Wednesday, May 27, 2020

'My mother was murdered': how Covid-19 stalks Brazil's nurses

More nurses – 157 – are thought to have died in Brazil than anywhere else, while JAIR JAIR Bolsonaro and his supporters continue to downplay the crisis

Caio Barretto Briso and Tom Phillips in Rio de Janeiro
Wed 27 May 2020
Maria Aparecida Duarte, second from left, with co-workers: ‘She shouldn’t have been working on the frontline.’


At the casualty department where she worked on the outskirts of São Paulo, Maria Aparecida Duarte was the nurse everyone loved, known for her dedication, her jokes and her smile.

But as the coronavirus pandemic swept through Brazil, claiming hundreds and then thousands of lives, the 63-year-old’s mood began to sour.

Hospitals in Latin America buckling under coronavirus strain
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/20/hospitals-in-latin-america-buckling-amid-coronavirus-strain

Four colleagues had died; countless were off sick. More than fear, Duarte felt resignation: she was certain she would be next.

On 10 April those premonitions were confirmed. Twenty-four hours after her last shift at the casualty ward in Carapicuíba, Duarte was admitted to hospital with Covid-19 symptoms and put on a ventilator.

Over the coming days two of her four children would join her in the intensive care unit for treatment. They all made it out, but their mother died on 3 May.

“She was the backbone of the family, the great matriarch,” said her daughter, Andreza Reina, who blames her mother’s government employers for requiring her to keep working but failing to equip her with adequate personal protective equipment (PPE).

Duarte, 34, claimed her mother, who had diabetes and high blood pressure, had worn a paper-thin cap to work and had to make her own face mask from a piece of cloth.


“She shouldn’t have been working on the frontline. My mother was murdered.”

Duarte is one of at least 157 Brazilian nurses who have died since the country’s first confirmed Covid-19 fatality in mid-March.

According to the International Council of Nurses (ICN) that means more nurses have died in Brazil than anywhere else on earth – including other coronavirus hotspots such as the US, where at least 146 have died, and the UK where the number is at least 77.

More than half of those fatalities have taken place in the south-eastern states of Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo where a combined total of over 10,000 people have died.

But nurses are losing their lives across the country, with at least 23 deaths in the north-eastern state of Pernambuco and 10 in Amazonas state, another hotspot.

In the capital of Amazonas, Manaus – where the soaring death toll has forced authorities to dig mass graves – Deizeane Romão is mourning her husband, a 46-year-old nurse named Nicolares Curico who died on 14 April.

“Take care of our daughters. I love them,” he wrote in a message to his wife before being admitted to intensive care a week before his death.

Romão said her husband had also loved his profession: “It wasn’t about the money – his salary was less than 2,000 reais (£600) per month.”

But a lack of PPE and staff, because so many colleagues were falling ill, had left him overworked and exposed.

“He felt unprotected because he didn’t have an N95 mask,” Romão said. “He was seeing more than 100 patients a day.” 
 
Nicolares Curico, Deizeane Romão and baby Nicole. Curico, a 46-year-old nurse from the Amazon city of Manaus, died on 14 April.

Manoel Neri, the president of Brazil’s federal council of nursing, said nurses were the hidden heroes of Brazil’s fight against the pandemic, which has also killed at least 114 doctors.

“There’s a huge gulf between the way nursing teams and medical teams are treated and the recognition they receive. But they are all on the frontline,” Neri said.

A recent Brazilian television report showed that at one Covid-19 field hospital in Rio air-conditioned rooms with beds had been prepared for doctors while nurses slept on mattresses on the floor.

“Doctors are treated like heroes but our nurses are forgotten,” Neri complained, accusing successive governments both leftwing and right of neglecting their demands for improved salaries and working conditions.

Howard Catton, head of the ICN, said: “[Nurses] are one of our most precious resources. If somebody is being forced to go to work without proper training and with no PPE, then a criminal investigation is required.”

Such are the hardships facing Brazilian nurses that many must moonlight. Tcharlyson de Freitas Ribeiro, a 26-year-old nurse from the Amazon city of Boa Vista, works part-time as an Uber driver in order to support his son and pregnant wife.

“Since the pandemic started I’ve had to stop driving to avoid the risk of exposing my passengers to the virus,” said Ribeiro, who is currently treating more than 50 Covid-19 patients at his hospital.

