HIV drugs run short in Kenya as people say lives at risk

NAIROBI, Kenya — Kenyans living with HIV say their lives are in danger due to a shortage of anti-retroviral drugs donated by the United States amid a dispute between the U.S. aid agency and the Kenyan government.

© Provided by The Canadian Press

The delayed release of the drugs shipped to Kenya late last year is due to the government slapping a $847,902 tax on the donation, and the U.S. aid agency having “trust” issues with the graft-tainted Kenya Medical Supplies Authority, activists and officials said.

Activists on Friday dismissed as “public relations” the government's statement on Thursday that it had resolved the issue and distributed the drugs to 31 of Kenya's 47, counties. The government said all counties within five days will have the drugs needed for 1.4 million people.

“We are assuring the nation that no patient is going to miss drugs. We have adequate stocks,” Kenya Medical Supplies Authority customer service manager Geoffrey Mwagwi said as he flagged off a consignment. He said those drugs would cover two months.

The U.S. is by far the largest donor for Kenya's HIV response.

Kenya’s health minister, Mutahi Kagwe, told the Senate’s health committee earlier this week that USAID had released the drug consignment that had been stuck in port. Patients are expected to receive them during the week.

He said USAID had proposed using a company called Chemonics International to procure and supply the drugs to Kenyans due to “trust issues” with the national medical supplies body.

Bernard Baridi, chief executive officer of Blast, a network of young people living with the disease, said the drugs would last for just a month.

He said the delay in distributing the drugs, in addition to supply constraints caused by the coronavirus pandemic, meant that many people living with HIV were getting a week's supply instead of three months.

Many of those who depend on the drugs travel long distances to obtain them and may find it difficult to find transport every week, and if they fail to take them they will develop resistance, Baridi said.

"Adherence to medication is going to be low because of access. ... If we don’t get the medication, we are going to lose people,” he said.

According to Baridi, children living with HIV are suffering the most due to the shortage of a drug known Kaletra, which comes in a syrup form that can be taken more easily. Parents are forced to look for the drug in tablet form, crush it and mix it with water, and it's still bitter for children to ingest.

Baridi urged Kenya's government and USAID to find a solution on who should distribute the drugs quickly, for the sake of the children.

On Thursday, about 200 people living with HIV in Kisumu, Kenya's third largest city, held a peaceful protest wearing T-shirts reading “My ARV’s My Life” and carrying posters that read “A sick nation is a dead nation" and “A killer government."

Some 136,000 people live with HIV in Kisumu, or about 13% of the city's population, said local rights activist Boniface Ogutu Akach.

“We cannot keep quiet and watch this population languish just because they can’t get a medicine that is lying somewhere, and that is happening because the government wants to tax a donation,” he said.

Erick Okioma, who has HIV, said the government’s attention has been diverted by the COVID-19 pandemic, which has affected even community perception.

“People fear even getting COVID than HIV,” Okioma said, asserting that local HIV testing and treatment centres were empty.

Tom Odula, The Associated Press

Biden wants to hit wealthy Americans with new tax hikes to fund childcare and education. Here's what it could mean for you. 

NOTHING UNLESS YOU ARE A MEMBER OF THE 1% (WHO ARE NOW CLAIMING TO BE THE MIDDLE CLASS!!!)

The vast majority of US households - 98%, by Penn Wharton's calculations - isn't likely to experience a tax hike.

jzeballos@businessinsider.com (Joseph Zeballos-Roig) 

Biden wants to levy new taxes on wealthy Americans to fund sweeping childcare and education programs.

The vast majority of US households - 98%, by Penn Wharton's calculations - isn't likely to experience a tax hike.

The top marginal income tax could be raised, along with the capital gains tax.

President Joe Biden is preparing to unveil a new set of tax hikes on the richest Americans to fund a collection of new education and childcare programs.

The New York Times and Bloomberg reported on Thursday these tax increases will be central to financing Biden's latest infrastructure plan, in line with the "Build Back Better" agenda he outlined during the campaign.

