks or gowns amid a huge shortage because of the coronavirus, the tech geeks have stepped in to help fill the gap.

Physicist Nico Neumann, who has converted the drop-in workshop into the MakerVsVirus hub, said: "For me, it started with five face shields for my uncle's medical practice.

AFP / Yann Schreiber3D printers fabricate the red piece that holds a sheet of transparent plastic

"Then my grandfather's care service wanted some, and then we noticed that there was this network in Germany" which was ready to be mobilised."

"We started out as a lot of private individuals and lone wolves who wanted to help," he added.

By late April, Neumann and his team had delivered around 1,600 shields to users in the region.

The figure is even more staggering if the contributions from all 180 MakerVsVirus hubs across Germany are taken into account -- some 100,000 face shields have been sent out in the last weeks.

- 'Overwhelming' -

Offloading dozens of plastic parts fresh from the 3D printers at his firm outside the city, Stefan Herzig said: "This situation is really overwhelming for everyone.

AFP / Yann SchreiberThe network of volunteers MakerVsVirus has made some 100,000 face shields in recent weeks

"It's a nice feeling being able to help, even if my contribution is relatively small."

The parts were laid on tables at the entrance of the workshop bearing neatly printed labels for new and fulfilled order documents, freshly delivered plastic parts and assembled face shields ready for delivery.

Each face shield comprises a flexible transparent sheet, anchored at top with a 3D-printed plastic part and secured around the head with an elasticated band. Another 3D-printed plastic part at the bottom helps the mask keep its shape.

Although some homemade components turn out fragile or misshapen, those up to standard are sturdy enough to withstand disinfection and repeated use.

Beyond helping medical and other institutions, a shipment of face shields has even reached the notoriously overcrowded and vulnerable refugee camp on the Greek island of Lesbos.

The online organisation brought together "all these different characters" who are adept at finding technical solutions to create much-needed equipment, said Neumann.

He himself has to organise his voluntary work around a full-time job developing optics.

"I'm not getting much sleep or having much of a weekend," Neumann said.

- Flexible -

With more professional firms increasingly stepping in to fill large orders for face shields, the former hobbyists are now tackling small batches and more specialist items.

AFP / Yann Schreiber3D printers fabricate by deposing layer upon layer of material, and can be quickly reprogrammed to produce different pieces

New offerings include an adaptor to fit dispensers from one disinfectant brand onto containers from another as hospitals use whatever supplies they can find.

Another is a plastic hook to relieve the strain on sore ears from wearing facemasks all day.

"In this environment where it's almost in our spare time, we can respond more flexibly than if you had to convert a whole company's production," Neumann said.

"These are things where we can help quickly with our 3D printers."

South Korea raises age of consent from 13 to 16  

AFP / Ed JONESUnder the revised law, adults who have sex with under-16-year-olds will be prosecuted for child sexual abuse or rape regardless of any alleged consent

South Korea has raised the age of consent for sex to 16 from 13 as it seeks to strengthen protection for minors following accusations the existing law on sex crimes was too weak.

Under the revised law, adults who have sex with under-16-year-olds will be prosecuted for child sexual abuse or rape regardless of any alleged consent.

Previously, teenagers aged 13 or older were held to be legally capable of consenting to sex, resulting in controversial cases and critics saying that sex offenders were escaping without punishment due to the low benchmark.

In 2017, a 42-year-old man was found not guilty of raping a then 15-year-old on the grounds she had consented, provoking outrage and calls for the age limit to be raised.

Despite its economic and technological advances, South Korea remains a traditional and patriarchal society, where victims of sexual assault have been shamed for coming forward.

The age of consent was raised to 16 in order to "protect teenagers from sex crimes at a fundamental level", the South's Justice Ministry said in a statement.

The amended law also eliminated statutes of limitation for sexual crimes against minors under 13.

IN CANADA AGE OF CONSENT WAS 14 THE HARPER CONSERVATIVE GOVT RAISED IT TO 16 IN 2010

Australian arm of group that wrote to Trump peddling bleach as coronavirus cure fined $150,000

Product from Genesis II ‘healing church’ poses serious health risks, Therapeutic Goods Administration says, but it remains for sale on church website


Melissa Davey Wed 13 May 2020 THE GUARDIAN


 RIGHT CLICK TO ENLARGE

The Genesis II Church of Health and Healing’s Australian chapter has been fined for selling a solution containing sodium chlorite, a chemical used as a textile bleaching agent and disinfectant, online as a Covid-19 cure. Photograph: MMS Australia

A “healing church” that promoted a solution containing industrial bleach as a cure for coronavirus has been fined more than $150,000 for multiple allegedly unlawful advertising offences.