Recent weeks have seen nurses mobilise to highlight such difficulties and remember the dead. On 1 May a group gathered in silence outside the presidential palace in face masks and white jackets – only to be set on by radical supporters of the president, Jair Bolsonaro, who has flouted social distancing and failed to visit frontline health workers.
FacebookTwitterPinterest Nurses with signs bearing the names of the healthcare professionals who have died from coronavirus hold a demonstration in Brasília. Photograph: Adriano Machado/Reuters

“They called us every name you can imagine – things that didn’t even make sense,” said Ana Catarine Carneiro, a Brasília-based nurse who said the Bolsonaristas had even accused the group of “genocide”.

“How can health professionals be genocidal?” asked Carneiro, a director at the city’s nursing union.

Carneiro said she had felt most stunned at being accused of fabricating coronavirus deaths by Bolsonaro’s followers, apparently as part of a leftwing plot against Brazil’s far-right president.


Brazil media boycott Bolsonaro residence after abuse of reporters

Read more

“It hurt me profoundly to hear them denying the deaths – because I think it’s just absurdly disrespectful to those who passed away and their families and friends,” she said.

There is nothing fabricated about the death of Curico, whose four-year-old daughter has yet to understand why he has not come home. “My days are so sad with him gone. I’ve no one to talk to. I can no longer smile,” said Romão, widowed aged 33.

Andreza Reina, the youngest of Duarte’s four children, has been taking sedatives and antidepressants to deal with the loss of her mother, whom friends knew simply as Cidinha. “For the country my mum is just another number,” she said.

“For me she was the most important person in the world.”
WHO launches foundation to put finances in better health
Issued on: 27/05/2020
The UN health agency launched the independently-run WHO Foundation, which the organisation hopes will give it greater control to direct philanthropic and public donations towards pressing problems such as the coronavirus crisis Fabrice COFFRINI AFP/File

Geneva (AFP)

The World Health Organization on Wednesday launched a new foundation for private donations, as US President Donald Trump threatens to pull the plug over its handling of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The UN health agency launched the independently-run WHO Foundation, which the organisation hopes will give it greater control to direct philanthropic and public donations towards pressing problems such as the coronavirus crisis.

Trump, accusing the WHO of mismanaging the pandemic, has frozen US funding and could pull out of the organisation next month if he does not see what he believes to be satisfactory changes.

Trump claims the WHO is too close to Beijing and covered up the initial outbreak in China.

The vast majority of the WHO's budget is in voluntary contributions which go straight from countries and other donors to their chosen destination.

The WHO therefore only has control over the spending of countries' "assessed contributions" membership fees, which are calculated on their wealth and population.

WHO director-general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus launched the new foundation at the organisation's headquarters in Geneva.

"One of the greatest threats to WHO's success is the fact that less than 20 percent of our budget comes in the form of flexible assessed contributions from member states, while over 80 percent is voluntary contributions, which are usually tightly earmarked for specific programmes," he said.

"There is a clear need to broaden our donor base, and to improve both the quantity and quality of funding we receive -- meaning more flexibility."

- Timely move -

The new foundation will facilitate contributions from the general public, individual major donors and corporate partners to the WHO. Its goal is to help the organisation achieve more sustainable and predictable funding.

Given the ongoing coronavirus crisis, the WHO Foundation will focus initially on emergencies and pandemic response.

On May 18, Trump threatened to freeze US funding to the WHO permanently and reconsider its membership unless "substantive improvements" were made within the next 30 days.

The United States, comfortably the biggest contributor to the WHO's budget, has already suspended funding.

Tedros insisted the new grant-making funding stream was not related to Trump's threat to freeze its contributions.

"It has nothing to do with the recent funding issues," he said, detailing that greater financial flexibility had been among his long-term reform plans since taking over the organisation in July 2017.

But the move is certainly timely.

- Next pandemic if, not when -

The novel coronavirus has infected at least 5.6 million people and killed more than 350,000 people since the outbreak first emerged in December, according to a tally from official sources compiled by AFP.

Tedros warned that the world remained vulnerable to the next pandemic coming down the line.

"Our focus should not be managing disease but in preventing it from happening," he said.

Tedros said the COVID-19 crisis had shown countries where the gaps were in their preparedness -- but they had not yet come up with the money to address them.

"Going forward, I think the world has learned its lessons," he said.

Tedros said that on pandemics, the globe needed to "make sure that countries are better prepared to finish the current one but to prepare for the next epidemic -- which may happen because we are still vulnerable".

Maria Van Kerkhove, the WHO's technical lead on COVID-19, said: "It's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when."