The so-called American Families Plan may come in at around $1.5 trillion in new spending aimed at curbing poverty, expanding tax credits for families, and establishing a new universal pre-K initiative. That's on top of the $2.3 trillion proposal called the American Jobs Plan that focuses on roads, broadband, in-home elder care, and domestic manufacturing. The White House has so far ruled out any tax hike on people earning below $400,000 annually.

Among the tax hikes the White House is eyeing: Raising the top marginal income tax rate to 39.6% from 37%, and doubling the capital gains tax for Americans earning above $1 million to 39.6% from 20%. This latter change would tax investment gains at the same rate as wages. Combined with a 3.8% surtax that's already levied on wealthy investors to fund the Affordable Care Act, it could lift the overall tax rate on capital gains as high as 43.4%.

Biden's campaign promise to shield households earning below $400,000 annually from tax increases only opens the top 2% of US households to new taxes as part of his agenda, per an estimate last year from the Penn Wharton Budget Model. The vast majority of Americans are not likely to experience one.

Indeed, the higher capital gains tax rate would hit only the wealthiest investors. IRS data from 2018 indicated only 0.32% of US taxpayers reported adjusted gross incomes higher than $1 million and capital gains or losses on their tax returns.

Administration officials are defending the tax hikes ahead of the plan's introduction next week. White House Chief of Staff Ron Klain tweeted the taxes on investors would affect only a sliver of Americans, or less than 1%.

Still, it's possible centrist Democrats may balk at ramping up taxes on investors. Greg Valliere, chief policy strategist at AGF investments, projected the capital gains tax would rise to a lower level after congressional negotiations.

"It's entirely possible that the top capital gains rate for millionaires will rise from 23.8% now to something like 30%," he wrote in a blog post. "Most of the administration's proposals will get watered down later this year."

UBS Global Wealth Management's Solita Marcelli wrote in a note published Friday that lawmakers will ultimately settle on a capital gains tax rate of 28%.

While also noting many families will not be subject to the higher capital gains tax being proposed, she wrote options will remain for people making $1 million or more from capital gains. "If you are able to defer your capital gains taxes to years where your taxable income is below the proposed USD 1 million threshold, it may be possible to continue paying the current long-term capital gains tax rate of 23.8%," she said.

Separately, she found no likely impact on the stock market from the news: "History shows no relationship between capital gains tax rate changes and stock market performance."

More money has flowed into the stock market over the past 5 months than in the past 12 years, according to Bank of America

More money has flowed into the stock market over the past 5 months than in the past 12 years, according to Bank of America

mfox@businessinsider.com (Matthew Fox) 4/23/2021

© AP Photo/Richard Drew Traders at a post on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange on March 4, 2020. AP Photo/Richard Drew WALL ST CRASH AND BURN

Money is quickly pouring into the stock market as the S&P 500 trades near record highs.

Bank of America said $602 billion had flowed into global stocks in the past five months, compared with $452 billion in 12 years.

A rotation out of bonds and into stocks could continue to favor stocks, the bank said.

Investors have mostly shunned the stock market over the past decade even as stocks cruised to record highs, but that trend seems to finally be reversing.

More cash has flowed into stocks in the past five months than in the past 12 years, Bank of America said in a note on Friday. It said $602 billion had flowed into global stocks in five months, compared with $452 billion over 12 years.

The trend reversal could lead to further upside, Bank of America said. In the past week alone, $14.6 billion flowed into stocks, according to the note.

While investors have shunned stocks over the past decade, companies have not. The fund flows that helped drive the market higher as investors stuck with bonds were from corporations via stock buybacks, which have totaled $6.3 trillion since 2008, the note said.

But now chief investment officers rather than CEOs could drive fund flows into stocks and drive the market higher amid a rotation into stocks and out of bonds, Bank of America said.

