Childhood trauma driving equality push by S. Korean MP

BY CLAIRE LEE (AFP)
When Jang Hye-yeong was 13 the strain of caring for her disabled sister tore her family apart.

Her autistic sibling was placed in a care home for almost two decades, while another sister was sent away to a boarding school, and her mother left the family.

The experience turned Jang into a disability campaigner -- and singer-songwriter and YouTuber to boot -- who was elected to parliament in April as one of South Korea's youngest MPs, aged just 33.

Jang stands out in a legislature where 83 percent of MPs are over 50 and only 19 percent are women -- a figure that would place the South at 116th in the latest Inter-Parliamentary Union global ranking.

Jang Hye-yeong (right), with her sister, who was placed in a care home for almost two decades
Handout, CinemaDAL/AFP

Now she is taking on the country's deep-seated patriarchy and religious conservatism -- including powerful megachurches that condemn homosexuality -- by drawing up a new anti-discrimination bill.

It would ban favouritism based on sex, race, age, sexual orientation, disability or religion as well as several more unusual criteria such as criminal history, appearance and academic background.

However, over the past 13 years six attempts to pass broad anti-discrimination laws in South Korea have all failed.

"For a long time, parliament has existed as an institution made up of middle-aged, able-bodied men," Jang said.

- 'Very natural' -

Despite its economic advances, South Korea remains socially conservative and Human Rights Watch says discrimination against women and minorities is widespread.

Jang said her family suffered; as well as autism, her sister has intellectual disability -- conditions some blamed when they were growing up on their mother's supposed "sins".

The mother struggled to cope and received limited help from the government or community, and eventually the disabled sister was placed in an institution where Jang alleges residents were mistreated.

Jang Hye-yeong was among six MPs from the Justice Party elected to parliament in April this year Jung Yeon-je, AFP

Soon afterwards their mother left the family and her father sent Jang to live with her grandparents.

"When I realised my mother had left, I was very sad, but on the other hand, I also thought it was a very understandable decision," Jang told AFP in an interview.

Her mother's experiences, and those of her sister and herself, made feminist campaigning "very natural" to her, she added.

In 2011 she dropped out of the prestigious Yonsei University -- an unconventional decision in a competitive society where college degrees often define lives.

Then, 18 years after the family split up, Jang took her disabled sister out of the care facility to look after her herself.

Jang's 2018 documentary "Grown Up" follows their first months living together again, and on YouTube Jang has consistently called for people with disabilities to live in the community.

Last year Jang joined the left-wing Justice Party and in April this year was among six MPs from the group elected to parliament in a vote that President Moon Jae-in's Democratic Party won by a landslide.

But Jang's bill will struggle to become law.

- 'It's a sin' -

Religious beliefs hold much sway in South Korea, where churches remain an important political space and many evangelicals oppose gay rights.

Pastor Kim Kyou-ho, who leads the campaign group Counter Measure Committee for Homosexuality Problems, insists the Bible says homosexuality is a "sin".

"If anti-gay people's human rights and freedom of speech are violated in the process of protecting the human rights of sexual minorities, we cannot call this democracy," Kim said.

About 40 percent of the country's parliament is Protestant, according to the United Christian Churches of Korea, and few politicians are willing to challenge the religious lobby.

Of 10 MPs who signed Jang's bill last month, only two are from the left-leaning Democratic Party, whose support is crucial.

Activists say the Democrats have failed women, with three party heavyweights currently accused of sexual misconduct, including Seoul mayor Park Won-soon, who took his own life earlier this month.

Jang was one of two female lawmakers who declared they would not attend Park's government-run funeral, and instead called on officials to take action against sexism.

Moon, a former human rights lawyer who once pledged to be a feminist leader, supported an anti-discrimination bill during his ill-fated 2012 presidential run.

But during his successful 2017 campaign he said he "opposed" homosexuality and that "social consensus" was needed before legalising same-sex marriage.

Jang, though, insisted rights issues could not wait.

"The essence of politics lies in making choices, and taking responsibility for your actions and words," she said.

'Alarm' at Poland's plan to leave treaty protecting women

BY AFP


The Council of Europe said Sunday it is "alarmed" that Poland's right-wing government is moving to withdraw from a landmark international treaty combating violence against women.

Polish Justice Minister Zbigniew Ziobro said on the weekend that on Monday he will begin preparing the formal process to withdraw from the Istanbul Convention, the world's first binding instrument to prevent and combat violence against women, from marital rape to female genital mutilation.

A previous centrist Polish government signed the treaty in 2012 and it was ratified in 2015, when Ziobro called it "an invention, a feminist creation aimed at justifying gay ideology".

The treaty was spearheaded by the Council of Europe, the continent's oldest human rights organisation, and its Secretary General Marija Pejcinovic Buric condemned the right-wing Law and Justice (PiS) government's plan to withdraw.

"Leaving the Istanbul Convention would be highly regrettable and a major step backwards in the protection of women against violence in Europe," she said in a statement on Sunday.

"If there are any misconceptions or misunderstandings about the convention, we are ready to clarify them in a constructive dialogue."

Around two thousand people marched in the Polish capital Warsaw on Friday to protest the government's withdrawal plan, some shouting "stop violence against women".

There was also outrage from several members of the European Parliament, with Iratxe Garcia Perez, the Spanish leader of the Socialist group, calling the decision "disgraceful".

"I stand with Polish citizens taking (to) the streets to demand respect for women's rights," he tweeted.

