Category: Public health



  • Norfolk Southern—the railroad giant whose train derailed and caused a toxic chemical fire in a small Ohio town earlier this month—has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to throw out a 2017 lawsuit filed by a cancer-afflicted former rail worker, and the Biden administration is siding with the corporation, fresh reporting from The Lever revealed Thursday.

    If the high court, dominated by six right-wing justices, rules in favor of Norfolk Southern, it could be easier for the profitable rail carrier to block pending and future lawsuits, including from victims of the ongoing disaster in East Palestine. Moreover, it “could create a national precedent limiting where workers and consumers can bring cases against corporations,” wrote two of the investigative outlet’s reporters, Rebecca Burns and Julia Rock.

    Former Norfolk Southern worker Robert Mallory was diagnosed with colon cancer in 2016. The following year, he filed a lawsuit alleging that his illness stemmed from workplace exposure to asbestos and other hazardous materials and that the rail carrier failed to provide safety equipment and other resources to ensure he was adequately protected on the job.

    Although he had never worked in Pennsylvania, Mallory filed his lawsuit in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas because his attorneys were from the state and “he thought he would get the fairest access to justice there,” Ashley Keller, the lawyer representing him before the Supreme Court, told The Lever.

    As Burns and Rock explained:

    Pennsylvania has what’s known as a “consent-by-registration” statute—something states have had on the books since the early 19th century—which stipulates that when corporations register to do business in the state, they are also consenting to be governed by that state’s courts. Norfolk Southern asserts that being forced to defend the case in Pennsylvania would pose an undue burden, thereby violating its constitutional right to due process.

    Even though Norfolk Southern owns thousands of miles of track in the Keystone State, the Philadelphia county court sided with the railroad and dismissed the case. Mallory appealed, and the case wound its way through state and federal courts before landing at the U.S. Supreme Court last year.

    The rail carrier is asking the high court “to uphold the lower court ruling, overturn Pennsylvania’s law, and restrict where corporations can be sued, upending centuries of precedent,” the journalists noted. “If the court rules in favor of Norfolk Southern, it could overturn plaintiff-friendly laws on the books in states including Pennsylvania, New York, and Georgia that give workers and consumers more leeway to choose where they take corporations to court—an advantage national corporations already enjoy, as they often require customers and employees to agree to file litigation in specific locales whose laws make it harder to hold companies accountable.”

    Unsurprisingly, the American Association of Railroads (AAR) and other powerful corporate lobbying groups such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers, and the American Trucking Association want to undercut the ability of workers and consumers to file lawsuits in the venue of their choosing. AAR, the rail industry’s biggest lobby, filed a brief last September on behalf of Norfolk Southern.

    Meanwhile, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) also filed a brief siding with the railroad giant. The Supreme Court is expected to issue a decision in the coming months.

    “This is totally insane,” The Lever‘s editor, David Sirota, wrote on social media.

    “Wow. Just wow,” Pennsylvania Sen. Katie Muth (D-44) tweeted in response to the report. “Sadly, this isn’t that surprising, but WTAF.”

    “Should Norfolk Southern prevail, the company could use the ruling to challenge other lawsuits on the grounds that they’re filed in the wrong venue,” The Lever reported, citing Scott Nelson, an attorney with the Public Citizen Litigation Group, which filed a brief backing Mallory. “Such a decision could affect lawsuits filed by residents exposed to hazardous chemicals as the result of accidents in other states,” including victims of air or water pollution caused by the recent derailment in East Palestine, five miles west of the Pennsylvania state border.

    “[Norfolk Southern] might say, ‘You can only sue us in Ohio or Virginia [where Norfolk Southern is headquartered],’ even if you were injured at your home in Pennsylvania from an accident that took place five miles away in Ohio,” Nelson told the outlet.

    In its brief, AAR argued that if the high court rules in favor of Mallory, he and other plaintiffs suing railroads under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act (FELA)—a law protecting rail workers injured on the job—”could have a wide range of jurisdictions to choose from.”

    However, Burns and Rock reported, “groups weighing in on Mallory’s side pointed out that ‘forum shopping’ is the norm for corporations,” including when companies with no physical presence in Delaware register in that state to dodge taxes or when firms file bankruptcy cases in states more likely to hand down favorable opinions.

    Notably, “Norfolk Southern freely utilizes the Pennsylvania courts to enforce its rights,” the Academy of Rail Labor Attorneys, a group of lawyers who represent rail workers, pointed out in a brief. “The railroad certainly is not prejudiced in any way by defending lawsuits in the state. For purposes of jurisdiction, there is no valid reason that a corporation such as Norfolk Southern should be treated differently than an individual within the state.”

    During oral arguments in the case last fall, Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan, a liberal appointed by former President Barack Obama, asked Deputy Solicitor General Curtis Gannon why the Biden administration decided to involve itself in this case.

    In response, Gannon said, “We pointed out not just that… the excessive availability of general jurisdiction could cause international concerns for trade with the United States and our commercial interests, but also the petitioner had called into question the constitutionality of a federal statute, and so we thought that it was important to make sure that the court’s decision here wouldn’t implicate the constitutionality of federal statutes.”

    The Biden administration’s contention that Pennsylvania’s law amounts to an overreach of state authority and calls into question the constitutionality of a federal statute is nonsensical, Keller, the plaintiff’s lawyer, told The Lever.

    “The United States relies on consent-by-registration statutes [like the Pennsylvania law] to obtain personal jurisdiction over various foreign entities,” said Keller. “If it’s unconstitutionally coercive when Pennsylvania does it, why isn’t it unconstitutionally coercive when the United States does it?”

    Burns and Rock warned that the high court’s decision could have implications for future lawsuits as well as pending ones.

    At least five class-action negligence lawsuits have been filed in Ohio against Norfolk Southern since the company’s February 3 freight train crash in East Palestine.

    While progressive advocacy groups and lawmakers have demanded that U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg move immediately to improve rail safety rules in response to that unfolding environmental and public health catastrophe, The Lever reported last week that Buttigieg is actively considering an industry-backed proposal to further weaken the regulation of train braking systems.

    Another Norfolk Southern train carrying hazardous materials careened off the tracks on Thursday near Detroit, Michigan. Union leaders and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) have described the recent derailments as the predictable result of Wall Street-backed policies that prioritize profits over safety.

    As Sirota, Burns, Rock, and Matthew Cunningham-Cook of The Lever pointed out in a Friday op-ed in The New York Times, the U.S. is home to more than 1,000 train derailments per year and has seen a 36% increase in hazardous materials violations committed by rail carriers in the past five years.

    The rail industry “tolerates too many preventable derailments and fights too many safety regulations,” the journalists wrote. “The federal government must move quickly to improve rail safety overall.”

    “It shouldn’t take a chemical cloud over a community in the American heartland to compel the government to protect its people,” they added. “If we want to get train derailments much closer to zero, the rail industry must evolve.”

    This post was originally published on Common Dreams.

  • Residents of East Palestine, Ohio are voicing alarm and mistrust of officials after a 150-car train carrying hazardous materials — including vinyl chloride — crashed in their small town, prompting emergency evacuations and a “controlled release” of chemicals into the air to prevent a catastrophic explosion. Norfolk Southern, the company that owns the derailed train, has insisted that public health…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.



  • As a deadly strain of avian influenza continues to decimate bird populations around the world and spread among other animals, some scientists are warning that mammal-to-mammal transmission has emerged as a real possibility with potentially catastrophic consequences for humans.

    Over the past year, officials in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada have detected cases of the highly pathogenic H5N1 bird flu in a variety of species, including bears, foxes, otters, raccoons, and skunks. Last month, a cat suffered serious neurological symptoms from a late 2022 infection, according to French officials who said that the virus showed genetic characteristics consistent with adaptation to mammals.

    Most of these infections are likely the result of mammals eating infected birds, according to Jürgen Richt, director of the Center on Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases at Kansas State University.

    More alarming, multiple researchers argue, was the large outbreak of H5N1 on a Spanish mink farm last October, which could mark the first known instance of mammal-to-mammal transmission.

    “Farmworkers began noticing a spike in deaths among the animals, with sick minks experiencing an array of dire symptoms like loss of appetite, excessive saliva, bloody snouts, tremors, and a lack of muscle control,” CBC News reported Thursday. “Eventually, the entire population of minks was either killed or culled—more than 50,000 animals in total.”

    “A virus which has evolved on a mink farm and subsequently infects farmworkers exposed to infected animals is a highly plausible route for the emergence of a virus capable of human-to-human transmission to emerge.”

    A study published two weeks ago in Eurosurveillance, a peer-reviewed journal of epidemiological research, described the outbreak and its public health implications. Notably, the authors wrote that their findings “indicate that an onward transmission of the virus to other minks may have taken place in the affected farm.”

    As CBC News noted, “That’s a major shift, after only sporadic cases among humans and other mammals over the last decade.”

    Michelle Wille, a University of Sydney researcher who focuses on the dynamics of wild bird viruses, told the Canadian outlet that “this outbreak signals the very real potential for the emergence of mammal-to-mammal transmission.”

    It’s just one farm and none of the workers—all of whom wore personal protective equipment—were infected. However, Dr. Isaac Bogoch, a Toronto-based infectious disease specialist, warned Thursday that if the virus mutates in a way that enables it to become increasingly transmissible between mammals, including humans, “it could have deadly consequences.”

    “This is an infection that has epidemic and pandemic potential,” Bogoch told CBC News. “I don’t know if people recognize how big a deal this is.”

    A “mass mortality event” involving roughly 2,500 endangered seals found off the coast of Russia’s Caspian Sea last month has also raised alarm.

    According to Phys.org:

    A researcher at Russia’s Dagestan State University, Alimurad Gadzhiyev, said last week that early samples from the seals “tested positive for bird flu,” adding that they were still studying whether the virus caused the die-off.

    Peacock warned there have been mixed reports from Russia about the seals, which could have contracted the virus by eating infected seabirds.

    But if the seals did give bird flu to each other it “would be yet another very concerning development,” he added.

    “The mink outbreaks, the increased number of infections of scavenger mammals, and the potential seal outbreak would all point to this virus having the potential to cause a pandemic” in humans, he said.

    Among birds, the mortality rate of H5N1 can approach 100%, ravaging wild bird populations and poultry farms alike. The World Organization for Animal Health told BBC News on Thursday that it has recorded almost 42 million cases of H5N1 in wild and domestic birds since the current outbreak started in October 2021. Another 193 million domestic birds have been culled in an attempt to curb transmission.

    The highly pathogenic strain of avian flu also frequently causes death in other mammals, including humans. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), nearly 870 cases of H5N1 were reported in humans from 2003 to 2022 and they resulted in at least 457 deaths—a fatality rate that exceeds 50%.

    The virus has “not acquired the ability for sustained transmission among humans,” the WHO stated last month. “Thus the likelihood of human-to-human spread is low.”

    However, a December report from the U.K. Health Security Agency warned that the “rapid and consistent acquisition of the mutation in mammals may imply this virus has a propensity to cause zoonotic infections,” meaning that it could jump to humans.

    Dr. Wenqing Zhang, head of the WHO’s global influenza program, told BBC News on Thursday that the threat posed by the virus spilling over “is very concerning and the risk has been increasing over the years as reflected in the number of outbreaks in animals as well as a number of infections in humans.”

    “We’re closely related to minks and ferrets, in terms of influenza risks… If it’s propagating to minks, and killing minks, it’s worrisome to us.”

    As CBC News reported this week: “Most human infections also appeared to involve people having direct contact with infected birds. Real-world mink-to-mink transmission now firmly suggests H5N1 is now ‘poised to emerge in mammals,’ Wille said—and while the outbreak in Spain may be the first reported instance of mammalian spread, it may not be the last.”

    Wille warned that “a virus which has evolved on a mink farm and subsequently infects farmworkers exposed to infected animals is a highly plausible route for the emergence of a virus capable of human-to-human transmission to emerge.”

    Louise Moncla, an assistant professor of pathobiology at the University of Pennsylvania, told the outlet that viruses often adapt to new host species through an “intermediary host.”

    “And so what’s concerning about this is that this is exactly the kind of scenario you would expect to see that could lead to this type of adaptation, that could allow these viruses to replicate better in other mammals—like us,” Moncla explained.

    The alarm bells sounded this week echo long-standing warnings about the growing prospects of a devastating bird flu pandemic.

    In his 2005 book, The Monster at Our Door, the late historian Mike Davis wrote that “the essence of the avian flu threat… is that a mutant influenza of nightmarish virulence—evolved and now entrenched in ecological niches recently created by global agro-capitalism—is searching for the new gene or two that will enable it to travel at pandemic velocity through a densely urbanized and mostly poor humanity.”

    Alluding to the “constantly evolving nature of influenza viruses,” the WHO recently stressed “the importance of global surveillance to detect and monitor virological, epidemiological, and clinical changes associated with emerging or circulating influenza viruses that may affect human (or animal) health, and timely virus-sharing for risk assessment.”

    To avert a cataclysmic bird flu pandemic, scientists have also emphasized the need to ramp up H5N1 vaccine production, with Wille pointing out that “a very aggressive and successful poultry vaccination campaign ultimately stopped all human cases” of the H7N9 strain of the virus in the early 2010s.

    Others have also criticized the global fur farming industry, citing the spread of bird flu as well the coronavirus among cruelly confined minks.

    “We’re closely related to minks and ferrets, in terms of influenza risks,” Dr. Jan Hajek, an infectious diseases physician at Vancouver General Hospital, told CBC News. “If it’s propagating to minks, and killing minks, it’s worrisome to us.”

    This post was originally published on Common Dreams.



  • Declaring the fight against HIV and AIDS infections in children “winnable,” public health officials from across Africa on Wednesday convened in Dar es Salaam, United Republic of Tanzania to discuss the steps needed from policymakers and the healthcare sector to eradicate pediatric cases by 2030.

    Representatives from 12 countries including Tanzania, Zimbabwe, Cote D’Ivoire, and Cameroon were joined by the U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), UNICEF, and other global organizations at the first ministerial meeting of the Global Alliance to End AIDS in Children.

    The alliance was formed last summer, as the United Nations noted that just 52% of children living with AIDS are on lifesaving treatment and warned progress for preventing pediatric cases is stalling. Among adults patients, 76% are receiving antiretroviral treatments.

    The delegates unanimously agreed on Wednesday to the Dar es Salaam Declaration for Action. The declaration’s commitments include:

    • Providing access to universal testing and treatment for all children and adolescents living with HIV and support them to remain virally suppressed;
    • Ensuring access to treatment and care for all pregnant and breastfeeding women and support them to stay in care;
    • Harnessing digital technologies to reach adolescents and young people;
    • Implementing comprehensive, integrated HIV services;
    • Working with and for men, women, and adolescent girls to ensure that mothers are protected from acquiring HIV during pregnancy and breastfeeding;
    • Ending the stigma, discrimination, and gender inequities experienced by women, children, and adolescents affected by HIV; and
    • Working with communities including men to prevent gender-based violence and counter harmful gender norms.

    “We have the tools, the guidance, the policies, and the knowledge we need. Now we must make good on this commitment and move to action,” reads the declaration. “Together we will not fail.”

    “Closing the gap for children will require laser focus and a steadfast commitment to hold ourselves, governments, and all partners accountable for results.”

