Home
by Nino Quincampoix Thu Apr 30, 2020 6:13 pmNaravno, postoji i opcija da ti platiš da testiraju na tebi.
Svetski Rat K(orona)
- Posts : 10317
Join date : 2012-02-10
- Guest
Dobosz Esterházy wrote:Klinički testovi se rade na neplaćenim dobrovoljcima. Samo u prvoj fazi, kada se na samom početku proverava bazična bezbednost leka, se testira na plaćenim dobrovoljcima, ali je taj broj relativno mali, do 50-ak subjekata.
Znam. Mislim na ekstremnu situaciju u kojoj se skraćuje put do vakcine.
- Posts : 51886
Join date : 2017-11-16
WW3 otkazan do daljeg
“The Intelligence Community also concurs with the wide scientific consensus that the COVID-19 virus was not manmade or genetically modified,” the statement reads.
The statement added, “The IC will continue to rigorously examine emerging information and intelligence to determine whether the outbreak began through contact with infected animals or if it was the result of an accident at a laboratory in Wuhan.”
DNI believes virus 'was not manmade or genetically modified'
The office of the director of national intelligence has released an unusual statement saying officials do not believe coronavirus was manmade, echoing many health experts.“The Intelligence Community also concurs with the wide scientific consensus that the COVID-19 virus was not manmade or genetically modified,” the statement reads.
The statement added, “The IC will continue to rigorously examine emerging information and intelligence to determine whether the outbreak began through contact with infected animals or if it was the result of an accident at a laboratory in Wuhan.”
Erős Pista
- Posts : 82300
Join date : 2012-06-10
_____
"Oni kroz mene gledaju u vas! Oni kroz njega gledaju u vas! Oni kroz vas gledaju u mene... i u sve nas."
Dragoslav Bokan, Novi putevi oftalmologije
- Posts : 51886
Join date : 2017-11-16
Polako. Ako zakljuce da iako nije willful misconduct ipak jeste gross negligence...
- Posts : 41156
Join date : 2012-02-12
Location : wife supremacist
Mór Thököly wrote:Polako. Ako zakljuce da iako nije willful misconduct ipak jeste gross negligence...
That's gross.
_____
What is it before it is called a day? Why do people try to call my name and not me?
чланак садржи негативну количину информације, прочиташ па знаш мање него пре.
- Guest
Pa osim nastanka u prirodi, ostaje opcija da je virus nekako iznet tokom eksperimenata sa njegovim veštački indukovanim mutiranjem kroz različite životinje, kao ubrzano simuliranje prelaska sa životinja na čoveka u laboratorijskim uslovima.
- Guest
ipak je priruda najveća laboratorija koju imamo
to svi SMEĆU suma
to svi SMEĆU suma
- Posts : 7703
Join date : 2017-03-14
pa to je jedna od vjerovatnijih pretpostavki da im se virus nekako izmigoljio dok su testirali, teorija da je bilo koja država ovo namjerno uradila meni ne pije vodu, ako je neko ovo namjerno uradio onda jedino neka individua tipa ludog naučnika incela po sistemu kad ja ne jebem onda makar ima svi da najebeteBendegúz Somogyi wrote:Pa osim nastanka u prirodi, ostaje opcija da je virus nekako iznet tokom eksperimenata sa njegovim veštački indukovanim mutiranjem kroz različite životinje, kao ubrzano simuliranje prelaska sa životinja na čoveka u laboratorijskim uslovima.
- Guest
ako je verovatnija, to znači da si računao verovatnoće
taj račun pokaži
taj račun pokaži
- Guest
Otvaraj topik
U.S. officials crafting retaliatory actions against China over coronavirus as President Trump fumes
The president has in recent days told aides and others that China has to pay for the outbreak and publicly floated demanding billions in compensation
May 1, 2020 at 12:25 a.m. GMT+2
Senior U.S. officials are beginning to explore proposals for punishing or demanding financial compensation from China for its handling of the coronavirus pandemic, according to four senior administration officials with knowledge of internal planning.
The move could splinter already strained relations between the two superpowers at a perilous moment for the global economy.
