Two-thirds of Americans think government should do more on climate

Bipartisan backing for carbon capture tax credits, extensive tree-planting efforts

PEW RESEARCH CENTER

WASHINGTON, D.C. (June 23, 2020) - A majority of Americans (63%) continue to say they see the effects of climate change in their own communities, and 65% believe that the federal government is doing too little to reduce the impacts of climate change, according to a new Pew Research Center survey.

At a time when partisanship colors most views of policy, broad majorities of the public - including more than half of Republicans and overwhelming shares of Democrats - say they would favor a range of initiatives to reduce the impacts of climate change, including large-scale tree planting efforts (90%), tax credits for businesses that capture carbon emissions (84%) and tougher fuel efficiency standards for vehicles (71%.)

The new national survey by Pew Research Center, conducted April 29 to May 5, 2020 among 10,957 U.S. adults using the Center's online American Trends Panel, finds that partisans remain far apart on several overarching questions about climate change. Much larger shares of Democrats than Republicans say human activity is contributing a great deal to climate change (72% vs. 22%), that it is impacting their own local community (83% to 37%) and that the government is doing too little to reduce the effects of climate change (89% to 35%).

However, there is bipartisan support for several policy options to reduce the effects of climate change. Large shares of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents (92%) and Republicans and Republican-leaning independents (88%) favor planting about a trillion trees around the world to absorb carbon emissions in the atmosphere. Majorities of Democrats and Republicans also support providing a business tax credit for carbon capture technology that can store carbon emissions before they enter the atmosphere (90% and 78%, respectively). Partisan divides are wider on policies related to tougher restrictions on power plant emissions, taxing corporations based on the amount of carbon emissions they produce and tougher fuel-efficiency standards for automobiles and trucks. Still, about half or more Republicans say they would favor each of these policies, including 64% who back tougher emission standards for power plants.

While partisanship remains the predominant dividing line in many views of climate and the environment, there are meaningful differences within party coalitions. In particular, Republicans and Republican leaners who describe their political views as moderate or liberal (roughly a third of all Republicans and leaners) are much more likely than conservative Republicans to see local impacts of climate change, support policies to address it and say the federal government is doing too little in areas of environmental protection. Further, younger generations and women in the GOP tend to be more critical of government action on the environment than their older and male counterparts. Republican women also are more supportive of polices aimed at reducing the impacts of climate change than GOP men.

Other key findings include:

• Majorities of both Democrats and Republicans prioritize alternative over fossil fuel energy sources. A broad majority of Americans (79%) say the more important priority for the country is to develop alternative sources, such as wind and solar, over expanding the production of oil, coal and natural gas, including 91% of Democrats and 65% of Republicans.
• There is broad support for developing more solar and wind energy. Large shares say they would favor developing more solar panel farms (90%) and more wind turbine farms (83%). There is far less support for expanding fossil fuel energy sources. Majorities oppose expanding coal mining (65%), hydraulic fracturing (60%) and offshore oil and gas drilling (58%).
• Those living near the coast are most likely to say climate change is affecting their local community. Seven-in-ten Americans who live less than 25 miles from the coastline say climate change is affecting their local community a great deal or some. By comparison, 57% of those who live 300 miles or more from the coastline say climate change is affecting their local community at least some.

###

These are among the findings from the new report, which is based on a survey of 10,957 U.S. adults conducted online April 29 to May 5, 2020, using Pew Research Center's American Trends Panel. The margin of error for the full sample is plus or minus 1.4 percentage points.

Read the full report: https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2020/06/23/two-thirds-of-americans-think-government-should-do-more-on-climate

Methodology: https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2020/06/23/government-and-climate-methodology/

Survey topline: https://www.pewresearch.org/science/wp-content/uploads/sites/16/2020/06/PS_2020.06.23_government-climate_TOPLINE.pdf

For more information or to arrange an interview email Haley Nolan at hnolan@pewresearch.org.

Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping America and the world. It does not take policy positions. The Center is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts, its primary funder. Subscribe to our daily and weekly email newsletters or follow us on our Fact Tank blog.

COVID-19 pandemic has unleashed unique worldwide wave of anti-semitism

Kantor Center at Tel Aviv University releases special report

AMERICAN FRIENDS OF TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY

The Kantor Center for the Study of Contemporary European Jewry at Tel Aviv University, published a special report, a summary of worldwide anti-Semitic phenomena associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. The report relies on hundreds of accounts from different locations around the globe from March-June.