The lack of fund flows into stocks over the past decade has served as evidence to Fundstrat's Tom Lee that stocks are not in a bubble. In January, Lee said he didn't see how the data "marks even the proximity of a top for equities."

Read the original article on Business Insider'

Biden wants to hit wealthy Americans with new tax hikes to fund childcare and education. Here's what it could mean for you. 

RACIST IDIOT COVID DENIER
Tory MP sorry after calling lockdowns greatest civil liberties breach since WWII internment camps
Rachel Gilmore 

Conservative MP David Sweet has apologized after issuing a tweet on Friday claiming there is “no evidence” that COVID-19 lockdowns work, stating they are the “the single greatest breach" of civil liberties "since the Internment Camps during WW2.”

© Office of David Sweet, MP Flamborough-Glanbrook Conservative MP David Sweet is seen in this photo.

He did not, however, walk back his comments about lockdowns -- which a doctor said were a vast departure from the facts.

"My tweet yesterday regarding the freedom of Ontarian's was to give a timeline only. In no way was I comparing today with the atrocities of war," Sweet wrote on Twitter.

"For anyone offended I unequivocally apologize."

Read more: Hidden Hate: Exposing the roots of anti-Asian racism in Canada

In his initial tweet, issued Friday night, Sweet used the example of internment camps to highlight his firm opposition to lockdowns.

"We are experiencing the single greatest breach of our Civil Liberties since the Internment Camps during WW2," he wrote.

He doubled down in a second tweet, also issued Friday.

“To be clear I am referring to Canadian internment camps of innocent immigrants during WW2,” he wrote. “Unjustly, because of their ethnic association had their civil liberties suspended even though they were landed immigrants or Canadians.”

About 24,000 people, including 12,000 Japanese Canadians, were forced into internment camps during the Second World War. Men in the camps were often separated from their families and forced to do physical labour, according to the Canadian Museum for Human Rights. Many lost all their property and thousands were later exiled to Japan.

One expert said the comparison was “disgusting.”

“To compare lockdowns to [Second World War] internment camps is wrong for so many reasons,” said Dr. Matthew Miller, assistant dean at McMaster University’s department of biochemistry and biomedical sciences.

“[Second World War] internment camps disproportionately affected a minority racialized community in Canada. And this pandemic, we know, is disproportionately affecting minority racialized communities, equity-seeking groups. And these lockdowns, frankly, protect those groups.”

Miller said Sweet’s comparison show such a “naiveté” and a “lack of understanding of the situation on the ground.”

As legions of Twitter users questioned his choice of comparison with hundreds of replies, Sweet issued a third tweet claiming he wasn't comparing the two issues.

“For those who just can’t hold back outrage "since" is Not the same or interchangeable with “as” or “like”! So cancel your disingenuous leap of comparison!” he fired out.

Less than half an hour before apologizing for his remarks, he tweeted in direct response to this Global News report.

"I guess I messed up my quiet reserved persona with you!" he wrote on Twitter.
Lockdowns are effective, experts say

During his tweetstorm, Sweet also called into question the efficacy of the lockdowns, despite resounding evidence that they’ve been an effective method of combatting the virus.

“ABSOLUTELY NO evidence that lockdowns work but dozens and dozens of papers proving they don’t,” claimed Sweet in his tweet.

“I’m am saddened and appalled at my political colleagues' silence!”

Global News reached out to Conservative Leader Erin O'Toole's office but did not receive a response by the time of publication.

Sweet's claims are totally contrary to all the evidence to date, which has clearly shown the efficacy of stricter lockdown measures at pushing down otherwise swelling case counts, according to Miller. Canada's disease trajectory was following a steady growth pattern, according to federal officials -- but that changed when hard-hit jurisdictions like Ontario brought down new measures.

"In recent days, following the implementation of restrictions in heavily impacted areas of Canada, the national RT has finally dipped below one," said Chief Public Health Officer Dr. Theresa Tam.

"This means that for the first time in many weeks, the epidemic has dropped out of a growth pattern."