On Wednesday Australia’s drugs regulator, the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA), said the Australian chapter of the Genesis II Church of Health and Healing had been fined for selling and promoting a solution containing sodium chlorite, a chemical used as a textile bleaching agent and disinfectant.

The Australian website for the church, MMS Australia, falsely claimed the solution could treat, cure, prevent and alleviate diseases including Covid-19, HIV and cancer, the TGA said.

It has been revealed that Genesis II church US leader, Mark Grenon, wrote to Donald Trump just days before the US president claimed disinfectant could be a coronavirus cure.

The letter stated that chlorine dioxide – a powerful bleach used in industrial processes such as textile manufacturing that can have fatal side-effects when drunk – is “a wonderful detox that can kill 99% of the pathogens in the body”. He added that it “can rid the body of Covid-19”.

In a statement the TGA said there was no clinical, scientifically-accepted evidence showing the solution could cure or alleviate any disease. The use of the solution “presents serious health risks, and can result in nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea and severe dehydration, which in some cases can result in hospitalisation”, it said.

The TGA also alleges MMS Australia implied a health practitioner had endorsed the product, and that the website included a testimonial endorsing the product from someone directly involved with the production, sale, supply and marketing of it.

MMS Australia has not removed the products from its website. It has updated the website to say those seeking miracle cures “should pray to The Lord for healing and guidance”. The website also says those seeking the bleach solution and other products urgently could add a $5 express shipping voucher to their online shopping basket to jump to the front of the queue.

“Our products, their descriptions and other information posted here are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent disease, and any apparent reference to same is inadvertent and purely coincidental,” MMS Australia said. “We do not believe in miracle cures, but in healthy, wholesome living and good nutrition to keep the temple of our souls, our bodies, clean and free of harmful chemicals and poisons. We also believe in the power of quiet contemplation, meditation and prayer.”

An Australian representative of the church’s MMS Australia Foundation previously told Guardian Australia: “Do you go into the Catholic church and question them about the wine or the bread that they serve in the Eucharist? No, so why doesn’t the world leave us alone? These are our sacraments and we should be free to use it and teach other people to use it.”

US orders group to stop selling bleach 'miracle cure' for coronavirus
Read more https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/21/bleach-coronavirus-us-orders-group-stop-selling

The TGA has been engaged in a long-running battle to stop false claims around the solution. Four people were taken to hospital in 2014 in Victoria after ingesting the solution, prompting the TGA to issue a warning that products with high concentrations of sodium chlorite are considered poison.

Victoria’s Department of Health has also issued warnings. At the time, a department spokesman said: “This isn’t like drinking bleach, it literally is drinking bleach.”

Dr Ken Harvey, an associate professor of public health from Monash University, said he welcomed the fine but it was not a strong enough deterrent given the product had been causing issues for years.

“Yes the TGA issued infringement notices but this is just essentially an invitation to pay the fine or go to court and argue their case,” Harvey said. “In the meantime the MMS website is still up selling the products, with a few extras disclaimers, and they are now trying to label it as some kind of religious sacrament.

“What the TGA needs to do is order the website be taken down and a safety and warning notice and apology put in its place. While an infringement notice is a good step, it hasn’t done anything to stop the website, which is still promoting and selling it.”

Australian 'healing church' defends bleach sales after US coronavirus cure claims

Exclusive: Group claims it should be allowed to promote its Miracle Mineral Solution on freedom of religion grounds

Ben Smee THE GUARDIAN Wed 6 May 2020

 

The Australian chapter of the Genesis II Church of Health and Healing sells industrial bleach, or chlorine dioxide – marketed as Miracle Mineral Solution – online. The US branch of the church has claimed it can cure coronavirus, among other things. Photograph: Genesis II Church of Health and Healing Australian website


Representatives of an international group that calls itself a “healing church” and promotes industrial bleach as a cure for coronavirus say they should be allowed to continue selling the potentially toxic “miracle” solution in Australia on religious freedom grounds.

The ABC reported on Tuesday the Australian chapter of the Genesis II Church of Health and Healing is selling chlorine dioxide – marketed as Miracle Mineral Solution – online.

