#PPE  #N95

Researchers rank various mask protection, modifications against COVID-19

Scientists tested consumer-grade masks and improvised face coverings to show how effective they can be at protecting individuals from airborne particles of similar size to those carrying SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19

UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA HEALTH CARE

Research News

 

IMAGE: MEDICAL PROCEDURE MASK AND MODIFICATIONS DESIGNED TO ENHANCE MASK FIT OR COMFORT FOR THE WEARER. A MASK W/EAR LOOPS (A) MODIFIED BY TYING THE EAR LOOPS AND TUCKING IN THE... view more 

CREDIT: UNC SCHOOL OF MEDICINE

CHAPEL HILL, NC - It's been shown that when two people wearing masks interact, the chance of COVID-19 transmission is drastically reduced. This is why public health officials have pleaded for all people to wear masks: they not only protect the wearer from expelling particles that might carry SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19), but masks also protect the wearer from inhaling particles that carry the virus. Some people, though, still refuse to wear a mask. So UNC School of Medicine scientists, in collaboration with the Environmental Protection Agency, researched the protectiveness of various kinds of consumer-grade and modified masks, assuming the mask wearer was exposed to the virus, like when we interact with an unmasked infected person.

Published in the journal JAMA Internal Medicine, the research shows that some masks were as much as 79 percent effective at blocking particles that could carry the virus. These were masks made of two layers of woven nylon and fit snug against the wearer's face. Unmodified medical procedure masks with ear loops - also known as surgical masks - offered 38.5 percent filtration efficacy, but when the ear loops were tied in a specific way to tighten the fit, the efficacy improved to 60.3 percent. And when a layer of nylon was added, these masks offered 80 percent effectiveness.

"While modifications to surgical masks can enhance the filtering capabilities and reduce inhalation of airborne particles by improving the fit of the mask, we demonstrated that the fitted filtration efficiencies of many consumer-grade masks were nearly equivalent to or better than surgical masks," said co-first author Phillip Clapp, PhD, an inhalation toxicologist and assistant professor of pediatrics at the UNC School of Medicine.

Co-first author Emily Sickbert-Bennett, PhD, director of infection prevention at the UNC Medical Center, added, "Limiting the amount of virus is important because the more viral particles we're exposed to, the more likely it is we will get sick and potentially severely ill."

As the adoption of face coverings during the COVID-19 pandemic became commonplace, there was a rapid expansion in the public use of commercial, home-made, and improvised masks which vary considerably in design, material, and construction. There have been a number of innovative "hacks," devices, and mask enhancements that claim to improve the performance characteristics of conventional masks - typically surgical or procedure masks. Despite their widespread dissemination and use during the pandemic, there have been few evaluations of the efficiency of these face coverings or mask enhancements at filtering airborne particles.

In this study, the researchers used a recently described methodological approach based on the OSHA Fit Test to determine the fitted filtration efficiency (FFE) of a variety of consumer-grade and improvised facemasks, as well as several popular modifications of medical procedure masks. Seven consumer-grade masks and five medical procedure mask modifications were fitted on an adult male, and FFE measurements were collected during a series of repeated movements of the torso, head, and facial muscles as outlined by the OSHA Quantitative Fit Testing Protocol.

Here are the different mask types with filtration efficacy. Bolded below is the top-of-the-line N-95 mask, which proved to be 98 percent effective.

CAPTION

Mask with ear loops (54% recycled nylon, 43% nylon, 3% spandex), tested with and without an optional aluminum nose bridge and non-woven filter insert in place (A), a cotton bandana folded diagonally once "bandit" style (B), a cotton bandana folded in a multi-layer rectangle (C), a single-layer woven polyester/nylon mask (80% polyester, 17% nylon, 3% Lycra®) with ties (D), a non-woven polypropylene mask with fixed ear loops (E), a single-layer woven gaiter/neck cover balaclava bandana (92% polyester and 8% spandex) (F), and a three-layer woven cotton mask (100% cotton) with ear loops (G).

Consumer-grade facemasks:

2-layer woven nylon mask, ear loops, w/o aluminum nose bridge: 44.7%
2-layer woven nylon mask, ear loops, w/ aluminum nose bridge: 56.7%
2-layer woven nylon mask, ear loops, w/ nose bridge, 1 non-woven insert: 74.4%
2-later woven nylon mask, ear loops, w/ nose bridge, washed, no insert: 79%
Cotton bandana - folded Surgeon General style: 50%
Cotton bandana - folded "Bandit" style: 49 %
Single-layer woven polyester gaiter/neck cover (balaclava bandana): 37.8%
Single-layer woven polyester/nylon mask with ties: 39.7%
Non-woven polypropylene mask with fixed ear loops: 28.6%
Three-layer woven cotton mask with ear loops: 26.5%

Medical facemasks and modifications:

3M 9210 NIOSH-approved N95 Respirator: 98%
Surgical mask with ties: 71.4%
Procedure mask with ear loops: 38.5%
Procedure mask with ear loops + "loops tied and corners tucked in": 60.3%
Procedure mask with ear loops + "Ear Guard": 61.7%
Procedure mask with ear loops + "23mm claw hair clip": 64.8%
Procedure mask with ear loops + "Fix-the Mask (3 rubber bands)": 78.2%
Procedure mask with ear loops + "nylon hosiery sleeve": 80.2%

###

Other authors are James M. Samet, PhD, MPH, Jon Berntsen, PhD, Kirby L. Zeman, PhD, Devrick J. Anderson, MD, MPH, David J. Weber, MD, MPH, and William D. Bennett, PhD.

This study was supported by the Duke-UNC Prevention Epicenter Program for Prevention of Healthcare-Associated Infections and a cooperative agreement between the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

#GETYOURGREENS
The Garment Worker Crisis In Bangladesh Proves A ‘Buy Less, Buy Better’ Approach Is The Only Way Forward
BY DANA THOMAS

 APRIL 2020


© Craig McDean

The coronavirus lockdown has decimated the retail business – but it is even more disastrous for workers further down the supply chain in garment-producing countries with no social safety net. It doesn’t have to be this way, says Dana Thomas.

In ‘Get Your Greens’, an ongoing series in line with the 50th anniversary of Earth Day, British Vogue explores how the industry is advancing towards a greener future.