Senior officials across multiple government agencies are expected to meet Thursday to begin mapping out a strategy for seeking retaliatory measures against China, two people with knowledge of the meeting said, speaking on the condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to disclose the planning. Officials in American intelligence agencies are also involved in the effort.
President Trump has fumed to aides and others in recent days about China, blaming the country for withholding information about the virus, and has discussed enacting dramatic measures that would probably lead to retaliation by Beijing, these people said.
In private, Trump and aides have discussed stripping China of its “sovereign immunity,” aiming to enable the U.S. government or victims to sue China for damages. George Sorial, who formerly served as a top executive at the Trump Organization and is involved in a class-action lawsuit against China, told The Washington Post he and senior White House officials have discussed limiting China’s sovereign immunity. Legal experts say an attempt to limit China’s sovereign immunity would be extremely difficult to accomplish and may require congressional legislation.
Some administration officials have also discussed having the United States cancel part of its debt obligations to China, two people with knowledge of internal conversations said. It was not known if the president has backed this idea.
Asked about this on Thursday, Trump said “you start playing those games and that’s tough.” He said canceling interest payments to China could undermine the “sanctity of the dollar,” but he added that there were other ways to levy extreme penalties on China, such as raising $1 trillion by imposing tariffs on Chinese imports.
Administration officials strongly cautioned that many of the discussions are preliminary and that little formal work has begun on turning these initial ideas into reality. Other administration officials are warning Trump against the push to punish China, saying the country is sending supplies to help the American response.
“Now is just not the right time,” one senior administration official involved in the talks said. “There will be a time to do it.”
But in recent days, some believe the battle between the administration’s economic advisers’ cautious approach to China and national security team’s push to retaliate against Beijing has begun to tilt toward the national security position.
“Punishing China is definitely where the president’s head is at right now,” one senior adviser said.
Some political advisers have also encouraged Trump to take a more forceful swing at China because they think it will help him politically.
White House officials and multiple congressional lawmakers have become increasingly fixated on China’s response to the outbreak and failure to contain it, asserting Chinese officials concealed key information and refused to cooperate with international health organizations. Chinese officials have repeatedly rejected allegations that they did not act swiftly enough to confront the virus.
U.S. officials spoke on the condition of anonymity for this story to discuss private and internal negotiations.
A spokesman for the White House National Security Council said in an email: “We don’t comment on internal deliberations.”
White House aides torn over trade hawk’s proposal as President Trump weighs action on China
On Monday, Trump suggested at a White House news conference that the United States will seek hundreds of billions of dollars in damages from China. The president also said he is considering additional measures to punish China, but did not specify what they are. “We can do something much easier than that,” Trump said in response to a question about demanding financial compensation from Beijing. “We have ways of doing things a lot easier than that.”
On Thursday, Geng Shuang, a spokesman for China’s Foreign Ministry, told reporters: “The U.S. should know that their enemy is the virus, not China. … They should focus on containment at home and international cooperation, instead of smearing China and shifting the blame onto China.”
He added: “As for punishment or accountability, as I have repeatedly stated, such rhetoric has no legal basis, and there’s no international precedent. … At this time, undermining others’ efforts will end up undermining oneself.”
The White House discussion around retaliatory measures reflects the increasing conviction among some administration officials about China’s alleged culpability in the spread of the virus, as well as political considerations. Recent polling suggests Americans’ opinions of China are at a low, and presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden has released an ad that paints Trump as being weak on Beijing.
Critics say the administration’s efforts to punish China amount to little more than political theater that also risks endangering the American economy and American lives, as China is likely to retaliate against measures taken by the United States. The coronavirus has killed more than 60,000 Americans and cost the nation trillions of dollars in economic activity.
“The chances of getting the Chinese to pay reparations is somewhere between zero and none,” said Scott Kennedy, senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a foreign policy think tank. “If your goal is to actually understand the origins and spread of the coronavirus, end this pandemic, restore economic growth, and prevent future crises, you have to get governments and different stakeholders to work together."
When the virus first emerged, Trump praised Chinese President Xi Jinping’s handling of the outbreak, saying Xi is doing “a very good job with a very, very tough situation.” More recently, Trump concentrated his attacks on the World Health Organization. “If it was a mistake, a mistake is a mistake,” Trump said earlier this month of China and the coronavirus. “But if they were knowingly responsible, yeah, I mean, then sure there should be consequences.”