• The new wave of anti-Semitism includes a range of libels that have one common element: The Jews, the Zionists and/or the State of Israel are to blame for the pandemic and/or stand to gain from it.
• The anti-Semitism generated by the coronavirus is intensive and fierce, has continued unremittingly for several months and reflects a high level of anxiety and fear in many populations.
• Coronavirus-related anti-Semitism is manifested throughout Europe, in the Americas and in the Muslim world. This new type of anti-Semitism, which partly reiterates classic anti-Semitic themes, includes conspiracy theories alongside medieval blood libels, now renewed in a 21st century format.
• Coronavirus-related anti-Semitism is propagated mostly by right-wing extremists, ultra-conservative Christians and Islamists, through their own media in various languages.
• Islamists describe Israel as the COVID-1948 virus -- after the year in which the Jewish state was established, declaring that this is the most dangerous virus of all.
• Activists in movements for delegitimizing Israel use the same argument. In addition, they accuse Israel of using the coronavirus as ammunition against the Palestinians.
• An Oxford University study revealed that 19.1% of the British public believes that the Jews caused the pandemic.

The reports come from an international network of volunteers, living in 35 countries, who are trained to identify and classify acts of anti-Semitism and add the material to The Moshe Kantor Database on Anti-Semitism. The network was established by the Kantor Center over 30 years ago and today numbers 60 participants. The database is a real-time collection of materials and resources on trends and events related to contemporary anti-Semitism, which includes English summaries based on source materials in all languages and formats including texts, visuals and audiovisuals.

Professor Dina Porat, Head of the Kantor Center, says, "These common motifs perpetuate anti-Semitic accusations from previous generations and other global catastrophes, once again presenting the well-known image of the Jew. However, the anti-Semitism generated by the coronavirus is fiercer and more intensive, has continued unremittingly for several months, and reflects a high level of anxiety and fear in many populations. This having been said, the situation should be seen in its overall context -- in which others are also blamed for spreading the virus: first of all, the Chinese, 5G antennas and the authorities who allegedly are not doing enough to stop the epidemic. Countries close down their borders, every foreigner is a suspect, and no new immigrants are allowed."

Coronavirus-related anti-Semitism is manifested in many parts of the world: A significant portion comes from the US and from Middle Eastern countries such as Iran, Turkey and the Palestinian Authority, but also from Europe and South America. In the US, accusations come mainly from white supremacists and ultraconservative Christians, pointing the finger at Jews in general and Haredi Jews in particular, while accusers in the Middle East mostly blame Israel, Zionism and the Mossad for creating and spreading the virus and intending to make a vast fortune from medications and the vaccine they are already developing.

In the western world, the main elements promoting anti-Semitic discourse are civil society groups with various ideologies, while in the Middle East some of this discourse is put forth by the regimes themselves.

Dr. Giovanni Quer, director of the Kantor Center, adds, "Universal disasters have been attributed to the Jews and to Israel before, giving rise to anti-Semitic discourse -- such as conspiracy theories blaming Israel for 9/11, or false reports accusing Israeli soldiers of harvesting organs from the bodies of dead Palestinians. The current wave of anti-Semitism is unprecedented, however, because, spreading very swiftly through the social media, it focused at first on the COVID-19 crisis and then quickly moved on because of social and political changes: Just a few days passed between the coronavirus crisis and the racism-related social crisis in the US, but anti-Semitic discourse remained just as fierce, with its proponents simply adapting their anti-Semitic narratives to the changing social contexts."

The Kantor Center for the Study of Contemporary European Jewry, inaugurated in 2010 at Tel Aviv University, provides an academic framework for the interdisciplinary research of European Jewry from the end of World War II until the present day. The center offers a platform for the diverse needs of researchers, students, governmental and civil service personnel, professionals, activists, and the public at large, both in Israel and abroad, and cooperates with European Jewish communities and their leaders. For more information, visit https://en-humanities.tau.ac.il/kantor.

###

American Friends of Tel Aviv University supports Israel's most influential, comprehensive and sought-after center of higher learning, Tel Aviv University (TAU). TAU is recognized and celebrated internationally for creating an innovative, entrepreneurial culture on campus that generates inventions, startups and economic development in Israel. TAU is ranked ninth in the world, and first in Israel, for producing start-up founders of billion-dollar companies, an achievement that surpassed several Ivy League universities. To date, 2,500 US patents have been filed by Tel Aviv University researchers -- ranking TAU #1 in Israel, #10 outside of the US and #66 in the world.

Ideologically extreme Facebook users spread the most fake news

Those who lack trust in media, and one another, also share it

UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO AT BOULDER

Facebook is a more fertile breeding ground for fake news than Twitter, and those on the far ends of the liberal-conservative spectrum are most likely to share it, according to new CU Boulder research.

The paper, in the journal Human Communication Research, also found that people who lack trust in conventional media, and in one another, post misinformation more often.

"We found that certain types of people are disproportionally responsible for sharing the false, misleading, and hyper-partisan information on social media," said lead author Toby Hopp, an assistant professor in the Department of Advertising, Public Relations and Media Design. "If we can identify those types of users, maybe we can get a better grasp of why people do this and design interventions to stem the transfer of this harmful information."