The current reality on the ground makes Sweet's tweet all the more "naïve and ignorant," according to Miller.

"ICUs are overwhelmed. We're having to shuttle patients all around the province to ensure that they're able to get the care they need. You know, it's just such an absolute disconnect from reality," Miller said.

The evidence is clear, he added: lockdowns are effective.

"There's absolutely no doubt that they do work," said Miller.

"Look, the reality is that no one wants to have to institute a lockdown. There's no one in the medical field, and there's certainly no one in government, who wants to do this."

He said that because of the impact on finances and mental health, lockdowns are a "last resort."

"Unfortunately, we're in an unprecedented public health crisis and nothing but the most stringent lockdown has worked. And frankly, we were too slow to institute a lockdown that could have easily prevented the severe third wave we're in now," Miller said.

"So all objective evidence points to the fact that these lockdowns have worked to curb these numbers."

Miller said he hopes that elected officials will do better in their use of social media.

"I certainly expect better from our elected officials," he said.

"Unfortunately, things like Twitter provide a platform for misinformed and uneducated people to have an audience and say whatever they want."

SEE

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Canada's First Internment Camps 

Who benefits from "fake meats"? We invite you to join us for the NFUniversity Class on Who benefits from “fake meats”? Silicon Valley and the Future of Farming taking place on Thursday, April 29th, 2021 at noon Pacific time (1 PM AB/SK, 2 PM MB, 3PM Eastern and 4 PM Atlantic).  Click here to register!

Biden’s big climate pledge: can it succeed, and what noticeable changes could it bring?

Joe Biden has closed out a two-day climate summit of more than 40 world leaders by warning that the planet risks reaching the “point of no return” if more isn’t done to escalate efforts to constrain the climate crisis.

© Photograph: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images Biden has framed this unprecedented transition as a glorious economic opportunity.

Oliver Milman 

 The Guardian

4/23/2021

Biden, along with several other national leaders, made a number of new promises in the summit. Here’s what it all means.

What has Joe Biden promised at the summit?

As its centerpiece announcement, the Biden administration has said planet-heating emissions will be cut by 50%-52% by 2030. The target was officially submitted to the United Nations as part of an overarching global system where countries submit voluntary emissions reduction goals in order to collectively avoid dangerous global heating.

Related: Biden vows to slash US emissions by half to meet ‘existential crisis of our time’

On top of this, the summit saw an American promise to double financial aid for developing countries struggling with the escalating droughts, floods, heatwaves and other impacts of the climate crisis, as well as a new US push to work with other countries on clean energy innovation.

The White House hopes the new commitments will spur other countries to do more, as well as signal the return of the US to the top table to climate leadership after a ruinous self-imposed exile under Donald Trump.

Is that enough to deal with the threat of climate change?

No. But then very little at this stage is sufficient. Despite decades of warnings from scientists, global greenhouse gas emissions have continued to soar, only dipping last year due to pandemic-related shutdowns. The cuts required to stave off truly disastrous global heating are now precipitously steep – reduce by around half this decade and then to zero by 2050.

Some activists feel the US could be doing more, with a group of protesters dumping wheelbarrows of manure outside the White House on Thursday. The climate aid pledge has also been criticized as “very low” by ActionAid USA.

Video: 'We have to step up': Biden sets goal to cut U.S. greenhouse gas emissions in half  (NBC News)

Conversely, the US goal is one of the most ambitious for a developed country, will make a significant dent in overall emissions and has generally been received as striking the right balance between ambitious and feasible by governments desperate to see the world’s largest economy rejoin the climate battle.

“Is it enough? No,” said John Kerry, Biden’s climate envoy. “But it’s the best we can do today and prove we can begin to move.”

How will big reductions in emissions change Americans’ lives?

Emissions have been gradually declining in the US for several years, largely due to the collapse of the ailing coal industry. Cutting emissions in half within a decade will require far more aggressive, and noticeable, changes – an explosion in solar and wind jobs, a rapid shift to electric cars, the refitting of energy inefficient buildings, the demise of coal country, a revamp of farming practices.