Trump has appeared to step up his attacks on China more recently. “We are not happy with China. We are not happy with that whole situation because we believe it could have been stopped at the source,” Trump said at a White House news conference Monday. “It could have been stopped quickly, and it wouldn’t have spread all over the world.”
The potential recourse for U.S. action has been unclear, even as congressional Republicans such as Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (S.C.) have increasingly demanded the United States “make China pay big time” over the damage. One senior Trump adviser said the “sovereign immunity” issue has been a particular focus of the president’s, as it could allow states and the federal government to sue China for damages.
Sens. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) and Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) are among members of Congress who have drafted legislation to strip China and other foreign governments of immunity if they took intentional acts to conceal or distort information about the coronavirus that led to damage to other countries. Trump has spoken to Hawley and other Republican senators about punishing China, two people with knowledge of the conversations said.
Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) has also floated waiving interest payments to China for any holdings of U.S. debt, “because they have cost our economy already $6 trillion and we could end up being an additional $5 trillion hit."
The Berman Law Group, a law firm that has launched the first major class-action lawsuit against China over the damage done by the virus, has been consulting with several senior Trump advisers in recent weeks on what they consider the most fruitful way to punish China. The team is both sharing information they learn about China’s actions in the case and stressing the value of a massive global lawsuit to make China pay for failing to warn other countries about a lethal virus.
Sorial, the former Trump Organization lawyer who has partnered with the Berman Law Group, has been the point man in communicating with top administration officials that the most effective way to compensate Americans for their losses is a civil suit and that curbing sovereign immunity could ease their path in court.
Sorial said in an interview that the president and White House are right to examine every method to make America whole for trillions of dollars in losses to businesses small and large and tens of thousands of deaths. Lead attorney Matthew Moore said the lawsuit is probably shielded from dismissal by current case law, which holds that governments that intentionally fail to warn of danger cannot claim immunity from a lawsuit. Moore added that restricting China’s immunity would make the case easier to pursue.
“I commend the president for what he is doing. We are now finally at the point that that kind of action is necessary,” Sorial said. “No matter where you sit on the political spectrum, if you are being generous, the government of China and the CCP [Chinese Communist Party] were grossly negligent.”
Chinese officials have said they did all they could to mitigate the risk and spread of the virus. They have also pointed to the country’s decision to lock down Wuhan earlier this year and other major cities to contain the spread of the virus.
China has attempted to aggressively stave off the prospect of a coordinated push by Western governments to hold it accountable. After Australian officials proposed a joint international investigation into the origins of the virus that would include sending inspectors into Wuhan, the Chinese ambassador to Australia this week threatened Australia with economic retaliation, sharply inflaming tensions.
China’s foreign minister, meanwhile, adopted a softer tack and thanked French President Emmanuel Macron after he expressed reservations about immediately launching the U.S.- and Australia-backed inquiry.
In early February, when American cities in Washington and California were seeing their first confirmed cases of the novel coronavirus infection, U.S. media reported that the virus originated in an exotic market that sold wild animals and described in detail the steps China had taken to lock down Hubei province to prevent it from spread.
As the weeks have passed, evidence has mounted that Chinese government officials sought to silence doctors who raised alarm about the virus’ human-to-human transmission and potential lethality.
Some White House officials and some Republicans also think that new information has emerged to suggest that a low-security Wuhan virology lab that analyzed dangerous coronaviruses — and located near the market — may have been the original source of the virus’s release and that Chinese officials sought to cover up information pointing to that source, according to two government officials.
But so far those theories have not been widely accepted or backed up with any material evidence. Many experts who have studied the outbreak do not think there were ties to the Wuhan lab, but U.S. officials continue to investigate the matter.
Trump weighed in on the controversy on Thursday. He was asked by a reporter whether he had seen intelligence that suggested with a high degree of confidence that the virus originated in the Wuhan lab, and he responded “yes I have.”
But he later said “there’s lots of theories” and that he wasn’t “allowed” to tell reporters why he was confident the virus might have come from a lab.