During a stroll down a busy street in London earlier this year, I clocked, next to the entrance of a fashion emporium, stacks of plastic pull-carts, like those you see in grocery stores. Inside, scores of shoppers were dropping the brand’s trendy, cheap clothes into those carts, with nary a thought about the impact those purchases might have on humanity or the planet.

Each year, the fashion industry produces 100 billion garments, and we buy roughly 80 billion. The remaining 20 billion are burned, shredded, or buried – the detritus of “economies of scale”. As a whole, the fashion industry is valued more than $3 trillion (£2.3 trillion) annually. According to a 2015 study by the charity Barnardo’s, the average item of clothing is worn seven times before being tossed; in China, the rental platform Y Closet reports it’s just three. Our landfills are heaving with clothes.

But what happens if we swing the other direction, and stop buying clothes, cold turkey, as we have with the onset of Covid-19 and the practice of self-isolation?

A social and economic disaster, that’s what.

Zara, with more than £16 billion a year in turnover, reported a 24.1 per cent drop in sales during the first two weeks of March. In response to those tumbling revenues, as well as government decrees to stay home, Inditex, the group that owns Zara, Massimo Dutti, Pull & Bear, shut nearly 4,000 shops in 39 countries. Zara’s top competitor, the Swedish brand H&M, closed more than 3,000 outlets throughout the world, including all of its US and UK outposts.

To get an idea of how many people such closures directly affect, Gap Inc, which includes Old Navy, Banana Republic and Athleta, employs 80,000 in its US stores alone – all of whom were let go when the company closed its stores last month. Some brands guaranteed pay and medical benefits to furloughed workers for the 14-day quarantine period. After that, who knows. But the long-term impact will surely be profound. According to the National Retail Federation in Washington DC, retail is America’s largest private sector employer, supporting one in four jobs – for a total of 52 million – and contributes nearly $4 trillion (£3.25 trillion) to the country’s GDP. The NRF projects that more than two million retail jobs in the US will be “imperilled” in May, and four million jobs within the next year. Earlier this month, True Religion jeans filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. Neiman Marcus and JC Penney are expected to follow.


Read more: Can Farfetch Solve The Climate Conscious Delivery Issue?

Debenhams in Oxford Street was boarded up as the company fell into administration in April 2020.
© Andrew Redington/Getty Images


In the UK, £10 billion of apparel inventory is sitting in distribution warehouses. The high-street retailer Debenhams has gone into administration, resulting in hundreds of redundancies. Arcadia Group, which owns Topshop and Miss Selfridge – already expected to permanently close 22 stores in a reorganisation plan devised last year – will likely shutter hundreds more. The retail chain Next went offline for two weeks in mid-March, in response to warehouse staff complaints that their safety had been compromised. When it reopened its online operations briefly, on April 14, it could only cope for a couple of hours before closing again, in the face of an overwhelming number of orders. At the time of writing, Oasis group had collapsed into administration, with 200 employees already laid off, and another 1,800 furloughed.

Overall, 20,620 stores in the UK will close permanently this year, the Centre for Retail Research reports. It added that between store closures and workforce reductions, 235,704 jobs will be lost – a 61.5 per cent jump over the 2019 figure. If stores remain closed until June, the loss due to unsaleable stock will exceed more than £20 billion. In all, analysts predict the fashion industry could lose £800 million in revenue.


Read more: What’s In My Clothes? Why A New Hashtag Asks Us To Go Deeper

If you think that sounds ominous, consider how the global shutdown is affecting folks further down the supply chain. Typically, a fashion item today is made in a succession of locales: fabric is woven and dyed in one, cut in another, sewed in a third, with zippers and buttons attached in a fourth. Finishing touches, like denim distressing and embroidery, are executed in yet another land. Most apparel manufacturing is situated in the world’s poorest countries, where workers are paid pennies per garment. Production is contracted or subcontracted; few fashion companies own their factories. For brands, cancelling orders is easy. Risk free, even.

Bangladeshi garment workers staged a protest to demand payment of due wages in Dhaka, 15 April 2020.

© MUNIR UZ ZAMAN/ via Getty Images


But for manufacturers and workers, the impact is devastating. Last month, fashion brands reportedly nixed or put on hold $2.8 billion (£2.2 billion) worth of apparel production in Bangladesh, endangering nearly 2 million garment worker jobs. Bangladesh is the world’s second largest supplier of ready-made garments, after China, and fashion accounts for 84 per cent of the country’s export earnings, equaling $40.5 billion (£33 billion). The government has imposed a country-wide lockdown – including garment factories – until 25 April.


According to a report by Pennsylvania State University’s Center for Global Workers’ Rights, 70 per cent of furloughed workers – most of whom are women – have been sent home without pay; minimum wage for garment workers is $95 (£77) a month, far below a living wage. At least 10,000 have lost their jobs outright. “Garment workers live hand to mouth,” said Kalpona Akter, executive director of the Bangladesh Center for Worker Solidarity (BCWS). When furloughed or laid off, they receive nothing; there are no unemployment benefits. “In garment-producing countries like Bangladesh, there is a weak social safety net,” said Liana Foxvog, director of campaigns for the Washington, DC-based International Labor Rights Forum. “As people lose jobs, this means malnutrition, and other financial hardships. The death toll could rise from the fallout of the economic crisis caused by coronavirus.” Last week, thousands of workers took to the street to protest the situation. “If we stay at home, we may save ourselves from the virus,” garment worker Sajedul Islam told AFP. “But who will save us from starvation?”

It doesn’t have to be this way. Other, better business practices do exist. Take “slow fashion”: the concept of small companies producing locally, often to order, with zero waste. Or rightshoring: the return to manufacturing in regions that were gutted by the 1990s offshoring exodus, with new, state-of-the-art factories run by workers via computers in clean rooms, allowing manufacturers to adjust volume demands to the ebbs and flows of the economy without causing a tsunami of layoffs.