    The global alliance has stressed since its formation last year that ending pediatric AIDS and HIV infections is an achievable goal, noting the progress that has been made in several African countries with high HIV burdens.

    “By the end of 2021, 12 countries in sub-Saharan Africa reached the target of 95% ART [antiretroviral therapy] coverage in pregnant women and Botswana was the first high prevalence African country to be validated as being on the path to eliminating vertical transmission of HIV,” reads a document released when the initiative was launched.

    Sixteen countries worldwide have also been “certified for validation of eliminating vertical transmission of HIV,” according to UNAIDS.

    But still, 160,000 children acquired HIV in 2021 and children accounted for 15% of all AIDS-related deaths that year, despite the fact that they only make up 4% of the total number of people living with HIV. Across the globe, a child dies of AIDS-related causes every five minutes.

    “Year on year, the same poor progress has been reported towards global and national targets for children and adolescents,” said the alliance last year. “Despite available, affordable, and highly effective tools and programming strategies to diagnose and treat HIV among children, adolescents, and pregnant and breastfeeding women, large service gaps for these populations remain.”

    By meeting the commitments laid out in the Dar es Salaam Declaration, officials said, they will promote active participation of national programs and affected communities, boost existing programs to end AIDS in children, and mobilize resources through “donor coordination and innovative financing.”

    “Closing the gap for children will require laser focus and a steadfast commitment to hold ourselves, governments, and all partners accountable for results,” said John Nkengasong, the U.S. global AIDS coordinator and leader of PEPFAR. “In partnership with the global alliance, PEPFAR commits to elevate the HIV/AIDS children’s agenda to the highest political level within and across countries to mobilize the necessary support needed to address rights, gender equality, and the social and structural barriers that hinder access to prevention and treatment services for children and their families.”

    Philip Mpango, vice president of the United Republic of Tanzania, said the host country “has showed its political engagement” regarding the issue.

    “Now we need to commit moving forward as a collective whole,” said Mpango. “All of us in our capacities must have a role to play to end AIDS in children. The global alliance is the right direction, and we must not remain complacent. 2030 is at our doorstep.”

    This post was originally published on Common Dreams.



  • The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s newly released plan for regulating wastewater pollution, including discharges of toxic “forever chemicals,” is far too muted and sluggish, a progressive advocacy group warned Friday.

    The Environmental Working Group (EWG) detailed how the EPA’s long-awaited Effluent Guidelines Program Plan 15 postpones sorely needed action to rein in widespread contamination from per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). PFAS are a class of hazardous synthetic compounds widely called forever chemicals because they persist in people’s bodies and the environment for years on end.

    “We are deeply concerned that the EPA is punting on restrictions for PFAS polluting industries like electronics manufacturers, leather tanners, paint formulators, and plastics molders,” said Melanie Benesh, EWG’s vice president of government affairs. “We are also alarmed that the EPA’s proposed restrictions on some of the most serious PFAS polluters—chemical manufacturers and metal finishers—are also getting delayed, with no timeline for when those limits will be final, if ever.”

    According to EWG, the EPA’s new plan “falls short” of its pledge, made in the agency’s 2021 PFAS Strategic Roadmap, to “get upstream” of the forever chemicals problem.

    As the watchdog summarized:

    The EPA confirmed that by spring 2024—nine months later than previously scheduled—it will release a draft regulation for manufacturers of PFAS or those that create mixtures of PFAS. The agency will do the same for metal finishers and electroplaters by the end of 2024, a delay of six months. The EPA did not announce when final rules will be available for these industries.

    The agency will also begin regulating PFAS releases from landfills but did not provide a timeline for a final rule.

    For all other industrial categories the EPA considered for PFAS wastewater limitation guidelines, the new plan includes more studies and monitoring, likely delaying restrictions on these sources indefinitely.

    “Polluters have gotten a free pass for far too long to contaminate thousands of communities. Now they need aggressive action from the EPA to stop PFAS at the source,” Benesh said. “But the EPA’s plan lacks the urgency those communities rightfully expect.”

    “Although it’s a good thing the EPA is committing to address PFAS discharges from landfills—a source of pollution that disproportionately affects vulnerable communities—it’s also frustratingly unclear from EPA’s plan when, if ever, those limits will materialize,” said Benesh.

    “Given the glacial pace of change in the EPA’s plan,” she added, “states should not wait for the EPA to act on PFAS.”

    “Polluters have gotten a free pass for far too long to contaminate thousands of communities. Now they need aggressive action from the EPA to stop PFAS at the source.”

    Scientists have linked long-term PFAS exposure to numerous adverse health outcomes, including cancer, reproductive and developmental harms, immune system damage, and other negative effects.

    A peer-reviewed 2020 study estimated that more than 200 million people in the U.S. could have unsafe levels of PFAS in their drinking water. The deadly substances—used in dozens of everyday household products, including ostensibly “green” and “nontoxic” children’s items, as well as firefighting foam—have been detected in the blood of 97% of Americans and in 100% of breast milk samples. Such findings stem from independent analyses because the EPA relies on inadequate testing methods.

    Researchers have identified more than 57,000 sites across the U.S. contaminated by PFAS. Solid waste landfills, wastewater treatment plants, electroplaters and metal finishers, petroleum refiners, current or former military facilities, and airports are the most common sources of forever chemical pollution. Industrial discharges of PFAS are a key reason why 83% of U.S. waterways contain forever chemicals, tainting fish nationwide.

    Some congressional Democrats are “trying to force the EPA to address PFAS more quickly,” EWG noted.

    The Clean Water Standards for PFAS Act, introduced in 2022 by Rep. Chris Pappas (D-N.H.) and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), would require the EPA to establish PFAS wastewater limitation guidelines and water standards for PFAS in nine distinct industry categories by the end of 2026.

    This post was originally published on Common Dreams.

  • Local residents and environmentalists warn that the rush to export fracked gas to energy-strapped allies in Europe and the rest of the world threatens to create an “industrial wasteland” in southern Louisiana. At least two export terminals near the Gulf Coast are already releasing toxic air pollution as massive ships are loaded with liquified natural gas, or LNG. The climate crisis demands a steep…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Before heading to El Paso, Texas, on January 8 for his first presidential visit to the U.S.-Mexico border, President Joe Biden announced a trifecta of hideous immigration policies, along with a familiar “crackdown” on “illegal” border crossings. The new initiatives include expanding the controversial Trump-era Title 42 to migrants from Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua and Haiti as well as refusing…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Since the early days of Tibetans seeking refuge from the brutalities of China’s invasion and occupation of Tibet, various health agencies, some affiliated to the United Nations, operating inside India ran a series of vaccination programs which sought to immunize thousands of Tibetans from various diseases. This was done with the approval and cooperation; of what was known then as the Tibetan Government in Exile, no doubt encouraged and persuaded by the Indian authorities. That has extended into the present period of Covid.

    Are Covid Injections Causing Harm To Exiled Tibetans?

    Photo: archivenet

    Given the refugee circumstances applying to Tibetans and being a culture which had developed over many centuries its own traditional medicine and treatment the notion of injections, super-drugs applied by white-coated clinicians, was entirely alien.

    But their exiled Government, and more importantly His Holiness the Dalai Lama, had been convinced of the wonders of western science; and with the genuine welfare of their fellow Tibetans in mind immunization projects were welcomed and approved.

    Are Covid Injections Causing Harm To Exiled Tibetans?

    Photo: archivenet

    We wonder how many Tibetan children were incorporated into a polio program when Bill Gates took control of India’s National Technical Advisory Group on Immunization (NTAGI) which mandated up to 50 doses of polio vaccines through overlapping immunization programs to infants under the age of five. “Indian doctors blame the Gates campaign for a devastating non-polio acute flaccid paralysis (NPAFP) epidemic that paralyzed 490,000 children beyond expected rates between 2000 and 2017. In 2017, the Indian government dialed back Gates’ vaccine regimen and asked Gates and his vaccine policies to leave India. NPAFP rates dropped precipitously.”. Source: https://greatgameindia.com/bill-gates-agenda-in-india-exposed-by-robert-kennedy-jr/

    However, unlike enshrined medical rights enjoyed by western citizens, such as informed consent, Tibetans were generally vaccinated and medicated without explanation, other than a compliance requested from a local Tibetan representative. On this basis Tibetan refugee schools and settlements were regularly singled out for vaccination programs. Whatever voices of dissent or concern were isolated, conformity and trust runs deep in Tibetan culture and if these projects had the endorsement of the exiled Tibetan authorities then that was sufficient to produce mass conformity.

    Are Covid Injections Causing Harm To Exiled Tibetans?

    Photo: Tibetan Health

    On occasions this matter has entered discussion there have been questions, and rightly so. Were Tibetans, already in a vulnerable and disadvantaged condition as refugees, cynically exploited by western health agencies and their drug-manufacturing partners? Used as a testing population? What monitoring was conducted for health injury, if any? Why was no reporting procedure implemented or explained, that would allow Tibetans to log any health-harming ‘side-effects’?

    It was though, some would argue a long time ago, such measures and protections only operated in the West, and certainly not in refugee settlements in India. Of course the health agencies involved had a duty-of-care and ethical obligations, did they apply them? A chapter of Tibetan exile history yes, but sadly one that’s being repeated. This time with an unlicensed, experimental, gene-modified drug; which since its implementation across the world, has already produced disturbing indications of serious risk-to-health.

    Are Covid Injections Causing Harm To Exiled Tibetans?

    Photo: archivenet

    There is growing medical evidence of the harm resulting from Covid injections and the concerns are mounting, especially as rates of cardiac related illness and deaths are rising considerably. Serious, medically examined and academically supported information on this, and other damage-to- health, associated with this novel gene-therapy, is available online. Tibetan communities, be they in India Switzerland , the USA or elsewhere did not escape the draconian and dystopian response to this flu-variant virus. They were subjected to similar campaigns of fear-mongering, psychological grooming and social restrictions.

    Photo: Tibet TV

    Like other administrations, the exiled Tibetan authorities issued the same narrative of mask-wearing, isolation measures and with the partnership of India, launched a ‘vaccination’ program. On March 7, 2021 the Dalai Lama, it was reported, enrolled himself to be ‘vaccinated’ and the Oxford Astra-Zeneca drug was administered. From the moment images of that event appeared across broadcast, online and print-media any possible hesitancy felt by a n exiled Tibetan would dissolve away.

    There could be no question, after all their spiritual and cultural leader approved; “This is very, very helpful, very good” Source: BBC News March 7 2021

    Yet similar questions ,which retrospectively haunt the mass vaccination of Tibetan refugees in the 1960s and 70s, apply in the present situation. Even more so given the entirely experimental nature of these genetically modified drugs, and mindful that not insignificant numbers of people have suffered health injury associated with these ‘vaccines’.

    Were Tibetans fully informed of the experimental nature of these vaccines, prior to agreeing receiving them? Was it explained to them that they can pose a number of not inconsiderable health risks? Was a procedure of reporting health-injury following vaccination explained and put-in-place for Tibetans in cases needed? Was it made entirely clear that before agreeing to receiving a vaccination the risks to health required to be explained? Lastly what health-monitoring has either the exiled Tibetan Administration, or Indian authorities implemented to assess, record and respond to health-damage post vaccinations?

    Are Covid Injections Causing Harm To Exiled Tibetans?

    Photo: Screen Grab/Israel National News

    It is likely the answer to those key concerns, will; as applying to citizens in the USA, Europe and elsewhere, be no!

    That being the case, it may well be that, as in all populations who have taken these ‘vaccines’, there will be a proportion of Tibetans who have suffered serious illness as a consequence. Given the nature of exiled Tibetan society and aspects of its culture such events are possibly not being submitted, equally there could be no reporting option in place. Then there could simply be an ignorance at work, no knowledge of the damage these drugs can inflict.

    Whatever the facts it is essential, at the very least, that any Tibetan whose health has been reduced and harmed following ‘vaccination’ should be offered immediate medical support. Meanwhile, having advocated and promoted across Tibetan communities, that these ‘vaccines’ should be taken, the exiled Tibetan Administration has a responsibility to examine and determine the extent and nature of such injury.

    Without such investigation, simply relying upon the assurances of the Indian medical authorities, or claims of vaccine manufacturers will leave Tibetans exposed to a dangerous harm that cannot be reversed.

    This post was originally published on TIBET, ACTIVISM AND INFORMATION.



  • While welcoming efforts to update U.S. air quality standards for soot, environmental and public health advocates on Friday warned that the Biden administration’s new proposal falls woefully short of what’s needed to protect vulnerable communities from deadly pollution.

    Because the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) declined to make any changes during the industry-friendly Trump administration, the United States currently relies on 2012 standards for soot, or fine particulate matter (PM2.5) from sources such as construction sites, fires, power plants, and vehicles.

    “EPA is not living up to the ambitions of this administration to follow the science, protect public health, and advance environmental justice.”

    The EPA is now proposing to strengthen the primary annual PM2.5 standard—which is about public health—from 12 micrograms per cubic meter to 9-10 micrograms per cubic meter, but over a two-month period the agency will take public comment on a range of 8-11 micrograms per cubic meter.

    The rule would not alter the secondary annual PM2.5 standard, which is meant to protect public welfare, including animals, crops, and nature. It also would retain existing primary and secondary standards for both PM2.5 over a 24-hour period and larger inhalable particles known as PM10.

    The agency estimates the new standard would prevent up to 4,200 premature deaths and 270,000 lost workdays each year while resulting in as much as $43 billion in net health benefits in 2032. EPA Administrator Michael Regan claimed that “our work to deliver clean, breathable air for everyone is a top priority” and framed the proposal as “grounded in the best available science.”

    However, campaigners and representatives from overburdened communities argued Friday that the EPA should listen to pleas for cleaner air from people at risk—rather than business groups fearmongering about potential economic impacts—and impose even stricter standards, which could reduce health issues like asthma and heart attacks and save thousands more lives annually.

    “This delayed proposed rule on soot is a disappointment and missed opportunity overall. Though aspects of EPA’s proposal would somewhat strengthen important public health protections, EPA is not living up to the ambitions of this administration to follow the science, protect public health, and advance environmental justice,” said Earthjustice attorney Seth Johnson.

    Sierra Club senior director of energy campaigns Holly Bender agreed that the rule “does not fully reflect the serious danger of this pollutant, the scientific record, or the positive impact stronger standards would have on communities across the country.”

    “The health burdens of air pollution are disproportionately borne by communities of color near heavily polluting facilities and infrastructure, like power plants, factories, and roads, and this standard is a long-overdue step toward correcting enduring environmental and health injustices faced by fenceline communities,” she stressed. “Anything short of the most protective standards gives a pass to the biggest polluters.”

    Northeast Ohio Black Health Coalition executive director Yvonka Hall also lamented that “with the new soot rule proposal, the EPA and the Biden administration have missed a vital opportunity to enact transformational change, to advance environmental justice, and to protect the most vulnerable Americans.”

    “Thanks to redlining, Black people are more likely to live, work, play, and pray in communities that are toxic,” Hall pointed out. “With this proposal, we have missed the chance to right some of those historical wrongs.”

    Noting that “Black children go to the emergency room for asthma 10 times more often than their white counterparts in the city of St. Louis” and “it’s eight times more often for Black adults,” Jenn DeRose, a Missouri-based Sierra Club campaigner, emphasized that “we need strong reductions in particulate matter pollution in my city and across the country to address problems created by generations of environmental racism targeted at Black communities.”