The website selling the product in Australia states the solution is the formulation “approved” by church founder, Jim Humble, who has published claims that people with Covid-19 recovered after taking MMS.

Guardian Australia spoke with an Australian representative of the church’s MMS Australia Foundation, which is selling the solution online and operates from an address in Hervey Bay, Queensland. The man would not identify himself due to “hate mail and hate phone calls” received in recent days.

“Do you go into the Catholic church and question them about the wine or the bread that they serve in the Eucharist? No, so why doesn’t the world leave us alone?” he said.

“These are our sacraments and we should be free to use it and teach other people to use it.”

It has been revealed that Genesis II church US leader, Mark Grenon, wrote to Donald Trump just days before the US president claimed disinfectant could be a coronavirus cure.

The letter stated that chlorine dioxide – a powerful bleach used in industrial processes such as textile manufacturing that can have fatal side-effects when drunk – is “a wonderful detox that can kill 99% of the pathogens in the body”. He added that it “can rid the body of Covid-19”.

The group has previously claimed the bleach can be used to treat diseases including cancer, HIV/Aids, asthma, ­autism and Ebola.

Health authorities in the US and Australia have previously warned that MMS poses a “serious health risk if consumed by humans” and was not approved for any therapeutic use. The product has been linked to hospitalisations in several Australian states. Dr Tony Bartone, president of the Australian Medical Association, called for the product to be banned in 2014 ahead of a visit to Melbourne by Humble.




The church representative said chlorine dioxide was commonly used for water purification, and that bottles were clearly labelled poison and carried appropriate disclaimers. But he conceded that in large enough doses, the solution could be fatal.

“Here is the big lie which the ABC could not resist perpetuating. The big bleach lie. You take enough water, you drink enough water, you kill yourself. You kill yourself by drinking enough water.

“Similarly we kill ourself by taking our sacrament full strength. You take two maybe three drops and you dilute it in a lot of water.

“Ask yourself, who is doing all this in the background, who is trying to sink us? There are dark forces against us. There are spiritual dark forces trying to get a hold of us. We are under assault. We are inundated with hate phone calls and hate mail.”

A complaint to the Therapeutic Goods Administration, lodged by public health expert Ken Harvey, urges immediate action against the church and its MMS Australia website, and calls for “substantial fines”.

The church’s MMS Australia website includes a disclaimer that “we do not list or sell any therapeutic goods, as defined by legislation, and any apparent mention or reference to same is inadvertent and coincidental”.

“Our products, their descriptions and other information posted here are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent disease, and any apparent reference to same is inadvertent and purely coincidental.
Anyone seeking medical products, should consult their physician.”


‘Please don’t inject bleach’: Trump’s wild coronavirus claims prompt disbelief

Harvey’s complaint says the site also: “links to (and thus endorses) a number of videos, testimonials, protocols and other material invoking Jim Humble who alleges that MMS, ‘has proven to restore partial or full health to hundreds of thousands of people suffering from a wide range of diseases.

“These include prohibited representations such as Covid-19, cancer, coronary heart disease, depression and multiple sclerosis.”

The Therapeutic Goods Administration does not typically regulate water purification products, but has previously published warnings about MMS out of concern that some people are using the solution for therapeutic purposes.

It warns that using the solution for purposes other than water purification, or at higher concentrations, can cause nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea and severe dehydration.

‘Please don’t inject bleach’: Trump’s wild coronavirus claims prompt disbelief

During Thursday’s coronavirus briefing the president floated the idea of ‘an injection inside’ – and medical doctors were quick to denounce it

Poppy Noor THE GUARDIAN Fri 24 Apr 2020



1:58 Trump floats dangerous coronavirus treatment ideas as Dr Birx looks on – video


Donald Trump had barely distanced himself from statements that malaria treatment could cure the coronavirus before he had moved on to another, even more unorthodox suggestion.

On Thursday night White House officials shared pretty predictable findings: that sunlight and common cleaning supplies can kill a virus within minutes when applied to different surfaces. But then the president had to take it to another level.


“I see the disinfectant where it knocks it out in a minute,” Trump said. “One minute! And is there a way we can do something, by an injection inside or almost a cleaning? Because you see it gets in the lungs and it does a tremendous number on the lungs, so it’d be interesting to check that. So, that you’re going to have to use medical doctors with, but it sounds interesting to me.”


   JIM CARRY 

Reactions were, as one would expect, quite swift.