The leader of the EU parliament's Renew Europe group, former Romanian prime minister Dacian Ciolos, tweeted: "Using the fight against the Istanbul Convention as an instrument to display its conservatism is a new pitiful and pathetic move by some within the PiS government".

The Council of Europe emphasised that the Istanbul Convention's "sole objective" is to combat violence against women and domestic violence.

The treaty does not explicitly mention gay marriage.

But that has not stopped the backlash to it in Hungary and Slovakia, where the parliament rejected the treaty insisting -- without proof -- that it is at odds with the country's constitutional definition of marriage as a heterosexual union.

The Strasbourg-based Council of Europe, which is separate from the European Union, has no binding powers but brings together 47 member states to make recommendations on rights and democracy.

The European Commission, the EU's executive arm, told AFP that it "regrets that such an important matter has been distorted by misleading arguments in some member states".

The Commission added that it would "continue its efforts to finalise the EU's accession" of the convention, which was signed in 2017 but has not yet been ratified.

PART 2'Alarm' at Poland's plan to leave treaty protecting women

BY AFP

The EU and the Council of Europe on Sunday voiced regret and alarm over the Polish right-wing government's move to withdraw from a landmark international treaty combating violence against women.

The Council of Europe said it was "alarmed" that Poland's right-wing government was moving to withdraw from a landmark international treaty combating violence against women.

Polish Justice Minister Zbigniew Ziobro said over the weekend that on Monday he would begin preparing the formal process to withdraw from the Istanbul Convention.

The treaty is the world's first binding instrument to prevent and combat violence against women, from marital rape to female genital mutilation.

Ziobro has in the past dismissed it as "an invention, a feminist creation aimed at justifying gay ideology".

The European Commission, the EU's executive arm, told AFP in Brussels that it "regrets that such an important matter has been distorted by misleading arguments in some member states".

The Commission added that it would "continue its efforts to finalise the EU's accession" of the convention, which was signed in 2017 but has not yet been ratified.

- 'Highly regrettable' -

A previous centrist Polish government signed the treaty in 2012 and it was ratified in 2015.

The treaty was spearheaded by the Council of Europe, the continent's oldest human rights organisation, and its Secretary General Marija Pejcinovic Buric condemned the right-wing Law and Justice (PiS) government's plan to withdraw.

"Leaving the Istanbul Convention would be highly regrettable and a major step backwards in the protection of women against violence in Europe," she said in a statement on Sunday.

"If there are any misconceptions or misunderstandings about the convention, we are ready to clarify them in a constructive dialogue."

Around two thousand people marched in the Polish capital Warsaw on Friday to protest the government's withdrawal plan, some shouting "stop violence against women".

There was also outrage from several members of the European Parliament, with Iratxe Garcia Perez, the Spanish leader of the Socialist group, calling the decision "disgraceful".

"I stand with Polish citizens taking (to) the streets to demand respect for women's rights," he tweeted.

The leader of the EU parliament's Renew Europe group, Romania's former prime minister Dacian Ciolos, tweeted: "Using the fight against the Istanbul Convention as an instrument to display its conservatism is a new pitiful and pathetic move by some within the PiS government".

- Other countries rejecting treaty -

Irish centre-right MEP Frances Fitzgerald said it was now essential for the whole of the EU to ratify the convention "so that no woman is left unprotected and vulnerable to violence".

The Council of Europe stressed that the Istanbul Convention's "sole objective" was to combat violence against women and domestic violence.

Although the treaty does not explicitly mention gay marriage, that has not stopped the backlash to it in Poland, Hungary and Slovakia.

In Slovakia, the parliament rejected the treaty insisting -- without proof -- that it was at odds with the country's constitutional definition of marriage as a heterosexual union.

The Strasbourg-based Council of Europe, which is separate from the European Union, has no binding powers but brings together 47 member states to make recommendations on rights and democracy.

There is growing anger among women in Turkey at the growing number of murders of women there Yasin AKGUL, AFP

Warsaw has already clashed with the EU Commission over reforms to its judicial system, championed by recently re-elected President Andrzej Duda.

Turkey is also mulling a possible withdrawal from the treaty, and on Sunday, women marched in several cities there to express support for the treaty.

The demonstrations also reflect rising anger in Turkey at the growing number of women killed, including the murder of university student Pinar Gultekin this month.

burs-zap-maj/pvh/jj

SEE
https://plawiuk.blogspot.com/2020/07/poles-split-over-govt-plan-to-exit.html
https://plawiuk.blogspot.com/2020/07/alarm-at-polands-plan-to-leave-treaty.html
https://plawiuk.blogspot.com/2020/07/poland-to-quit-treaty-on-violence.html
https://plawiuk.blogspot.com/2020/07/polish-nationalist-catholic-reaction-4.html

MONOPOLY CAPITALISM
US doubles spending on potential virus vaccine to nearly $1 billion
The United States has doubled its investment -- to nearly $1 billion -- to expedite development of a potential COVID-19 vaccine by American firm Moderna, which on Monday begins the decisive final phase of clinical trials.

The government now plans to spend up to $472 million on top of the previously announced $483 million, the Moderna biotechnology company announced Sunday.

Moderna said the added investment was justified by its decision, in conjunction with the government, to "significantly" expand a Phase Three clinical trial of a candidate vaccine to include 30,000 participants.

In a small, initial trial, Moderna's experimental vaccine produced coronavirus antibodies -- which should help fend off the disease -- in the bodies of all 45 participants.