Garment workers shouted “We want our wages” as they protested their due pay in Dhaka, 13 April 2020.
© NurPhoto

Consumers play a part, too. We can buy less, buy better – an approach many may need to embrace in these financially difficult times, post-lockdown. While higher-quality clothes have a steeper price tag, over time, the investment does pay off. They look smarter, last longer, and your carbon footprint is much smaller. And buying better will ripple all the way down the supply chain: workers won’t be pushed to meet impossible quotas at half a living wage, or forced to do unpaid overtime. Instead, they’ll develop more sophisticated sewing skills – their work will be based on quality, not quantity – which would mean an increase in wages. That is, if brands are willing to pay more for such talent.

Read more: How To Detox And Organise Your Wardrobe

As for what we already own? We can repair and rewear, rather than tossing and replacing; we should cherish our wardrobes. And we can hold companies accountable for bad behaviour. Boycott, protest, call them out on social media. The power of the purse is mightier than you think.

We’ve all been running too fast, consuming too much, our purchasing habits hurting too many fellow citizens in too-faraway places for far too long. People are not disposable. We should not treat the result of their hard-fought efforts as disposable either. It’s time to leave the grocery cart at the grocery store, and buy – and wear – clothes with intention.

Dana Thomas is the author of ‘Fashionopolis: The Price of Fast Fashion and the Future of Clothes’, available to purchase here.

British Vogue

Meet Hassan Akkad, The Refugee Turned Hospital Cleaner In Vogue’s Key Worker Portfolio

BRITISH VOGUE 

JULY 2020 ISSUE

© Jamie Hawkesworth

BY GILES HATTERSLEY 4 JUNE 2020

The Syrian refugee and BAFTA-winning filmmaker signed up as an NHS hospital cleaner before taking on the government over migrants’ rights. As he appears in the July issue, photographed by Jamie Hawkesworth, Giles Hattersley meets the man who became a lightning rod for change.

“My friends are calling me the Greta Thunberg of Covid-19,” says Hassan Akkad wryly, followed by a warm and self-effacing laugh. It is mid-afternoon in early June, and the filmmaker-turned-hospital cleaner is having a quick break in the car park at Whipps Cross Hospital in east London during a 10-hour shift. Breaks are welcome. The work is tough and the PPE hard to wear, especially now it’s getting warmer. All this is before you factor in the reality of working on a coronavirus ward for the past two months in a borough that has been hit hard.

 Meet The 3 Essential Workers On The Cover
BY OLIVIA MARKS

His friends may have been teasing him about the Thunberg thing, but like every decent gag, there’s more than a dash of truth (though, to be honest, Akkad’s life has been far more dramatic than the young environmentalist’s). His mind-boggling backstory has taken him from life as a teacher and TV production professional in Damascus, to being arrested, tortured and eventually having to flee, embarking on a 3,000-mile, 87-day odyssey across the Middle East and Europe to seek asylum in the UK. Having documented his trip to BAFTA and Emmy award-winning effect, when the pandemic hit he answered the NHS’s call for support staff by signing up as a cleaner for his local hospital trust – and became an accidental lightning rod for change.

First came an arresting Twitter post, an impactful mirror selfie showing the 32 year old in the extreme protective gear required for his new job. Then, on 20 May, a sucker punch video, in which he directly addressed the prime minister over the revelation that NHS cleaners, porters and social care workers not born in the UK would not be entitled to have their families remain here should they become infected with, and die from, coronavirus.

Edward Enninful On The Everyday Heroes That Inspired The July Cover Story

“I genuinely felt as if I got some bad news from my family,” he says of reading the news reports on his way to work that day. “I was so hurt. I spend every day with these guys,” he explains of his fellow cleaners. “Ninety-nine per cent are not UK or European born. They’re all migrants and are bottom of the pyramid when it comes to payment. Some of my colleagues had picked up on the news and everyone was hurt. Imagine working on a Covid-19 ward and discovering the government has excluded you from protection?"

“I was livid,” he continues. “I put my PPE and my uniform on and was cleaning, but the whole time I was so distracted by it. Eventually I was like, ‘You know what: fuck it’’’, he says, a non-characteristic tone of fury entering his voice. “I went on break, went to my car, switched the camera on and started recording.” He says it took him two goes to get it right, his voice breaking as he uttered the words, “stabbed in the back.” After signing off with a simple, “I hope to hear back from you”, he posted the video and went back to work. “It was all I could do,” he says.

The July Issue Is Dedicated To The New Front Line
BY EDWARD ENNINFUL

Then something extraordinary happened. Within hours of the “Hi Boris…” video going live to Akkad’s 9,000 Twitter followers (he has 35,000 now), more than five million people had viewed his plea for justice thanks to multiple retweets. Within four hours of it going live, the government performed a dramatic U-turn. Having caught the mood of the country, Akkad was dubbed a hero. He was splashed across front pages and even went for an “emotional chat” (as described in the Metro) with Piers Morgan on Good Morning Britain. “When you have the Guardian and the Daily Mail both writing a good article about you, it means you hit the right nerve,” he says, the wry smile returning.

Narguis Horsford, a London Overground train driver, appears on the July 2020 cover of British Vogue, fronting an issue dedicated to essential workers.
© Jamie Hawkesworth

He is quick, though, to brush off praise. “I have a privilege. My privilege is that I have a Twitter account and I speak English. I have to use my privilege to speak out.” In fact, he found his victory a more complicated experience that the result would suggest. “There was a mix of emotions. I felt so happy that I had looked after my colleagues, that I platformed their voices and opinions. But also I was upset because…” He pauses. “What if I didn’t do it? Shouldn’t the government be considerate enough to do this without me speaking out?” He lets the thought hang in the air.


Jamie Hawkesworth On The “Joyous” Task Of Capturing The New Front-Line For The July Issue
BY ELLIE PITHERS

Akkad features in the July issue of Vogue, photographed by Jamie Hawkesworth in the hazy sun of an April afternoon spent outside the hospital. He joins a 20-page portfolio spotlighting essential workers across many professions who have brought hope and fortitude to a crisis. On top of his advocacy – to say nothing of his cleaning – he has been documenting his colleagues at Whipps Cross, too, taking captivating portraits which he hopes to exhibit some day. There is also talk of a memoir (Covid will only warrant a chapter of it) and there will be more film projects once the pandemic eases.