Medical doctors have been quick to denounce the idea of injecting cleaning products to clear the virus. Just watch Trump’s coronavirus response coordinator Dr Deborah Birx’s face turn from shock to bemusement as she hears his suggestion.
Daniel Lewis(@Daniel_Lewis3)

Here is Dr. Birx's reaction when President Trump asks his science advisor to study using UV light on the human body and injecting disinfectant to fight the coronavirus. pic.twitter.com/MVno5X7JMAApril 24, 2020

If a qualified physician – who nonetheless has spent enough time with Trump to know his tendency to fabricate – is this shocked, it’s hard not to feel sorry for Trump’s base. Which story are they supposed to believe?

Matt Haig(@matthaig1)

Donald Trump supporters are struggling right now. They are having to simultaneously think Coronavirus is just the flu while also thinking it is a Chinese bio weapon designed to turn them communist all while standing in their kitchens injecting disinfectant into themselves. Hard.April 24, 2020




Many have analyzed the way in which Trump uses simple, accessible language in his speeches – around the level of what an eight-year-old could understand. Some are now suggesting his own processing capabilities might be in line with that.
Glenn Kirschner(@glennkirschner2)


Trump absorbs/processes info on a 3rd grade level. Doctors talk about the impact of disinfectant & UV rays on the virus on surfaces/outside the body. Trump’s inability to intelligently process info leads him to suggest putting dsinfectants & sunlight INSIDE the body. #unfit https://t.co/FGP6Hg84HoApril 24, 2020

Harvard’s toxicology Twitter account felt the need to issue medical advice online following Trump’s statement, giving a scientific reason for why you shouldn’t swallow bleach (you know, for when common sense won’t suffice).
Harvard Toxicology(@Harvard_Tox)

Please don’t inject bleach or drink disinfectant. Bleach injections cause hemolysis (where your red blood cells that carry OXYGEN break apart) and cause liver damage, and many disinfectants can cause dangerous burns or bleeding in your stomach. This tweet IS medical adviceApril 24, 2020

Comments such as these, which could potentially harm the public, should be taken seriously. But some took the slapstick approach (making memes) to help them digest.



David Mandel(@DavidHMandel\
pic.twitter.com/oJr8jgGbigApril 24, 2020
And it makes sense. Because at a time like this, you have to laugh, because truly there are no tears left.

Sarah Cooper(@sarahcpr)
How to medical pic.twitter.com/0EDqJcy38pApril 24, 2020

Employees at Clorox and Lysol must be thinking: “This is not the job I signed up for.”
Celeste Ng(@pronounced_ing)

I have a lot of sympathy for every PR people at every single disinfectant company who was told yesterday, “Look, we need to you write a serious non-profane press statement telling people not to inject bleach—in the next 10 min, please.”April 24, 2020

Neuroscientist Dr Sanjay Gupta, on the other hand, felt more sorry for the doctors who have to spend their time advising Trump.
New Day(@NewDay)

.@drsanjaygupta on Dr. Birx and officials' reactions to Trump’s comments about sunlight and disinfectant: “I don't know how they continue to do the job sometimes because they just have to spend as much time spinning around this stuff as they do actually talking about the science” pic.twitter.com/33sYsooSBAApril 24, 2020

Political pundits likened the speech to something that you might find on a satirical news website such as the Onion. The only thing more satirical, surely, is that this is real life.
Jim Pickard(@PickardJE)
this is not The Onion
this is not Brass Eye
this is actual news:
disinfectant manufacturer Reckitt Benckiser has put out a statement advising people not to *inject disinfectant* after the US president suggested it might help treat coronavirus https://t.co/a3lqPrFMvsApril 24, 2020

'Don't inject Lysol': maker of household cleaner hits back at Trump virus claim

‘Under no circumstance’ should Lysol be used in human body
President floated idea of product as Covid-19 treatment or cure


We must be clear that under no circumstance should our disinfectant products be administered into the human body (through injection, ingestion or any other route),” said a spokesperson for Reckitt Benckiser. Photograph: Joshua L Jones/AP

The maker of a popular brand of household cleaner has urged users not to inject it into their bodies in the wake of comments by Donald Trump at the daily White House briefing that injections of disinfectant might be a treatment or cure for the coronavirus.

Lysol, which is owned by a British company, is widely used as a spray to clean household surfaces and has become a vital tool for Americans seeking to disinfect their houses and apartments during the pandemic.