    Latinos are also “far more likely to live and work in areas where air quality is the poorest, and regularly breathe soot and smog, which can cause and exacerbate respiratory illness,” said Laura Esquivel, the Hispanic Federation’s vice president of federal policy and advocacy. “This rule falls short of taking steps to mitigate the decades of neglect and harm done to the health of our communities and to the health of Latino children in particular.”

    Echoing the campaigners, Anita Desikan, a senior analyst for the Center for Science and Democracy at the Union on Concerned Scientists, said that “the science is clear—PM pollution causes serious health problems, and the biggest impacts are hitting Black, Latinx, and low-income people, many of whom are already overburdened with exposure to multiple pollutants.”

    “Over the past decade, study after study has shown how breathing PM pollution causes real, meaningful damage,” Desikan continued. “Today’s proposal gets us closer to where we need to be—but the problem is urgent and the solution is long overdue. EPA needs to act quickly, follow the science, and finalize the strongest possible rule.”

    While Dr. Doris Browne, former president of the National Medical Association, the largest U.S. organization representing Black physicians, expressed gratitude for the Biden administration’s efforts in the official EPA statement announcing the proposal, other public health leaders were far more critical.

    American Lung Association president and CEO Harold Wimmer said that the proposed rule “misses the mark and is inadequate to protect public health from this deadly pollutant,” citing scientific research to advocate for an annual standard of 8 micrograms per cubic meter and a 24-hour standard of 25 micrograms per cubic meter.

    Declaring that “health organizations and experts are united in their ask of EPA to finalize the national standards for particle pollution” at those levels, Wimmer pledged that his group “will file detailed technical comments and provide testimony at the public hearing to urge EPA to strengthen the final standards,” and encouraged the public to do the same.

    Air Alliance Houston executive director Jennifer Hadayia highlighted that “during the recent cold snap, we were exposed to 24-hour industrial flares that spewed particulate matter across the region. And, our state regulatory agency—the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality—does nothing to stop it.”

    “We applaud the EPA for stepping in where our state will not, but we wish they had gone further,” said Hadayia. “A stronger 24-hour standard would protect more Houstonians from the recent flares.”

    Critics of the proposal also want the EPA to reconsider not just the primary, or health-based, standards, but also the secondary, or welfare-based, ones.

    “Because countless people and organizations like the National Parks Conservation Association spoke out and demanded the Biden administration take action, they’ve taken this modest step toward cleaner air, but it doesn’t go far enough,” said Ulla Reeves, campaigns director for the organization’s Clean Air Program.

    “Beyond the harm it causes people, soot wreaks havoc on our national parks’ plants, wildlife, waters, and our views,” Reeves said. “People deserve to visit national parks and not only breathe clean air but also experience the natural world free from this haze and soot pollution.”

    This post was originally published on Common Dreams.



  • Four months after U.S. President Joe Biden said in a television interview that “the pandemic is over,” global immunization experts are warning that “pandemic fatigue” may be contributing to declining demand for Covid-19 vaccines in developing countries, even as vaccination rates in the Global South are far below the World Health Organization’s target.

    As The Washington Post reported Wednesday, Covax, the WHO-backed vaccine sharing initiative launched in 2020, expects to deliver about 400 million doses of Covid-19 vaccines in 2023, compared to roughly one billion doses that were distributed in lower-income countries in 2021 and 2022.

    “As long as Africa lags far behind the rest of the world in reaching widespread protection, there is a dangerous gap which the virus can exploit to come roaring back.”

    Millions of doses sent to South Africa were thrown away in the second half of 2022, according to the Post, though only a third of the nation’s population is fully vaccinated. WHO has called on countries to ensure 70% or more of each country’s population is vaccinated against the coronavirus, but just 20% of people in low-income countries were immunized as of December.

    The Post‘s report comes as some public health experts in the U.S. have criticized the Biden administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for moving on from pandemic mitigation measure such as pushing for mask-wearing during Covid-19 surges, using metrics such as overwhelmed hospitals—rather than transmission numbers—to determine whether communities are considered to be at high risk for outbreaks, and shortening the recommended isolation period for people who have been infected.

    As Science News reported last month, when Biden declared the pandemic over in September, 10,000 deaths from Covid-19 were still being recorded each week—”10,000 too many, when most of these deaths could be prevented,” WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said at the time.

    Ayoade Alakija, co-chair of the African Union’s African Vaccine Delivery Alliance, told the Post Wednesday that “wealthy nations were sending the wrong message to other countries that were not as highly vaccinated.”

    “You’re telling us the pandemic is over?” Alakija said. “It’s disingenuous.”

    Pandemic fatigue has also become evident in vaccination rates in the U.S., with only half of the country’s vaccinated population having received booster shots, according to the CDC.

    The larger vaccination gaps in the lower-income countries could raise the chance that new variants emerge and spread across the globe, public health experts have long warned.

    “As long as Africa lags far behind the rest of the world in reaching widespread protection,” Matshidiso Moeti, Africa director for WHO, said in October, “there is a dangerous gap which the virus can exploit to come roaring back.”

    This post was originally published on Common Dreams.

  • I wasn’t surprised when the test results from my rheumatologist showed no COVID-19 antibodies, even though I had received all five doses of the vaccine that have been FDA-approved for immune-compromised folks like me. I knew the heavy dose of immune suppressants I take for my connective tissue disease made it likely that I would be in the estimated 3 percent of “moderately to severely”…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • RNZ News

    Travellers from China to Australia will be required to have a negative pre-departure covid-19 test from January 5 — and New Zealand says it is now assessing the health risks.

    China has seen skyrocketing covid case numbers, and a range of other countries including the United Kingdom, the United States and France have also imposed testing requirements.

    NZ government duty minister Stuart Nash said tonight that New Zealand was currently assessing the situation.

    “I’ve been informed today that Australia has announced pre-departure testing for travellers arriving from China. This measure is being taken in response to the rapidly unfolding situation in China,” he said.

    “New Zealand has a public health risk assessment under way which will be completed in the next 24 hours.

    “Our response will remain proportionate to the potential risks posed by travellers and in the context of the international situation.”

    New Zealand, to date, had said it has no plans to introduce testing for Chinese visitors, the Ministry of Health said last week.

    An ‘abundance of caution’
    Australia’s Health Minister Mark Butler said this decision was taken out of an “abundance of caution” and a temporary measure due to the lack of detailed information about the epidemiological situation in China.

    “That lack of comprehensive information has led a number of countries in recent days to put in place various measures — not to restrict travel from China, it’s important to say — but to gather better information about what is happening epidemiologically in that country,” he said.

    Butler said the government warmly welcomed visitors from China, and Australia was “well positioned right now in the fight against covid”.

    “The resumption of travel between China and Australia poses no immediate public health threat to Australians,” he said.

    Butler said universities and the tourism industry would also welcome the resumption of travel from China, as would people who had long been separated from their family and friends.

    “We know there are many many hundreds of thousands of Chinese Australians who have been unable to see family and friends for months — and, in some cases, years — and their ability to do that over the coming period will be a matter of considerable joy for them, particularly as we head into the Lunar New Year period,” he said.

    Butler said that, although the subvariant that appeared to be driving the wave in China was already present in Australia, the situation was “developing very quickly”.

    Concerns over new variant
    “There are concerns, in an environment of cases spreading so quickly, about the possibility of the emergence of a new variant,” he said.

    “Now there’s no evidence of that right now.

    “This is a measure taken out of an abundance of caution to provide Australians and the Australian government with the best possible information about a fast-evolving situation.”

    Butler said the Chinese government was informed about the measures this morning.

    “It won’t come as any surprise to the Chinese government that Australia is putting this arrangement in place, I don’t think, given the broad range of countries that have taken similar steps over the last 48 to 72 hours,” he said.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ. 

  • By Lydia Lewis, RNZ Pacific journalist, and Jan Kohout, RNZ journalist

    Twenty four Pacific peoples have been recognised in the 2023 New Year’s honours.

    A former Premier of Niue, Young Vivian, leads the list of distinguished Pacific peoples in the list.

    Vivian has been made an officer of the New Zealand Order of Merit for his services to Niue.

    Fiji-born Dr Api Talemaitoga, a familiar face to Pacific communities during the height of covid-19 in Aotearoa, has been acknowledged for his decades of service in the medical sector.

    The first Pacific priest ordained in Rome in 1990, Father Paulo Filoialii of Samoa, has been recognised for services to the Pacific community.

    Also on the honours list is Lisa Taouma, the producer and director of Coconet TV, the largest pool of Pacific content on screen in New Zealand.

    And the lead singer of the popular band Ardijah, Betty-Anne Monga, has been recognised for services to music.

    ‘Better things will come’: Niue’s Young Vivian
    Young Vivian started his career as a teacher in New Zealand.

    He went to a British school based on an English system. He failed English and was told to leave because enrolments were backed up.

    Betty-Anne Monga from Ardijah
    Betty-Anne Monga . . . lead singer of the popular band Ardijah. Image: Dan Cook/RNZ Pacific

    He said he “begged the education officer” to stay so he was sent to Northland College and was “very happy” there.

    Community members say he has been instrumental in fostering a love for Vagahau Niue, or Niue language, as a respected elder.

    Speaking to RNZ Pacific reporter Lydia Lewis in 2022, at the launch of the Niue language app in Auckland, Vivian said:

    “A language is a key to your culture and your tradition. It gives you that spiritual strength of who you are and you are able to face the world,” he said.

    “That’s very, very important to a small nation like Niue who has a population of only 2500 people, but here in Australia and New Zealand it’s 80,000.”

    Former Niue premier Young Vivian
    Former Niue premier Young Vivian says he is “proud” of the next generation of Vagahau Niue speakers at the Niue language app launch. Image: Lydia Lewis/RNZ Pacific

    When he went home to Niue, he was “dissatisfied”.

    “I want to be fully independent, but I could see signs that people were not acceptable to that so I gave up, only then we can be real Niueans,” Vivian said.

    His message to Pacific leaders is to believe in themselves.

    “They must depend on themselves and God, they have everything in their homes, they need guts, stickability and determination, small as they are, they can stand up to it.”

    He encourages the next generation to go back to basics.

    “You have to depend on literally what you’ve got,” he said.

    Dr Api Talemaitoga
    Dr Api Talemaitoga . . . “I have this knowledge about health and I find it a real pleasure to do it.” Image: Greg Bowker Visuals/RNZ Pacific

    ‘Profound privilege’: Dr Api
    Dr Api Talemaitoga has been acknowledged for his decades-long work in the medical sector.

    “I see it as a profound privilege, I have this knowledge about health and I find it a real pleasure to do it.”

    More than three decades in the job after graduating in 1986, he has a deep sense of pride for the next generation.

    “I was really fortunate to be given the opportunity to give the graduation address at the University of Otago for medical students,” he said.

    “To see the highest number of Pasifika medical students walk across the stage was really emotional.

    “I can happily retire now that I see this new generation of young people, enthusiastic, bright, diverse and they are the ones that will carry on the load in the future.”

    Dr Talemaitoga always has a smile on his face and an infectious laugh, he is incredibly hard to get hold of because he is always helping his patients.

    A young Dr Api sitting on the arm of sofa to the left of his paternal grandmother Timaleti Tausere in Suva. His parents Wapole and Makelesi Talematoga are on the left, his sister Laitipa Navara is sitting on his dad's lap and his brother Josateki Talemaitoga is in the middle next to his mum. At the back is his Dad's youngest brother Kaminieli and sitting on the ground at the front is cousin Timaleti.
    A young Dr Api sitting on the arm of sofa to the left of his paternal grandmother Timaleti Tausere in Suva. His parents, Wapole and Makelesi Talematoga, are on the left, his sister Laitipa Navara is sitting on his Dad’s lap and his brother Josateki Talemaitoga is in the middle next to his mum. At the back is his Dad’s youngest brother Kaminieli and sitting on the ground at the front is cousin Timaleti. Image: Dr Api Talemaitoga/RNZ Pacific

    When asked how he keeps his charisma day in day out, he said:

    “I am not superhuman, some days are just dreadful and you come home feeling really disillusioned and what’s the point of all of this when you see three or four people in a row heading for dialysis,” he said.

    “Then you have days where you make a difference to one person out of the 25 or 30 you see that day.

    “They feel really encouraged that you’ve been able for the first time to explain their condition to them … you can’t put it in words, it’s such an amazing feeling.”

    Father Paulo Sagato Filoialii and Pope John Paul II.
    Father Paulo Sagato Filoialii and Pope John Paul II. Image: Father Paulo Sagato Filoialii/RNZ Pacific

    ‘This is for you, not me’: Father Paulo
    The first Pacific Priest ordained in Rome in 1990 – Father Paulo Sagato Filoialii is dedicating his medal to the community he has served for decades, that has in turn backed him.

    “I want to offer this medal for the Pacific Island people, this is for you, not for me. This medal I will receive is for all of you and I thank you all for your prayers, for your love and your support, God bless you all,” he said.

    Father Paulo has contributed his time to the Catholic community in Christchurch and Ashburton.

    Upon Father Filoialii being ordained, the Samoan Mass was performed for the first time in the Vatican, resulting in Pope John Paul II decreeing that the Samoan Mass can now be performed anywhere in the world.

    ‘Proud’: The Coconet TV’s Lisa Taouma
    Pioneering Pasifika producer and director Lisa Taouma paved the way for Pacific peoples in media.

    She created the ground-breaking site The Coconet TV which is the largest pool of Pacific content on screen in Aotearoa.

    On top of that she made the Polyfest series, the long-standing Pacific youth series Fresh, five award-winning documentaries, the feature film Teine Sa and two short films.

    Taouma believes you are only as good as the people you bring through.

    “I’m proud of having brought Pacific stories to the fore around the world, I am proud of having brought Pacific people with me into that space, that is what I am most proud of,” She said.

    Taouma said it was awesome that more indigenous people were being recognised globally.

    While she is humbled to receive the honour, she admits not accepting it crossed her mind.

    “I felt quite conflicted at the start, you know there are problems with the idea of empire and how Pacific people have been treated under the history of the British Empire,” she said.

    “At the same time, it is really important to stand in this space as a Pacific woman and to have more Pacific people recognised by the Crown if you like.

    “This is a system that is hopefully more reflective of Aotearoa and where we stand now.”

    ‘I never looked back’: Sully Paea
    Niuean youth-worker Sully Paea has dedicated his life to working with youth, founding the East Tamaki Youth and Resource Centre between the late 1970s and 1986.

    Paea said he was lost. He battled alcoholism and pushed through a diagnosis of depression. He had a violent criminal career until he met his wife which changed him completely.

    He has dedicated his life to working with youth, founding the East Tamaki Youth and Resource Centre between the late 1970s and 1986.

    After 40 years serving the community, he has never looked back

    Nina has been nominated for her great services to Pacific Development with an Honorary Queen's service medal. She is posing with her grandchildren.
    Tafilau Nina Kirifi-Alai . . . “Seeing Pasifika communities graduating from university has been rewarding.” Image: Tafilau Nina Kirifi-Alai/RNZ Pacific

    ‘We’re getting there as people’: Tafilau Nina Kirifi-Alai
    Tafilau Nina Kirifi-Alai has been honoured for her great services to Pacific Development.

    Kirifi-Alai has been the Pacific manager of Otago University for more than 20 years.