© 2020 AFP
Bob and Doug, the best friends on historic SpaceX-NASA mission

Issued on: 27/05/2020 - 19:16Modified: 27/05/2020 - 19:14

With their crew cuts, cool demeanor, short and precise sentences, Robert Behnken and Douglas Hurley have all the traditional hallmarks of the men of NASA 
Bill INGALLS NASA/AFP/File
SCTV Guide - After SCTV - Bob and Doug McKenzie


Kennedy Space Center (United States) (AFP)

Robert Behnken and Douglas Hurley, the astronauts set to launch into orbit on a SpaceX rocket Wednesday, are both former military pilots, both recruited by NASA in 2000, and both married to fellow astronauts.

With their crew cuts, cool demeanor, short and precise sentences, they have all the traditional hallmarks of the men of NASA.

Smiling, reasonable, competent, reliable: in other words "The Right Stuff" of the early era of spaceflight.


They met in 2000 when they began their training at the space agency, and have been best friends ever since, said Hurley, 53.

Both of them attended military test pilot school, a well worn path to the astronaut corps.

Behnken, 49, holds a doctorate in mechanical engineering from the California Institute of Technology.

He signed up for the military during his studies and attended the elite Air Force Test Pilot School at Edwards Air Force Base in California.

A colonel, he's flown more than 25 different aircraft, including the F-22 fighter.

Hurley was also a colonel and before joining NASA was a fighter pilot and test pilot in the Marine Corps, a specialist for the F/A‐18.

Between 2008 and 2011, they both flew two missions, separately, on the Space Shuttle.

In 2015, NASA assigned them their next mission: the first crewed flight of the Crew Dragon, built by SpaceX and initially planned for 2017.

- Dream mission -

"If you gave us one thing that we could have put on our list of dream jobs that we would have gotten to have some day, it would have been to be aboard a new spacecraft and conduct a test mission," Behnken told reporters when he arrived at the Kennedy Space Center from Houston last week.

It was through the astronaut corps that each of them met their wives, who have also space missions to their credit.

Behnken married Megan McArthur, and they have a six-year-old boy, Theodore.

Doug married Karen Nyberg, and they too have a son, Jack, aged 10.

The bond of friendship that unites the two men is an obvious asset for such a risky mission, where they each might have to take control of the spacecraft that is set to auto pilot by default.

Hurley is the more meticulous, even obsessive, of the two, said Behnken.

"If we have to get useless information, Doug is always the repository for that," joked Behnken in a video released by NASA.

Hurley himself admitted to being an expert in "obscure procedures."

As for Behnken, Hurley said his friend thinks of everything ahead of time. "He's already got it all figured out."

But he's no good at bluffing and "doesn't have a good poker face," added Hurley.

On Monday, the head of NASA texted the pair to ask one last time: are you sure you want to go ahead?

"They both came back and they said, 'we're go for launch,'" said Jim Bridenstine. "So they're ready to go."

It's a moment they've been training for the past five years.

© 2020 AFP


SpaceX readies for blast-off with NASA astronauts aboard

AFP / Gregg NewtonA SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket with the Crew Dragon spacecraft sits atop launch complex 39A at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida on May 25, 2020

Gray skies loomed over Florida's Atlantic coast Tuesday, just one day before two astronauts were set to blast off aboard a SpaceX capsule on the most dangerous and prestigious mission NASA has ever entrusted to a private company.

There was a 60 percent chance for favorable weather for Wednesday's flight, according to Tuesday's latest Cape Canaveral forecast.

US astronauts Bob Behnken and Doug Hurley have been in strict quarantine for two weeks ahead of their trip on the brand-new Crew Dragon capsule, which will be propelled by a Falcon 9 rocket.

Both the capsule and the rocket were manufactured by SpaceX, the start-up founded in 2002 by the then-thirty-something Elon Musk, a brilliant and brash Mars-obsessive who made his fortune with PayPal and also created the famous Tesla electric cars.

The Crew Dragon is to carry the astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS), which orbits the Earth about 250 miles (400 kilometers) above sea-level at about 17,000 miles per hour.

The success of this mission is a point of national pride for the United States, which has depended on Russian rockets to reach space since its last crewed flight in 2011.

Neither the new coronavirus pandemic nor confinement measures to stop its spread were able to derail the launch, and President Donald Trump will become only the third US leader to watch the take-off of a human space flight in person, after Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton.
NASA/AFP / Bill INGALLS
Douglas Hurley and Robert Behnken are seen in their spacesuits on May 23, 2020

"This is a unique moment where all of America can take a moment and look at our country do something stunning again," NASA administrator Jim Bridenstine said.

In a nod to an earlier era of US space flight, Bridenstine resurrected a vintage 1970s NASA logo nicknamed "the worm," whose distinctive red font will adorn the rocket on Wednesday.