Biden has framed this unprecedented transition as a glorious economic opportunity – “when I think of climate change, I think of jobs” has become a presidential slogan – and while experts agree that millions of new jobs can flow from a shift to clean energy the change will be jarring to some, particularly those working in fossil fuels

.

 Solar panels at the Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System in the Mojave Desert near Primm, Nevada. Photograph: Jacob Kepler/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Regulations to force oil, coal and gas out of the energy system, along with mandates for electric cars, will have to materialize. But the climate problem is manifest – if the US is to get to net zero emissions by 2050 the focus at some point will shift to everything from airline and shipping emissions to gas stovetops in homes to whether a switch away from meat eating could help lower the sizable methane pollution from cattle.

Biden’s task is to help accelerate a shift already under way to renewables while cushioning the blow to those left by the wayside, all while avoiding a backlash from an American public wary of personal sacrifice.

How likely is it Biden will be able to deliver this?

There are record levels of alarm among the American public over the climate crisis, with majorities of Democratic and Republican voters supporting action to bring down emissions. Big business, unions and city leaders have also swung strongly behind the push for a federal response.

Imposing barriers remain in Congress, however, where Republicans have clung on to Trump-era rhetoric that acting on the climate crisis will harm the economy. The Biden climate target will put “good-paying American jobs into the shredder,” warned Mitch McConnell, the Republican Senate leader.

Biden will be able to unilaterally shut off new oil and gas drilling on public lands and set new pollution standards for cars and power plants, but further legislation will be required. Given the paper-thin Democratic control of Congress, the fate of even broadly popular measures such as Biden’s $2tn infrastructure plan – which would greatly expand electric vehicle charging stations, boost public transit and push forward renewable energy deployment – appear uncertain.

At some point Biden will have to bring in “sticks” as well as “carrots”, such as a tax on carbon emissions and a directive to utilities to phase out fossil fuels. Again, such measures face huge hurdles in Congress.

If he does get all of that done, is it problem solved?

As the administration is keen to point out, the rest of the world is responsible for about 85% of all emissions and only through a coordinated, determined international effort will humanity avoid the punishing ravages of the climate crisis.

Canada and Japan announced upgraded emissions reduction targets at the climate summit but China, the world’s leading carbon polluter, didn’t bring anything new and some countries, such as Brazil and Australia, have deeply recalcitrant leaders. Ahead of key UN climate talks in Scotland later this year, Biden will not only have to corral an unusually divided domestic polity to achieve his goals but also prod other countries to do more. It’s an unenviable task.

TALC poses Health risk in forms like baby powder, bath bombs: Health Canada

While some forms of talc do not pose a health risk, other popular uses like in bubble baths, baby powder and bath bombs carry a risk of causing ovarian cancer, a government assessment found.

© Provided by Global News FILE - In this April 19, 2010, file photo, baby powder is squeezed from its bottle in Philadelphia. In a study released on Tuesday, Jan. 7, 2020, U.S. government researchers found no evidence linking baby powder with ovarian cancer in the largest-ever analysis of an issue that has prompted thousands of lawsuits and a recent product recall. (AP Photo/Matt Rourke, File)

Amanda Connolly 

GLOBAL NEWS

4/23/2021

Researchers from Health Canada as well as from Environment and Climate Change Canada released on Thursday the final results of a screening assessment into the safety of talc products, launched in 2018.

The conclusion: avoid using products containing talc in loose powder form, and avoid using products containing talc in the female genital area.

READ MORE: Woman with cancer awarded $29M in Johnson and Johnson talcum powder suit

"The final screening assessment, based on the latest scientific evidence, concludes that certain uses of talc may be harmful to human health," reads a press release issued by health officials.