But the firm was clear no one should do anything else with its product, despite Trump’s bizarre claims at his daily press conference on Thursday evening and which were denounced widely by health experts as “jaw-dropping”.

“We must be clear that under no circumstance should our disinfectant products be administered into the human body (through injection, ingestion or any other route),” said a spokesperson for Reckitt Benckiser, the United Kingdom-based owner of Lysol, in a statement to NBC News.

“As with all products, our disinfectant and hygiene products should only be used as intended and in line with usage guidelines. Please read the label and safety information,” the statement continued.




At Thursday’s White House coronavirus taskforce briefing, Trump had discussed new government research on how the virus reacts to different temperatures, climates and surfaces.

“Is there a way we can do something, by an injection inside or almost a cleaning?” Trump had mused.

Trump has a record of defying science – from pollution to the climate crisis – and also used the briefing to float the idea of treating coronavirus patients’ bodies with ultraviolet (UV) light.

When he turned to the senior member of the White House coronavirus taskforce present, health expert Deborah Birx, to ask if she had heard about light

WITH A DISTRACTED PUBLIC, THE PENTAGON TRIES TO GET AWAY WITH KILLING INNOCENT CIVILIANS

Murtaza Hussain
May 8 2020

Smoke from a U.S.-led coalition airstrike is seen over buildings near the front line on Feb. 10, 2019 in Bagouz, Syria. Photo: Chris McGrath/Getty Image

THE UNITED STATES’S WARS continue to rage in the Middle East and Africa against the backdrop of the Covid-19 pandemic. Even in normal times, these conflicts got little public scrutiny. But with attention more occupied than usual, some U.S. military operations have been escalating even further. In recent years, these conflicts have become even deadlier for innocent people. The Trump administration has shown itself to be not just indifferent, but positively encouraging of the killing of civilians in foreign wars.

If there is a time to get away with killing people with no fear of accountability, it’s now. Yesterday, the Pentagon released its annual report on civilian casualties in its wars for the year 2019. According to the report, 132 civilians were killed by the U.S. military in Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, and Syria. In Yemen and Libya, countries where the U.S. also carries out airstrikes, the report simply claimed that no civilians were killed last year. “All DoD” — Department of Defense — “operations in 2019 were conducted in accordance with law of war requirements,” the report flatly stated, “including law of war protections for civilians.”

We already know from independent reports that Pentagon official figures on civilian casualties are, in general, woefully underreported. A 2017 investigation published by the New York Times found that, during a U.S. air campaign in Iraq, potentially thousands more civilians were killed than reported in official figures. In some cases, the military used video footage showing strikes on Islamic State positions as propaganda material, when in reality the footage showed airstrikes hitting homes full of civilians. Independent monitoring groups like Airwars have also documented thousands of civilian deaths from U.S. aerial campaigns that have gone unacknowledged in official figures.

The report issued to Congress this year was in line with new reporting requirements intended to provide more oversight about the impact of U.S. military operations on civilians. But the utility of these reported figures seems questionable: The military conducts almost no on-the-ground investigations of the impact of its strikes and is evidently willing to report figures that are absurdly low — literally incredible — for the sake of political expediency.

“The military often says that they don’t have the capacity to do this type of investigation. If that’s truly the case, they shouldn’t be bombing.”

In the past, the Pentagon suggested that it does not have the resources to conduct on-the-ground investigations in cases in which civilians are alleged to have been killed. Recently, reports surfaced that the military has begun requesting more funds to help track civilian deaths. But independent researchers and nongovernmental organizations have already been carrying out such investigations for years, with far few resources than the Pentagon — with its vast budget — has at its disposal. All this raises the question of who exactly the military has been killing over nearly two decades of war.

“It’s the military’s responsibility, if they’re going to carry out a strike, to have some way of knowing who they’re killing or injuring and what the impact is,” said Daphne Eviatar, director of the Security with Human Rights program at Amnesty International. “In this congressional report, the Pentagon stated that all their operations were in line with the laws of war. But if they don’t even have a basic understanding of the impact of their strikes, it is difficult to see how they can conclude that.”

THE NUMBER OF airstrikes carried out by U.S. forces has declined over the last two years, as military campaigns in Iraq and Syria wound down. American forces still carry out periodic operations in those countries, however, as well as undertaking strikes in Yemen and Somalia ostensibly aimed at terrorist groups. In Somalia in particular, U.S. operations have been ramping up heavily in recent months. While the military maintains that these strikes are not killing any civilians, reports published by The Intercept and elsewhere suggest a deadlier impact on innocent people in the country than the Pentagon is acknowledging. In some cases, the military has dismissed credible reports that its operations have killed Somali civilians.