SpaceX made history in 2012 when it became the first private entity to dock a cargo capsule to the ISS. Two years later, NASA commissioned the company to modify the Dragon to carry passengers.

That was already Musk's original dream for the capsule anyway, according to SpaceX vice president Hans Koenigsmann.

"Cargo Dragon, we put a window on it so that people wouldn't forget about it," he said of the original ship design.

"We (were) founded with the idea of human spaceflight."

- Delays -

The program, into which NASA has invested more than $3 billion, is three years behind schedule.
AFP / Gregg NewtonThe chances of there being favorable weather for the launch was put at 60 percent, according to NASA

And a NASA-commissioned Boeing spacecraftcalled the Starliner, is even further delayed.

After a successful uncrewed test flight last year, a Crew Dragon capsule later exploded during a ground engine test. There were also issues developing the capsule's large parachutes.

But after thousands of checks and re-checks, NASA is finally ready to go -- or as ready as they can be to strap two people on top of a 500-ton rocket filled with combustible fuel.
AFP/File / Philip PachecoElon Musk founded SpaceX in 2002


"We never feel comfortable, because that's when you're not searching," said Kathy Lueders, head of NASA's commercial crew program.

"We're going to stay hungry until Bob and Doug come home," she said.

- 'Above geopolitics' -

Now, the weather is the last unpredictable variable.

But "the trend is in the right direction," Bridenstine said, despite the rain that forced his Tuesday press conference indoors and away from the big countdown clock outside.

The option to delay remains available until 45 minutes before the flight's scheduled departure at 4:33 pm (2033 GMT).

The next potential windows for blast-off are Saturday and Sunday.

After they reach orbit, it will take Hurley and Behnken around 19 hours to reach the ISS, where Bridenstine says they could stay until early August.
AFP / Gregg NewtonThe Falcon 9 rocket is seen May 25, 2020 ahead of its launch from the Kennedy Space Center in Florida

Their return will resemble the Apollo re-entries: a water landing in the Atlantic Ocean, off the coast of Florida.

If all goes well, the Crew Dragon could then begin regular flights from the United States to the ISS.

At the end of August, three other Americans and a Japanese astronaut are scheduled to fly on the ship, and Europe, Canada and Russia have been invited to participate in subsequent missions.

The Russians, with whom the US built the ISS, have agreed to continue their space partnership, according to Bridenstine, though they have not officially signed onto the new program.

"It's really above terrestrial geopolitics," he said. "Literally -- above terrestrial geopolitics."

26MAY2020

Thousands of protesters gather in Hong Kong amid Chinese anthem law debate


Pro-democracy demonstrators scuffle with riot police during a lunchtime protest as a second reading of a controversial national anthem law takes place in Hong Kong, China on May 27, 2020. 
© Tyrone Siu, Reuters
Text by:
NEWS WIRES

Thousands of protesters shouted pro-democracy slogans and insults at police in Hong Kong on Wednesday as lawmakers debated a bill criminalizing abuse of the Chinese national anthem in the semi-autonomous city. 

Police massed outside the legislative building ahead of the session and warned protesters that if they did not disperse, they could be prosecuted. 

In the Central business district, police raised flags warning protesters to disperse before they shot pepper balls at the crowd and searched several people. More than 50 people in the Causeway Bay shopping district were rounded up and made to sit outside a shopping mall, while riot police with pepper spray patrolled and warned journalists to stop filming.

In the Mong Kok district in Kowloon, some protesters set cardboard boxes and plastic on fire as demonstrations carried on into the night. The blaze was put out by firefighters.

Across Hong Kong, 360 people were arrested on charges including unauthorized assembly, possession of items that could be used for unlawful purposes — such as gasoline bombs — to driving slowly and blocking traffic, according to Facebook posts by the Hong Kong police force.

The bill would make it illegal to insult or abuse the Chinese national anthem, “March of the Volunteers” in semi-autonomous Hong Kong. Those guilty of the offense would face up to three years in prison and a fine of 50,000 Hong Kong dollars ($6,450).

Opponents of the bill say it is a blow to freedom of expression in the city, while Beijing officials say it will foster a patriotic spirit and socialist values.





'A symbol of the country's dignity'

“Western democracies all have laws to protect their national flags, national anthems and emblems. Any insulting acts toward these symbols would also be criminal,” pro-Beijing lawmaker Tony Tse said in the legislative debate.

Tse said the bill would not affect human rights or force people to love the country or support any political power. “The purpose of this is to protect the dignity of a country,” he said.

Pro-democracy lawmaker Charles Mok disagreed, saying the legislation would not help gain the respect of people and was an excuse to control freedom, speech and ideas of people.