For now, he is committed to Whipps Cross, at least until the death rate fully ebbs. He has no illusions about when that might be. It is the first day of eased

FORCES FOR CHANGE
Former UN Climate Chief Christiana Figueres On The Women Fighting Global Warming

BY CHRISTIANA FIGUERES13 DECEMBER 2020

After helping orchestrate the landmark Paris Agreement five years ago, Christiana Figueres explains how women are disproportionately affected by the climate crisis, and why we need to be better represented at the tables where decisions are being made.

When Christiana Figueres took up her role as the executive secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in 2010, many considered achieving a global agreement on climate change a near-impossible task. But the Costa Rican diplomat managed to succeed where others had failed, with the historic Paris Agreement — a commitment to keep global warming well below 2C and pursue efforts to keep temperature rises below 1.5C — signed by 197 countries on 12 December 2015.

Read more: What Is “Climate Grief”?

Since leaving the UN, Figueres has continued to be one of the leading female voices of the climate movement, co-founding Global Optimism, an organisation working to inspire action on the environmental crisis. She also co-wrote The Future We Choose (Manilla Press, 2020), a book that presents a hopeful vision of the world we must create in order to survive the climate crisis.

Here, Figueres explains why women are crucial to the climate movement and how we can all play our part.

“We know that women in developing countries are disproportionately affected by climate change because women in those countries are traditionally entrusted with growing the food their families need, gathering firewood and getting water. The availability of food and water are directly impacted because of climate change, which is causing increasing numbers and severity of droughts. On a practical level, this means women are having to walk further to get water as well as firewood, making their days longer, and leaving their children and homes to do so. The traditional roles that women have in developing countries are getting increasingly difficult because of climate change.

“That’s why it’s so important that female voices are at the decision tables when it comes to the climate crisis. Currently, there are just not enough women in decision-making positions, thinking about the different ways that climate change is gender-specific, and making more inclusive decisions.


“When I took over as executive secretary of the UNFCCC in 2010, I made it a point to work with women such as [former global senior gender advisor of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature] Lorena Aguilar, [former president of Ireland] Mary Robinson and many others to get more recognition of the disproportionate impacts of the climate crisis on women, as well as the role that women play in both decision-making and solution-bringing. The importance of promoting gender equality was eventually included in the Paris Agreement as well — I'm truly grateful to all those women who worked to bring that about.

Climate protests in Rome, October 2020.
© Getty Images

“At the UN, we also had specific initiatives to improve representation, for example requesting that governments include women in their negotiating teams. In my six years as head of the UNFCCC, I saw an increase in female representation, which was very healthy. It’s still far from 50/50, but certainly better. I’ve also noticed that there are a lot of women dedicating themselves to sustainability, including in areas such as biodiversity, conservation and food production.


“It’s delightful to be able to work with women who are tackling the climate crisis from different perspectives — some of them as artists, authors, political leaders, engineers, negotiators. It’s great to see women spread through all the different parts of the climate movement. Having different points of view, collective wisdom and leadership are absolutely fundamental to addressing climate change. This has to be about radical collaboration.



Extinction Rebellion Climate Crisis activists protesting against fast fashion outside of London Fashion Week, February 2020.
© Getty Images



“It’s often women who determine what is purchased, how much is purchased and what people eat in their families, so there is a lot of behaviour that is being influenced by women. If women are more aware of the climate implications, they can make wiser decisions and avoid those products that cause high greenhouse-gas emissions. For example, beginning to diminish the amount of red meat we eat and moving over to plant-based protein is important. There are 16 steps identified by a new initiative called Count Us In that can help people take steps that matter to cut their personal carbon footprints.


“It’s about recognising that everyone can contribute. Each one of us will not win this battle individually — it will require all of us playing our role wherever we can.”

As told to Emily Chan.

The Future We Choose (Manilla Press, 2020), by Christiana Figueres and Tom Rivett-Carnac, is out now

Subsidy cuts in Lebanon harm low-income citizens

Security forces intervene in protesters with tear gas in Beirut, Lebanon on September 1, 2020 [Houssam Shbaro/Anadolu Agency]

December 12, 2020 

Following the Central Bank of Lebanon's decision to start implementing subsidy cuts for basic goods including flour, fuel, and medicines, widespread protests have erupted across the country, news agencies reported.

Xinhua News Agency reported United Nations (UN) officials expressing their fear on Tuesday that the subsidy cuts would cause havoc in the country if no alternative plan, such as creating a safety net, is made before the removal of the subsidy.

The central bank has been providing foreign currency to importers of essential goods at a favourable rate, as the value of the Lebanese lira continues to decline due to a prolonged economic crisis.

Attempting to restrain the protests, the Lebanese authorities proposed on Tuesday issuing special cards with limited deposits to help around 600,000 families in need deal with the new conditions.

However, the General Confederation of Lebanese Workers called on Tuesday for protests across the country to demonstrate against ending the subsidy. The protests will take place next week.

As reported by Anadolu Agency, researcher Mohammad Shamsuddin warned that cutting the subsidy for fuel would raise the price of 20-litre containers from 16,000 liras ($11) to 65,000 liras ($43), stressing that this would lead to a crisis among the low-income citizens who will be unable to warm their homes during winter.

READ: HRW urges Lebanon authorities not to neglect healthcare workers' safety

Fouad Ballouk, head of Baalbek's municipality, told Anadolu Agency that 95 per cent of the residents of his city, in addition to thousands of Syrian refugees, depend on subsidised fuel during winter, adding that a humanitarian crisis would be "inevitable" during the cold season between September and March. Several other Lebanese cities are facing the same fates.

Representative of fuel distributors in Lebanon Fadi Abu Shakra called for not ending the subsidy, pointing to the low rate of wages in the country.

The minimum rate of wages is 675,000 liras ($445) he remarked, highlighting that a fuel container could not be priced more than 16,000 liras ($11) amidst these conditions.

Economist Mounir Younes told Xinhua News Agency that the money used to finance cards aimed for the low-income families comes from the state's budget or the central bank, which will print more money and lead to a further increase in inflation.

"Special cards are only beneficial if the government adopts a mechanism to control prices in the country, which is impossible in Lebanon due to the absence of a proper team who can achieve this," according to Younes.

"We need a more comprehensive and long-term solution to secure not only food, medicines, and fuel, but also education for people in private schools, otherwise we will witness a social explosion," he concluded.