In the expanded trial starting Monday, half the 30,000 participants will receive a 100-microgram dose of the vaccine, while the rest will be given a placebo.

The United States has suffered more than 146,000 coronavirus deaths, leading the world in that grim category, even as the number of new cases has continued to surge.

It has announced massive investments in a huge effort to expedite vaccine development and get millions of Americans vaccinated by early next year.

On Wednesday, the American-German BioNTech/Pfizer pharmaceutical alliance announced that the US government had committed $1.95 billion to procure 100 million doses of its eventual vaccine.

With laboratories around the world in a furious race to develop a first effective vaccine, Moderna seems to hold the lead as it enters a final round of clinical trials -- a decisive step in determining whether a vaccine is both effective and safe.

Moderna, which has been working with US health authorities, said it expects to be able to produce 500 million doses a year -- and potentially up to 1 billion -- starting in 2021.

Chinese biotech firm Sinovac said July 6 that it, too, would begin a Phase Three clinical trial "this month," in collaboration with Brazil's Butantan biologic research center.

Also reporting encouraging early results have been a British project developed by Oxford University in partnership with the multinational AstraZenica laboratory, and a Chinese project, led by researchers from agencies including the Academy of Military Medical Sciences.

That effort is being financed by the CanSino biotechnology group, which is listed on the Hong Kong stock exchange.

In all, nearly 200 candidate vaccines are in development, including 23 now in the clinical phase, being tested on humans.

Essential Science: Why coronavirus causes smell loss is revealed

One of the symptoms of COVID-19 established early on during the coronavirus pandemic was will a loss of smell (anosmia) on the part of many who were infected. New research has the answer to why this happens.
The loss of smell associated with the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 and the disease COVID-19 is contented to olfactory support cells. This finding contrasts with earlier research that suggested that neurons were vulnerable to the novel coronavirus infection. One curio with the infection is that olfactory cell types appear to be especially vulnerable to a viral infection.

Nasal congestion from a cold, allergy, sinus infection, or poor air quality are the most common and established causes of anosmia. To these we can add infection with the novel coronavirus. Even where there are no other symptoms of the virus, anosmia can have a profound effect on a person's quality of life. For instance, those with anosmia may not be able to fully taste foods and may lose interest in eating.
COVID-19 symptoms
The main symptoms of COVID-19 are a high temperature, a new, continuous cough and a loss or change to your sense of smell or taste. The identification of the loss of the sense of smell (and taste) came a little after the identification of respiratory issues and fever. For example, it was not until the 18th May 2020 that the U.K. government (in tandem with many other nations) added loss of smell (anosmia) and taste (ageusia) to the list of symptoms of coronavirus infection that should indicate to people that they need to self-isolate for 7 days.


Smelling Something?
brian-fitzgerald (CC BY 2.0)

How common is the loss of the sense of smell?
Medical guidance published in the British Medical Journal suggests that half of patients with COVI-19 may lose sense of smell. Focused treatment involves patient reassurance, olfactory training, safety advice, and the administration of topical corticosteroids.
How does the loss of the sense of smell happen?
The new finding into the mechanism where the sense of smell is lost comes from the Harvard Medical School, and the mechanism is different to how the coronavirus infects the cells of the lungs. The difference is because the olfactory sensory neurons of the nasal passage do not express the gene that encodes the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor protein (which is the route SARS-CoV-2 uses to enter human cells - an enzyme attached to the cell membranes of cells in the lungs, arteries, heart, kidney, and intestines).


Coronavirus testing in Russia, which Britain has accused of trying to hack vaccine research
Kirill KUDRYAVTSEV, AFP

Whereas, ACE2 is expressed in cells that provide metabolic and structural support to olfactory sensory neurons, as well as certain populations of stem cells and blood vessel cells. Hence it appears that infection of nonneuronal cell types is the mechanism be responsible for anosmia in COVID-19 patients.
The researchers drew this inference from analyzing existing single-cell sequencing datasets that detailed the genes expressed by hundreds of thousands of individual cells located in the upper nasal cavities of humans, mice and nonhuman primates.
Implications
As well as pointing out a path for treatments for COVID-19 related anosmia, an additional importance attached to the research is that they may explain the background behind COVID-19-associated neurological issues. Such findings indicate that SARS-CoV-2 does not directly infect neurons but probably interferes with brain function by affecting vascular cells in the nervous system.


A woman walks past a coronavirus-related mural painted by urban artist Alejandro Bautista Torres, aka Kato, in Mexico City on July 15, 2020
PEDRO PARDO, AFP

Research paper
The research has been published in the journal Science Advances, with the research paper titled "Non-neuronal expression of SARS-CoV-2 entry genes in the olfactory system suggests mechanisms underlying COVID-19-associated anosmia."

Essential Science
This article forms part of Digital Journal’s long running Essential Science column, where a topical science subject is examined each week by Dr. Tim Sandle.

The week before we continued with coronavirus news, looking at whether there was sufficient evidence to indicate whether SARS-CoV-2 was becoming more infectious through a mutation of its spike protein.

Tom Cotton calls slavery 'necessary evil' in attack on New York Times' 1619 Project
Republican gives interview to Arkansas Democrat-Gazette
Senator wants to ‘save’ US history from New York Times

Tom Cotton speaks at a press conference in Washington. Photograph: Michael Brochstein/SOPA Images/REX/Shutterstock

Bryan Armen Graham
Published Sun 26 Jul 2020 22.54 BST

The Arkansas Republican senator Tom Cotton has called the enslavement of millions of African people “the necessary evil upon which the union was built”.