“We oppose the second reading of the national anthem bill, not because we don’t respect the national anthem. The national anthem is a symbol of the country's dignity. If it wants to be respected, then let this government first respect the rights and freedoms of its people first," Mok said. 

The debate over the anthem bill is expected to continue on Thursday.

Bill proposed in January 2019

The bill was proposed in January 2019 after spectators from Hong Kong jeered at the anthem during high-profile international soccer matches in 2015. Last year, FIFA fined the Hong Kong Football Association after fans booed the national anthem at a World Cup qualifying game.

Hong Kong was returned to China from British colonial rule in 1997 under a “one country, two systems” framework that promised freedoms not found on the mainland. Anti-China sentiment has risen as residents see Beijing moving to erode those rights.

Mass protests in 2014, known as the Umbrella Revolution, followed the Chinese government’s decision to allow direct election of the city leader only after it screened candidates. In the end, the plan for direct elections was dropped.

Legislation proposed in Hong Kong last year that would have allowed Hong Kong residents to be sent to mainland China for trials set off months of demonstrations that at times involved clashes between protesters and police. The legislation was withdrawn.

China's ceremonial parliament now meeting in Beijing has moved to enact a national security law for Hong Kong aimed at forbidding secessionist and subversive activity, as well as foreign interference and terrorism. Hong Kong's own government has been unable to pass such legislation due to opposition in the city, and Beijing advanced the law itself after the protests last year.

Asked about possible U.S. retaliation over the security legislation, Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Zhao Lijian said in Beijing that China would take necessary steps to fight back against what he called “erroneous foreign interference in Hong Kong’s affairs.”

IS COVID-19 A “CAPITALOCENE” CHALLENGE?


Featured image courtesy of Elisabeth Abergel
Rapid shifts across nine planetary boundaries, including deforestation, loss of biodiversity, and climate change, have occurred as a result of the Anthropocene. As recent advances in research suggest, political, economic, and technocratic interests drive global development enterprises. “Capitalocene,” a word used frequently now, emphasizes the palpable connections between planetary transformations and the functioning of the capitalist machine.[1] The environmental social sciences, especially Ecological Marxism and, more recently, emerging discourses within the environmental humanities (EH), have drawn our attention to the systemic causes of environmental destruction, which have generated numerous crises scenarios for humanity. In this piece, we show how Covid-19 is a challenge emanating from the “Capitalocene” and argue that this framework provides a better understanding of global pandemics—their outbreak, spread, and the long-term (welfare) measures needed to prevent them.
What has led to the outbreak of Covid-19—the greatest pandemic “modernity” has so far been confronted with? Though the source of Covid-19 is still unknown, some studies suggest that it has a high level of similarity with viruses found among pangolins, while others confirm that it is a bat-borne infection. It is undoubtedly a zoonotic disease, in which a virus is genetically transmitted from animals to humans. While natural scientists argue that animals are hosts and carriers, environmental humanities scholars trace the real source to humans.[2]
The concept of “Capitalocene” provides a radical critique of the idea that capitalism is just about economics. It endorses the view that capitalism is also implicated in power and culture. The dramatic rise in meat consumption has to be understood as aligned with neoliberal lifestyles and global mass culture, where happiness as a material condition is linked to hedonistic gains, such as an increase in purchasing power and capitalist consumptive desires, in contrast to a eudemonic notion of wellbeing. For example, in countries like India, communities adhering to non-violent religious doctrines preached by Buddhism and Jainism traditionally practised vegetarianism. However, a cultural (and hence dietary) transformation has manifested in the rapid growth of the Indian poultry sector, which grew by around 8–10 percent annually between 1990 and 2010, with an annual turnover of US$7,500 million.[3] These sectors, and the processing methods they utilize to achieve rapid production targets, are largely unhealthy and unhygienic.
In Bird Flu: A Virus of Our Own Hatching, Michael Greger exposed the links between capitalist live farming practices and virus ecology in the following lines, “If you actually want to create global pandemics, then build factory farms”[4] (fig. 1). The outbreak of deadly diseases, such as Ebola, SARS, Nipah, SADS, and avian influenza (H5N1), in the last two to three decades are all outcomes of rapid planetary changes. The challenges caused by live farming practices are manifold, with the risk of viral eruptions from (similar stock) reservoir species, the risk of the spread of infection through unhygienic waste disposal practices of factory farms, and the development of human resistance to antibiotics, etc. Moreover, the geographic extent of the live animal trade increases the rate at which disease agents explore their evolutionary possibilities. Apart from these risks, the cruelty inflicted on non-human species is beyond redemption. Exotic animals and endangered fish species are prey to illegal trafficking and trading networks, regulated by the powerful nexus of multi-national corporations in alliance with biotech companies and local collaborators, ever hungry for profits against irreversible ecological costs.[5]
Jenia_Mukharjee_Figure_1
Figure 1: Factors linking factory farms and pandemics[6]
Based on detailed research on the nature of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and coronavirus (SARS-CoV), researchers have concluded that human coronaviruses will re-emerge, multiply, and mutate, with the proliferation of intensive industrial farms and unsanitary wet markets.[7] Prospective medical advances like vaccines and medicines might not be sustainable solutions. The outbreak of pandemics over the last two decades make it clear that this is not a war between viruses and vaccines; rather, awareness and continued protest against injustices meted out by big capital and giant cartels are the key weapons of success. The continued assault on smaller maritime enterprises, farm production, domestic local markets, and indigenous soft infrastructures, encouraging global returns, will further expose the fault lines of disaster management mechanisms, eliciting a manifold of vulnerability scenarios. This calls for special attention to the protection of small-scale industries faced with the threat of co-optation and infringement. Policies, therefore, need to be not only redirected towards piecemeal containment strategies, but also towards systemic gaps within national development models.
The “Capitalocene” framework is significant in terms of exposing Covid-19 as a “neo-liberal disease” deeply embedded in the material and cultural fabric of our times.[8] It can be controlled only at the surface level—that is, temporarily suppressed—through the implementation of aggressive preventative measures, such as the development of vaccines and the formation of antibodies. Yet the crisis will keep recurring until structural inequities and injustices, manifesting in the omnipresent contradictions between capital and labor and human and nature are dealt with, and a just, democratic, sustainable, and resilient world order established. Food sovereignty, by guaranteeing locally manufactured diversified food production in different countries, will ensure parallel wellbeing of smallholder farmers and animals. It calls for appropriate and in-depth research to support diversified agricultural knowledge and skills across specific local contexts.