The paper comes at a time when, amid a global pandemic and contentious run-up to a presidential election, social media companies are grappling with how to curb so-called fake news.

In the past month, Twitter, Facebook and Google began labeling misleading, disputed or unverified posts about coronavirus, vowing to delete those that threaten public health.

Twitter has also slapped labels on President Donald Trump's tweets, dubbing them as inaccurate or glorifying violence. Trump responded by accusing Twitter of silencing conservative speech. Meanwhile, Facebook employees staged a virtual walk-out saying their company wasn't doing enough to address suspect posts.

"A decade or two ago, traditional news organizations played a key gatekeeping role in determining what was true or not true," said Hopp. "Now, with the proliferation of social media and with traditional news organizations under financial distress, there is a sea change occurring in the way that information flows through society."

Previous research has shown that older adults and those who identify as Republican are more likely to share fake news. But Hopp wanted to go beyond demographic or political labels.

"We wanted to look at more nuanced factors indicating how these people see the world around them," Hopp said.

To do so, his team recruited 783 regular Facebook and Twitter users over the age of 18 and, with their permission, collected and analyzed all of their posts for the period between August 1, 2015, and June 6, 2017 (before, during, and after the 2016 election). Participants also took a lengthy survey to assess their ideological conservatism vs. liberalism and identify how much they trusted friends, family and community members, and mainstream media.

The researchers then looked at who shared content from 106 websites identified as fake news or "countermedia" sites by watchdog groups or legacy news organizations like NPR or U.S. News & World Report.

"Despite the fact that we tend to call it 'fake' news, a lot of this stuff is not completely false," said Hopp, who prefers the term "countermedia." "Rather, it is grossly biased, misleading and hyper-partisan, omitting important information."

The good news: 71% of Facebook users and 95% of Twitter users shared no countermedia posts. The bad news: 1,152 pieces of fake news were shared via Facebook, with a single user responsible for 171. On Twitter, 128 pieces of countermedia were shared.

"We found that Facebook is the central conduit for the transfer of fake news," said Hopp.

In the Facebook sample, those self-identified as extremely conservative--7 on a scale of 1 to 7--accounted for the most fake news shared, at 26%. In the Twitter sample, 32% of fake news shares came from those who scored a 7.

But those who scored a 1, identifying as extremely liberal, also shared fake news frequently, accounting for 17.5% of shares on Facebook and 16.4% on Twitter.

In all, about one-fifth of users at the far ideological extremes were responsible for sharing nearly half of the fake news on the two platforms.

"It is not just Republicans or just Democrats, but rather, people who are--left or right--more ideologically extreme," said Hopp.

Those in the ideological middle and those with high levels of media and social trust were--generally speaking--the least likely to share fake news.

"People with high levels of social trust are more likely to compile online social networks comprised of diverse individuals, and this can hamper the spread of fake news," said Hopp, noting that when a fellow user calls out a post as inaccurate, others may be less likely to share it. "If someone posts something that is incorrect, false or misleading, I don't think it hurts for individual users to provide a factual rebuttal."

The authors note that the sample is not necesarily representative of the general population of all social media users nationwide, and more research is necessary.

With several other papers in the works, the authors, including Assistant Professor of Journalism Pat Ferucci and Assistant Professor of Advertising Chris Vargo, hope to provide insight to lawmakers, companies and individual users hoping to stem the fake news tide.

"We can disagree, but when we have fundamentally different views about what information is true and what is not, democracy becomes very difficult to maintain," said Hopp.

###

Confrontation may reduce white prejudices, Rutgers study finds

Researchers examine the power of confronting biased statements

RUTGERS UNIVERSITY

 

Confronting a white person who makes a racist or sexist statement can make them reflect on their words and avoid making biased statements about race or gender in the future, Rutgers researchers find.

The study, published in the journal Social Psychological and Personality Science, suggests that when white men and women are confronted after expressing a bias about African Americans, Latinos, and women, they seek to identify and regulate their own biases about multiple groups of people.

"Many people are reluctant to confront instances of bias because they worry about backlash from others," said Kimberly Chaney, a doctoral graduate student in social psychology at Rutgers University-New Brunswick's School of Arts and Sciences. "But we found that confronting prejudice can be a powerful way to reduce not just one but multiple types of prejudice. We all have the ability to make a change and sometimes speaking out against small instances of bias may make a big change."

In the first part of the study, a group of 161 white college students was shown images of white and Black people accompanied with descriptive sentences, and then asked to draw inferences about the people pictured. Three photos of Black men included sentences intended to evoke a stereotypical response, such as "This man spends a lot of time behind bars." The task could draw the stereotypical response of "This man is a criminal" or a neutral response like "bartender," the researchers said.