The Office of the Director of National Intelligence issued its own statement on the matter, saying that it “will continue to rigorously examine emerging information and intelligence to determine whether the outbreak began through contact with infected animals or if it was the result of an accident at a laboratory in Wuhan.”
Senior Trump administration officials — both in the National Security Council and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — have been furious at the Chinese government’s lack of transparency and failure to follow security protocols amid the virus’s march across the globe. That included China’s resistance in January to letting U.S. officials visit China to investigate the virus’s origins.
In a sign of the general shift toward taking on China, Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, appeared on “Fox & Friends” on Wednesday, emphasizing the president is eyeing options to punish those responsible for the damage the virus has wreaked on the United States.
“He has asked the team to look into very carefully what happened, how this got here, and to make sure he will take whatever actions are necessary to make sure that the people who caused the problems are held accountable for it,” Kushner said.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/04/30/trump-china-coronavirus-retaliation/
- Posts : 7703
Join date : 2017-03-14
1% da se neko u Wuhanu zarazio u prirodi od neke životinje, 9% da se zarazio na pijaci, 90% iz laboratorijeTalason wrote:ako je verovatnija, to znači da si računao verovatnoće
taj račun pokaži
valja li ovako?
- Guest
kolega, niste ni pročitali skriptu, a kamoli preporučenu literaturu, evo vam index, pa se vratite neki drugi put
- Posts : 51886
Join date : 2017-11-16
https://www.theguardian.com/world/commentisfree/2020/may/01/sweden-coronavirus-strategy-nationalists-britain
- Posts : 51886
Join date : 2017-11-16
A head of procurement for the NHS has set up a business to profit from the private sale of huge quantities of personal protective equipment in the midst of the coronavirus outbreak, an undercover investigation by the Guardian can reveal.
David Singleton, 42, a senior NHS official in London who has been working at the capital’s Covid-19 Nightingale hospital, launched the business two weeks ago to trade in visors, masks and gowns.
- Posts : 28265
Join date : 2015-03-20
Vlade širom sveta imaju priliku da krenu novim putem pripremajući se za povratak u normalan život nakon izolacije u cilju suzbijanja širenja koronavirusa, poručila je u klimatska aktivistkinja Greta Tunberg, na onlajn konferenciji povodom Dana planete Zemlje.
Tunberg, koja se proslavila kao 15-godišnjakinja kada je počela petkom da izostaje sa nastave kako bi pred švedskim parlamentom protestovala protiv zagađenja životne sredine, kazala je da je pandemija pokazala da moramo razmišljati dugoročno.
"Sviđalo se to nama ili ne, svet se promenio, postupno je drugačiji nego pre par meseci i verovatno više neće biti isti, a mi ćemo morati da izaberemo novi put”, kazala je.
"Ako jedan virus može uništiti ekonomije za nekoliko nedelja, to pokazuje da ne razmišljamo dugoročno i da ne uzimamo te rizike u obzir”, zaključila je.
Tunberg (17) je bila jedna od učesnica internet konferencije povodom Dana planeta Zemlje, pokrenutog pre punih 50 godina kako bi se povećala svest javnosti o važnosti zaštite životne sredine.
Njen pokret "Petkom za budućnost" objavio je tim povodom video snimak koja prikazuje porodicu koja živi normalnim životom dok joj oko kuće gori požar, kako je i sama slikovito upozoravala u svojim istupima.
Tunberg, koja se proslavila kao 15-godišnjakinja kada je počela petkom da izostaje sa nastave kako bi pred švedskim parlamentom protestovala protiv zagađenja životne sredine, kazala je da je pandemija pokazala da moramo razmišljati dugoročno.
"Sviđalo se to nama ili ne, svet se promenio, postupno je drugačiji nego pre par meseci i verovatno više neće biti isti, a mi ćemo morati da izaberemo novi put”, kazala je.
"Ako jedan virus može uništiti ekonomije za nekoliko nedelja, to pokazuje da ne razmišljamo dugoročno i da ne uzimamo te rizike u obzir”, zaključila je.