Cotton, widely seen as a possible presidential candidate in 2024, made the comment in an interview with the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette published on Sunday.

He was speaking in support of legislation he introduced on Thursday that aims to prohibit use of federal funds to teach the 1619 Project, an initiative from the New York Times that reframes US history around August 1619 and the arrival of slave ships on American shores for the first time.

Cotton’s Saving American History Act of 2020 and “would prohibit the use of federal funds to teach the 1619 Project by K-12 schools or school districts”, according to a statement from the senator’s office.

“The entire premise of the New York Times’ factually, historically flawed 1619 Project … is that America is at root, a systemically racist country to the core and irredeemable,” Cotton told the Democrat-Gazette.

“I reject that root and branch. America is a great and noble country founded on the proposition that all mankind is created equal. We have always struggled to live up to that promise, but no country has ever done more to achieve it.”

He added: “We have to study the history of slavery and its role and impact on the development of our country because otherwise we can’t understand our country. As the Founding Fathers said, it was the necessary evil upon which the union was built, but the union was built in a way, as [Abraham] Lincoln said, to put slavery on the course to its ultimate extinction.”

Nikole Hannah-Jones, who was awarded this year’s Pulitzer Prize for commentary for her introductory essay to the 1619 Project, said on Friday that Cotton’s bill “speaks to the power of journalism more than anything I’ve ever done in my career”.

On Sunday, she tweeted: “If chattel slavery – heritable, generational, permanent, race-based slavery where it was legal to rape, torture, and sell human beings for profit – were a ‘necessary evil’ as Tom Cotton says, it’s hard to imagine what cannot be justified if it is a means to an end.

“Imagine thinking a non-divisive curriculum is one that tells black children the buying and selling of their ancestors, the rape, torture, and forced labor of their ancestors for PROFIT, was just a ‘necessary evil’ for the creation of the ‘noblest’ country the world has ever seen.

“So, was slavery foundational to the Union on which it was built, or nah? You heard it from Tom Cotton himself.”

Cotton responded: “More lies from the debunked 1619 Project. Describing the views of the Founders and how they put the evil institution on a path to extinction, a point frequently made by Lincoln, is not endorsing or justifying slavery. No surprise that the 1619 Project can’t get facts right.”

In June, the Times was forced to issue a mea culpa after publishing an op-ed written by Cotton and entitled “Send in the troops”. The article, which drew widespread criticism, advocated for the deployment of the military to protests against police brutality toward black Americans.

Times publisher AG Sulzberger initially defended the decision, saying the paper was committed to representing “views from across the spectrum”.

But the Times subsequently issued a statement saying the op-ed fell short of its editorial standards, leading to the resignation of editorial page director James Bennet.

The US withdrawal from the Paris climate accord is a racist act

The Paris agreement threw a lifeline to millions of people of color facing a premature death. Trump is tearing that away

Adrienne Hollis
THE GUARDIAN
Mon 27 Jul 2020

Children play near downed trees and power lines in the aftermath of Hurricane Michael in Panama City, Florida, on 11 October 2018. Photograph: Brendan Smialowski/AFP/Getty Images


It’s official – in 100 days the United States will formally withdraw from the Paris climate agreement. The impact of Donald Trump’s decision, taken three years ago, is already being felt by environmental justice communities.

Racism is the driving force behind why certain people and places face disproportionate environmental exposure to toxic substances, adverse climate change effects, Covid-19 infections and deaths. This raises the question: was withdrawing from the Paris agreement also a racist decision? How will this morally incomprehensible policy change affect Black, Latinx, Indigenous and other communities of color?

The United States will join a tiny proportion of the world’s countries that reject, or have failed to ratify, the Paris agreement.

Its overarching purpose is to reduce global warming emissions and thus keep the global average temperature rise to well below 2C and as close to 1.5Cs as possible – levels that aim to avoid some of the worst climate change impacts.

After the US withdrawal was announced, I participated on a group call to identify spokespeople knowledgable on the economic consequences of the US withdrawal. No one mentioned the impact on people, particularly people of color. I pointed out this oversight again on the call with the reporter but quickly realized they weren’t interested.

But I am.

The ramifications of the Paris agreement withdrawal on vulnerable populations is at the heart of the matter.


\Nobody in the Trump administration asked communities what withdrawing from the Paris agreement would mean for their futures. For one thing, US withdrawal could mean premature death for millions of people living in environmental justice communities.

The Environmental Protection Agency found that transportation, energy use and industry contribute most significantly to production of heat-trapping emissions. And it’s people of color and Indigenous communities that are disproportionately affected by this environmental pollution.

According to a 2018 Quartz article by Bartees Cox, communications director at Groundswell, black people are more likely than white people to live near landfills and industrial plants. Additionally, more than half of the 9 million people currently living near hazardous waste sites are people of color. A New England Journal of Medicine study found that black people are three times more likely to die from exposure to air pollutants than white people. And yet, the Trump administration moved forward with their decision to withdraw from the Paris agreement.

The good news is that, despite this administration’s refusal to join worldwide efforts to reduce global warming emissions, there is still climate action occurring in the United States. According to the United Nations Foundation, at least 24 states and Puerto Rico have joined the US Climate Alliance, an organization focused on supporting and realizing the Paris agreement mission. Currently, US Climate Alliance membership represents 55% of the US population, 40% of US heat-trapping emissions, and an $11.7tn economy – enough to make it the third-largest economy in the world if it were a country. In addition, according to the Fourth National Climate Assessment, some states, local governments and private-sector businesses have voluntarily pledged to reduce emissions in line with the goals outlined in the agreement.