Life a 'waking nightmare' for 12 million children in Yemen, UNICEF Chief says

A Yemeni woman mourns in a hospital after Houthis carried out artillery attack in Taiz, Yemen on November 30, 2020 [Abdulnasser Alseddik/Anadolu Agency]

December 12, 2020 

UNICEF Executive Director Henrietta Fore announced on Thursday that Yemen is the most dangerous place on earth for children, stressing that: "Yemen is teetering on the edge of complete collapse."

During her virtual participation in the "Averting famine in Yemen: What can we do now and in 2021?" event, she said: "Over 80 per cent of people require urgent humanitarian assistance and protection. Including 12 million children, whose lives are a waking nightmare."

Fore added: "It is perhaps the most dangerous place on earth to be a child. One child dies every ten minutes from a preventable disease. Two million are out of school. And thousands have been killed, maimed, or recruited since 2015. Just last week, 11 were reportedly killed, including a one-month-old baby."

Fore stressed: "The situation on the ground is a tangle of crises – any one of which would bring a country to its knees. Conflicts across 49 frontlines – up from 36 in just one year. An economy in tatters – families can no longer cope."

"Support systems and infrastructure – from hospitals and schools to water and sanitation systems – on the brink of collapse. A COVID-19 pandemic sweeping across the country. Through all of this, our humanitarian teams are facing fighting, blockades, and bureaucratic hurdles to reach the millions who need our help."

OPINION: Yemen is teetering on the edge of total destruction

She continued: "And now, despite repeated warnings, the country is facing a nutrition crisis. 2.1 million children are acutely malnourished – and almost 358,000 severely malnourished. We believe famine-like conditions have already begun for some children."

The UNICEF official reiterated: "These are not just numbers on a page. These are millions of individual tragedies. Millions of blighted futures. And millions of parents making the gut-wrenching choice between food and medical care for their children."

Giving an example, she indicated: "Last Friday, from an ICU bed in Hodeida, an eight-year-old girl named Zahra begged UNICEF and her medical team to let her go home. She explained that her father couldn't afford both food and medical expenses. A choice no parent should have to make."

"As the world watches, an entire country and its people are being deprived of the basics of life."

Fore explained: "Our teams are doing all we can, but the needs are growing faster than we can respond," emphasising the need for urgent political action.

Concluding her speech at the event, Fore expressed: "2020 will be remembered not only for COVID-19 – but as a year in which we failed the children of Yemen once again. We must not make the same mistake in 2021."

EU calls for Israel to revise eviction orders against Palestinians in Jerusalem

December 12, 2020 

A general view of Batan al-Hawa neighbourhood of Silwan in East Jerusalem on December 11, 2020 [Mostafa Alkharouf/Anadolu Agency]

December 12, 2020 


The Office of the European Union (EU) Representative called on Friday for Israel to cancel eviction orders for Palestinian families in the Batan Al-Hawa and Sheikh Jarrah neighbourhoods of occupied Jerusalem, a statement announced.

On 3 and 23 November, Israeli courts ruled to uphold the evictions of eight Palestinian families in the Batan Al-Hawa neighbourhood in East Jerusalem, affecting 45 people, including small children, according to the statement.

It also stated that the Israeli courts ruled to maintain the evictions of Palestinian families in the Sheikh Jarrah neighbourhood of East Jerusalem, affecting 32 people, including six children and: "Putting all families at imminent risk of forced transfer."

On 3 and 9 December, representatives of the EU and some EU member states visited a number of these families faced with threats of imminent eviction in both the Sheikh Jarrah and Silwan neighbourhoods of East Jerusalem.

The statement added: "In the last several years, the number of eviction decisions has increased in particular in Sheikh Jarrah and Silwan, where entire communities of close to 200 families are at risk."

Meanwhile, "In Batan Al-Hawa alone, 14 families have already lost their homes since 2015, and over 80 other households are facing eviction demands and are at imminent risk of displacement."

OPINION: The EU reaction to settlements and security coordination reflects the PA betrayal of Palestine

According to the statement: "Israeli domestic laws, creating the basis for the claims to evict the families, do not exempt Israel, as the occupying power, from meeting its obligations to administer the occupied territory in a manner that provides for and protects the local population. Israel has not acquired sovereignty over the territory in the course of its administration."

It added: "In line with the EU's long-standing position on Israel's settlement policy, illegal under international law, and actions taken in that context, such as forced transfers, evictions, demolitions and confiscations of homes, the EU calls on the Israeli authorities to reverse the rulings on the intended evictions."

The statement concluded: "The EU missions in Jerusalem and Ramallah recall the successive Foreign Affairs Council Conclusions and statements in which the EU has repeated its strong opposition to Israel's settlement policy and actions taken in this context, including evictions."

"This policy is illegal under international law and its continuation undermines the viability of the two-state solution, the prospect for a lasting peace and seriously jeopardises the possibility of Jerusalem serving as the future capital of both states."

Algeria parties condemn normalisation between Morocco and Israel 

Algerian parties have criticised the tripartite agreement between Morocco, the US and Israel, considering it a political, diplomatic and ethical stain. 

Meanwhile, the Moroccan people have expressed their rejection of normalisation through their mass protests and various efforts to hinder this step.

In a statement published on Facebook, the National Liberation Front (FLN) confirmed that it had: "Angrily denounced and condemned the announcement made by the Kingdom of Morocco regarding the establishment of diplomatic relations with the usurping Zionist entity, in exchange for the recognition of the US president of Morocco's alleged sovereignty over occupied Western Sahara."

The statement added: "The most remarkable part of the humiliating and shameful agreement that traded the nation's honour, is that it coincided with Human Rights Day (10 December)."



A growing number of countries in the MENA region are normalising ties with Israel – 

Cartoon [Sabaaneh/MiddleEastMonitor]

The statement considered that: "Giving up the inalienable right of the Palestinian people in exchange for obtaining an illusory sovereignty over occupied Western Sahara is humiliating. It will remain a political, diplomatic and ethical stain on the forehead of the involved parties who have always bragged about supporting the Palestinian cause. Today, the truth is revealed after agreeing to sell the sacred cause based on a deceitful and fake tweet published in the last moment. It is a gift from the have-nots to the unworthy."