[1] Jason Moore writes, “Capitalocene is a kind of critical provocation to this sensibility of the Anthropocene, which is: We have met the enemy and he is us.”
[2] Thom van Dooren, “Pangolins and Pandemics: The Real Source of this Crisis is Human, not Animal,” newmatilda.com, published 22 March 2020, https://newmatilda.com/2020/03/22/pangolins-and-pandemics-the-real-source-of-this-crisis-is-human-not-animal/.
[3] Rajesh Mehta and R. G. Nambiar, “The Poultry Industry in India,” fao.org, published January 2007, http://www.fao.org/ag/againfo/home/events/bangkok2007/docs/part1/1_5.pdf.
[4] Michael Greger, Bird Flu: A Virus of Our Own Hatching (New York: Lantern Books, 2006).
[5] In May 2019, the documentary Sea of Shadows directed by Richard Ladkani premiered at the Rachel Carson Center for Environment and Society. The film shows how the vaquita, the world’s smallest whale, is near extinction, as its habitat is being destroyed by Mexican cartels and Chinese mafia, who harvest the swimming bladder of the totoaba fish, “the cocaine of the sea.” This is just one example of the numerous illegal trading and trafficking operations occurring across the planet.
[6] Links between Factory Farming & Pandemics/Epidemics. 2019. Farms Not Factories. https://farmsnotfactories.org/articles/if-you-want-pandemics-build-factory-farms/.
[7] Vincent C.C. Cheng et al., “Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus as an Agent of Emerging and Reemerging Infection,” Clinical Microbiological Reviews 20, no.4 (2007): 660–694. https://doi.org/10.1128/CMR.00023-07.
[8] Rob Wallace et al., “COVID-19 and Circuits of Capital,” Monthly Review: An Independent Socialist Magazine, published 1 May 2020, https://monthlyreview.org/2020/04/01/covid-19-and-circuits-of-capital/.