    She has assisted scholarships of Pacific students and has led developments for the University of Otago to support Pacific tertiary institutions in the region.

    “Seeing Pasifika communities graduating from university has been rewarding,” she said.

    “To see all those colours in the garments and all those families and all that, was like oh yeah we are getting there, we’re getting there as a people. This is why we left our homes to seek greater opportunities, education wise and work wise, and I actually believe that education is the key.”

    ‘Knowing your culture, knowing your roots’: Rosanna Raymond
    Activism is what paved the road for multidisciplinary artist and curator Rosanna Raymond.

    Her work has taken her to China, Australia and Britain, where she has built an awareness of Pacific art and fashion.

    She draws on her strong cultural bond to artefacts that were taken from their original land and are now displayed in museums throughout the world.

    She made a huge written contribution by co-publishing Pasifika Styles: Artists inside the Museum in 2008 and was Honorary Research Associate at the Department of Anthropology and Institute of Archaeology at University College, London.

    She said moving forward whilst staying true to several of her roots was what led her to where she was today.

    The full list of Pasifika in the New Year’s Honours list are:

    To be Companions of the New Zealand Order of Merit:
    The honourable Mititaiagimene Young Vivian, former Premier of Niue – For services to Niue.

    To be Officers of the New Zealand Order of Merit:
    Nathan Edward Fa’avae – For services to adventure racing, outdoor education and the Pacific community

    David Rodney Fane – For services to the performing arts

    Dr Apisalome Sikaidoka Talemaitoga – For services to health and the Pacific community

    Lisa-Jane Taouma – For services to Pacific arts and the screen industry

    To be Members of the New Zealand Order of Merit:
    Father Paulo Sagato Filoialii – For services to the Pacific community

    Sefita ‘Alofi Hao’uli – For services to Tongan and Pacific communities

    Lakiloko Tepae Keakea – For services to Tuvaluan art

    Marilyn Rhonda Kohlhase – For services to Pacific arts and education

    Felorini Ruta McKenzie – For services to Pacific education

    Betty-Anne Maryrose Monga – For services to music

    Sullivan Luao Paea – For services to youth

    Rosanna Marie Raymond – For services to Pacific art

    The Queen’s Service Medal:
    Kinaua Bauriri Ewels – For services to the Kiribati community

    Galumalemana Fetaiaimauso Marion Galumalemana – For services to the Pacific community

    Hana Melania Halalele – For services to Pacific health

    Teurukura Tia Kekena – For services to the Cook Islands and Pacific communities

    Nanai Pati Muaau – For services to Pacific health

    Lomia Kaipati Semaia Naniseni – For services to the Tokelau community

    Ma’a Brian Sagala – For services to Pacific communities

    Mamaitaloa Sagapolutele – For services to education and the Pacific community

    Honorary:
    Tofilau Nina Kirifi-Alai – For services to education and the Pacific community

    Tuifa’asisina Kasileta Maria Lafaele – For services to Pacific health

    Nemai Divuluki Vucago – For services to Fijian and Pacific communities

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ. 

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • By Conan Young , Local Democracy Reporting editor

    This year was another huge one for Local Democracy Reporting, with our reporters at the forefront of uncovering some of the biggest stories in their regions.

    Felix Desmarais in Rotorua exposed hitherto secret plans by the council to revoke the reserve status of seven council reserves, paving the way for new housing to be built on them, including social housing.

    It became a major election issue with residents using the ballot to choose candidates opposed to the plan, which was subsequently canned by the new council.

    Local Democracy Reporting
    LOCAL DEMOCRACY REPORTING

    Steve Forbes covered the chaos created by understaffed and overstretched Emergency Departments, with a deep dive in to the death of a patient who visited Middlemore Hospital.

    He was first with a damning independent report that found the ED was “an unsafe environment for both patients and staff”.

    It was a year of climate change-induced severe weather, and LDR reporters produced numerous stories on how councils were coping, or not, when it came to putting back together what Mother Nature had torn apart.

    Flooding this year continued to represent an existential threat to Westport after the devastating inundation seen last year as well. Brendon McMahon’s stories have reflected the reality on the ground, such as the predicament faced by residents on Snodgrass Road who had been left out of a proposed flood protection scheme.

    Nelson clean-up
    Nelson reporter Max Frethey has kept readers up to date as that city deals with its own clean-up after devastating downpours in August, which left the city with a repair bill of between $40 million and $60 million, the biggest in its 160-year history.

    Sarah-Lee Smith inside her flood-damaged Snodgrass Rd home in Westport.
    Sarah-Lee Smith inside her flood-damaged Snodgrass Rd home in Westport. Image: Brendon McMahon/LDR

    The weather kept Marlborough’s Maia Hart busy this year as well in a region with communities still cut off or with limited access due to damage caused a year ago.

    But it was her story on the resilience of elderly Lochmara Bay resident Monyeen Wedge that really captured readers’ attention. Living alone, she went three days without power and was forced to live off canned food.

    The pandemic and the response of health authorities and councils continued to be an area of inquiry for LDR in 2022, and none more so than Moana Ellis in Whanganui.

    While high vaccination rates amongst pākehā protected thousands from the worst affects of the Omicron wave, it was a battle for DHBs to reach many Māori, who already had a distrust of health authorities. Moana’s reporting ensured these communities were not forgotten.

    In one of LDR’s most read stories of 2022, Alisha Evans uncovered the extent of bureaucratic overreach in Tauranga when through traffic was discouraged on Links Ave with the help of a fine. A glitch led to infringements being issued to drivers living as far away as the South Island who had never even visited the city.

    Reporters have documented the good and the bad of people’s interactions with vulnerable ecosystems. North Canterbury’s David Hill shone a light on the wonton destruction of endangered nesting birds in the region’s braided river beds by 4WD enthusiasts.

    Community efforts
    While Mother Nature was the winner following a series of stories from Taranaki’s Craig Ashworth on community efforts to protect dwindling stocks of kaimoana, which finally resulted in a two-year long rāhui.

    The national roll out of flexible median barriers, aka “cheesecutters”, caused consternation in Whakatāne where Diane McCarthy talked to police who said they would struggle to pass drivers on their way to emergencies and farmers driving slow-moving tractors worried about extra levels of road rage from slowed-up motorists.

    The dire state of the country’s water infrastructure is magnified in places like Wairarapa, with its small ratepayer base and decades old pipes and sewage treatment. There was no better illustration of this than Emily Ireland’s reporting on Masterton’s use of its Better Off funding where it was pointed out a mum was using a council provided portaloo to potty train her toddler because sewage was backing up in the town system whenever there was heavy rain.

    The human impact of decisions around water infrastructure was also brought in to sharp relief in Ashburton reporter Jonathan Leask’s excellent reporting. He took up the cause of a couple and their three children who were shut out of moving in to their dream home due to high nitrate levels limiting the building of any more septic tanks.

    One of the biggest changes around council tables this year was the election of Māori ward candidates, with half of all councils now having these. Northland’s Susan Botting has been first out of the blocks reporting on the new dynamics at play, starting with Kaipara mayor Craig Jepson’s ban on karakia to open meetings. The ban was hastily reversed, but led to the largest hikoi in Dargaville for some time.

    Hamish Pryde and a worker from Pryde Contracting were busy opening up the Wairoa River mouth last month in an effort to avert a flooding disaster for the township and low-lying areas.
    Hamish Pryde and a worker from Pryde Contracting were busy opening up the Wairoa River mouth last month in an effort to avert a flooding disaster for the township and low-lying areas. Image: Hawke’s Bay Regional Council/LDR

    As with all of LDR’s reporters, choosing just one stand out story from the many fine pieces published throughout the year is almost impossible. None more so than Tairāwhiti reporter Matthew Rosenberg.

    But no wrap of 2022 would be complete without mention of his story on bulldozer driver Hamish Pryde. The 65-year-old helped save Wairoa from a dangerously high river by negotiating already badly flooded paddocks and opening up a sand bar so the river could drain out to sea.

    As Matthew says, “not all heroes wear capes, some drive bulldozers”.

    Local Democracy Reporting is Public Interest Journalism funded through NZ On Air. Asia Pacific Report is a partner in the project.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • “The cells don’t have any heat. So, they’re sleeping with their clothes on,” a woman named Regina told Truthout of her son’s experience in Hill Correctional Center in Illinois in early December. “They’re not heating the tiers. There’s no heat in the day room. There’s no heat outside the showers.… The water is cold. You can let it run for a little while and you may get a little warm. But it’s not…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Thanks to new legal pathways, people around the world could sue plastics manufacturers for damages totalling more than $20 billion by 2030, with most lawsuits originating in the U.S., according to a new study. The report, published by the Australian Minderoo Foundation, estimates that the plastics industry is costing society around $100 billion annually in environmental clean-ups…

    Source

  • RNZ News

    Thousands of people will be cancelling their Christmas Day plans thanks to the invisible grinch, covid-19.

    Leading epidemiologist Professor Michael Baker estimates 85,000 people will be in isolation by then.

    He says gathering outdoors or in well-ventilated spaces is key to limiting the Christmas spread of covid — and testing beforehand.

    “No-one will thank you for turning up and infecting other people, particularly if there are vulnerable people there. This is a time to be responsible and test if you have got symptoms, and then act accordingly.”

    Crunching the numbers, Professor Baker said we could expect about 12,000 new infections on Christmas Day, based on the daily average of reported cases, plus the same number again of unreported ones.

    Covid Modelling Aotearoa programme co-leader Dion O’Neale agreed.

    “We’re sitting at the peak of a relatively decent-sized wave at the moment, so definitely lots of people will end up missing Christmas because they’re a confirmed case and will have to isolate.”

    He expected reported case numbers to decrease, but reminded people not to rely on that as a signal the wave is over.

    “They just don’t report a case when they’re having a fun time, that’s almost certainly happened this week with schools knocking off and a bunch of people leaving work.”

    ‘We have had to actually cancel Christmas’
    One Auckland man, who wished to remain anonymous, said Covid had slipped through the chimney at his house – he had two family members who tested positive this week.

    “Sadly we have had to actually cancel Christmas. We had been really looking forward to getting together with my sister and her kids for a big family get-together… and I had to phone her yesterday and say, ‘Look, I’m really sorry we can’t do it, it’s all off’.”

    They would take Christmas Day as it came and delay their family gathering.

    “We’re just going to have to try and make it as nice as we possibly can, depending how people are feeling. It could be that some people are feeling unwell.”

    Auckland woman Melanie Bruges will get out of isolation in time to celebrate Christmas Day with family.

    “We’re having family over on Christmas Day on Sunday, so I’m going to keep a really low-profile until then. We’ll probably test on Christmas Day before everybody comes over.”

    If her husband or their seven-year-old tested positive, they would postpone.

    “We’ve got five grandparents around for Christmas Day and we wouldn’t want them to be exposed to anything just for the sake of a meal. We can always put it off.”

    Free biscuit not worth the risk
    For the thousands who were flying to their Christmas Day destination, O’Neale said it paid to be cautious and mask-up.

    “Is it really diminishing your travel experience if you don’t get your free glass of water and a dry biscuit on the plane? Would you rather have a dry biscuit or covid?”

    Professor Michael Baker
    Professor Michael Baker . . . “A matter of making small changes in how you do things just to make it a lot safer for everyone.” Image: RNZ News

    He and Professor Baker did not want the grinch to steal Christmas.

    “It’s absolutely essential for your health, wellbeing and enjoyment of life to get out and reconnect with your family and friends and have an enjoyable summer, that is so important,” Professor Baker said.

    “Covid should not get in your way at all, and it’s a matter of making small changes in how you do things just to make it a lot safer for everyone.”

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ. 

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • RNZ Pacific

    About 50 striking nurses have held a protest in American Samoa over their employment conditions.

    The protest yesterday follows some nurses at the LBJ Hospital who walked off the job on Friday after discovering their pay was lower than they expected it to be.

    The striking nurses protested near the hospital about unpaid overtime and the hospital’s failure to pay them wage increments promised last week.

    One senior nurse told RNZ Pacific that with the LBJ Hospital hiring unlicensed nurses from Fiji, and accommodating them in hotels to await nursing school in January, it must be able to afford wage commitments to its current staff.

    Two nurses who spoke on condition of anonymity to KHJ News said they were promised increases in their latest pay cheques, which were credited to bank accounts last Friday.

    They said what they were promised and what was in their accounts did not match.

    Those nurses who did receive pay increases are said to have received hikes ranging from 18 cents an hour to $1 an hour, but it is believed that some did not receive a pay rise at all.

    KHJ News reports the nurses saying they work a minimum of 12 hours and the ratio is sometimes one nurse to 12 patients because of the acute nursing shortage.

    They said this is against regulations and puts patients’ lives at risk.

    Since Friday, contract nurses have been manning the wards and clinics, including newly hired ones from Fiji who have yet to undergo certification under US standards.

    A meeting between the nurses and the board of directors and CEO of the hospital is due to take place.

    Hospital management has yet to respond to media questions about the nurses’ action.

    The CEO of the LBJ Hospital, Moefaauo William Emmsley, announced a week ago that the hospital had completed a salary reclassification for nurses which would bump up the entry rates for nurses and all salary levels.

    LBJ hospital, American Samoa
    LBJ Hospital in American Samoa . . . an acute nursing shortage. Image: RNZ Pacific

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ. 

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Charleston, West Virginia — Brooke Parker has spent the past two years combing riverside homeless encampments, abandoned houses, and less traveled roads to help contain a lingering HIV outbreak that has disproportionately affected those who live on society’s margins. She shows up to build trust with those she encounters and offers water, condoms, referrals to services, and opportunities to be…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • RNZ News

    With restrictions eased, public health warnings muted and mask wearing now almost non-existent, the risk of contracting covid-19 is still very real, particularly as people come together for Christmas parties and family gatherings.

    Daily covid-19 numbers are the highest they have been for four-and-a-half months.

    Immunologist Dr Anna Brooks of the University of Auckland says she is gravely concerned at the cavalier approach hundreds of thousands of New Zealanders are now taking to covid, particularly thinking that if they have already had it, they are not at risk of reinfection.

    Dr Brooks tells Kathryn Ryan about how New Zealand is coping with the pandemic’s enduring impact and looks ahead to what could be a deadly summer of reinfection.

    Kathryn Ryan: What is going on at the moment with this rise in reported cases? Are we in another surge of covid? 

    Dr Anna Brooks: Yes, that absolutely seems to be the case.

    These variants that are circulating have a better chance of infecting us because they’re evading our immune defences and so reinfections are going to be far more common than we’ve experienced for example, in the second wave.

    So, there might be a bit more complacency because we’ve had two waves and people may have thought, “Well, I had it once I didn’t get it again,” and that’s really just not the case.

    These variants, there’s a whole bunch of them out there and many of them we actually won’t even know exist because of the low level of data collection and variant tracking.

    New subvariants
    KR: We’re getting new subvariants; just explain what that means for your existing level of protection, either from previous infection and/or from vaccination — these subvariants will be better at evading than what we had before. 

    AB: Exactly. What’s happening is as each new variant or subvariant is evolving, it’s doing so to evade our immune protection.

    So absolutely, that can be from the vaccinations and/or previous infection.