Tunberg (17) je bila jedna od učesnica internet konferencije povodom Dana planeta Zemlje, pokrenutog pre punih 50 godina kako bi se povećala svest javnosti o važnosti zaštite životne sredine.
Njen pokret "Petkom za budućnost" objavio je tim povodom video snimak koja prikazuje porodicu koja živi normalnim životom dok joj oko kuće gori požar, kako je i sama slikovito upozoravala u svojim istupima.
_____
#FreeFacu
Дакле, волео бих да се ЈСД Партизан угаси, али не и да сви (или било који) гробар умре.
- Posts : 7703
Join date : 2017-03-14
a taman smo odmorili od nje i njenih bolesnih roditelja...
- Guest
Šta je ovde pogrešno rekla?
- Posts : 28265
Join date : 2015-03-20
kenja milogorcima preterano
_____
#FreeFacu
Дакле, волео бих да се ЈСД Партизан угаси, али не и да сви (или било који) гробар умре.
- Posts : 7703
Join date : 2017-03-14
Nije rekla ništa pogrešno i nije rekla ništa novo ni bitno da bi mediji to prenosili.Talason wrote:Šta je ovde pogrešno rekla?
But Greta Thunberg.
- Posts : 5823
Join date : 2012-02-10
Pocesta
- Guest
radovaću se svakom budućem estradnom nastupu grete t.
čisto zbog zato
čisto zbog zato
- Guest
new left review 122 mar apr 2020 7
THE MONSTER ENTERS
mike davis
https://newleftreview.org/issues/II122/articles/mike-davis-in-a-plague-year
- Spoiler:
Coronavirus1 is the old movie that we’ve been watching over and over again since Richard Preston’s The Hot Zone (1994) introduced us to the exterminating demon, born in a mysterious bat cave in Central Africa, known as Ebola. It was the first in a succession of new diseases erupting in the ‘virgin field’ (that’s the proper term) of humanity’s inexperienced immune systems. Ebola was soon followed by avian influenza, which jumped to humans in 1997, and sars, which emerged at the end of 2002; both initially appeared in Guangdong, the world’s manufacturing hub. Hollywood, of course, lustfully embraced these outbreaks and produced a score of movies to titillate and scare us. (Steven Soderbergh’s Contagion, released in 2011, stands out for its accurate science and eerie anticipation of the current chaos.) In addition to these films, and the innumerable lurid novels, hundreds of serious books and thousands of scientific articles have responded to each outbreak, many emphasizing the appalling state of global preparedness to detect and respond to such novel diseases.
I
So Corona walks through the front door as a familiar monster. Sequencing its genome (very similar to its well-studied sister sars) was simple enough, yet the most vital bits of information are still missing. As researchers work night and day to characterize the virus, they are faced with three huge challenges. First, the continuing shortage of test kits, especially in the United States and Africa, has prevented accurate estimates of key parameters such as reproduction rate, size of infected population and number of benign infections. The result has been a chaos of numbers. Second, like annual influenzas, the virus is mutating as it courses through populations with different age compositions and health conditions. The variety that Americans are most likely to get is already slightly different from that of the original outbreak in Wuhan. Further mutation could be benign, or it could alter the current distribution of virulence which now spikes sharply after age 50. Either way, Trump’s ‘corona flu’ is at minimum a mortal danger to the quarter of Americans who are elderly, have weak immune systems or suffer from chronic-respiratory problems.
Third, even if the virus remains stable and little mutated, its impact on younger age cohorts could differ radically in poor countries and amongst high-poverty groups. Consider the global experience of the Spanish Flu in 1918–19, which is estimated to have killed 1 to 2 per cent of humanity. In the us and Western Europe, the original h1n1 in 1918 was most deadly to young adults. This has usually been linked to their relatively strong immune systems, which overreacted to the infection by attacking lung cells, leading to viral pneumonia and septic shock. More recently, however, some epidemiologists have theorized that older adults may have been protected by ‘immune memory’ from an earlier outbreak in the 1890s.