Further Reading
Cheng, Vincent C.C., Susanne K.P. Lau, Patrick C.Y. Woo, and Kwok Yung Yuen. “Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus as an Agent of Emerging and Reemerging Infection.” Clinical Microbiological Reviews 20, no.4 (2007): 660–694. https://doi.org/10.1128/CMR.00023-07.
Greger, Michael. Bird Flu: A Virus of Our Own Hatching. New York: Lantern Books, 2006.
Mehta, Rajesh, and R.G Nambiar. “The Poultry Industry in India.” fao.org. Published January 2007. http://www.fao.org/ag/againfo/home/events/bangkok2007/docs/part1/1_5.pdf.
Moore, J.W. “The Capitalocene, Part I: On the Nature and Origins of our Ecological Crisis.” The Journal of Peasant Studies 44, no.3 (2017): 594–630. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2016.1235036.
van Dooren, Thom. “Pangolins and Pandemics: The Real Source of this Crisis is Human, not Animal.” newmatilda.com. Published 22 March 2020. https://newmatilda.com/2020/03/22/pangolins-and-pandemics-the-real-source-of-this-crisis-is-human-not-animal/.
Wallace, Rob, Alex Liebman, Luis Fernando Chaves, and Rodrick Wallace. “COVID-19 and Circuits of Capital.” Monthly Review: An Independent Socialist Magazine. Published 1 May 2020. https://monthlyreview.org/2020/04/01/covid-19-and-circuits-of-capital/.
The State of the Field of Environmental History
Article (PDF Available) in Annual Review of Environment and Resources 35(1) · November 2010  
DOI: 10.1146/annurev-environ-040609-105431



John Mcneill

Abstract

This article reviews the state and evolution of the field of environmental history since about 1970. It focuses chiefly on the work of professional historians, but because environmental history is pursued by many varieties of scholars, it occasionally discusses the work of archeologists, geographers, and others. It offers a working definition of the field and an account of its origins, development, and institutionalization from the 1970s until 2010. It briefly surveys the literature on several world regions, concentrating most heavily on South Asia and Latin America, where environmental history at present has grown especially lively. It considers the prominence of Americanists (that is, historians of the United States, not the same thing as Americans) in the field and how that prominence is now waning. It reviews the utility of environmental history for historians, sketches some of the critiques of environmental history, and comments upon some signal findings of recent years.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228203552_The_State_of_the_Field_of_Environmental_History

THE USES OF ENVIRONMENTAL HISTORY: JOHN R. MCNEILL

This is the first in a series of posts exploring the uses of environmental history. The series has been adapted from contributions to a roundtable forum published in the first issue of the new Journal for Ecological History, edited by the Renmin University’s Center for Ecological History.