    What we’ve sort of had in our country, is we had that really large first wave, which was the BA.1 and [BA.2]… then the next wave we had was BA.4 and [BA.5], so we’ve got some what we call hybrid immunity within the community, absolutely. But it’s not enough to stop reinfection when the subvariants are still able to skip round our antibody response and infect us.

    And as we know, our vaccinations are a great starting point for preventing severe illness but they’re not great at preventing infection. So, if these variants are capable of infecting any of us, regardless of our baseline immunity, then we’re going to see cases rise, we’re going to see severe illness and hospitalisations and deaths again — that’s the facts.

    Impact of reinfection
    KR:
    Can we talk about reinfection? Because I think people have had that sense of, ‘I’ve had it, so I’ve got a few months free now.’ But is there also a sense of, ‘I’ve had it and I didn’t have any major issues, so I’ll be fine next time too.’ Can you explain what we’re learning about the impact of reinfection and what to assume, or rather not to assume? 

    AB: I think that’s exactly right. I think there’s a general feel that if you’ve had covid, you survived it perfectly fine, that if you get it again, it’ll be the same.

    But what we’re seeing coming through the literature — and these are really large-scale studies that have been tracking reinfections — is that each infection or reinfection is increasing your health harms or your risk of health harms.

    So, that’s where we really want to raise awareness right now, that people aren’t complacent about the fact that just because they’ve had at once, they’re not at risk, because everyone is at risk.

    What we don’t understand is how long the body takes to get back to what I call a baseline level of [recovery in the body] and you won’t necessarily feel that. You may have had your infection, it may have been very mild and you’re like, ‘Yeah, that was nothing.’ But it’s not really nothing if you then go and get another reinfection, and then another one on top of that.

    We don’t really know, especially now there are so many variants circulating, we just don’t know what the risk factors are and even the ability… to get exposure to multiple variants over a short period of time.

    The literature is telling us each infection is risky, and reinfections increase that risk. Some of the publications are suggesting that that risk lasts for at least six months and that those are risks of heart attacks, strokes, clotting events, all those things that nobody wants as a risk factor.

    Inflammation risk
    KR:
    Just explain again why inflammation, that elevated immune response and why inflammation associated with it is a risk factor for long covid? 

    AB: What we understand from all the research that’s going on is that, first of all, this virus is not just a respiratory virus.

    That was where the first level of complacency crept in, when we started to see less respiratory failure, and the lung issues, and kicked off with Omicron.

    But essentially, Omicron has been a different beast, and remains that way. What we do know is that it still has the ability to impact our blood vessels, our blood vessels feed all our organs.

    Part of the immune response when we get infected, we know that the virus can cause clotting issues, and that probably happens in all of us. It’s part of an immune response to form clots to get the infection under control and perhaps what’s going on is that some of us resolve that inflammation and that clotting, and we all go back to normal, and in others, that doesn’t happen.

    And that’s just one part of the picture. What I believe a lot of the literature is pointing towards — and it is one of the hypotheses we’re chasing down — is also that your immune system has had a hammering to a certain extent and we don’t know how to actually detect that, we don’t know how long it takes to resolve, but it kind of puts us all in a slightly vulnerable position.

    What we are starting to see more coming through, and again, as I say, as part of the research we’re looking into, is that it disrupts our immune control of what we are wandering around with every day and that’s all our microbiome, and including latent or dormant viruses that we got in childhood, that live with us for life.

    Some of the research is indicating that we get a reawakening of our viruses and some of the ones that are well known are chickenpox. Many of us get chickenpox, and then we get shingles. When our immune system — our immune control — breaks down, we get an outbreak of shingles because the shingles presentation, if you like, indicated that you had chickenpox as a child.

    Epstein-Barr virus
    That’s one virus we know, the other one that is kind of front and centre that everyone’s chasing down a bit more is Epstein-Barr virus. So this is EBV, or what we know of as glandular fever, and most of us are exposed to this.

    The numbers are around at least 90 percent of us wander around controlling EBV dormantly… but at the same time, we know that not everyone gets severely impacted by EBV.

    We’re starting to wonder whether it’s viruses like that, that inhibit us all, that are getting reawakened through a loss of immune control. And that could be contributing to what we now know as post-viral illnesses because, obviously, long covid is front and centre because this pandemic is uncovering that, but it also loops into myalgic encephalomyelitis or chronic fatigue syndrome.

    EBV has been a strong contender as being a cause of that illness too, so it’s really showing us that we haven’t done enough research into understanding how our immune systems wonderfully control latent viruses or dormant viruses that we contract as youth, as children, and maybe that’s part of the picture here.

    KR: So the question now is, what is it you can do to go forth and have a fabulous Christmas, a good holiday, enjoy life as fully as possible but still manage this continuing risk?  

    AB: We all want to have fun in summer and gatherings and all the rest of it. My main message at the moment is that I want to make sure people understand that there is a risk… and we want people to manage their own risk, but not just their own risk, because vulnerable people are getting more and more shut away, because they no longer feel safe to be anywhere because they’re vulnerable to infection.

    Those two things coming together, we’re basically in a position where we’re now essentially being told to look out for our own selves, because there’s very little public health messaging about the risks.

    It’s two things here. It’s education that the risk isn’t going away, you want to protect yourself and understand those risks, and know that… any infection comes with a risk and there are people out there that are getting more and more concerned about their health not being taken seriously, because people around them don’t care anymore…

    Keeping businesses open
    I think some simple measures will keep businesses open too… You know, quite often when we’re raising awareness you feel like it’s the economy or businesses that are like, ‘Oh, make covid go away.’ We’re actually raising this awareness to keep businesses open. We want businesses to thrive over summer, but if there are no health protections in place, and you have customers in enclosed spaces, and your staff are getting infected, you’ll have no staff, you can’t open and so on and so forth.

    I think the most obvious one is flying and public transport… if we’re not masking on planes, is that a ticking time bomb before there are no staff and you can’t get to your holiday destination?

    KR: Back to your other key point, which is that reinfection being the trend possibly of the summer, those rates are getting quite high… are they getting close to a third of new cases being reinfections? 

    AB: Yeah, it looks that way. We have to remember that without a surveillance programme of you know, random testing, we have actually very little intel on what that number is going to be.

    [If] we’re not collecting random data, then we have no idea how much asymptomatic spreads happening or how many people are getting infections.

    We can’t forget about that. We need to remember that that is why we RAT before an event, that is why we RAT before we go to a Christmas function. It’s not just because you’ve got symptoms — we don’t know how many people are getting asymptomatic infections.

    That’s now become an individual choice, whether you do that, because it’s not part of any public health messaging that you should check to make sure you’re not asymptomatic.

    So, if we don’t know how many people are out there asymptomatic, they’re not going to be testing, they’re not going to be reporting, and then they won’t even know if in a month, two months’ time they get an infection, whether that’s a reinfection.

    That’s what we would love to see from a scientific position, and, you know, safety and understanding all of our risks, is actually gathering data so we can understand this and that includes knowing what variants are out there.

    Every time around immune system is waning, depending on how long ago we were infected, or boosted or vaccinated, then the chances of our illness…being worse is going to increase as well. So severity, risks increase the further ago your immune response was.

    RAT tests and variants
    KR: Are the RAT tests just as effective with the new variants? 

    AB: We’ve heard that the RATs are picking up the variants. It’s only as good as how good the person is testing as well.

    KR: Are the boosters keeping up with the variants? 

    AR: Boosting revives your immune system… the data showed any boost is going to give you that little bit more protection, because what it’s doing is training the immune system, and it’s reviving it, it’s waking it up, and you’ve got more circulating antibodies. They might not be perfect at shutting down the variant that you get infected with, but it’s going to do a better job than being completely non-boosted.

    But what we’d like see is, there are the bivalent vaccination boosters that will protect you more against the BA.4 and [BA.5] strains. And essentially what we really need is a new generation of vaccines that sterilises and stops infections.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ. 

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • RNZ News

    The parents of a New Zealand baby at the centre of a legal dispute that has made global headlines will not be appealing against a judge’s decision to hand guardianship of the child to the High Court.

    The four-month-old — known only as Baby W — requires urgent open heart surgery, with both blood and blood products required for the operation and potentially its aftermath.

    Te Whatu Ora/Health New Zealand took the case to court because the parents refused to allow blood transfusions from anyone who might have had the Pfizer covid-19 vaccine.

    The NZ Blood Service does not differentiate between blood from vaccinated and non-vaccinated people, saying there was “no evidence that previous vaccination affects the quality of blood for transfusion”.

    A judge on Wednesday ruled in favour of Te Whatu Ora, allowing the surgery to go ahead with whatever product the NZ Blood Service provides. Doctors, having been made agents of the court for the surgery, said on Wednesday afternoon they would be ready to operate within 48 hours.

    The family’s lawyer Sue Grey and high-profile media supporter Liz Gunn said this morning there was no time to appeal against the court’s decision, but they had confidence the child would “get the best possible care with the best, safest blood” because “the government cannot afford anything to go wrong for Baby W as the world is watching”.

    “The priority for the family is to enjoy a peaceful time with their baby until the operation, and to support him through the operation,” the pair said in a post on the New Zealand Outdoors and Freedom Party Facebook page.

    Grey co-leads the party.

    The baby will be in intensive care for up to a week and under Te Whatu Ora’s guardianship possibly until the end of January, allowing time for their recovery. The doctors were told to keep the parents “informed at all reasonable times of the nature and progress of [the baby’s] condition and treatment”.

    Te Whatu Ora has been approached for comment.

    Judge’s ruling expected
    The ruling should not have come as a surprise, University of Otago bioethics lecturer  Josephine Johnstone told Morning Report on Thursday.

    “This may seem like a very 2022 case and it is in many ways, but it connects to lines of decision over time where there have been disputes about what’s in the best interests of a child that has very serious medical needs,” she said.

    “So this is consistent with previous cases around the refusal of blood products for children whose parents are Jehovah’s Witnesses… or refusal of medical care for cancer treatment for children whose parents have alternative health and science[ views, which is sort of similar to this. In many ways it’s consistent with those decisions. It’s not really a break in that way.”

    Johnstone said the parents’ authority over their child’s health and upbringing was being limited in only a very minor way.

    “The parents still have all of the other decision-making authority that parents have. And parents do have enormous latitude to make decisions about how to raise their children — what religion to raise them, what kinds of beliefs, what kinds of home to create, what kind of traditions, they have enormous decision-making power about children’s [medical treatment], but it’s not unlimited.

    “In very rare cases where it’s a life-and-death situation, we can expect the courts to step in — and that’s exactly what happened.”

    Johnstone’s view was backed up by Rebecca Keenan, a former nurse who now works as a barrister, specialising in medical law.

    Put child ‘firmly first’
    “[The court has] put the child firmly first and have gone by the evidence and supported the health board,” she told Morning Report.

    “From reading the judgment, you can see that the parents have been taking their baby out of hospital, against medical opinion, and there’s obviously been a real breakdown in the relationship between the parents and the medical staff.”

    Wednesday’s judgment outlined a meeting in late November during which the parents’ support person “proceeded to pressurise the specialists with her theory about conspiracies in New Zealand and even said that deaths in infants getting transfusions were occurring in Starship Hospital”.

    Johnstone said while having a support person in meetings with medical staff was a right, it was clear in this case they were not helpful.

    “One has to imagine that the involvement of some of the anti-vaccine campaigners has escalated not just this case at the national level, but even the discussions between the family and their medical team, so that’s explicitly mentioned in the case and is definitely a factor in how things must have got to the point where a court order would be needed.”

    While not an unexpected ruling, Johnstone fears it might further strain the relationship between parents with alternative views on medical matters and their doctors.

    “Any family who has these views and has a very sick child, their healthcare providers are going to have to work that much harder to keep them engaged and keep their trust … a big challenge,” she said.

    Pleased over care
    Speaking to RNZ’s First Up earlier on Thursday morning, Deputy Prime Minister Grant Robertson said he was “pleased” Baby W would soon be getting the care he needs.

    “Nobody underestimates the emotion and the challenge and the difficulty here, but we have to do what’s right for the child.”

    The case has made headlines globally, with coverage on BBC News, CNN and The Guardian.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ. 

  • RNZ News

    The New Zealand government has announced a Royal Commission into its covid-19 response.

    The Commission will be chaired by Australia-based epidemiologist Professor Tony Blakely, former Cabinet minister Hekia Parata, and former Treasury Secretary John Whitehead.

    It will start considering evidence from February 1 next year, concluding in mid-2024.

    The Royal Commission will look into the overall covid-19 response, including the economic response, and find what could be learned from it.

    Some things — like particular decisions taken by the Reserve Bank’s independent monetary policy committee, and the specific epidemiology of the virus and its variants — will be excluded.

    Announcing the moves, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said a Royal Commission was the highest form of public inquiry in New Zealand and was the right thing to do given covid-19 was the most significant threat to New Zealanders’ health and the economy since the Second World War.

    “It had been over 100 years since we experienced a pandemic of this scale, so it’s critical we compile what worked and what we can learn from it should it ever happen again,” she said.

    Fewer cases, deaths
    “New Zealand experienced fewer cases, hospitalisations and deaths than nearly any other country in the first two years of the pandemic but there has undoubtedly been a huge impact on New Zealanders both here and abroad.”


    The Royal Commission of Inquiry announcement. Video: RNZ News

    Ardern said Professor Blakely had the knowledge and experience necessary to lead the work, and Parata and Whitehead would add expertise and perspectives on the economic response and the effects on Māori.

    The terms of reference had been approved and the scope will be wide-ranging, covering specific aspects including the health response, the border, community care, isolation, quarantine, and the economic response including monetary policy.

    Ardern said monetary policy broadly was included in the review, but “what is excluded is the Reserve Bank’s independent Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) and those individual decisions that would have been made by that committee”.

    However, it “will not consider individual decisions such as how a policy is applied to an individual case or circumstance”.

    “We do need to make sure we learn broadly from the tools that we used for our response so that we make sure we have the most useful lessons possible going forward. Individual decisions don’t necessarily teach us that.

    “What we want to be careful about is that … we draw a distinction between individual decisions on any given day made by, indeed, officials within MBIE or the independent monetary policy committee given the role that they have and the independence of that committee, but broadly speaking monetary policy is included.”

    This was because the review needed to be mindful of the independence of the MPC, Ardern said.

    Impacts on Māori
    Terms of reference also included specific consideration of the impacts on Māori in the context of a pandemic consistent with Te Tiriti o Waitangi relationships, she said.

    Things like lockdowns and the length of them in general will be in scope, but for instance whether a specific lockdown should have ended one day or three days earlier would not be, Ardern said.

    Covid-19 Response Minister Dr Ayesha Verrall said the vaccine mandates were in scope, along with communication with communities, and this would be able to include looking at matters of social licence.

    The inquiry will cover the period from February 2020, to October 2022.

    Ardern was confident the inquiry would be able to be resourced appropriately.

    So far 75 reviews of New Zealand’s response had been carried out within Aotearoa since 2020, and internationally New Zealand had been named as having the fewest cases and deaths in the OECD for two years in a row, Ardern said.

    “However, we said from the outset there would be an appropriate time to review our response, to learn from it, and with the emergency over and our primary focus on our strong economic recovery — that time is now.

    ‘Our next pandemic’
    “Our next pandemic will not be for instance necessarily just a new iteration of covid-19 … one of the shortcomings we had coming into covid-19 was that our pandemic plan was based on influenza and because it was so specific to that illness there wasn’t enough in that framework that could help us with the very particular issues of this respiratory disease.”