Half of the participants were then randomly assigned to be verbally confronted for using a negative stereotype in their response. They then completed a similar task with different faces and sentences, including ones with women that could elicit stereotypical responses. For example, responses such as "This person works at a hospital" could elicit a stereotypical response of "nurse" instead of "doctor." Participants who were confronted for using a negative Black stereotype used significantly fewer stereotypes about women than participants who were not confronted for using a negative Black stereotype.

Another part of the study considered whether confrontation for using a stereotype about women reduces expressions of bias toward ethnic and racial minorities. Each white adult male participant believed he was interacting with another white adult male online to discuss moral dilemmas. One scenario involved a nurse who discovered an issue at a hospital and was asked to discuss with their partner what the nurse should do. Half of the participants who referred to the nurse as "she" during the online discussion were confronted by their online partner. Those participants were later asked to complete a task that could elicit negative stereotypes about Black and Latinx Americans. Participants who were confronted for using a negative stereotype about women used significantly fewer stereotypes about Black and Latinx Americans than participants who were not confronted for using a negative stereotype about women.

"There is still a lot more to understand about confronting prejudice, including how it should be done, what you should say and when it will be most effective," said study co-author Diana Sanchez, a professor of psychology. "Confronting someone is challenging, but we hope that knowing that it can be effective might make people more willing to step up."

###

Effects from low-level concentrations of harmful chemicals preserved in three generations of fish

OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY

 

IMAGE: AN INLAND SILVERSIDE FISH THREE DAYS AFTER HATCHING FROM THE EGG. view more 

CREDIT: NATHAN BURNS

CORVALLIS, Ore. - Fish exposed to very low levels of chemicals commonly found in waterways can pass the impacts on to future generations that were never directly exposed to the chemicals, according to Oregon State University researchers.

"What that gets at is something your grandparents may have come into contact with in their environment can still be affecting the overall structure of your DNA in your life today," said Kaley Major, a postdoctoral scholar at Oregon State and lead author of the paper published today in the journal Frontiers in Marine Science.

The study focused on synthetic (man-made) endocrine disrupting chemicals, which mimic the body's hormones. They are found in many household and industrial products including flame retardants, food, toys, cosmetics and pesticides. Previous research has shown exposures to the chemicals can lead to altered sex ratios, lower fertility rates and deformities in fish.

Endocrine disruptors can cause adverse biological effects in other animals, including humans, by altering natural hormones in the body that are responsible for development, behavior and fertility. Past research done elsewhere has shown that those adverse alterations in humans can be passed to future generations.

"It's really important to understand how animals can deal with stress in the environment, particularly when we are introducing new stressors on a daily basis," said Susanne Brander, an assistant professor and aquatic toxicologist in OSU's Department of Fisheries and Wildlife with whom Major worked.

"Our research helps show what animals do to respond to these changes and how quickly they can respond to them. That's going to help us understand our impact on the environment in the long run."

The researchers conducted the study with inland silversides, a fish found in estuaries that averages about 4 inches in length and is native in eastern North America and the Gulf of Mexico. They have also been introduced in California. They primarily feed on zooplankton and are an important prey species for birds and commercially valuable fish.

Previous research had shown negative impacts on fish exposed to high levels of endocrine disruptors, but little is known about fish exposed to low levels of the chemicals, Major said.

In the experiment, the inland silversides were exposed to the equivalent of a few drops of each endocrine disruptor in an Olympic-size swimming pool. The researchers studied three generations of fish over 21 months to see if the effects of endocrine disruptor exposure only to the parents were passed from generation to generation.

The experiment focused on methylation, a process by which a set of carbon and hydrogen atoms known as a methyl group is added to a DNA molecule. Methylation can be tracked and can be an important indicator of how an organism will develop.

Previous research with mammals and other species of fish has found that endocrine disruptors impact methylation. That led Brander, Major and their collaborators to wonder whether endocrine disruptors, particularly low concentrations, would impact methylation in fish that live in estuaries, ecosystems which are important for biodiversity and often impacted by nearby urban areas.

The results were surprising, the researchers said. They found consistent patterns of methylation across the three generations of fish they studied, even though only the first generation was exposed to endocrine disruptors for a few weeks in early life.

The researchers believe the methylation patterns they observed across the three generations may influence expression of genes associated with the skewed sex ratios, reduced hatching and developmental defects observed by Ph.D. student Bethany DeCourten as part of the larger study. Future research will help the scientists understand more about what the methylation markers mean and what that says about how pollutants may affect evolution of inland silversides.

###

In addition to Brander, who is also part of the Coastal Oregon Marine Experiment Station, Major and DeCourten, authors of the paper were Jie Li, Monica Britton, Matthew Settles and Richard Connon, all of the University of California, Davis; and Alvine Mehinto of the Southern California Coastal Water Research Project.