The FNL stressed that it: "Renews its commitment, on this perfidious occasion, to continue its support for the Palestinian cause until victory is achieved in order to establish an independent state with Al-Quds as its capital."

READ: Morocco-Israel normalisation is a slap in the face of the African Union

The party also reiterated its support for the rights of the Saharawi people in their struggle and resistance until the implementation of the international legitimacy resolutions, as well as holding a referendum on self-rule to decide the fate of the people of Western Sahara.

Head of the Movement for the Society of Peace Abderrazak Makri posted on Facebook: "The Moroccan regime did not decide to normalise only today, and anyone who knows the complications of the Palestinian cause will be aware of the old hidden and uncovered paths of normalisation between Morocco and the Zionist entity."

The leader of Algeria's largest Islamic party drew a distinction between the position of the Moroccan state and that of the Moroccan people, stating: "We are aware of the efforts made by the Moroccan people to reject normalisation through their mass protests and varied efforts in this regard, and they will not be disappointed by Allah's will."

As a sign of solidarity with the Justice and Development Party that leads the Moroccan government, Makri expressed: "What will the affected party (the Justice and Development Party) in this case do? We ask Allah to help them handle the situation. Regardless of existing infiltrations of the Arab regimes that have inherited the honour of defending the Palestinian cause through national struggles and movements, but have abandoned it, the peoples of the region will remain faithful until the storm passes thanks to our steadfast values of Islam and the spirit of our nation that stands as our defence in difficult times."

Makri added: "The struggle continues, and by Allah's will, some will be humiliated and others will be honoured."

The head of the Movement of Society for Peace seized the opportunity to call on the Algerians to preserve: "National cohesion to avoid the greed of conspirators."

Polisario ambassador to Algeria: 'Trump agreement with Rabat and Tel Aviv is null and void' 

December 12, 2020 

Members of the Sahrawi People's Liberation Army parade during a ceremony to mark 40 years after the Front proclaimed the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR) in the disputed territory of Western Sahara on February 27, 2016 [FAROUK BATICHE/AFP via Getty Images]

Demonstrations of the Sahrawi people and supporters in the Spanish capital, Madrid against Rabat's policy

Ambassador of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Saguia El-Hamra and Río de Oro (Polisario Front), Abdelkader Taleb Omar, declared that Trump's agreement with Rabat and Tel Aviv is null, lacks legitimacy, and violates the United Nations (UN) resolutions.]

In his statement to the official Algerian news agency, the Sahrawi ambassador stressed that this agreement: "Will not affect the determination of the Sahrawis in their struggle for their cause." Omar explained that Trump does not have the right to control sovereignty over the disputed land, and that: "Only the Sahrawi people have the right to decide on the matter."

Omar confirmed that the partners in the agreement: "Are doing business, usurping the rights of people and trading with the blood of the Palestinian and Saharawi peoples", while confirming that this deal "will never succeed," given that Trump is about to leave the White House.

The Sahrawi ambassador indicated that the outgoing US president who: "Denies the rights of the Saharawi people is acting individually," and that his move "does not express the position of the new US administration," while comparing Trump's position with his rejection of the results of the presidential elections in his country.

The Sahrawi official asserted: "This agreement is nothing but a summer cloud that will evaporate after Trump's departure from the White House," recalling the UN's clear position on the Western Sahara issue.

As Israel and Moroccan Jews celebrate new ties, others are critical

December 12, 2020 

A Saharawi man holds up a Polisario Front flag near Moroccan soldiers guarding the wall separating the Polisario controlled Western Sahara from Morocco on 3 February 2017 [STRINGER/AFP via Getty Images]

December 12, 2020 

Israel and Moroccan Jews on Friday celebrated an agreement to normalise relations between the two countries, but the largest party in Morocco's government faced internal wrangling over a move that some Moroccans regard as a betrayal of Palestinians.

The US-brokered deal – the fourth such "normalisation" announcement involving an Arab country and Israel in as many months – also drew criticism from Moscow.

A core element of the deal brokered by President Donald Trump was US recognition of Morocco's claim to sovereignty over Western Sahara. A decades-old territorial dispute has pitted Morocco against the Algeria-backed Polisario Front, which seeks to establish an independent state.

Russia's foreign ministry said the US decision to recognise Moroccan sovereignty was a breach of international law, the RIA news agency reported.

Winning global support for its claim over Western Sahara is Morocco's most important foreign policy goal. It has also often pursued a more open stance towards Israel and Israelis of Moroccan descent than have other Arab states.

Moroccan Foreign Minister Nasser Bourita said on Thursday that King Mohammed VI has pursued a US shift in its Western Sahara policy for three years, forging close ties with Trump's son-in-law and senior adviser, Jared Kushner.

But while the king has the final say on foreign policy, the moderate Islamist PJD – which gained the most seats in a 2016 election – did not appear wholly united on the announcement about Israel.

OPINION: Morocco-Israel normalisation is a slap in the face of the African Union

In a debate late on Thursday after the deal was announced, disagreements emerged among senior party leaders, according to one member who was present. Nearly a full day later, on Friday, the party had still not commented on the deal, long after its main coalition partners had welcomed the move.

Morocco was home to a large Jewish community before Israel was founded in 1948, and around 3,000 Jews still live there.

Around 50,000 Israelis travel to Morocco each year to visit religious sites and other tourist attractions, but there are no direct flights and tourists undergo a lengthy process to obtain visas.

Suzanne Harroch, a Moroccan Jewish singer from Rabat, said the new arrangement would bring her closer to her relatives in Israel.

"The history of the Jews in Morocco dates back 3,000 years. This history was interrupted, but now with this decision normalcy will be restored," she said.

CLIMATE CHANGE

It’s been 5 years since Paris Agreement but are Nationally Determined Contributions equitable?

To cap global warming at 1.5°C or even 2°C is a tall task that needs much more effort from countries in reducing reliance on fossil fuels

By Shazneen Cyrus Gazdar
Published: Saturday 12 December 2020
Photo: Pixabay

Five years since the adoption of the Paris Agreement, the world is still far from meeting the climate goals: Of capping the global average temperature increase at “well below 2 degree Celsius above pre-industrial levels and pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.”