    It would be an exercise in ensuring Aotearoa had the strongest possible playbook for a future pandemic, Ardern said.

    She expected the inquiry will cost about $15 million — similar to others, with the 2019 mosque attacks inquiry costing about $14 million.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ. 

  • MEDIAWATCH: By Hayden Donnell, RNZ Mediawatch producer

    One press conference question at a Prime Ministerial summit in Aotearoa New Zealand kicked off a wave of social media scorn this week — and even criticism and international headlines about sexism. But media made a better fist of the awkward questions thrown up by parents withholding consent for the treatment of their sick baby and their supporters.

    At a press conference involving Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and her Finnish counterpart Sanna Marin on Wednesday, November 30, a Newstalk ZB journalist unloaded a question which generated an immediate tsunami of criticism.

    “A lot of people will be wondering are you two meeting because you’re similar in age and you’ve got a lot of common stuff there, when you got into politics and stuff. Or can Kiwis actually expect to see more deals between our two countries down the line?”

    “I wonder whether or not anyone ever asked Barack Obama and John Key whether they met because they’re of similar age. We of course have a higher proportion of men in politics, it’s reality. Because two women meet it’s not simply because of their gender,” she said.

    Marin was even more succinct.

    “We are meeting because we are both prime ministers,” she said.

    After that the criticism started flooding in on social media.

    Then it came from those in the wider New Zealand media.

    Question’s premise
    On Today FM, Lloyd Burr took aim at the question’s premise.

    “Just because they’re both young women Prime Ministers? You think that’s why they’re meeting?

    “Do you think she’s come all the way to New Zealand to talk fashion and beauty tips, childbearing, menstruation, maybe anti-aging tips,” he asked, sarcastically.

    The criticism continued in the international media.

    CBS News in the US took aim at the reporter’s “sexist question” in a headline, while videos of the exchange posted by organisations like SBS News and The Washington Post garnered millions of views.

    There are questions on why Marin is here, given our two countries are not huge trading partners.

    Thankfully she kindly pointed some of those reasons out, saying she was worried about countries becoming dependent on trading with authoritarian regimes and wanted to establish closer ties with democratic allies.

    Angle covered
    Other reporters, including TVNZ’s Katie Bradford on 1News, covered that angle.

    A simple “What are you here to achieve?” would have got a similar response without generating any international headlines about sexism.

    Newstalk ZB may have produced a near-global consensus on that poor question to Marin and Ardern, but it did a lot better covering the bulletin-leading case of two parents who had refused to consent to their sick child getting a desperately-needed operation.

    They were afraid the baby might receive a transfusion of blood from a donor who hd been vaccinated against covid-19.

    Lawyer and Outdoors Party leader Sue Grey is representing the family in court — and in the media.

    That was awkward for media wary of giving their platforms to her anti-vax views and it resulted in some on-air flare-ups.

    Newstalk ZB’s Heather du Plessis-Allan cut Grey off when she started airing anti-vax talking points.

    “I don’t want to go into your beliefs on this,” du Plessis-Allan told Grey.

    “I’ve got to be honest with you, I just can’t go there. I just cannot be bothered with this.”

    Similar scenario
    A similar scenario played out the following day on RNZ’s Morning Report when Corin Dann interviewed Grey.

    That devolved into a lengthy oscillation between Grey’s attempts to recite anti-vax talking points and Dann’s increasingly exasperated interruptions.

    Predictably, Grey’s supporters have taken this treatment as evidence of a vast media cover-up.

    Meanwhile, the out-of-context or inaccurate claims about vaccines she did get to broadcast might have worried some listeners.

    But having told listeners to trust experts, and not laypeople, Morning Report and other media also allowed experts airtime.

    Dann talked to haematologist Jim Faed later on Morning Report the same day and immunology professor Nikki Turner appeared on Heather du Plessis-Allan’s ZB show and on Three’s The Project. Experts like her provided a useful corrective, but another way to avoid broadcasting misinformation is to just not book people who spread it.

    Dann sounded a little agonised over interviewing Grey while previewing Morning Report on RNZ’s First Up with Nathan Rarere.

    “We’ll talk to the lawyer of the mother about this,” he said. “This is obviously a very tricky story, a very sensitive story, but nonetheless one that is in the court.”

    Led news bulletins
    Not only was it a matter before the court — it was a story that led news bulletins and filled front pages, including that of the New Zealand Herald on Thursday.

    Sue Grey and conspiracy theorist Liz Gunn featured in the front page photo along with the child in question — all under the headline “We’re not prisoners”.

    It was probably not realistic to ban Grey from media appearances under those circumstances.

    In The Spinoff, Stewart Sowman-Lund recognised those factors compelling the media coverage, before suggesting an approach for reporters interviewing Grey.

    “Those interviewing her should either be fully prepared to counter — in detail — her anti-vaccination rhetoric or — given the likelihood it will quickly descend into conspiracy territory — cut it off early.”

    Maybe Dann and Du Plessis-Allan could have been better served committing to one of those two roads.

    But at least their questions were incisive and on-topic, even if they weren’t met with useful responses.

    If this week’s prime ministerial press conference showed us anything, it is that it is less embarrassing for our journalists to have it that way round than the opposite.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ. 

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • In early November, the U.S. Department of Labor filed suit against the Brazil-headquartered, global industrial meatpacker JBS for hiring child labor. Children as young as 13 were hired through a contractor to clean up bloody meatpacking plants in Minnesota and Nebraska.

    The suit, filed in the name of U.S. Secretary of Labor Martin Walsh, alleged JBS hired children through Packers Sanitation Services (PSSI) to clean its meatpacking plants during the graveyard shift in Grand Island, Nebraska, and Worthington, Minnesota.

    The complaint was presented to a federal court on November 9. Through an investigation carried out in August, the Department of Labor identified at least 31 children between 13 and 17 years of age in hazardous occupations.

    The jobs performed by minors included pressure-washing cutlery covered in animal byproduct and cleaning floors where animals are slaughtered with corrosive cleaning products. A 13-year-old child and at least one other teen suffered caustic chemical burns from cleaning products they used.

    “When I’m leaving, [the minors] are coming in … around 11 pm,” Ricardo Luna, a 16-year employee at the Worthington plant told the Minneapolis Star-Tribune. “They leave bathed in water.”

    The Fair Labor Standards Act prohibits work by children under 13, as well as after-hours work by children between the ages of 14 and 15 from June 1 to Labor Day and after 7 pm for the rest of the year. The law also restricts the number of hours minors can work on school days and prohibits children from handling dangerous equipment.

    The U.S. Department of Labor requested an immediate injunction against all PSSI operations. On November 10, a federal judge granted the restraining order, pausing operations at the company, which currently employs 17,000 workers cleaning approximately 700 meatpacking plants across the U.S.

    PSSI blamed the violations on “rogue individuals,” including a Worthington plant manager, who the company says solicited fraudulent work papers. But based on initial evidence, the Department of Labor alleges the illegal hiring to be taking place at 400 other plants across the country.

    PSSI refused to share information with the Department and, according to the department’s suit, allegedly acted in “preventing, discouraging, surveilling, or threatening employees from cooperating with the Department of Labor, and from retaliating against any employees who participate in the investigation.”

    Employees Already Bearing Meatpacking’s COVID-19 Spread

    JBS’s presence in the U.S. has been the object of criticism and investigation from researchers, state agencies and organized civil society since JBS bought out the U.S.-based Swift and Company in 2007 and started operations stateside.

    Agrarian researcher Alessandro Bonanno identifies JBS’s growth from a small Brazilian company into an international behemoth as an example of state capitalism. The Worker’s Party (PT) governments of Presidents Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and Dilma Rousseff supported JBS not only with Brazil’s regulatory might, but also as a minority equity owner.

    The company began globalizing consolidated production lines under the Brazilian, early 2000s industrial policy of “National Champions” that continued, if by bribery and other louche means, under the presidencies of Michel Temer and Jair Bolsonaro. Bipartisanship, it appears, isn’t just a U.S. problem.

    State support domestically and abroad, and foreign expertise in production and futures trading, helped JBS set up operations worldwide and consolidate agribusiness competitors across countries under its control.

    As much as U.S. agribusiness operations flout labor and environmental regulations abroad, JBS imposes the same in the U.S. and other countries. There seems an element of “turnaround is fair play” here — the Global South imposing the blowback of industrial production onto the Global North — but there’s nothing fair in promoting the destruction of land and labor (and consumer interests) in any compass direction.

    The pandemic served as another example in which the damage of JBS production is “externalized” onto someone else stateside. The U.S. House of Representatives Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis placed JBS’s — and overall Big Meat’s — role in propagating COVID-19 in U.S. meat plants under sharp scrutiny. According to the subcommittee’s investigation, published in May, the meat industry — including Smithfield, JBS and Tyson — acted in close coordination with the Trump administration to protect its profits and export balances while endangering the lives of plant workers.

    However well-intended, Washington reforms of the sector presently appear dubious at best. In June, the USDA announced its intentions to pursue efforts to pivot toward a more resilient food system, including diversifying production in response to a pandemic-disrupted supply chain. The Obama administration’s efforts, under the same Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack, to end the meat monopoly and the sector’s conspiracy to depress farmer gate prices were notorious in their defeat.

    The Biden administration’s campaign to repeal the Trump administration’s “regulatory boycott” more than a year into the pandemic and shift the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s flimsy recommendations for jobsite COVID protection into enforceable rules did not extend to the food industry.

    We learned more on the ground. Of the two of us, São Paulo, Brazil-based Allan de Campos Silva is a geographer interested in the relationships that meatpackers share across countries. Under the sponsorship of the Minnesota-based Agroecology and Rural Economics Research Corps that coauthor Rob Wallace helped found, this past summer, de Campos Silva interviewed immigrant meatpackers at JBS plants in Cold Spring and Worthington, Minnesota. The research is conducted in partnership with evolutionary biologist Kenichi Okamoto and the University of St. Thomas in St. Paul.

    Interviewees reported JBS violations and negligence amid the COVID-19 outbreak.

    The outbreak in the Cold Spring plant was reported in early May 2020 and initially affected 83 workers. Less than a week later, 194 employees were infected. Earlier that April, President Trump evoked the Defense Production Act, allowing the continued operation of meat plants during the pandemic, even during such ongoing plant outbreaks. Employees at JBS in Cold Spring reported that the company subsequently failed to follow social distancing standards and encouraged employees to work even if they were sick.

    About 80 percent of employees at the Cold Spring plant are immigrants from Somalia, who, in Minnesota since the 1990s, are part of the largest Somali community in the U.S. The Somali community at Cold Spring plant organized protests, demanding the closing of the plant for two weeks for disinfection and adoption of better prevention and control protocols. Nevertheless, the outbreak in the Cold Spring plant was soon associated with spread into neighboring counties.

    Another outbreak of COVID-19 in the JBS meat plant in Worthington, Minnesota, population 13,000, led to the plant closing earlier in April 2020. Of the plant’s 2,000 workers, 239 tested positive for the virus.

    In contrast to the Cold Spring plant, the Worthington JBS plant employs workers from a broader mix of immigrant backgrounds. They are immigrants from a variety of different Latin American, African and Asian countries, including Mexico, Guatemala, Myanmar and Eritrea. The mix would make it more difficult to organize protests and pursue collective demands for greater protection during the pandemic. However, the presence of the grassroots organization Unidos MN would prove essential in helping workers in their efforts at securing greater health protection.

    The Worthington meat plant is among 153 other units associated with counties with high rates of COVID-19 contamination in the U.S. By April 2020, Nobles County, in which Worthington is situated, had the highest contamination rate in Minnesota and had already recorded at least one JBS employee death.

    According to a community leader that de Campos Silva interviewed, the spread of COVID-19 in the Worthington plant was linked to the increase in extra work shifts in response to JBS pressure in the face of the temporary closure of another plant operated by JBS in Marshalltown, Iowa, in the first half of April 2020. The outbreak at the plant in Worthington would also spill over into Sioux Falls, 60 miles from Worthington, in the neighboring state of South Dakota, from which many JBS employees commuted daily.

    Meatpacking plants in the U.S. rely heavily on immigrant employment. Workers in these positions are often underpaid and fear being penalized for revealing symptoms and staying home without pay. Many workers have suffered wage cuts, reduced hours and negative health impacts. Some of these workers live in overcrowded housing and many live in intergenerational family homes. This makes proper social distancing difficult and increases the chances of seniors getting sick in the community.

    Neither sped-up work lines nor child labor are new orders of business during an unprecedented pandemic. The use of ill-protected labor has long included the kinds of child labor JBS now claims violates its ethical code. In 2016, JBS was punished for hiring child labor in Brazil. The company was caught using children to collect chickens for slaughter on the night shift and was forced to pay fines totaling more than $500,000.

    Illegal Deforestation and Slavery at the Other End of JBS’s Supply Line

    The serious complaint about JBS child labor practices in the United States came the same week Repórter Brasil/Unearthed disclosed that JBS bought cattle from a gang that operated in Rondônia and was known as one of the worst deforesters in Brazil.

    In 2021, the Repórter Brasil team implicated JBS and other companies in sourcing cattle from ranches that employed slave labor. In 2020, Repórter Brasil also found JBS and rival Marfrig sourced livestock from a farm owner implicated in massacring a group of Indigenous men. The hideous disclosures are accruing annually.

    JBS’s presence in this arc of deforestation and murder continues to the other end of Brazilian production. As in Minnesota, COVID-19 outbreaks that began in JBS plants spread out, including into the municipality of São Miguel do Guaporé, also in Rondônia. At the time, about 60 percent of the municipality contracted the virus largely from the company’s initial refusal to implement health protocols for testing and control.

    Unlike in the U.S., Brazil objected to JBS’s failure to act to staunch the COVID outbreaks in its plants. JBS was convicted of collective moral damage and fined $3.6 million.

    The repeated harm across crisis and country suggests a structural cause. Social scientists have subjected Big Meat’s place in society to broader critical analysis. Sociologists Ian Carrillo and Annabel Ipsen framed the transformation of meat plants into disease epicenters as a sign of sectoral precariousness, even as meat companies reconfigured their COVID-exposed workplaces into another worker sacrifice zone:

    Agrifood scholars have long argued that decades of consolidation in the food system have placed the control of our food in the hands of few companies, creating conditions for labor, environmental, and food security crises. COVID-19 has deepened this crisis in U.S. meatpacking, as growing infections among a workforce disproportionately comprised of immigrants and refugees forced plants to close or slow down production. “The supply chain is breaking,” warned one Tyson executive.… With killing floors closed or operating at reduced capacity, suppliers euthanized hundreds of thousands of animals, and processing came to a stand-still in the oligopolized industry.

    Sociologists Ivy Ken and Kenneth León argued in a similar vein that the health crisis in meatpacking plants in the U.S. is a consequence of the consolidation of a corporate governance regime, guided by a policy of death, which consists of coercing workers, mostly nonwhite, to risk their lives to keep the treadmills of industry running.

    The seeming shock of child labor at JBS plants in the United States, during a week when the world had its eyes turned to COP27 in Egypt and industrial husbandry’s role in climate change, only adds corporate insult to injury. The revelation underscores that like their U.S. counterparts, the “Batista Brothers” — Wesley and Joesley, owners of JBS — are fully engaged in exploiting their way towards the promised land of infinite growth on a finite planet, whatever the damage.