The bad news is that current pledges aren’t enough to reduce emissions in line with the goals of the Paris agreement. There is also not enough being done to create communities that are resilient in the face of unavoidable climate change impacts. Currently, because of the climate crisis, we continue to see growing global warming emissions, rising sea levels, chronic flooding, extreme heat, intense drought, worsening wildfires and hurricanes, devastating food shortages and other negative impacts that affect environmental justice communities around the world first and worst. If we fail to stay within the parameters set in the Paris agreement, severe climatic events like these will only get worse.

People are losing their homes, their jobs and most importantly their lives. Not everyone can afford to pay higher electric bills when temperatures soar. The novel coronavirus pandemic has also made access to cooling centers during a heatwave or evacuation centers during a hurricane even more challenging. Not everyone has equal access to quality healthcare, something the pandemic has laid bare in the way Covid-19 patients are treated (or not). In addition, studies have recently emerged about the possible connection between particulate matter and Covid-19.

So, ask yourself: if the first group of people in the US to truly benefit from efforts to decrease global warming emissions by participating in the Paris agreement are people of color, what else can we call this but environmental racism and willful neglect?

Latinos In the US Experiencing Staggering COVID-19 Death Rates, Reasons Identified

COVID-19 around the world. Photo by Gerd Altmann/Pixabay

Guneet Bhatia | Jul 24 2020,

Coronavirus is spreading like wildfire across the southern and western U.S. and Latinos, who represent a significant percentage of the population in these regions are bound to suffer a great loss due to the pandemic.

Apart from the continued rampage of the COVID-19 pandemic, several other structural conditions make Latinos more vulnerable to getting infected by the coronavirus and unfortunately, die due to it.

Some of these factors have been identified in a new study published in the journal Annals of Epidemiology. It is the first nationwide analysis of COVID-19 transmission and deaths among Latinos.

The researchers concluded that several factors put them at a greater risk of getting COVID-19. The researchers found that living in crowded housing arrangements and being engaged in high-risk jobs in industries such as meatpacking, poultry and hospitality are some of the top reasons why Latinos continue to remain disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Study’s lead researcher Carlos Rodriguez-Diaz said that there were structural challenges before the COVID-19 era that existed but now those are being highlighted.

During the study of the data, researchers found that Latinos accounted for a much higher number of coronavirus cases when compared to their percentage in the total population in certain areas in the Northeast, Midwest and West U.S.

The team referred to ceratin reports that indicated that the Latin American population in these areas accounted for 33 percent of the total coronavirus cases even though they constituted just 18 percent of the total population in the area.

According to data by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported previously, 73 of every 10,000 Latinos contracted COVID-19, compared to 62 Blacks and 23 whites.

Lack of or proper access to healthcare and high levels of air pollution in the region have also been identified as reasons why the Latino population is suffering the most among all minorities when it comes to COVID-19 pandemic.

“We found access to health care was harder in the Midwest, so it’s very likely people only accessed care when they felt really bad, and as the disease progresses it gets more difficult to manage,’’ Rodriguez-Diaz said.

Opinion: After the Covid-19 masks are gone, will we breathe cleaner air?

Dr Karen Moore of the Green-Schools programme wonders if despite Covid-19 and the lockdown, can we take some long lasting benefits from it all – for the air we breathe, our health and quality of life

Dr Karen Moorehttps://www.thejournal.ie/readme/air-pollution-5156739-Jul2020/

CLEAR BLUE SKIES over the world’s cities have become a visible mark of one of the changes this pandemic has brought. As lockdowns have shut down factories and kept cars off the roads, global pollution levels have fallen drastically.

Potentially positive outcomes of this crisis include opportunities to make lasting changes that will save lives and increase our resilience in the long-term. Improving air quality is one opportunity.

According to the World Health Organisation, air pollution causes approximately seven million premature deaths every year, mainly due to stroke, heart disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), lung cancer and respiratory infections.

More than 1,000 people in Ireland die prematurely each year because of poor air quality, according to the Environment Protection Agency.

The impact of the lockdown on air pollution levels is complex, but the general global trend was less air pollution. According to this year’s Air Quality Index, Particulate Matter (PM2.5) decreased by 44% in Wuhan, 54% in Seoul and 60% in New Delhi.

Other studies also show levels of nitrogen dioxide (NO2)and particulate matter pollution over China, Western Europe, and the United States have fallen dramatically during the lockdown. In Ireland, pollution from cars dropped by 50% during the lockdown.

Air pollution and Covid-19

Air pollution not only causes or contributes to premature death but exacerbates a wide range of respiratory illnesses and Covid-19 appears to be no exception. Many researchers around the world are now reporting that air pollution may have significantly worsened the Covid-19 pandemic and led to more deaths.

As well as predisposing people who live with polluted air to succumb to the virus, scientists are also suggesting that air pollution particles may act as ‘vehicles’ for viral transmission.


A study of air quality in Italy’s northern provinces, that have been hardest hit by Covid-19, found a correlation between mortality rates and high levels of pollution. A US study found people who had lived in areas with long-term pollution exposure for 15-20 years had significantly higher mortality rates from Covid-19.

As much research on coronavirus to date, these studies are just emerging and many still need to go through the peer-review process, ensuring the quality of the research. Air pollution is an established contributor to underlying disease, although correlations do not yet prove there is an additional effect on Covid-19 mortality.