The study was funded by the Environmental Protection Agency, California Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Delta Stewardship Council.

Far-UVC light safely kills airborne coronaviruses

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IRVING MEDICAL CENTER

 NEW YORK, NY (June 24, 2020) -- More than 99.9% of seasonal coronaviruses present in airborne droplets were killed when exposed to a particular wavelength of ultraviolet light that is safe to use around humans, a new study at Columbia University Irving Medical Center has found.

"Based on our results, continuous rborne disinfection with far-UVC light at the current regulatory limit could greatly reduce the level of airborne virus in indoor environments occupied by people," says the study's lead author David Brenner, PhD, Higgins Professor of Radiation Biophysics at Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons and director of the Center for Radiological Research at Columbia University Irving Medical Center.

The research was published today in Scientific Reports.

Background

Conventional germicidal UVC light (254 nm wavelength) can be used to disinfect unoccupied spaces such as empty hospital rooms or empty subway cars, but direct exposure to these conventional UV lamps is not possible in occupied public spaces, as this could be a health hazard.

To continuously and safely disinfect occupied indoor areas, researchers at Columbia University Irving Medical Center have been investigating far-UVC light (222 nm wavelength). Far-UVC light cannot penetrate the tear layer of the eye or the outer dead-cell layer of skin so it cannot reach or damage living cells in the body.

The researchers had previously shown that far-UVC light can safely kill airborne influenza viruses.

The new paper extends their research to seasonal coronaviruses, which are structurally similar to the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes COVID-19.

Study details

In the study, the researchers used a misting device to aerosolize two common coronaviruses. The aerosols containing coronavirus were then flowed through the air in front of a far-UVC lamp. After exposure to far-UVC light, the researchers tested to see how many of the viruses were still alive.

The researchers found that more than 99.9% of the exposed virus had been killed by a very low exposure to far-UVC light.

Based on their results, the researchers estimate that continuous exposure to far-UVC light at the current regulatory limit would kill 90% of airborne viruses in about 8 minutes, 95% in about 11 minutes, 99% in about 16 minutes, and 99.9% in about 25 minutes.

Using far-UVC light in occupied indoor spaces

The sensitivity of the coronaviruses to far-UVC light suggests that it may be feasible and safe to use overhead far-UVC lamps in occupied indoor public places to markedly reduce the risk of person-to-person transmission of coronaviruses, as well as other viruses such as influenza.

Ongoing studies in SARS-CoV-2

In a separate ongoing study, the researchers are testing the efficacy of far-UVC light against airborne SARS-CoV-2. Preliminary data suggest that far-UVC light is just as effective at killing SARS-CoV-2.

"Far-UVC light doesn't really discriminate between coronavirus types, so we expected that it would kill SARS-CoV-2 in just the same way," Brenner says. "Since SARS-CoV-2 is largely spread via droplets and aerosols that are coughed and sneezed into the air it's important to have a tool that can safely inactivate the virus while it's in the air, particularly while people are around."

Brenner continues, "Because it's safe to use in occupied spaces like hospitals, buses, planes, trains, train stations, schools, restaurants, offices, theaters, gyms, and anywhere that people gather indoors, far-UVC light could be used in combination with other measures, like wearing face masks and washing hands, to limit the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and other viruses."

###

More information

The paper is titled, "Far-UVC light (222-nm) efficiently and safely inactivates airborne coronaviruses."

The other authors (all CUIMC) are Manuela Buonnano, David Welch, and Igor Shuryak.

The study was funded by the Shostack Foundation and the NIH (grant R42-AI125006-03).

The authors declare that the Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York have a pending patent on the technology: "Apparatus, method and system for selectively affecting and/or killing a virus."

The authors declare no additional financial or other conflicts of interest.

Columbia University Irving Medical Center provides international leadership in basic, preclinical, and clinical research; medical and health sciences education; and patient care. The medical center trains future leaders and includes the dedicated work of many physicians, scientists, public health professionals, dentists, and nurses at the Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, the Mailman School of Public Health, the College of Dental Medicine, the School of Nursing, the biomedical departments of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, and allied research centers and institutions. Columbia University Irving Medical Center is home to the largest medical research enterprise in New York City and State and one of the largest faculty medical practices in the Northeast. For more information, visit cuimc.columbia.edu or columbiadoctors.org.