    Other people’s well-being outside their roles as compliant consumers or veritable slaves is treated only as an inconvenience. The Batista Brothers, after all, named their boat “Why Not,” referring to the rationale behind bribing politicians in exchange for favorable rulings greasing the way to prosecutorial immunity for the full array of damage and destruction JBS production leaves in its wake.

    The Batistas only embody the nature of broader relations felt now across countries. The meat processing plants serve as crystallized centers of the capitalist mode of production, where diseases, hunger, environmental destruction and death are industrialized and shipped.

    The processing plants’ deleterious effects — from centers of capital to centers of the forest — are today felt most strongly by the Native peoples on the frontier of deforestation in the Amazon and by the Latino, African and Asian people who work in the plants thousands of miles away, at the other terminus of the supply line.

    Faced with these widely arrayed gears of exploitation and destruction, almost planetary in their scope, we need to internationalize our struggles — from São Paulo to St. Paul — so that we may end agribusiness as we know it. Under our common humanity, child labor and slavery and the destruction of the forests on which our species’ very existence depends are indefensible and unforgivable, however much, in this case, politicians are bribed in both countries.

    Alternate ways of living together across borders and with other species have long been modeled by peoples who while marginalized by a system centered on manufacturing billionaires also number in the millions. There is a whole world out there making relations of production work for all beyond what’s offered by brand-name cruelty.

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • The current Congress has one last chance to pass legislation that would lift a major barrier to opioid addiction medication and potentially turn the tide of the drug overdose crisis.

    The Mainstreaming Addiction Treatment (MAT) Act would deregulate buprenorphine, a gold standard medication for treating opioid addiction and preventing overdose. Harm reduction activists, physicians and a litany of medical associations have spent years pushing Congress and consecutive presidential administrations to nix the so-called X-waiver, which doctors are required to obtain from the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) in order to prescribe buprenorphine.

    Rates of fatal drug overdose were already on the rise when the COVID-19 hit and isolated drug users from friends, family and the limited number of doctors who have an X-waiver to prescribe buprenorphine. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) found massive racial disparities in the fatal overdose data from 2020, particularly in areas with high levels of income inequality. Researchers concluded that yearslong efforts to expand access to buprenorphine were more likely to benefit white people than Black, Brown and Indigenous people.

    From 2019 to 2020, overdose deaths among white people grew by 22 percent after slowing in recent years, while overdose deaths among Black and Indigenous Americans exploded at roughly twice that rate — an increase of 44 percent and 39 percent, respectively. In 2021, drug-related deaths topped 100,000 annually, the highest level ever recorded, according to the CDC.

    Now, physicians and activists are scrambling to pass the MAT Act in the Senate, where the bill has languished after passing with broad bipartisan support in the House as part of a broader mental health reform package. Advocates say the Senate’s end-of-the-year vote on omnibus federal spending legislation is the last chance the Senate has to pass the MAT Act before the current Congress expires.

    At least 543 organizations endorse the MAT Act, including a long list of major medical associations ranging from the American Association of Nurse Anesthesiology to the American Academy of Pediatrics. In a letter to Senate leadership currently circulating among physicians, medical professionals call the bill a “bipartisan solution to overdose crisis.”

    “Buprenorphine is considered a gold standard of care for opioid use disorder because it prevents overdoses, reduces use of opioids like fentanyl, and helps individuals achieve recovery,” the doctors wrote. “But due to outdated federal rules that prevent health care providers from prescribing buprenorphine, only about 1 in 10 people with opioid use disorder receive medications for the condition.”

    With such a broad bipartisan and medical consensus on buprenorphine, observers say it’s only a matter of time before the X-waiver is lifted entirely. After appearing to drag its feet, the Biden administration issued new rules allowing certain providers to work around the X-waiver and prescribe buprenorphine to patients in need, but regulators say permanently stripping the red tape from the books would require and act of Congress.

    Law enforcement is also resistant to change after orchestration a nationwide crackdown on prescription opioids that failed to reduce overdose deaths. Courts have ruled that the DEA wrongly targeted doctors and pharmacists for providing buprenorphine, and jails and prisons resisted dispensing the drug to incarcerated people, who are extreme risk of fatal overdose after being caged and forced into withdrawal.

    National Institute on Drug Abuse Director Nora Volkow recently said “there’s absolutely no reason” why primary care providers shouldn’t prescribe methadone, the other gold standard for treating opioid addiction. Currently, methadone is more highly regulated than buprenorphine, with patients required to visit specialized clinics where they are put under extreme surveillance. Methadone and buprenorphine are both technically opioids, but no other painkiller is regulated like this — one reason why there is a longstanding stigma among potential prescribers.

    Ellen Glover, director of the drug policy and harm reduction campaign at People’s Action, a group that organizes grassroots activists around federal policy, said the MAT Act has more co-sponsors than 99.9 percent of the dozens of other bills before the current Congress.

    “Yet, we’ve lost over 108,000 people from overdose in the last year, and Congress hasn’t moved any legislation this year to stem the tide of death,” Glover said in an email. “Every death is a policy failure.”

  • In Chicago, the Treatment Not Trauma campaign won overwhelming community support for a non-binding referendum calling for investment in public mental health centers and a non-police crisis response system. Authored by 33rd Ward Alderperson Rossana Rodriguez and envisioned by a coalition of community groups and stakeholders, the ordinance calls for developing a Chicago Crisis Response and Care System within the Chicago Department of Public Health.

    On November 8, residents in three wards said “yes” to the Treatment Not Trauma campaign, for an overwhelming win. The 6th, 20th and 33rd wards received 98 percent, 96 percent and 93 percent “yes” votes, respectively. The Treatment Not Trauma campaign — which includes the Collaborative for Community Wellness, Southside Together Organizing for Power, 33rd Working Families, DefundCPD, and most crucial of all, individual community members — sustained the effort through thousands of calls, conversations and doorknocks from mental health professionals, community organizers and residents.

    The referendum results combat the idea that Black and Brown residents of Chicago are opposed to mental health investment and divestment from policing.

    And Chicago isn’t the only city where organizers are fighting for non-police mental health responses and mental health care systems. In Ann Arbor, Michigan, the city council voted in April 2021 to invest $3.5 million in federal stimulus funding into a non-police mental health crisis response system. On November 4, the city officially closed its community engagement survey, which asked for input from residents in an effort toward community accountability.

    Ann Arbor will hopefully create a system similar to models like CAHOOTS in Eugene, Oregon, the Street Crisis Response Team in San Francisco, MH First in Oakland, and B-HEARD in New York City. These cities use a non-police crisis response model and send a person trained in medical support to help people experiencing mental health crises, reducing the frequency of criminalization and harm. This role could be filled by an emergency medical technician (EMT), a social worker or a community member trained in deescalation. These programs have successfully treated mental health crises as a public health issue, not a public safety issue.

    Studies show that people who encounter a police officer while experiencing a mental health crisis are 16 times more likely to be shot and killed by police than people who are not experiencing a mental health crisis. Thirty-three to 50 percent of “use of force” incidents involve a disabled person, according to research by the Ruderman Family Foundation.

    Election Day canvassers pose for a picture holding a sign saying, Vote YES to reopen our mental health centers at The Breathing Room and Garden in the 20th ward neighborhood of Garfield Park.
    Election Day canvassers pose for a picture holding a sign saying, “Vote YES to reopen our mental health centers” at The Breathing Room and Garden in the 20th ward neighborhood of Garfield Park.

    Why Cops Are Wrong for the Job

    Mental illness stigmatization has led to a widespread narrative of the out-of-control, violent mentally ill person — but in reality, people experiencing mental illness are more likely to be victimized. Mental health calls to emergency services are usually handled by police, which poses a public health danger. By putting officers in the position to act as mental health professionals, local governments endanger people’s lives, increasing the likelihood of imprisonment and death. In 2021, officers trained to use force for compliance claimed over 100 lives during mental health or wellness checks.

    Mainstream analyses often attribute the risk factors of mental illness to individual ailments without a structural analysis of the systems that put people’s lives at risk. To paraphrase longtime abolitionist political leader Angela Y. Davis, carceral solutions only disappear people, not problems. Prisons have become some of the largest mental health institutions in the United States, with systemic racism and structural inequality exacerbating the criminalization of Black and Brown people. Policing is a reactionary measure rooted in social inequality that enforces white supremacy.

    Public health investment could create infrastructure and preventative measures by establishing multiple points of crisis intervention before police involvement. Crisis intervention could include access to health and trauma care, nutritious foods, clean built environments, and more. Mental health crises can be mitigated or reduced in severity by meeting basic needs and developing clear care plans. Police respond to situations after they occur, so preventative measures would create more opportunities for community empowerment and combatting police violence. However, police budgets continue to increase in many cities while public infrastructure investment has declined.

    Community members and organizers submit petition signatures to the board of elections in downtown Chicago, Illinois, on August 8, 2022.
    Community members and organizers submit petition signatures to the board of elections in downtown Chicago, Illinois, on August 8, 2022.

    During her 2019 campaign run, Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot promised to reopen the citys closed mental health centers and fund an additional $25 million in mental health care systems. Instead in 2020, in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, Mayor Lori Lightfoot gave 60 percent of its discretionary American Rescue Plan funds — COVID recovery funds provided by the federal government — to the Chicago Police Department. On November 7, Lightfoot continued her mission to invest in policing when her budget was approved by the city council by a vote of 32-18, with an additional $64 million going toward policing.

    Of the original 19 public mental health centers in Chicago, 10 were shut down between former mayors Richard Daley and Rahm Emanuel. Five public mental health clinics remain in a city of 3 million people, where 79 percent of the city has less than 0.2 therapists per 1000 residents. Rahm Emanuel also participated in an attempted cover-up of the police killing of Laquan McDonald, a teenager experiencing a mental health crisis, after he was shot multiple times by police officers in October 2014. Community members have not forgotten the killing of Laquan and the attempted cover-up as police officers continue to harm young Black and Brown children.

    Going forward into Chicago’s local elections in early 2023, the Treatment Not Trauma campaign will be calling on candidates to support structural mental health investment and demand that the City of Chicago invest in systems of care. Chicago will hopefully be among the ranks of cities running non-police crisis response systems and public mental health centers for all of its residents, not just the few.

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and a handful of other Democrats sent shockwaves across social media on Tuesday after apparently voting with Republicans to terminate the COVID-19 national emergency declared by former President Donald Trump in March 2020 as the virus shuttered the nation and much of the world. Schumer’s office later told reporters that his “yea” vote was mistakenly recorded — including on his own website — and his vote was actually a “nay.” Other top Democrats still voted with the GOP.

    In a 61-37 vote, 11 Democrats joined 49 Republicans in voting for a joint resolution to bring the pandemic national emergency declaration to an end. Unless there were other “mistakes,” the Democrats voting with Republicans include Sen. Amy Klobuchar (Minnesota), Sen. Tim Kaine (Virginia) and others. Progressive observers were outraged, arguing the pandemic is far from over with winter threatening a surge in COVID cases along with other respiratory illnesses that could destabilize an already stressed health care system.

    However, there appears to be some confusion not only over who voted for what, but also over two different declarations. Trump reluctantly declared a “national emergency” in March 2020 after the World Health Organization designated COVID a global pandemic, but an earlier order signed by Trump’s health czar at the Department of Health and Human Services declared a “public health emergency” in January 2020 as the virus threatened to sweep across the United States. Both declarations give the federal government emergency powers to intervene in state policy in order to meet urgent medical needs.

    The Senate’s joint resolution would only affect the national emergency declared by Trump and was passed by simple majority under the Senate’s executive oversight rules. The Biden administration recently announced another 60-day extension of the public health emergency, which gives the federal government power to expand Medicaid coverage, nutrition assistance, and other benefits often provided by state governments for the duration of the pandemic.

    The White House also said President Joe Biden would veto the Senate resolution to terminate the national emergency declaration, and House Democrats may choose to ignore the resolution for the remainder of their term in the majority. In a statement, the White House said the national emergency provides the federal government with authority ensure that “necessary supplies” are readily available as winter approaches and the health care system remains under stress. The order allows millions of people to receive free tests, treatments and vaccines through federal and state programs.

    “Strengthened by the ongoing declaration of national emergency, the federal response to COVID19 continues to save lives, improve health outcomes, and support the American economy,” the White House Office of Management and Budget statement said, adding that terminating the national emergency “abruptly and prematurely would be a reckless and costly mistake.”

    Last month, Biden extended the national emergency indefinitely before it will finally expire on March 1, 2023, according to Fierce Healthcare. The declaration allows for waivers that expanded the use of telehealth services and loosen regulations to allow for innovative public health programs, such as federally supported COVID testing sites.

    The administration has also drawn authority from both emergency declarations to expand nutrition benefits for low-income families and to bolster programs such as Medicaid and Medicare to protect people from losing health coverage during a pandemic. Removing the public health emergency order in particular could open up federal pandemic efforts to challenges from conservative states.

    Kansas Republican Sen. Roger Marshall introduced the joint resolution to terminate the national emergency declaration on Tuesday, citing a CBS interview with Biden in September, when the president said the “pandemic is over.” Some observers saw the statement as a gaffe after administration officials walked it back. On the Senate floor, Marshall argued that COVID cases, deaths and hospitalizations are down, and the administration is “manipulating” policy in order to “super-size” government power and enact a federal “spending spree.”

    On the floor, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Oregon) noted that it was the third time the Senate debated Marshall’s resolution and warned it was a “recipe for chaos” in the health care system as winter brings COVID, flu, and other viruses. The resolution would create “red tape” and make it harder to for federal agencies to keep waivers on the books that have kept hospitals staffed and supplied, and allowed for flexibility in programs such as Medicaid, which provides health coverage to millions of lower-income people.

    “Congress ought to be looking here to support medical workers and protect our health care system from becoming totally overwhelmed by viruses,” Wyden said, adding the resolution was dead on arrival in the House. “The Marshall resolution and this broader Republican effort we have been hearing about on the floor to eliminate health care flexibilities does the opposite.”

    However, leading Democrats, such as former presidential hopeful Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, voted with Republicans to pass the resolution in the Senate. Press offices for both Senators Schumer and Klobuchar did not respond to several inquiries from Truthout.

    The resolution is unlikely to be taken up by the House while Democrats remain in charge, but leading Democrats may be signaling to the Biden administration that it should start preparing for an “end” to the pandemic, or at least to the emergency powers granted to his administration. With a closely divided Senate and the GOP expected to have a slim House majority next year, the senators may be warning Biden that patience is limited among lawmakers and the public alike, and Congress is expected to fiercely debate the issue.

    While the resolution did not address the January 2020 public health emergency order from the Department of Health and Human Services, that authorization will also likely be a target for Republicans. If the public health emergency order is revoked or expires in March, the administration’s pandemic powers would begin to unravel, including a requirement that states do not remove people from Medicaid rolls. If the public health order expires during the winter and GOP-led states begin dropping people from Medicaid, experts warn that struggling hospitals could face a financial and logistical disaster.