However, the findings of these studies when finished could have a significant impact on how governments choose to ease lockdowns in the coming months; improving air quality could play an important role in overcoming the pandemic and protecting against future outbreaks.

Scientists have said the fall in polluting emissions is just a short-term result of lockdown and they warn that pollution levels must be limited into the future as much as possible to protect human health both during and after the Covid-19 crisis. We cannot leave this crisis with the same levels of pollution as before.

We have to plan a sustainable recovery that will be true to the definition of sustainable development in ‘meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs’.

Undesirable pre-Covid ‘normal’

Perhaps unsurprisingly it is reported that air pollution in China has climbed back to pre-pandemic levels, led by an oil and coal-powered ‘recovery’. Data from the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA) shows concentrations of fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2) across China are now at the same levels as one year earlier.

European cities have also seen a big dip in air pollution during the virus outbreak, but pollution is expected to rebound as lockdown eases. In Ireland, as we move around more with the easing of the restrictions, we cannot help but notice increases in vehicle traffic.
There is an opportunity to leave this crisis with some things being better than before. We need a sustainable recovery that will be true to the definition of sustainable development in ‘meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs’.

Around the world experts, bodies like the UN, environmental and equality campaigners and local people are calling on governments for action to help retain the air quality benefits of lockdown.

Air pollution comes from many sources— how we generate power, manufacture products, provide services and move things and ourselves around. But a key contributor to improved air quality in lockdown was the reduction in commuting due to remote working arrangements and travel restrictions.

Our habits need to change if we are to future-proof against further viral outbreaks and help maintain improved air quality. Every day most people need to move somewhere or something, so perhaps we can start there.



RELATED READS

11.07.20Opinion: We need serious help to 'stop burning stuff' to heat our homes

02.06.20Travel demand on public transport during Phase One has been higher than expected, says NTA

27.05.20Fall in air pollution from traffic since Covid-19 restrictions

An important factor that is not yet known is how people’s travel habits will change post–Covid-19. Will we avoid mass transport and walk or cycle more or rely on the private car? Working from home may become more mainstream and dreaded commutes a thing of the past for some. There is a need to act quickly and provide safe alternatives to the private car to avoid gridlock and increased air pollution.

Differences being made

Many places worldwide are acting decisively to re-organise their mobility networks in response to the crisis. To accommodate more bikes and walkers, while facilitating social distancing, temporary cycle lanes and streets closed to cars have been popping up in cities like Berlin, Budapest, Mexico City, New York and Bogotá.
Milan, in Italy’s worst-hit region of Lombardy, will help people stay out of their cars, by building 35km of new cycle paths that connect the 220km existing path network to make cycling and scooter transport, both foot and electric powered, more accessible. There will be incentives for purchasing a bike and scooters and new bike parking.

In Brussels, the city centre is a priority zone for cyclists and pedestrians since May and will stay for the foreseeable future. Meanwhile, other city councils have reallocated road space to make social distancing easier for those walking and cycling. Among them are Berlin, Budapest, Vancouver, Calgary, Winnipeg, Mexico City, Washington DC, Brookline MA, and Hackney in London.

What about Ireland?

With the strong possibility that social distancing may have to be maintained for some time, what plans are there in Ireland to emerge from lockdown with cleaner transport options in place? Covid-19 Mobility Frameworks, focused on supporting people switching to walking and cycling and facilitating social distancing are formed or in progress by some County Councils.

However, the majority are only around larger towns and cities. Also, many of the changes are outlined as ‘temporary’ but for many locals and commuters, it is hoped that once installed these measures will prove so successful that they will become permanent. Dublin and surrounds are expanding 30 km/hr zones. Paths are being widened.

Pedestrian priority at junctions and enforcement of no pavement parking is being improved. Temporary bike lanes are being installed and, importantly, protected from cars and parking. Nationwide residents are writing to their County Councils requesting traffic diversions from popular active travel routes that have become so important during this pandemic. ‘Quietways’ or low-traffic streets that accommodate walkers and cyclists are also being implemented.

Some of these changes need a lot of support to ensure their success.
It is one thing to put up slower speed signs and quite another to actually see reduced speeds which require a mix of awareness-raising, traffic-calming measures and enforcement.

What will happen as lockdowns are lifted? What is planned for major congestion points like the approach and entrances to public transport hubs and schools? In Ireland, before Covid-19, space outside most schools was often constricted and very busy, sometimes to the point of putting pupils at risk of being knocked down by a car.

We were just starting to see School Street zones successfully installed around some schools. School Streets/School Zones allow only walking or cycling at school start and finish times.
Already where car, bus and train journeys have been dwindling, cycling has been picking up the slack. As a form of solo transport, it has become appealing for many, especially in and around streets with decreased car traffic. Many places are planning for more cyclists. Dublin City Council plans to treble of the number of people cycling into the city.

But if this is to become a reality the council needs to improve cyclists’ safety around dangerous junctions, cycle lanes that come and go and bike lane car parking issues. For mass transport on buses and trains, there will need to be strong communication on the hygiene of transport and how to commute safely.

Other supports are coming into play for recovery though as well, such as to help the car industry recover and put more vehicles on roads. In China, some local governments have already announced subsidies for new car purchases and lifted limitations on new license numbers. In many countries, there is a strong possibility for an increase in cars and congestion and pollution post-Covid-19. Transport operators, public authorities, policymakers need to anticipate this and act before it becomes the ‘new norm’.