The screening flagged two areas of concern: the potential for inhaling talc particles when using products like baby powder, body powder and loose face powder, which carries a risk of lung damage; and potential risks when talc-containing products are used in certain self-care products for women.

These products include body powder, baby powder, diaper and rash creams, genital antiperspirants and deodorants, body wipes, bath bombs and bubble bath products.

There is no evidence suggesting talc poses a risk if ingested or used on top of the skin through products like pressed powder makeup, officials said.

Canadians are being advised to check the ingredient lists on products they are using, and to avoid using products containing loose talc that can be inhaled or that is intended for use around the female genitals.

Using the products around the female genitals is associated with a risk of ovarian cancer.

READ MORE: Can talcum powder cause ovarian cancer?

"Canadians concerned about current or previous use of products containing talc should also consult their health-care professional," the statement added.

Video: Health Canada finds talcum powder may cause cancer, lung damage

The safety of talc has been in the spotlight in recent years because of several lawsuits that linked use of baby powder with individuals who later developed ovarian cancer.

Johnson & Johnson has paid out roughly $5 billion in legal settlements since 2016 to individuals who say they developed cancer after using baby powder routinely for personal hygiene.

READ MORE: Johnson & Johnson to pay $417 million in lawsuit linking talcum powder to cancer

Health Canada's draft assessment issued in 2018 suggested a link was likely.

Officials are now looking to adjust some of the product monographs for products containing talc, and reduce exposure to those products.

Video: Health Matters: Johnson & Johnson being investigated for possible asbestos

 VIDEO Female salmon perish at higher rate as temperatures warm

 Video: How Los Angeles is trying to recycle wastewater into drinkable water (CNBC)

TURNING GREY WATER CLEAR

Offshore wind firm to work with researchers on recycling glass fibers to tackle blade waste

Anmar Frangoul 
CNBC 4/23/2021

The issue of what to do with wind turbine blades when they're no longer needed is a headache for the industry.

In recent years, a number of companies involved in the sector have attempted to find solutions to the problem.

© Provided by CNBC This file photo, taken on July 31, 2018, shows workers checking the quality of newly-manufactured wind turbine blades at a factory in China.

A collaboration between academia and industry is to focus on the recycling of glass fiber products, in a move that could eventually help to reduce the waste produced by wind turbine blades.

In an announcement on Thursday, the University of Strathclyde, which is based in Glasgow, Scotland, said it had signed a memorandum of understanding with Aker Offshore Wind and Aker Horizons.

Among other things, the trio will work together to scale-up and commercialize a process developed in the laboratory which centers around recycling glass-reinforced polymer composites used in wind turbine blades.

According to the university, the system focuses on the "thermal recovery and post-treatment of glass fibres" from glass-reinforced polymer composite scrap, with the end result "near-virgin quality glass fibres." The idea is that, using this system, the composite waste could be re-used.

"This is a challenge not only for the wind power industry, but for all industries reliant on GRP materials in their production and manufacturing," Liu Yang, who is head of the Advanced Composites Group at the University of Strathclyde, said in statement.

"Retaining and redeploying the embodied energy in the fibres is essential as we move to a more circular economy," he added.

The issue of what to do with wind turbine blades when they're no longer needed is a headache for the industry. This is because the composite materials blades are made from can prove to be difficult to recycle, which means that many end up as landfill when their service life ends.

As the number of wind turbines on the planet increases, the problem will become even bigger. Strathclyde says blade waste could hit 400,000 tons a year in 2030.

In recent years, a number of companies involved in the sector have attempted to find solutions to the issue.

Last December, for example, GE Renewable Energy and Veolia North America signed a "multi-year agreement" to recycle blades removed from onshore wind turbines in the United States.

In an announcement at the time, GE Renewable Energy said the blades would be shredded at a Veolia North America site in Missouri before being "used as a replacement for coal, sand and clay at cement manufacturing facilities across the U.S."

In January 2020, Danish wind energy giant Vestas said it was aiming to produce "zero-waste" wind turbines by the year 2040.