Related
New Data Shows the U.S. Military Is Severely Undercounting Civilian Casualties in Somalia


With loosened targeting rules under President Donald Trump and a public that is even more distracted than usual, the conditions are ripe for negligent behavior that will result in the deaths of innocents. Nongovernmental organizations that devote resources to investigating the impact of U.S. airstrikes have noted with frustration that, despite tighter reporting requirements from Congress, a gigantic budget, and a sprawling organizational footprint, the military is still not giving an honest account of the impact of its actions. The obviously underreported figures provided in this report will do little to change the perception that the ugly truth is still being hidden.

“We do lots of research on the impact of airstrikes, visiting places they’ve taken place, interviewing survivors, analyzing satellite imagery, and working with weapons experts,” said Eviatar, noting that even limited investigations have turned up far more civilian casualties than the military acknowledges. “The military often says that they don’t have the capacity to do this type of investigation. If that’s truly the case, they shouldn’t be bombing places if they don’t even have the ability to know who they’re killing.”


CONTACT THE AUTHOR:


Murtaza Hussainmurtaza.hussain@​theintercept.com@mazmhussain

ERIK PRINCE OFFERED LETHAL SERVICES TO SANCTIONED RUSSIAN MERCENARY FIRM WAGNER

Photo illustration: Soohee Cho/The Intercept, Getty Images

ERIK PRINCE, FOUNDER of the private security firm Blackwater and a Trump administration adviser, has sought in recent months to provide military services to a sanctioned Russian mercenary firm in at least two African conflicts, according to three people with knowledge of the efforts.

Prince, who is the brother of Trump Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, met earlier this year with a top official of Russia’s Wagner Group and offered his mercenary forces to support the firm’s operations in Libya and Mozambique, according to two people familiar with Prince’s offer.

Wagner officials said they are not interested in working with Prince, three people familiar with their decision told The Intercept.

A lawyer for Prince denied that his client met anyone from Wagner.

The Wagner Group is a semi-private military force that operates in countries or conflicts where the Russian government seeks plausible deniability for its activities. It is often equipped and supported directly by the Russian Ministry of Defense, according to reports and experts who track Wagner’s activities. The U.S. State Department website also lists Wagner as an entity connected to the “Defense Sector of the Government of the Russian Federation.” Any business relationship between Prince and Wagner would, in effect, make the influential Trump administration adviser a subcontractor to the Russian military.

In recent years, the Russian government has deployed Wagner to several African countries, Ukraine, and Syria, where the U.S. military killed dozens of Wagner fighters in 2018 after the Russians and their Syrian allies attacked an oil facility that the United States was defending.

“Wagner Group is an instrument of Russian policy. It works under the GRU, which is the Russian military intelligence,” said Sean McFate, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council and a former military contractor who has written about mercenaries.

In attempting to do business with Wagner, Prince may have exposed himself to legal liability.

In attempting to do business with Wagner, Prince may also have exposed himself to legal liability. In 2017, the Trump administration sanctioned Wagner, as well as its founder and head Dmitry Utkin, for having “recruited and sent soldiers to fight alongside [Russian-backed] separatists in eastern Ukraine” during the 2014 Russian invasion. The Russian government denied involvement in the invasion, even as its forces occupied and took control of Crimea, also in Ukrainian territory, in violation of international law.

The sanctions prohibit individuals or companies from providing “financial, material, or technological support for, or goods or services to or in support of, any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order.” They also forbid anyone “to have acted or purported to act for or on behalf” of Wagner. The 2017 addition of Wagner to the sanctions list builds on a 2014 executive order signed by President Barack Obama.

“In my experience, the act of soliciting from a sanctioned party would indeed be an apparent violation,” said Brian O’Toole, a senior fellow with the Atlantic Council and former senior sanctions official at the Treasury Department. “Whether you make that [legal] case is an entirely separate matter,” he said, adding that pitching business to Wagner “would seem to be a fairly egregious thing to do.”

Related
The FBI Is Investigating Erik Prince for Trying to Weaponize Crop Dusters


When Prince met with Wagner leadership, he was already under federal investigation for violating arms trafficking regulations. The proposal to the Russian firm also raises questions about whether Trump administration officials authorized the meeting or were aware of Prince’s efforts to work with the group.