 “As Useful as We Want to Be”
Environmental or ecological historians do not “need to become more useful and practical” in anything. They should feel free to be useless as regards global problems if they wish. If their motives for engaging in environmental history are nothing loftier than curiosity, that is no sin.  The great majority of historical work, like the great majority of work in general, makes little to no contribution to addressing global problems. Just because environmental historians work with the environment, and the environment is the locus of some global problems, does not create any special obligation for environmental historians. Historians of slavery do not need to become more useful and practical in addressing human trafficking, just as labor historians do not need to become more useful and practical in addressing mass unemployment.
Indeed, for some environmental or ecological historians, it would require considerable retooling to be able to become more useful in addressing current global problems. Those whose expertise  focuses on the depiction of nature in late medieval Spanish texts or water management in the Chola kingdom[1] probably have no better basis for addressing such global problems as climate change or biodiversity loss as the average citizen. But that should not mean that their topics are illegitimate because they are not deemed “useful.” Usefulness in the context of today’s problems should not be a requirement for historians. If it were, very little history, even environmental history, would be justifiable.
If environmental historians wish to become more useful and practical in addressing global problems, they should do so. Many find this ambition a compelling reason to pursue environmental history in the first place. Some labor or gender historians find motivation for their work in the hope that it will advance the cause of social equality. This is well and good, if it is their wish and not an expectation, or a fortiori a requirement.
One way to seek to be more useful and practical relies on belief in a variant of John Maynard Keynes’s words: “Practical men who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist. Madmen in authority, who hear voices in the air, are distilling their frenzy from some academic scribbler of a few years back.”  Environmental historians might aspire to be the modern equivalent of Keynes’s defunct economist or academic scribbler (though few of us aspire to be defunct). They might hope their work will filter into the minds of people in power, albeit more likely not through their own words, but via popularizers and journalists. It probably will never happen for most of us, and the “practical men” and “madmen in authority” will get their unoriginal ideas elsewhere. But it might happen for some of us—for better or for worse.
5149022871_c39564eaa3_b
Dr Stephen Pyne speaking at the 1910 Firefighter Graves Rededication Ceremony, Woodlawn Cemetery, St. Maries, ID, August 20, 2010. Photo by Forest Service Northern Region via Flickr (CC BY 2.0).
A second way is to become an authority on the recent history of a particular issue, as Stephen Pyne has done on wildfire and fire management in the US.[2] From time to time, when the US Forest Service engages in reconsideration of its principles and policies, it invites Pyne to weigh in. Ultimately, he may be ignored more often than he might wish. But, every now and then, he gets a chance to influence fire management policy in the US.
Some parallel to Pyne’s route is open to some of us. No doubt, it requires persistence, good fortune, a tolerance for having our wisdom ignored, and calm in the face of the routine belief that “scientists’” views are more authoritative than those of historians. But it is possible to become a prominent expert on the recent history of a given current environmental issue, becoming influential through our writings and occasionally being invited to the table when policy discussions are convened.
As one who works in Washington, DC, I have been invited to help produce policy papers in think tanks that work hard to influence policy. These experiences have been educational, in an anthropological fieldwork sort of way, and enjoyable. But I have not seen a shred of evidence to suggest that my efforts made a scintilla of difference to anyone, let alone to those with their hands on the levers of power.[3] Nor do I stand much chance of being among Keynes’s influential academic scribblers. This does not trouble me at all.
It does not trouble me partly because there is a third way, beyond the Keynes route and the Pyne route, to address global problems. It is even more indirect, and open only to those of us who are teachers: our students. Some of them seek to exercise power, and a few may succeed. To the extent that I can shape their outlook, their priorities, I can hope to wield some indirect influence upon global problems (although I confess that I see no evidence of that among my former students now in high places). Moreover, thousands of my former students are citizens and consumers, and it is possible that by exposing them to environmental history I have helped shape their behavior in ways that, however small, address global problems.
The other reason I am not troubled is my starting point: Environmental historians do not need to become more useful and practical. We should do so if we want to.
Coda 
Mosquito.jpg
Aedes aegypti. Coloured drawing by A.J.E. Terzi. Source: Wellcome Library, London. CC BY-SA 4.0
Since I wrote the above words, I have tried to make myself more useful. Some years ago, in order to write a book about ecology, disease, and warfare in Caribbean history, I learned a fair bit about a species of mosquito that has since acquired notoriety. Centuries ago, Aedes aegypti influenced the course of imperial politics by serving as the primary vector of yellow fever. It also can carry dengue, chikungunya, and other human diseases. Today it is famous as the chief vector of the Zika virus that is spreading around the world.
To date, Zika’s primary impacts have been felt in Brazil. But by late summer in 2016, it had infected more than 7,000 people in the US territory of Puerto Rico, and several cases had turned up in Florida. The US Congress came in for widespread criticism for doing nothing about it.
My education in mosquito matters is only skin deep, so it came as surprise when I was asked to “brief Congress” on the history of efforts to control A. aegypti. Together with Prof. Margaret Humphreys of Duke University (a historian of medicine), I turned up on the appointed September day, better dressed than usual—admittedly a low bar. Prof. Humphreys and I each spoke twice about the perils and promise of mosquito control, once for the House of Representatives and once for the Senate. We answered dozens of questions, most of them not about the past but about the future. We gave the impression that mosquito control nowadays is no easy proposition—for both political and biological reasons. We explained that no vaccine against Zika is likely to be available for two years or more, and there is no assurance an effective one will ever exist.
zika-briefing
Zika briefing. Photo courtesy of the author.
The audience, all better dressed than I, consisted of a few dozen of what we call in Washington “Hill staffers,” meaning employees of members of Congress.[4] As far as I could tell, not a single senator or representative attended. I was only mildly disappointed, because I had been advised to expect that “briefing Congress” did not mean speaking to anyone who was actually a member of Congress.
So I thought little about it and returned to my quotidian duties, as did Prof. Humphreys. Three weeks later, she emailed me with the news that Congress had just voted to approve $1.1 billion for Zika control (she apparently pays closer attention to US politics than I do). We jokingly congratulated each other on historians’ astounding power to shift the Congress out of its lethargy. Did we actually have any impact? Did the staffers to whom we spoke convey the gist of our remarks to their bosses? Did the senators and representatives take action because of what they heard? I don’t know, but I would guess not. I suspect I am still not one of Keynes’s consequential academics. But if I’m ever asked to brief Congress again, I’ll probably dig out my best clothes once more.

[1] These examples are randomly generated. I am not aware of anyone who has such expertise; if anyone does and feels aggrieved at these exampled being used in this context, I apologize.
[2] Pyne has written many fire histories, some of which delve into deep history, but what interests policy people in Pyne’s views on today’s issues is his work on recent history. Perhaps it also helps in his case that he worked as a fire fighter for many summers in his youth.
[3] E.g., J.R. McNeill. “Can History Help Us with Global Warming?”  in Climatic Cataclysm: The Foreign Policy and National Security Implications of Climate Change, ed. Kurt Campbell (Washington: Brookings Institution Press, 2008), 26–48.
[4] They work on Capitol Hill, hence the phrase “Hill staffers.”