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Date and time:

    17 November 2022, 1-2.30 pm AEDT, 9-10:30am WIB

    Speakers:
    • Shailey Prasad (University of Minnesota, USA) – COVID-19 pandemic and primary health care in the US
    • Christine Phillips (Australia National University, Australia) – Primary health care and COVID-19 in Australia
    • Made Ady Wirawan (Udayana University, Indonesia) – Primary health care and COVID-19 in Indonesia

    Convenor: Dr I Nyoman Sutarsa

    Register via this link

    The COVID-19 pandemic exposed the fragility of Indonesia’s health systems, including delivery of essential health services in the primary care setting. The pandemic also revealed existing health and social inequities in Indonesia, with highly uneven effects and experiences across locations and services. Like in many other middle-income countries with fragile health and primary care services, in Indonesia the pa.demic placed an immense burden on health systems, particularly community-based health programs and the delivery of essential health services in primary care settings. For example, the social restrictions designed to contain the pandemic have negatively influenced the uptake of antenatal care visits, self-management programs for patients with chronic illnesses, and other community empowerment activities.

    This seminar will discuss lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic in order to improve and strengthen primary health care in Indonesia. Understanding the impacts of the pandemic on the uptake of essential health services in primary care settings, including barriers and enablers, is critical to ensure continuity of care, to reduce the burden of preventable diseases and to decrease utilisation of health resources and hospitalisation rates. This panel discussion brings together experts from the USA, Australia, and Indonesia, to share knowledge and best practices when it comes to collecting and documenting the effects of the pandemic on sustainability of access to essential health services. Such comparative data are crucial for health leaders and policymakers to identify and prioritise actions, strategies, and health resources, that can strengthen essential health services in primary care in Indonesia. The seminar will also discuss reform strategies to ensure better access and uptake of essential health services, and to prepare better systems for future pandemics or public health emergencies. 

    Convenor:

    Dr I Nyoman Sutarsa is a Senior Lecturer in Population Health, Medical School at The Australian National University and a member of the ANU Indonesia Institute’s advisory board, and a Lecturer and Researcher in the Department of Public Health and Preventative Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Udayana University

    Speakers:

    I Md Ady Wirawan, MD, MPH, Ph.D (Ady) is a family medicine physician and professor at the Department of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Udayana University, Bali, Indonesia. He is currently the Vice Dean for Student, Information, and Cooperation Affairs at the Faculty of Medicine, Udayana University. His areas of interest in research include occupational health, travel medicine, global health, and primary care. He led the development of the Integrated Travel Health Surveillance and Information System at Destinations (TravHeSID), and also Indonesia Travel Health Network (InaTravNet).

    The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed the fragility of healthcare systems in Indonesia, including service delivery of essential health services at the primary care settings. In this talk I describe the challenges for the healthcare system in Indonesia during pandemic, disruption of essential health service provisions, strategies for adaptation used to strengthen essential services, and future recommendation for Indonesia.

    Professor Christine Phillips is a general practitioner, Head of Social Foundations of Medicine at the Australian National University, and Associate Dean for Health Social Science. She is a co-founder of the Refugee Health Network of Australia and a member of the Migrant and Refugee Health Partnership national peak body. In 2021, she led the development of the WHO Global Competency Framework for Health workers working with Migrants and Refugees. She is the Medical Director of Companion House Refugee Health Service in the ACT. Through the COVID-19 pandemic has provided intensive support for primary care service delivery for marginalized populations.

    The COVID-19 pandemic in Australia was delayed through border closures and an initial public health focus on elimination. In this talk I describe the impacts of lockdowns on social cohesion, mental health and primary health care delivery. The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted fragilities in aged care and challenges in whole-of-community collaboration for both elimination and mitigation strategies. Primary care was emphasized in policy as a way of driving social cohesion and community-based care. This response will be compared and contrasted with Australia’s health response to the HIV epidemic in the late twentieth century.

    Shailendra (Shailey) Prasad, MD MPH FAAFP is the Associate Vice President for Global and Rural Health at the University of Minnesota. He is the Carlson Chair of Global Health and the Executive Director of the Center for Global Health and Social Responsibility at the University of Minnesota, Professor and Vice-Chair of Education at the Dept of Family Medicine and Community Health and an Adjunct Professor at the School of Public Health at the University of Minnesota. He is the co-lead of the CDC funded National Resource Center for Refugees, Immigrants and Migrants and the NIH/Fogarty funded Northern Pacific Global Health consortium. He is also a founding member and part of the leadership team of Advocacy for Global Health Partnerships. He is actively involved in the growth of academic primary care and global health research training across various parts of the world as part of Family Medicine Global Education Network (FamMed GEN).

    The COVID19 pandemic created unprecedented challenges to the health care systems around the world. Dr. Prasad will review the affect it had on healthcare systems in the US, particularly around healthcare workforce and medical education. He will review the role of primary care/Family Medicine in this and the need to changes in Family Medicine Education in the future.

    The post Forum on strengthening primary health care in Indonesia: Lessons from COVID-19 appeared first on New Mandala.

    This post was originally published on New Mandala.

  • Days after ProPublica detailed dangerous working conditions at a chlorine plant that used asbestos until it closed last year, public health advocates and two U.S. lawmakers are renewing calls for Congress to ban the carcinogen.

    “American workers are dying from asbestos. It is way past time to end its use,” said Sen. Jeff Merkley, a Democrat from Oregon. “This ProPublica report confirms our worst fears: workers dealing with asbestos are often left vulnerable to this deadly, dangerous substance.”

    Merkley and Rep. Suzanne Bonamici, D-Ore., are sponsoring the Alan Reinstein Ban Asbestos Now Act, which would permanently ban the importing and use of asbestos. The proposed legislation is named after Alan Reinstein, who died in 2006 from mesothelioma, a cancer caused by asbestos. Alan’s wife, Linda, co-founded the Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization, one of the leading nonprofits that has advocated for protecting the public from the dangers of asbestos.

    The lack of a ban “puts workers, their families, and the surrounding communities at risk for deadly disease and death from asbestos exposure, which as ProPublica detailed, is sickeningly frequent and widespread and without consequences for the companies that allow it to continue,” said Linda Reinstein in a statement.

    Reinstein has helped build a coalition of doctors, public health experts, trade unions and advocates to push Congress to pass the asbestos ban. This week, Reinstein’s organization sent letters to members of Congress calling for their support and highlighting the findings of the ProPublica investigation.

    “This powerful article explodes the decades-long claim of the chlor-alkali industry that its use of asbestos is safe for workers,” said Bob Sussman, a former deputy administrator for the Environmental Protection Agency during the Clinton administration who now works as counsel for the Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization. “There can no longer be any doubt that, as EPA has found, asbestos-using plants present a serious risk to the worker health and this risk must be eliminated.”

    The lawmakers filed the bill in May and it had one Senate committee hearing in June. Since the ProPublica report was published in collaboration with NPR last Thursday, three House members have signed on to co-sponsor the bill.

    Unlike dozens of other countries, the United States has never fully banned asbestos. The EPA made an attempt to do so in 1989, but it was overturned in federal court in 1991, and efforts by lawmakers to outlaw the carcinogen have repeatedly fallen short. Meanwhile, the chemical industry has continued to import hundreds of tons of asbestos — more than 200,000 pounds — every year for use in chlorine production plants.

    The industry has long fought against a ban by saying its workers were well protected by strict safety measures and strong workplace safety regulations. Public health organizations and lawmakers had suspected that those safety claims were exaggerated, but for years were unable to assess the conditions inside these plants.

    The ProPublica investigation found that safety standards were routinely disregarded at what was once America’s longest-standing chlorine plant. Workers at the OxyChem Niagara Falls plant said asbestos would splatter on the ceilings and walls, roll across the floor like tumbleweeds and stick to workers’ clothes. Windows and doors were left open, allowing asbestos dust to escape. The company’s own industrial hygiene monitoring showed their workers were repeatedly exposed to unsafe levels. Federal workplace regulators had also stopped conducting regular unannounced inspections at the plant; the Occupational Safety and Health Administration included the Niagara Falls site and others like it in a special program for “exemplary” workplaces.

    In response to ProPublica’s reporting, OxyChem said the health and safety of its workers is its top priority. The company said the workers’ accounts from Niagara Falls were inaccurate, but wouldn’t provide specifics on what was incorrect. The plant closed last year for unrelated reasons. Eight other plants in the U.S. still use asbestos.

    “It’s devastating to see at every step of the way where worker safety wasn’t protected: by the companies, and by the EPA and OSHA during past administrations,” said Merkley.

    Asbestos is a toxic mineral that can cause serious illnesses like scarring of the lungs, called asbestosis, and mesothelioma, a vicious cancer that kills most victims within a few years. The government’s inability to ban asbestos has been cited as one of the greatest failures of the U.S. chemical regulatory system. “The system was so complex, it was so burdensome that our country hasn’t even been able to uphold a ban on asbestos — a known carcinogen that kills as many as 10,000 Americans every year,” President Barack Obama said in 2016 on the day he signed legislation meant to fix these problems.

    Later that year, the EPA began the formal process of re-evaluating the risks associated with asbestos. It took five years, and in 2020, the agency determined chlorine workers were at “unreasonable risk” from their exposure to asbestos.

    In April, the EPA proposed a new asbestos ban. The rule needs to be finalized before it goes into effect, and the EPA has said that it is planning to be done with that process by November 2023. In that time, EPA will consider industry arguments against a ban, including claims that workers face little risk of exposure. The chemical companies have also argued the ban could disrupt the country’s supply of chlorine used to clean drinking water, even though public health advocates say only a small portion of chlorine from asbestos-reliant plants is used for that purpose. Twelve Republican attorneys general have backed the companies and said an asbestos ban would place a “heavy and unreasonable burden” on the industry.

    Two key trade associations, the American Chemistry Council and The Chlorine Institute, said in statements this week that they continue to believe asbestos is used safely in the chlorine industry.

    Michal Freedoff, the official in charge of chemical regulation at EPA, told ProPublica she could not comment on the final rule-making process but said the agency would not be backing down on the science.

    The agency has already extended the original deadlines for evaluating and regulating asbestos. The evaluation was supposed to be complete three years after it started in 2016, and the regulations should have been finalized within two years after that. Lawmakers and public health advocates worry, given the chemical industry’s influence, that there will be even further delays or a new ban will be held up in court. (In response, the EPA pointed out that despite an increased workload, its budget for chemical regulation has remained flat for six years. It also said the Trump administration missed deadlines for nine out of the first 10 chemicals, including asbestos, that were to be regulated under the new 2016 law.)

    Organizations like the Environmental Defense Fund are calling for the EPA to expedite its ban, especially given the findings in the ProPublica investigation. The “reporting underscores the need to take action to ban chrysotile asbestos, particularly to protect workers,” said Maria Doa, senior director of chemicals policy at the Environmental Defense Fund. “Given the strong, well-established science on the unreasonable risks posed by chrysotile asbestos, we reiterate our call for EPA to expedite its final decision to ban chrysotile asbestos and to require rapid implementation of the ban.”

    Merkley and Bonamici, along with the Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization, are instead pushing Congress to write a ban into law, which would accelerate the process and make it harder for the industry to overturn it in court. The bill would ban all six known types of asbestos, whereas the EPA rule would only ban the one type primarily used in the U.S.

    ProPublica reached out to Sen. Tom Carper, D-Del., and Rep. Frank Pallone, D-N.J., the chairs of the committees where the bill was filed. Carper said he remains “committed to working with our colleagues on both sides of the aisle, as well as advocates and industry stakeholders” on the proposal. Pallone, however, said he believed the EPA will act on asbestos. “I’m confident the Biden Administration takes this public health threat as seriously as I do, and look forward to continuing to work with them to get asbestos banned once and for all,” he said in a statement. The minority leaders of the committees, Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va., and Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Wash., did not respond to questions or provide comment on the conditions at the Niagara Falls plant.

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • For years, Americans have been served an image of an idyllic family farmer who is responsible for the food that makes its way to our homes. Unfortunately, for the majority of the food we eat, that image is not based in reality. The truth is that food production, especially industrial animal agriculture, is causing an ecological crisis in our waterways that further perpetuates the legacy of environmental racism. And it needs to stop.

    The overwhelming majority of today’s U.S. food systems are dominated by a handful of international corporations. These profit-driven enterprises often employ industrialized methods, such as concentrated animal feeding operations, or CAFOs, where animals are “produced” in incredibly cramped and unsafe facilities.

    CAFOs are a formidable threat to the health of our nation’s waterways, representing one of the largest unaddressed sources of nitrogen and phosphorus pollution in the United States. Their uncontrolled — and mostly unregulated — discharges into waterways lead to harmful algal blooms, which in turn impair drinking water supplies, fisheries and recreational waters across the country. Look no further than Lake Erie, the Chesapeake Bay, the Mississippi River Basin, North Carolina’s coastal estuaries, and many other inland and coastal waters that are already gravely affected. Aside from the damages done to safe drinking water and human health, it’s also really expensive. Harmful algal blooms alone can negatively impact economies by as much as $4 billion a year.

    Just one of these animal factories can produce as much animal waste as a large city with millions of people. According to a 2013 study, it adds up to 1.1 billion tons of animal waste every year. At many of these facilities, the animal waste is stored in unlined lagoons that inevitably pollute groundwater. In many cases, the excess waste is applied to agricultural fields far beyond what is needed to grow food, resulting in pollution of nearby surface waters and groundwater. Some facilities even go so far as to haphazardly spray the excess waste onto fields, creating a hellish experience for the neighboring communities.

    Picture homes, schools and parks covered in airborne liquified animal waste. Imagine windows shut tight in the middle of the summer because of the overwhelming odors. Consider the countless lives burdened by respiratory diseases. Think of all the rivers and streams poisoned with pathogens.

    It is worth noting that CAFOs are not found everywhere. Instead, they are predominantly located in rural areas, often in communities of color. They are purposefully located here because these frontline communities often lack the political clout to stop them. The CAFOs are constructed quickly, with minimal community input and, once operational, are ostensibly shielded from any kind of transparency, oversight or consequences. For example, in North Carolina, General Statute 106-24.1 shields the state’s agriculture industry by making any information collected or published by the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services classified from the public. But it’s not just North Carolina. There are “ag-gag” laws on the books in several states.

    The CAFO crisis is funded by huge corporations, such as Smithfield Foods, and abetted by politicians who choose to look the other way. Like so many of the catastrophes affecting frontline communities and waterways, it’s a nightmare of our government’s own making, which means we also have the power to correct it. We always have a choice, and it’s possible to make the changes we need.

    The most effective way to legislatively confront the CAFO crisis would be for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to use the Clean Water Act to prevent uncontrolled discharges of untreated animal waste into our nation’s water by requiring these facilities to obtain permits that contain real limits. The Clean Water Act has had so many successes during its 50 years, just imagine what could happen if we fully implemented and enforced it. Unfortunately, the EPA has thus far failed to respond to pressure, so environmental groups are suing in order to force the regulator to take action on clean water rules governing factory farms.

    We can also urge our members of Congress to go further and pass real legislation, such as the Farm System Reform Act, which would help rein in the monopolistic practices of the agriculture industry, invest billions in a more resilient food system, and finally start transitioning us away from CAFOs to more regenerative practices by truly independent farmers and ranchers.

    Finally, we can and should encourage the industry to change their ways by pulling our purse strings. As the saying goes, money talks, and these companies must be forced to listen. We don’t always have to purchase food from corporations that are contributing to this CAFO crisis. For those who are able to pay a little bit more at the grocery store, just think of all you can save.

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.