A former Navy SEAL who rose to prominence and notoriety as head of the private security firm Blackwater, Prince has been a vocal supporter of President Donald Trump, serving as an unofficial adviser on military and foreign policy issues in Africa, the Middle East, and Afghanistan. Prince was a Trump donor in 2016 and has worked to support the president politically while proposing private military solutions that would benefit his companies financially.

Early in the Trump administration, Prince proposed privatizing the war in Afghanistan and supplying Trump with a private spy service intended to circumvent the U.S. intelligence community. Neither proposal succeeded, despite having support for some of his ideas from senior administration officials, including Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

For years, Prince has tried, mostly unsuccessfully, to win military contracts with governments in Africa and the Middle East. Wagner has become an increasingly visible player in the region as Russia’s influence there has grown, allowing the country to operate under the radar at a time when “plausible deniability is more powerful than firepower,” according to McFate, the mercenary expert.

“The reason why groups like Wagner exist is that modern war is getting sneakier and mercenaries are a great way to get things done in the shadows.”

“The reason why groups like Wagner exist, and the reason why people like Erik Prince [are] succeeding, is that modern war is getting sneakier and mercenaries and groups like Wagner are a great way to get things done in the shadows,” McFate said.

Libya has been divided and in conflict since the U.S. and NATO allies removed longtime dictator Moammar Gadhafi in 2011. The United Nations and most of the international community, including the U.S, recognize the Government of National Accord in the Libyan capital Tripoli as the country’s official leaders. But the eastern portion of the country is led by strongman Khalifa Hifter, who tried last year to take Tripoli. Both sides are backed by foreign powers that have continually violated a U.N. embargo on military support. Turkey and Qatar have supported the GNA, while Russia, the United Arab Emirates, and Egypt have backed Hifter.

Last spring, Hifter’s forces, the Libyan National Army, moved to take Tripoli, but were thwarted within days. Hifter turned to Moscow and Wagner. Americans are prohibited from aiding either side of the conflict without U.S. government authorization.

At the same time, Prince sought to provide a force in Mozambique, where the government has been fighting a small insurgency over the past two years. President Filipe Nyusi of Mozambique flew to Moscow to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin in August 2019. The countries signed several trade pacts, and Russia agreed to send military aid. Russian military hardware and Russian nationals working for Wagner arrived in Mozambique in September, according to news reports.

After Wagner lost more than a dozen fighters in Mozambique, Prince sent a proposal to the Russian firm offering to supply a ground force as well as aviation-based surveillance, according to documents viewed by The Intercept and a person familiar with Prince’s proposal.

Prince has also served as an adviser to the de facto ruler of the United Arab Emirates, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed, known as MBZ, for more than a decade. Under bin Zayed’s leadership, the UAE, a close regional ally of the U.S., has intervened militarily in several regional wars in the Middle East and Africa. A pariah during the Obama administration, Prince was taken in by the Emirati crown prince and awarded a contract worth hundreds of millions of dollars to create and train a presidential guard for the royal family. He was later removed for mismanagement, among other reasons.

Prince also has ties to China. He is co-chair of Frontier Services Group, a Hong-Kong based logistics company he founded and whose largest investor is the Chinese government. The Intercept has previously reported that the U.S. government has investigated Prince for his ties to China’s intelligence service. The conflicts between Prince’s commercial interests and the goals of the many governments that retain his services have piled up as Prince has tried to sell military and mercenary capabilities around the world. FSG, for example, signed a contract for fishing rights in Mozambique around the same time Prince began exploring defense contracts there. The fishing contract has since been dissolved, according to the company.

“The conflicts of interest are deep and threaten democracy when you have a free agent going between the U.S. and its main power rivals,” said McFate. “It would never clear an intelligence community background check. This is a dangerous thing for any democracy.”


Matthew Cole, Alex Emmons
April 13 2020
THE INTERCEPT

Gerry Adams illegally held during Troubles, supreme court rules

Ex-Sinn Féin leader wins fight to overturn two convictions for attempting to escape from Maze prison

Owen Bowcott Legal affairs correspondent 

THE GUARDIAN Wed 13 May 2020
 

Gerry Adams’s convictions were unsafe because his detention was not personally considered by the secretary of state for Northern Ireland. Photograph: Brian Lawless/PA

The former Sinn Féin leader Gerry Adams was interned illegally at the height of Northern Ireland’s Troubles because the wrong minister approved his detention order, the supreme court has ruled.