We now have an opportunity to ‘build back better’ and invest in the future, not the past. Our response to Covid-19 can be harnessed to create a fairer, healthier society. So after the masks are gone, we can all breathe cleaner air.

Dr Karen Moore is a Travel Officer with Green-Schools. The Green-Schools Travel programme is funded by the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport and supported by the National Transport Authority.

PLAN B 

What Happens If COVID-19 Vaccine Fails? Experts Emphasize Need For Backup Plans

Guneet Bhatia | Jul 27 2020,

The last couple of weeks have been a sort of good news for people battling COVID-19 pandemic. Many coronavirus vaccines, currently being tested in humans, showed positive outcomes in mid-stage clinical trials and some are even providing to be effective as indicated in early data from the last-stage clinical trials.

Even Americans received their fair share of good news last week as Dr. Anthony Fauci, one of the leading infectious diseases expert in the country, announced the promising early results from COVID-19 vaccine trial and the prospect of having a breakthrough soon.

However, some experts believe that Americans should not get used to the idea that a miracle vaccine or a drug is just around the corner to save them against the novel coronavirus. This would lead to complacency and further make it difficult to manage the pandemic that is already killing hundreds of people each day.

So far, the U.S. has failed at controlling the coronavirus outbreak. The positive news of promising testing results from COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials has increased hopes in people. But health experts have decided to remain skeptical and believe that there is a need to think about Plan B too, just in case Plan A does not work as anticipated.


“I think we absolutely have to have a backup plan in place,” said Carl Bergstrom, a biologist at the University of Washington. “It's something that’s not talked about enough.”

Bergstrom said that even in the best-case scenario, the scientific community and pharmaceutical companies are still six to eight months away from large-scale inoculations to be able to manufacture the COVID-19 vaccine for the general population. Therefore, this is the time for the public and policymakers to develop plans for the long-term.
“So far the story of the vaccine development seems to be that none of the things that could have gone wrong have gone wrong,” he said. “That doesn't mean we’re home free by any means.”

U.S. President Donald Trump has long claimed that American will have a cure “soon” or the novel coronavirus will disappear on its own. However, that does not seem likely and there is no timeline to “soon” as yet.

There is no clarity on an alternative plan available to consider just in case coronavirus vaccines fail for some reason or are deemed ineffective.

Ken Frazier, CEO of the pharmaceutical giant Merck recently warned that it is not practical and will indeed be harmful to be hoping for or creating hype for a medical breakthrough before 2021.

“The reality of the world is that this time next year very well may look like what we're experiencing now,” he said in an interview. "I think when we do tell people that a vaccine's coming right away, we allow politicians to tell the public not to do the things that the public needs to do, like wear the damn masks.”

Andressa Parreiras, Biomedic, and Larissa Vuitika, biologist, work in a laboratory during the extraction of the virus genetic material on March 24, 2020 in Belo Horizonte, Brazil. The Ministry of Health convened The Technological Vaccine Center of the Federal University of Minas Gerais laboratory to conduct research on the coronavirus (COVID-19) in order to diagnose, test and develop a vaccine. According to the Ministry of Health, as of Tuesday, March 24, Brazil has 1.891 confirmed cases of the coronavirus (COVID-19) and at least 34 recorded deceases. Pedro Vilela/Getty Images

White House brands teachers “essential workers” to force reopening of schools

By Evan Blake WSWS
27 July 2020

Under conditions in which the coronavirus pandemic is raging out of control, the Trump administration is escalating its homicidal campaign to reopen schools across the US, which is guaranteed to spike infection rates even further. At a press conference Friday, White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany branded teachers “essential workers” akin to meatpackers, one of the sections of the working class most devastated by the pandemic.

McEnany declared that “schools are essential places of business … our teachers are essential personnel.” She added, “Our meatpackers were meatpacking because they were essential workers. … And we believe our teachers are essential.”

The comparison between teachers and meatpacking workers is highly significant and must be taken as a sharp warning by teachers and all education workers.

Junior high teacher Angela Andrus at a rally Thursday, July 23, 2020, in Salt Lake City, Utah. (AP Photo/Rick Bowmer)

Since the start of the pandemic, meat processing plants have seen among the highest rates of infections and deaths of any industry in the US. In late April, following a series of walkouts and job actions over unsafe conditions, which forced the closure of 22 plants across the country, Trump invoked the Defense Production Act and deemed meatpacking plants “critical infrastructure,” requiring them to stay open. As a result, the number of cases and deaths have tripled, with well over 30,000 workers infected and more than 100 killed by the virus.

In drawing this comparison, the White House is putting teachers on notice that they intend to carry out the same dictatorial measures should there be organized strikes or mobilizations to prevent the reopening of schools.

While branding teachers “essential,” McEnany defended the deployment of at least 200 federal agents to Portland, Oregon, where they have brutally repressed peaceful protesters, in multiple flagrant violations of the Constitution. Last week, Trump threatened to deploy 75,000 agents to “any of the cities” that he chooses. The ultimate target of these shock troops is the working class, including educators, meatpackers, autoworkers and more, who are being forced to sacrifice their lives for corporate profit.

For the financial oligarchy, reopening the schools is a lynchpin in the broader campaign to “reopen the economy,” which in essence is the drive to extract ever-greater surplus value from the working class in order to pay for the mountains of debt accumulated through the bailout of Wall Street in the CARES Act.