At the 21st Conference of Parties (COP 21) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in Paris, non-Annex 1 — developing — countries signed pledges; they agreed to shoulder the responsibility of reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions along with Annex 1 and 2, — developed and industrialised — countries. In simple terms, country-level GHG emissions equates to energy spent by burning fossil fuels. This, in turn, equates to economic growth.

From the Kyoto Protocol, the predecessor of the Paris Agreement, developing and poor countries followed the principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities (CBDR-RC). It acknowledges the different capabilities and differing responsibilities of individual countries in addressing climate change.

This is based on the historical context of emission pathways: Rich countries developed by burning fossil fuels, industrialising and therefore becoming economically stable. Following the CBDF-RC, non-Annex 1 countries are allowed their fair share of carbon budget and GHG emission.

In the Paris Agreement, however, non-Annex 1 countries put aside this principle and pledged to reduce their emissions along with Annex 1 countries. This acknowledged that though we do not have a historical responsibility in reducing emissions, considering the impacts of climate change we will get on board.

This took the form of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) — climate action plan of countries — and, moving forward, Long-term Low Greenhouse Gas Emission Development Strategies (LTSs) in the form of Net Zero targets.

India is within the “2°C compatible” rating — the country’s climate commitment (through 2030) is considered a fair share of global effort, but is not consistent with the Paris Agreement of 1.5°C.

The United States, Russia, China and Japan are on a 4°C (or higher) pathway; Australia, Canada and others are a modicum better, on a 3°C warming pathway.

However, outside the 2°C compatible pathway it all adds up to these major emitters being well outside the fair share range — not at all consistent to the what was agreed upon in Paris in 2015.

In terms of the fair share of equity, countries should have similar emissions-reduction costs vis-à-vis their gross domestic product. But economies like the US and those in the European Union have been high emitters, still have high per capita emissions and have high capacities to act — approaches that focus on equality, equal cumulative emissions and historical responsibility. Yet, their NDCs are highly inequitable; much more stringent reductions are needed, which partially result in negative emission allowances in all years.

Country Compatibility of NDCs to the Paris Agreement of below 2°C to 1.5°C; Source: Climate Action Tracker

Ironically, the sense of optimism from countries party to the convention on how they fare with their NDCs indicate the mismatch between expectations and reality. Even if every country fulfils every commitment, global warming would still be more than 3°C.

Now, literally, is the time to act; By the next cycle to update NDCs in 2025, the scale of the task may be beyond reasonable reach. It would be folly for Parties to wait until then to correct the lack of ambition as NDCs are a stepping stone towards Net Zero emissions by mid-century.

Fossil fuel projections for major economies


A dash (–) denotes that no updates were available, Data as of September 2020; source: UNEP Production Gap Report, 2020

Prior to the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, there were some encouraging signs. Indonesia and the US lowered their projections for coal output. But Russia increased its projections; Australia, Canada, the US and Russia also forecast even larger increases in their oil and gas production. Russia, the US and Canada also expected to produce substantially more gas.

Overall, the net change of developed countries towards 2030 is that there is going to be a substantial increase in gas. This indicates a reluctance to move away from ‘bridging fuel’ natural gas — a major methane (among GHG) emitter. This indicates that developed countries do not intend on a fair and equitable distribution of the carbon pie for developing countries.

Global fossil fuel production needs to decline 6 per cent every year for the next decade for a 1.5°C rise in temperatures, according to the United Nations Environment Programme Production Gap Report. Even for a 2°C rise, it needs to keep decreasing 2 per cent year-on-year.

For a 1.5°C pathway, coal output will have to decrease 11 per cent annually through 2030; oil and gas production should fall 4 per cent and 3 per cent, respectively. But countries aim to produce 120 per cent and 50 per cent more fossil fuel by 2030 than would be consistent with limiting global warming to 1.5°C or 2°C, respectively.

This translates to a 2 per cent annual average growth in global production over the next decade even as all signs point to a continued global fossil fuel production gap.

THE SOUTH SHALL RISE AGIN

Psycho secession: Texas’ lost-cause lawsuit was the first shot in a new Civil War

Published December 12, 2020
By Lucian K. Truscott IV, Salon- Commentary
\

President Donald Trump and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (Facebook).

They didn’t bother with writing articles of secession this time. No, Ken Paxton, the disgraced attorney general of the state of Texas, did that for them when he filed a lawsuit directly with the Supreme Court seeking to overturn the presidential election. On Wednesday, Missouri and 16 other states filed a brief with the court seeking to join the Texas lawsuit, which alleges that the four decisive swing states of Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin and Georgia violated the Constitution by allowing mail-in voting in the November election. On Thursday, a majority of the Republican caucus in the House, 126 members of Congress, signed on to the lawsuit along with the instigator in chief, Donald Trump. Twenty-five states and territories signed a brief opposing the Texas lawsuit. Friday evening, the Supreme Court rejected the suit out of hand.

The 18 states and 126 members of Congress, including House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy and Minority Whip Steve Scalise, are seceding from democracy. It amounts to nothing less than an act of sedition by the entire Republican Party, 70 percent of whom believe that Joe Biden’s election was illegitimate, according to a Quinnipiac poll released on Thursday. In contrast, 98 percent of Democrats think Biden’s victory was legitimate, along with 62 percent of independents.

The last time anything like this happened was in 1860, when the election of Abraham Lincoln led almost immediately to declarations of secession by seven states between Dec. 20, 1860 and Feb. 1, 1861. Two months later, on April 12, the bombardment of Fort Sumter began, and the Civil War was underway.

It’s not a shooting war — yet — but Texas didn’t just file a lawsuit this week, it set a match to the Constitution of the United States. It isn’t just that these Republicans don’t recognize Joe Biden as our next president. They don’t want to be part of the democracy that this country was founded on. They don’t respect the votes of their fellow citizens. They don’t want what more than 80 million people wanted when they cast their votes in this election. They want what Donald Trump wants.

Thankfully, it’s not the whole country. The Quinnipiac poll found that 60 percent of registered voters think that Biden’s victory was legitimate. But it wasn’t the whole country in 1860, either. It was only after the election of Lincoln that the Southern states seceded from the Union over the issue of slavery.