Spanish Flu found a favoured niche in army camps and battlefield trenches where it scythed down young soldiers by the tens of thousands. This became a major factor in the battle of empires. The collapse of the huge German spring offensive of 1918, and thus the outcome of the War, has been attributed to the fact that the Allies, in contrast to their enemy, could replenish their sick armies with newly arrived American troops. But the Spanish Flu in poorer countries had a different profile. It’s rarely appreciated that almost 60 per cent of global mortality, perhaps 20 million deaths, occurred in the Punjab, Bombay and other parts of western India, where grain exports to Britain and brutal requisitioning practices coincided with a major drought. Resultant food shortages drove millions of poor people to the edge of starvation. They became victims of a sinister synergy between the flu and malnutrition, which suppressed their immune response to infection and produced rampant bacterial, as well as viral, pneumonia. In a similar case in British-occupied Iran, several years of drought, cholera and food shortages, followed by a widespread malaria outbreak, preconditioned the death of an estimated fifth of the population.
This history—especially the unknown consequences of interactions with malnutrition and existing infections—should warn us that covid-19 might take a different and more deadly path in the dense, sickly slums of Africa and South Asia. With cases now appearing in Lagos, Kigali, Addis Ababa and Kinshasa, no one knows (and won’t know for a long time because of the absence of testing) how it may synergize with local health conditions and diseases. Some have claimed that because the urban population of Africa is the world’s youngest, with over-65s comprising only 3 per cent of the population—as opposed to 23 per cent in Italy—the pandemic will only have a mild impact. In light of the 1918 experience, this is a foolish extrapolation. As is the assumption that the pandemic, like seasonal flu, will recede with warmer weather.
More likely, as Science warned on 15 March, Africa is ‘a ticking time-bomb’.2 In addition to malnourishment, the fuel for such a viral explosion is the huge number of people with crippled immune systems. hiv/aids has killed 36 million Africans over the past generation, and researchers estimate that there are currently 24 million cases, along with at least 3 million suffering from the ‘white plague’, tuberculosis. Some 350 million Africans are chronically malnourished, and the number of small children whose growth has been stunted by hunger has been increasing by millions since 2000. Social distancing in mega-slums like Kibera in Kenya or Khayelitsha in South Africa is an obvious impossibility, while more than half of Africans lack access to clean water and basic sanitation. Additionally, five of the six nations with the world’s worst healthcare are in Africa, including the most populous, Nigeria. Kenya, a country well-known for exporting nurses and doctors, has exactly 130 icu beds and 200 certified icu nurses to greet the arrival of covid-19.
2
A year from now we may look back in admiration at China’s success in containing the pandemic—and in horror at the us’s failure. (I’m making the heroic assumption that China’s declaration of rapidly declining transmission is more or less accurate.) The inability of us institutions to keep Pandora’s Box closed is hardly a surprise. Since 2000 we’ve repeatedly seen breakdowns in frontline healthcare. Both the 2009 and 2018 flu seasons, for instance, overwhelmed hospitals across the country, exposing the drastic shortage of hospital beds after years of profit-driven cutbacks of in-patient capacity. The crisis dates back to the corporate offensive that brought Reagan to power and converted leading Democrats into neoliberal mouthpieces. According to the American Hospital Association, the number of in-patient hospital beds declined by an extraordinary 39 per cent between 1981 and 1999. The aim of this reduction was to raise profits by increasing ‘census’ (the number of occupied beds). But management’s goal of 90 per cent occupancy meant that hospitals no longer had capacity to absorb patient influx during epidemics and medical emergencies.
In the new century, us emergency medicine continues to be downsized in the private sector by the ‘shareholder-value’ imperative of increasing short-term dividends and profits, and in the public sector by fiscal austerity and reductions in preparedness budgets. As a result, there are only 45,000 icu beds available to deal with the projected flood of critical coronavirus cases. (By comparison, South Koreans have over three times more beds available per 1,000 people than Americans.) According to an investigation by usa Today, ‘only eight states would have enough hospital beds to treat the 1 million Americans of 60 and over who could become ill with covid-19’. At the same time, Republicans have repulsed all efforts to rebuild safety nets shredded by the 2008 recession budget cuts. Local and state health departments—the vital first line of defence—have 25 per cent fewer staff today than they did before Black Monday twelve years ago. Over the last decade, the cdc’s budget has fallen 10 per cent in real terms.3 Since the coronation of Trump, fiscal shortfalls have only been exacerbated. The New York Times recently reported that 21 per cent of local health departments reported reductions in budgets for the 2017 fiscal year.