Race, rurality play prominently in Georgia areas hardest hit by COVID-19

MEDICAL COLLEGE OF GEORGIA AT AUGUSTA UNIVERSITY

 

IMAGE: DR. JUSTIN XAVIER MOORE, EPIDEMIOLOGIST IN THE DEPARTMENT OF POPULATION HEALTH SCIENCES AT THE MEDICAL COLLEGE OF GEORGIA view more 

CREDIT: PHIL JONES, SENIOR PHOTOGRAPHER, AUGUSTA UNIVERSITY

While counties in populous metropolitan Atlanta had the highest number of COVID-19 cases in the initial weeks following Georgia's first reported case, it was rural Southwest Georgia counties, with a higher number of black residents and lower number of ICU beds, experiencing the highest rates of infection and death per capita, investigators report.

Among those counties with more than 10 cases, Terrell and Dougherty counties, both included in the Albany, Georgia Metropolitan Statistical Area, along with the Southwest Georgia counties of Randolph and Early, had the highest mortality rates in those first seven weeks ending April 24. By the end of their assessment period, Georgia counties with 50% or greater black residents had a 79% higher incidence rate than those with less than a 50% black population, and twice the mortality rate.

These more rural Georgia counties also had a lower number of intensive care beds and primary care physicians per 100,000 population, Dr. Justin Xavier Moore and his colleagues report in the Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians. They also had more individuals age 60 and older earning under $20,000 compared to counties experiencing lower mortality rates.

It's likely that higher death rates in counties with less ICU beds are tied to treatment delays resulting from the need to transport patients elsewhere, investigators say. These counties identified as hotspots for COVID-19 are known as well for higher death rates from diseases like stroke and sepsis, corresponding author Moore and his colleagues say.

"Hospital critical care capacity represents the most important medical care factor for preventing deaths from COVID-19," they write. "Understanding the geographic areas that have the highest disease burden and morbidity will allow policy makers, public health professionals and critical care providers to appropriately allocate resources and adequately prepare for the disease pandemic for specific populations."

Race and rurality often are connected in disease, as they are in COVID-19, says Moore, epidemiologist in the Department of Population Health Sciences at the Medical College of Georgia at Augusta University. "It's like these are different ingredients of a horrible recipe."

That recipe also consistently includes poor social determinants of health, such as the conditions where you live, learn and work, mixed with a low proportion of health care services in many of these areas, which tends to have a multiplier effect that can overwhelm health services that are available and enable disease, Moore notes. An established history of distrust of health care systems by blacks, resulting from realities like the 40-year Public Health Service/Tuskegee Institute study in which black men with and without syphilis were followed for decades with some care but no actual treatment for syphilis, make some hesitant to seek care, Moore adds. Conflicting information that emerged and continues to emerge about COVID-19 likely also fuels that flame.

MCG investigators and their colleagues at Kaiser Permanente in Oakland, California, encouraged state and local governments to strongly support the southwestern portion of the state with more ICU beds, ventilators and emergency medical staff. "We can't just take our foot off the gas pedal," says Moore.

"As a nation, we need to really rethink how we approach public health," he says to dramatically reduce lost lives and to prevent already struggling economies from being decimated by disease. Systemic racism plays a huge role and work must be done to repair relationships, he says.

"I honestly believe a lot of people are afraid to seek certain care because of discrimination," so people may present with more advanced cases of all kinds of diseases, including COVID-19. Now is a good time to make permanent change, rather than a trend that passes like a hashtag, he says.

Initially one out of every two people who got seriously ill with COVID-19 died in Georgia's rural, largely black communities, he notes, while today death rates are closer to 10% and to those from other serious medical problems like sepsis in the rest of the country, he says.

"Lung cancer, sepsis, colorectal cancer, diabetes ... they all have a different pathophysiology in the sense of how they break down your body, but the problem is we have a persistent and long history of systemic racism disadvantages that have made it to where the social determinants of health are so heavily skewed in a negative way for blacks, Hispanics, the darker you are basically," Moore says. "It's not surprising; it's saddening and frustrating. The thing is, we just need better health care for people, period. I don't know how else to put it."

Through April 24, there were 22,147 confirmed cases and 892 confirmed fatalities from COVID-19 in Georgia. As of June 22, the Georgia Department of Public Health was reporting 64,701 cases and 2,643 deaths in the state; Moore is currently doing a data review to see if the clear disparities he saw early in the disease spread continue to hold. Looking at deaths per 100K population more recently, the Southwest Georgia counties of Turner, Terrell, Randolph and Early were leading the state in mortality rates, according to the Department of Public Health. In May, largely black and rural Hancock County in Central Georgia also emerged as a hotspot with high death rates.

Fulton County in metropolitan Atlanta --which has the largest population in Georgia and is about 45% black according the latest U.S. Census Bureau facts -- had the highest number of confirmed COVID-19 cases, in fact the first two cases reported in Georgia were in Fulton County, the Georgia Department of Public Health reported March 2. The two individuals lived in the same household and one had recently returned from Italy.

Georgia counties with a larger percentage of male residents also had significantly higher (19%) mortality rates from COVID-19 than those with higher percentages of females, investigators at MCG and their colleagues say. Other studies have suggested that males are more likely to have serious disease and to die.