His two convictions for attempting to escape from the Maze prison in the 1970s have also been quashed by the UK’s highest court.

The unanimous decision follows a hearing in London last year at which lawyers for the 71-year-old challenged the way he was held under emergency legislation.

Delivering judgment, Lord Kerr said: “We hold that the power [to make a detention order] should have been exercised by the secretary of state and that therefore that the making of the interim custody order was invalid since the secretary of state had not himself considered it. In consequence, Mr Adam’s detention was unlawful.”

Adams, who has always denied being a member of the IRA, was taken into custody under article 4 of the Detention of Terrorists (Northern Ireland) Order 1972, which covered anyone whom the secretary of state for Northern Ireland “suspected of having been concerned in the commission or attempted commission of any act of terrorism”.

The regulations required that the Northern Ireland secretary be involved personally in making any such decision.

Documents released to the public records office under the 30-year rule revealed that the government knew there had been a procedural irregularity in relation to the detention of Adams and other republicans who tried to escape with him from the heavily guarded internment camp.

A note dated 17 July 1974 recorded a meeting held by the then Labour prime minister, Harold Wilson, called to consider “an urgent problem which the attorney general had brought to his attention”.

The note explained that “following a recent attempt to escape by four prisoners [a reference to Adams and others] from the Maze, an examination of the papers concerning those prisoners revealed that applications for interim custody orders concerning three of them had not been examined personally by the previous secretary of state for Northern Ireland during the Conservative administration.

“It now appeared that the [previous] Conservative administration had left both tasks to junior ministers in the Northern Ireland office and, according to [the attorney general’s] information, there might be as many as 200 persons unlawfully detained in Northern Ireland.” Adams’s order had been signed by a minister of state.

The supreme court was asked to decide whether it was parliament’s intention that only the secretary of state for Northern Ireland should have the power to make an interim custody order.

The director of public prosecutions for Northern Ireland, who was the respondent in the case, successfully argued in the Northern Ireland courts that the Carltona principle – based on a 1943 test case – allows that “where parliament specifies that a decision is to be taken by a specified minister, generally that decision may be taken by an appropriate person on behalf of the minister”.

Adams, who was a Sinn Féin TD for Louth in the Irish Dáil until February, was not present at the supreme court hearing in London last November.

The case was heard by five justices including the lord chief justice of England and Wales, Lord Burnett. Kerr, a former lord chief justice of Northern Ireland, presided.

Adams was first interned in March 1972 and was released in June that year to take part in secret talks with the Conservative government in London. More than 1,900 suspects were interned in the early years of the Troubles as violence spiralled out of control. Those held were overwhelmingly nationalists or republicans; not all were members of paramilitary organisations.

Adams was rearrested in July 1973 in Belfast and taken to the Maze, also known as Long Kesh detention centre. On Christmas Eve 1973 he was one of four detainees caught attempting to break out. A hole had been cut in a perimeter fence and all four men were already out of the prison.

His second escape attempt, in July 1974, was a more elaborate scheme involving kidnapping a man who had a striking resemblance to him from a bus stop in west Belfast. The man was taken to a house where his hair was dyed and he was given a false beard, the lower courts in Belfast were told.

His double was driven to the Maze where the plan was that he would be swapped for Adams in a visiting hut. Prison staff had been alerted, however, and Adams was arrested in the car park of the jail. He was later sentenced to 18 months in jail for the first escape attempt and an additional three years for the second attempt, after two separate trials before single judges sitting without a jury.

Presenting Adams’ appeal at the supreme court, Sean Doran QC said: “Everything goes back to the original order … We would ask the court to rule that those convictions are now unsafe.”

Kerr said: “The structure of the 1972 [Detention of Terrorists] Order is such that it was clearly intended that the making of an ICO, as opposed to the signing of the order had to be the outcome of personal consideration by the secretary of state. In this case, a minister in the Northern Ireland Office had made the ICO. That minister could have signed the order, but he could not validly make it.

“As a result, Mr Adams’ detention had not been lawfully authorised. His detention was therefore invalid, and it followed that he should not have been convicted of attempting to escape from lawful custody for the elementary but inevitable reason that the custody in which he had been detained was, in fact, not lawful. His appeal is therefore allowed, and his convictions are quashed.”