With high rates of absenteeism in auto factories and other workplaces due to the lack of childcare, schools are “essential workplaces” to herd workers back into their workplaces so the ruling class can resume the extraction of profits. The lowering or cutting off of the $600 a week federal addition to state unemployment benefits is similarly aimed at forcing workers back to work, regardless of the dangers they face.

The number of new COVID-19 cases across the US has been continually on the rise since early June, after states lifted their final social distancing restrictions and reopened the majority of businesses. Record numbers of new cases have been repeatedly set in recent weeks, with Friday seeing a record 78,000 new cases. The number of daily new deaths has also steadily risen, reaching over 1,100 four times last week.

As part of the drive to restart production and reopen the schools, the Trump administration is hell-bent on suppressing public health experts and falsifying medical science. Following weeks during which Trump has publicly denigrated Dr. Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Dr. Fauci stated last week that he and his family have received death threats and harassment during the pandemic.

At Friday’s press conference, McEnany repeatedly referred to the guidelines on reopening schools issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). In response to Trump’s recent criticism that the original guidelines were “very tough and expensive,” the agency issued a statement last Thursday which represents the subordination of science to the profit interests of the ruling class.

Titled “The Importance of Reopening America’s Schools This Fall,” the statement declares, “the available evidence provides reason to believe that in-person schooling is in the best interests of students.”

The statement falsely claims that “the rate of infection among younger school children, and from students to teachers, has been low.” In fact, one of the most comprehensive studies on the impact of the virus on youth was published the week prior on the CDC’s own website and came to the exact opposite conclusion. The study, conducted in South Korea, involved the contact tracing and testing of nearly 60,000 people who had contact with 5,706 COVID-19 patients, and the results “found the highest COVID-19 rate for household contacts of school-aged children.” The study warned that “young children may show higher attack rates when the school closure ends [in South Korea], contributing to community transmission of COVID-19.”

The CDC also downplayed the dangers posed to children despite increasing evidence to the contrary. “The best available evidence indicates if children become infected, they are far less likely to suffer severe symptoms,” the CDC declared.

Infection rates are skyrocketing among youth in the regions hardest hit by the virus. In Tennessee, there have been almost 4,000 cases for children ages 0-10 and an additional 9,600 for those ages of 11-20. In Mississippi, more than 4,900 children have tested positive for COVID-19.

In Florida, over 23,000 minors have tested positive, with an elevated positivity rate of 13.4 among children who have been tested. On July 17, nine-year-old Kimora Lynum succumbed to the virus, despite having no pre-existing health issues. She collapsed from a high fever after being released from a hospital, becoming the fifth and youngest minor to die from COVID-19 in Florida.

Asked on CBS’s “Face the Nation” Sunday why the CDC had not set a specific benchmark for the reduction of infection rates before schools could reopen, Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar said, “We don't believe that there are uniform thresholds for school reopenings.” The former pharmaceutical executive added, “Each community is going to have to make the determination about the circumstances for reopening and what steps they take for reopening, but the presumption should be we get our kids back to school—and we figure out how to make that happen.”

Leaving decision-making in the hands of local authorities, who have also been threatened with the loss federal funds if they remain closed, is a recipe for disaster. There are over 13,000 school districts across the country, and each one is being told to prepare its own reopening plans, creating a highly chaotic and haphazard patchwork of plans. Districts adjacent to each other and facing a similar spread of the pandemic can have completely different plans for reopening, underscoring the irrational and unplanned nature of the capitalist response to the pandemic.

Opposition to the reopening of schools continues to mount among parents and educators, with an Associated Press-NORC poll released last week finding that fully 77 percent of Americans are opposed to the resumption of in-person learning. Forty-six percent believe that major adjustments are needed before schools reopen, and 31 percent insist that schools should not open at all. Eighty percent of those surveyed were extremely or somewhat concerned that reopening schools would produce a surge in cases in their community.

Car caravan protests and rallies have been held in a growing number of cities. On Friday, hundreds of educators and parents rallied in Des Moines, Iowa, in a “Drive for Lives” car caravan opposing Governor Kim Reynolds’ plan to reopen schools part-time. The Facebook group “Iowa Educators for a Safe Return to School” has quickly ballooned to nearly 20,000 members less than a month after being launched. In Salt Lake City, Utah, over 150 educators rallied at the state capitol Friday to protest Governor Gary Herbert’s directive that schools reopen next month.

Similar caravans and rallies have taken place in numerous cities in recent weeks, often organized through local and state Facebook groups set up by educators and parents independently of the teacher unions. The American Federation of Teachers (AFT) and National Education Association (NEA) have made it clear they will help the authorities implement their reopening plans. At the same time, they are trying to channel opposition to Trump behind the campaign to elect Joe Biden, who was part of the massive assault on teachers and public education that occurred during the eight years of the Obama-Biden administration.

Both corporate-controlled parties back the back-to-school policy, along with the savage austerity measures that will be imposed on one school district after another. This only exposes the hypocritical claims by the Democrats and Republicans who claim their demand for the reopening of schools is driven by concern over the students’ needs.

The Socialist Equality Party calls upon educators, parents and students to develop a network of independent, rank-and-file safety committees and to fight to unify across districts and states to prepare for a nationwide strike against the reopening of schools. The murderous policy of the ruling elite must be countered with a broad-based mobilization of educators and all workers and the development of a political fight by the working class for socialism and a vast redistribution of wealth to meet social needs, including the right to fully funded and high-quality public education for all. 

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2020/07/27/scho-j27.html