Trump also closed the White House pandemic office, a directorate established by Obama after the 2014 Ebola outbreak to ensure a rapid and well-coordinated national response to new epidemics, and three months before the outbreak he shut down the predict project, a pandemic early-warning system and foreign-aid programme established after the avian flu crisis in 2005. According to Science, predict had ‘discovered more than 1,000 viruses from viral families that contain zoonoses, including viruses involved in recent outbreaks, and others of ongoing public health concern.’ This total included 160 potentially dangerous coronaviruses identified in bats and other animals.
We are therefore in the early stages of a medical Katrina. Having disinvested in emergency-medical preparedness while all expert opinion recommended a major expansion of capacity, the us now lacks elementary supplies as well as public-health workers and emergency beds. National and regional stockpiles have been maintained at levels far below what is indicated by epidemic models. Thus the test-kit debacle has coincided with a critical shortage of basic protective equipment for health workers. Militant nurses, our national social conscience, are making sure that we all understand the grave dangers created by inadequate stockpiles of protective supplies like N95 face masks. They also remind us that hospitals have become greenhouses for antibiotic-resistant super-bugs such as C. difficile, which may become major secondary killers in overcrowded hospital wards.
3
The outbreak has instantly exposed the stark class divide in healthcare that Our Revolution—the grassroots campaign group spun out of Bernie Sanders’s 2016 election bid—has put on the national agenda. In sum, those with good health plans who can also work from home will be protected, assuming they follow the necessary safeguards. Public employees and other unionized workers with decent coverage will have to make difficult choices between their income and their health. Meanwhile, millions of low-wage service workers, farm employees, the unemployed and the homeless will be thrown to the wolves. As we all know, universal coverage in any meaningful sense requires universal provision for paid sick days. Some 45 per cent of the us workforce is currently denied that right—and therefore compelled to transmit the infection or set an empty plate. Likewise, fourteen Republican states have refused to enact the provision of the Affordable Care Act that expands Medicaid to the working poor. That’s why one in four Texans, for example, lacks coverage and has only the emergency room at the county hospital to seek treatment.
With Sanders as usual leading the charge, the Democrats successfully pressured the White House and congressional Republicans to agree to paid sick leave as an emergency measure. But, as Sanders immediately pointed out, the compromise legislation remains full of unacknowledged loopholes and can be rescinded as soon as the pandemic recedes. Nonetheless, it is an important beachhead for taking the struggle to the next level—permanent, universal sick days for the entire workforce. And as the Trump Administration, panicked by the prospect of electoral annihilation, concedes to other sensible measures, such as government control over production of key medical supplies, new opportunities arise for pressing the case for public medicine in months to come.
The deadly contradictions of private healthcare in a time of plague are most visible in the for-profit nursing-home industry which warehouses 2.5 million elderly Americans, most of them on Medicare. It is a highly competitive sector capitalized on low wages, understaffing and illegal cost-cutting. Tens of thousands die every year from the facilities’ neglect of basic infection-control procedures and from state governments’ failure to hold management accountable for what can only be described as manslaughter. For many care homes—particularly in Southern states—it is cheaper to pay fines for sanitary violations than to hire additional staff and provide them with proper training. It’s not surprising that the first epicentre of community transmission was the Life Care Center, a nursing home in the Seattle suburb of Kirkland. I spoke to Jim Straub, an old friend and union organizer in Seattle-area nursing homes, who characterized the facility as ‘one of the worst staffed in the state’ and the broader Washington nursing-home system as ‘the most underfunded in the country—an absurd oasis of austere suffering in a sea of tech money’.
Moreover, he pointed out that public-health officials were ignoring the crucial factor that explained the rapid transmission of the disease from the Life Care Center to ten other nearby nursing homes: ‘Nursing home workers in the priciest rental market in America universally work multiple jobs, usually at multiple nursing homes’. The authorities failed to find out the names and locations of these second jobs and thus lost all control over the spread of covid-19. No one is yet proposing to compensate exposed workers for staying at home. Across the country, dozens, probably hundreds more nursing homes will become coronavirus hotspots. Many employees will eventually choose the food bank over such conditions and refuse to go to work. At which point the system could collapse, and we shouldn’t expect the National Guard to empty bedpans.