The current study looked at the impact of COVID-19 in all 159 Georgia counties from March 3 through April 24 and got the county specific information on confirmed cases and deaths from the Johns Hopkins 2019 Novel Coronavirus Data Repository. Investigators then linked COVID-19 data with county-level data on related issues like socio-demographics, access to health care and hospital critical care infrastructures from sources like Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services hospital reports, Moore says.

###

Read the full study here.

UM researcher helps reveal changes in water of Canadian arctic

THE UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA

IMAGE: CREW MEMBERS DEPLOY EQUIPMENT ONTO THE ICE FROM A CANADIAN ICEBREAKER, CCGS LOUIS S. ST. LAURENT, IN THE ARCTIC OCEAN. view more 

CREDIT: PHOTO BY GARY MORGAN, CANADIAN COAST GUARD

MISSOULA - Melting of Arctic ice due to climate change has exposed more sea surface to an atmosphere with higher concentrations of carbon dioxide. Scientists have long suspected this trend would raise CO2 in Arctic Ocean water.

Now University of Montana researcher Michael DeGrandpre and his patented sensors have helped an international team determine that, indeed, CO2 levels are rising in water across wide swaths of the Arctic Ocean's Canada Basin. However, some areas have exhibited slower increases, suggesting other processes - such as biological uptake of CO2 - have counteracted expected increases.

The work was published this month in the journal Nature Climate Change. The study is online at https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-020-0784-2.

DeGrandpre is a UM chemistry professor, and in 2015 he and the company he founded, Sunburst Sensors, won two coveted XPRIZE awards for developing inexpensive, durable sensors to better understand ocean acidification. Sunburst Sensor technology also was used in this recent study for a CO2 measurement system placed on board a Canadian icebreaker, the CCGS Louis S. St. Laurent.

University of Montana chemistry Professor Michael DeGrandpre poses with a research buoy deployed through the ice in the Canada Basin of the Arctic Ocean.

DeGrandpre said ocean measurements are taken while the icebreaker is underway, sometimes crashing through ice one to two meters thick. DeGrandpre and UM research associate Cory Beatty have participated in these research cruises since 2012 with support from the National Science Foundation Office of Polar Programs.

"Because of the inaccessibility of the Arctic and the typically harsh work conditions, we really need a world-class icebreaker to access these areas," DeGrandpre said. "It also has given us a high-quality, consistent dataset, which really helped with this latest study. Most Arctic CO2 datasets are from infrequent cruises that do not visit the same locations year to year."

He said the new study combines sporadic data dating back to 1994 with the more-frequent data they have collected since 2012. DeGrandpre said their consistent dataset will only improve, as NSF recently awarded them an $890,000 grant to continue the icebreaker project through 2023.

###

Sunnier but riskier

Conservation efforts to open up rattlesnake habitat bring in much-needed sunlight but could attract more threatening predators

PENN STATE

IMAGE: NEW RESULTS SUGGEST THAT CONSERVATION EFFORTS TO OPEN UP OVERGROWN SNAKE HABITAT DO PROVIDE MORE OPPORTUNITIES FOR PREGNANT TIMBER RATTLESNAKES TO REACH TEMPERATURES NECESSARY FOR EMBRYOS TO DEVELOP, AS INTENDED.... view more 

CREDIT: CHRISTOPHER CAMACHO

UNIVERSITY PARK, Pa. -- Conservation efforts that open up the canopy of overgrown habitat for threatened timber rattlesnakes--whose venom is used in anticoagulants and other medical treatments--are beneficial to snakes but could come at a cost, according to a new study by researchers at Penn State and the University of Scranton. The researchers confirmed that breeding areas with more open canopies do provide more opportunities for these snakes to reach required body temperatures, but also have riskier predators like hawks and bobcats. The study, which appears in the June issue of the Journal of Herpetology, has important implications for how forest managers might open up snake habitat in the future.

Timber rattlesnakes are a species of conservation concern in Pennsylvania and are considered threatened or endangered in many of the northern states within their range. Like other ectothermic animals, snakes do not produce their own body heat and must move to warmer or cooler areas to regulate their temperature. Timber rattlesnakes typically use sunny, rocky forest clearings to breed, however many of these "gestation sites" are becoming overgrown with vegetation, blocking much-needed sunlight.

"Pregnant timber rattlesnakes typically maintain a temperature 6 to 8 degrees Celsius higher than normal so that their embryos can develop," said Christopher Howey, assistant professor of biology at the University of Scranton and former postdoctoral researcher at Penn State. "If a gestation site doesn't provide enough opportunities for snakes to reach that temperature, a snake might abort its litter, or babies might be born too small or later in the season, which reduces their chances of obtaining an essential first meal before hibernation. We wanted to understand if existing conservation efforts to open up the canopy in gestation sites actually do provide more thermal opportunities for snakes, as intended, and if these efforts impact predation risk."