This time there isn’t a single issue, there’s a single man: Donald Trump. In this way, what’s happening right now in this country is eerily similar to what happened in Germany in the 1920s and 1930s with Adolf Hitler’s rise to power. Trump has identified and used the same sort of mass hysteria Hitler did — a sense of resentment among his supporters that somehow they have been left behind and misunderstood and humiliated, and that only he, Trump, understands them and is willing to stand up for them and will bring back their rightful way of life.

So far, Trump has only played around with the kind of violence that Hitler made use of to achieve power and then consolidate it. Trump used implied violence in the chants of “Lock her up” that energized supporters at his rallies in 2016 and throughout the campaign of 2020. By staying silent this year when armed protesters occupied the State Capitol in Michigan, Trump implied his support, and his exhortations to “liberate” states that were mandating lockdowns to fight COVID were taken by many as invitations to violence.

Now armed protesters have gathered outside the home of the Michigan secretary of state, and Georgia election officials report that they are receiving death threats and racist voice mails. The Republican Party of Arizona has retweeted exhortations from those who say, “I’m willing to give up my life for this fight,” suggesting it’s time to “die for something.” The New York Times reported this week that the chair of the Wisconsin Elections Commission has said that “people on Twitter have posted photographs of my house.” Another tweet mentioned her children and threatened “I’ve heard you’ll have quite a crowd of patriots showing up at your door.”

The conservative website The Bulwark reported this week that far-right websites have been posting addresses and other personal information about Republican elected officials in Georgia, superimposing target crosshairs over images of their faces. Right-wing Republicans are in full cheerleader mode trying to turn Kyle Rittenhouse, who is accused of murdering two people and wounding another at a Kenosha, Wisconsin, protest, into a hero of the Trump cause. A Democratic state representative in Pennsylvania told the New York Times that “we’ve been getting emails all the time, all hours of the day and night,” and that “they’re getting more angry, and a lot of calls are saying we won’t be forgetting.”

This kind of stuff is not a joke. The fantastic lie that has gripped the Republican Party started out with everyone going along with Trump’s fantasy and kind of humoring him. But now it’s taken a deadly turn. Trump has been calling Republican state representatives on the phone and pressuring them to go along with his demands that they ignore the votes that have taken place in swing states and appoint electors that will vote for him. If they step out of line, they’re branded as traitors, cowards, RINOs. He’s doing this kind of stuff to his own people, to loyal Republicans who have voted the party line since they were in short pants.

When you add in what’s been happening in red states with COVID, it’s jaw-dropping. Governors and Republican-controlled state legislatures are so intimidated that they won’t pass mask mandates and bar closures, not to mention rules against mass gatherings. COVID cases and hospitalizations in red states are off the charts. They are lining up refrigerated trucks outside hospitals in states like North and South Dakota. Republicans are killing their own people in craven attempts to keep Donald Trump from attacking them on Twitter. God only knows what’s going to happen in those states when the COVID vaccines become widely available, although we’re getting some idea with reports of people standing up at meetings of county commissioners pledging not only that they won’t wear masks, they’ll also refuse to be vaccinated.

http://www.rgnorman.co.uk/artphotoslife.asp?pid=275

The Mason-Dixon line is psychological this time. These people have lost their minds. They have seceded from sanity and reason. This Civil War isn’t being fought with rifles and pistols. It’s a war fought with lies and delusions. This week it passed the number of Americans killed in World War II, and its victims are just as dead as the bodies buried at Anzio and Normandy. Americans are dying every time Mitch McConnell stands up and blocks a COVID relief bill. They are dying every time a Republican senator like Ron Johnson presents testimony from an anti-vaxxer as if it were a sane person instead of an outright idiot. They’re dying by the thousands with their mask-less hubris. They’re dying for Donald Trump, but at least for now, our democracy has not died with them.

US: In Texas, Trump supporters and lawmakers threaten secession if Biden win is certified

Trump and his party have been claiming voter fraud in the November polls

Web Desk December 13, 2020 

After the US Supreme Court rejected Texas' bid to throw out voting results in four key states that president-elect Joe Biden won in November's presidential election, the Texas Republican Party issued a statement raising the spectre of secession. “Perhaps law-abiding states should bond together and form a union of states that will abide by the constitution,” said party chairman Allen West. He said the court's order had established "a precedent that says states can violate the US Constitution and not be held accountable". Trump and his allies have been claiming voter fraud in the November polls. 

A Texas lawmaker even announced plans to introduce a referendum pushing to secede from the US. Republican lawmaker Kyle Biedermann said in a statement, according to Fox News: "The federal government is out of control and does not represent the values of Texans. That is why I am committing to file legislation this session that will allow a referendum to give Texans a vote for the state of Texas to reassert its status as an independent nation.”



The US Supreme Court had earlier rejected a lawsuit seeking to overturn the results of the presidential election in several key battleground states won by Joe Biden, effectively ending President Donald Trump's bid to challenge the outcome of the November 3 polls. The Supreme Court on Friday rejected a bid from Texas' attorney general, and backed by Trump, to block the ballots of millions of voters in battleground states of Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin that went in favour of president-elect Biden, who won 306 electoral seats in the polls. Only 270 seats are required for winning the race to the White House.

The election results will be formally certified next week by a 538-member electoral college.

The 'secession' statement raised hackles within the Democratic Party. There are increasing calls to sanction the lawmakers who supported the same, and to exclude them from the Congress, citing Section 3 of the fourteenth amendment of the US Constitution.

House majority leader Steny Hoyer said the Supreme Court's decision should put an end to Trump's attempts to overturn the results of the presidential election that he lost. The results are clear, there was no widespread fraud, and Joe Biden is the next president of the United States, he said. "The 126 Republicans who signed on in support of this case should be ashamed of themselves for putting their own political interests before the interests of our nation, the Constitution, and our democratic principles," Hoyer said.

Supporters of President Donald Trump announced they will stifle Washington on Sunday with a pair of rallies. The rallies come a month after a pro-Trump demonstration that drew at least 10,000 people to the capital. The day began with Trump thrilling his supporters by driving by in his limousine and ended with scattered clashes between Trump supporters and local activists. Sunday's rallies are meant as a show of force just two days before the electoral college meets to formally elect Joe Biden as the next president.

-Inputs from agencies