4
The pandemic broadcasts the case for universal coverage and paid leave with every step of its deadly advance. While Biden chips away at Trump, progressives must unite—as Bernie proposes—to win the Democratic Convention for Medicare for All. This will be the task of the combined Sanders and Warren delegates inside Milwaukee’s Fiserv Forum in mid-July, but the rest of us have an equally important role to play on the streets, starting with the fight against evictions, layoffs, and employers who refuse compensation to workers on leave. (Afraid of contagion? Stand six feet from the next protestor, and it will only make a more powerful image on tv.) Universal coverage and associated demands are only a first step, however. It’s disappointing that in the primary debates, neither Sanders nor Warren highlighted Big Pharma’s abdication of the research and development of new antibiotics and antivirals. Of the eighteen largest pharmaceutical companies, fifteen have totally abandoned the field. Heart medicines, addictive tranquilizers and treatments for male impotence are profit leaders, not the defences against hospital infections, emergent diseases and traditional tropical killers. A universal vaccine for influenza—that is to say, a vaccine that targets the immutable parts of the virus’s surface proteins—has been a possibility for decades, but never profitable enough to be a priority.
As the antibiotic revolution is rolled back, old diseases will reappear alongside novel infections, and hospitals will become charnel houses. Even Trump can opportunistically rail against absurd prescription costs, but to combat this scenario we need a programme to break up drug monopolies and provide for the public production of lifeline medicines. (This used to be the case: during wwii the us Army enlisted Jonas Salk and other researchers to develop the first flu vaccine.) As I wrote fifteen years ago in The Monster at Our Door: Access to lifeline medicines, including vaccines, antibiotics and antivirals, should be a human right, universally available at no cost. If markets can’t provide incentives to cheaply produce such drugs, then governments and non-profits should take responsibility for their manufacture and distribution . . . The survival of the poor must at all times be accounted a higher priority than the profits of Big Pharma.
The current pandemic expands the argument: capitalist globalization now appears to be biologically unsustainable in the absence of a truly international public-health infrastructure. But such an infrastructure will never exist until social movements break the power of Big Pharma and for-profit healthcare. This requires an independent socialist design for human survival that goes beyond an updated New Deal. Since the days of Occupy, socialists have put the struggle against income and wealth inequality on Page One: a great achievement to be sure. But now we must take the next step of advocating social ownership and the democratization of economic power, with the healthcare and pharmaceutical industries as immediate targets.
The left must also make an honest evaluation of our political and moral weaknesses. As excited as I have been about the leftward evolution of a new generation and the return of the word ‘socialism’ to political discourse, there’s a disturbing element of national solipsism in the us progressive movement that is symmetrical with the new nationalism. We tend to talk only about the American working class and American radical history (perhaps forgetting that Debs was an internationalist to the core), in what sometimes veers close to a left version of America Firstism. In addressing the pandemic, then, socialists should stress the urgency of international solidarism at every possible occasion. Concretely, we need to agitate our progressive friends and their political idols to demand a massive scaling up of the production of test kits, protective supplies and lifeline drugs for free distribution to poor countries. It’s up to us to ensure that Medicare for All becomes foreign as well as domestic policy.
San Diego, 5 April 2020
- Posts : 3460
Join date : 2014-10-29
Na osnovu?MNE wrote:1% da se neko u Wuhanu zarazio u prirodi od neke životinje, 9% da se zarazio na pijaci, 90% iz laboratorijeTalason wrote:ako je verovatnija, to znači da si računao verovatnoće
taj račun pokaži
valja li ovako?
Pre ce biti 99% da se neko zarazio u prirodi/industriji/pijaci, 1% da je 'pobegao iz laboratorije'. Al sta ja znam, ja sam samo nekoliko godina radila u labu sa GM organizmima...
_____
you cannot simply trust a language model when it tells you how it feels
Similar topics
|
|
|