The research team first quantified thermal opportunities for rattlesnakes in known gestation sites that had open or closed canopies. They logged temperatures within thermal models--essentially a copper tube painted to have similar reflectivity and heat absorbance to a snake--placed in areas where the researchers had seen snakes basking.

"As expected, we found that gestation sites with more open canopies did indeed provide more opportunities for snakes to reach optimal temperatures," said Tracy Langkilde, professor and head of biology at Penn State. "This confirms that conservation efforts to open up the canopy do what they are intended to do. But we also found that this might come at a cost, in the form of more threatening predators."

The research team also placed foam models painted like rattlesnakes at gestation sites and monitored for predators using trail game cameras--remote cameras that are triggered by movement. While there was a similar overall number of predators at sites with open canopies and closed canopies, the more threatening species--red-tailed hawks, fishers, and bobcats--only appeared at open sites.

"Our results suggest that there are tradeoffs to any management strategy and that by opening up a gestation site, we may inadvertently put more predation risk on a species," said Julian Avery, assistant research professor of wildlife ecology and conservation at Penn State. "Our models were slightly less visible to potential predators than actual snakes, so our estimates of predation risk are probably conservative, and the tradeoff may be more pronounced than what we observed."

Less threatening predators--raccoons and black bears--appeared at sites with both open and closed canopies.

"As far as we know, this is the first time that a black bear has been observed preying on a rattlesnake, or at least a model," said Howey. "Until now, we always thought that black bears avoided rattlesnakes, but we observed one bear attack two models and bite into a third."

The team suggests that forest managers should balance canopy cover and predation risk during future conservation efforts, for example by selectively removing trees that block direct sunlight but that do not considerably open up the canopy.

Improving conservation efforts at rattlesnake gestation sites is particularly important because, as far as the researchers know, snakes return to the same sites year after year to breed. If a gestation site decreases in quality, they might leave the site to find a new area, but it is unclear how successful these efforts are and the act of moving to new sites could increase contact with humans.

The researchers are currently radio-tracking actual snakes and directly manipulating the canopy cover to better understand how snakes behave in response to predators at sites with open vs. closed canopies.

"Timber rattlesnakes are an important part of the ecosystem, and where you have more rattlesnakes, you tend to have lower occurrences of Lyme disease because the snakes are eating things like chipmunks and mice which are the main vectors for the disease," said Howey. "Rattlesnake venom is also used in anticoagulants, in blood pressure medicine, and to treat breast cancer. Our research will help us refine how we conserve these important animals."

###

In addition to Howey, Langkilde, and Avery, the research team includes Mark Herr, an undergraduate student at Penn State at the time of the research and currently a graduate student at the University of Kansas. This work was supported by the Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles, the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, and the National Science Foundation.

America's political future will be shaped by aging, journal indicates

THE GERONTOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA

 

The latest issue of the journal Public Policy & Aging Report (PP&AR) from The Gerontological Society of America shows how aging is reshaping politics today in unprecedented ways, and how it will continue to do so for years to come.

Titled "Building Momentum for a New Future in Politics and Aging," the journal highlights existing studies as well as recommended areas for further research.

"Here, we see how equal amounts of policy progress and stagnation, as well as changing cultural views on aging, are fueling social, economic, and political changes in ways both expected and not," wrote PP&AR Associate Editor Michael Lepore, PhD, in his introduction. "Some of these societal changes raise concerns about limitations in current and future generations' abilities to live well into old age, at younger ages with disabilities, and as caregivers, whereas other shifts, like evolving cultural views on aging, nurture a more intergenerationally just society."

Among the seven articles that follow, the journal offers insight into major trends in the politics of aging; how generational political divides are influencing aging-related policies; the impact of aging on the economy; political impediments to aging in place; the importance of support for family caregivers; the longevity and health of U.S. presidential candidates; and how to build momentum through the frames we use to describe aging.

"Recognizing and grappling with the relevance of aging to politics is an essential step to ensuring that we are not weaving the last thread of the American social fabric but, rather, beginning a new national era that embraces aging and fully supports our interpersonal and transgenerational interdependences," Lepore wrote. "By achieving these goals, living well into and throughout old age -- despite physically or cognitively disabling conditions -- will be increasingly possible for all."

###

Public Policy & Aging Report is a publication of the National Academy on an Aging Society, the policy institute of The Gerontological Society of America (GSA). As the nation's oldest and largest interdisciplinary organization devoted to research, education, and practice in the field of aging, GSA's principal mission -- and that of its 5,500+ members -- is to advance the study of aging and disseminate information among scientists, decision makers, and the general public.