Terror Attack on Charlie Hebdo Ignites Fear of Global Nuclear Disaster
It will be an apocalyptic thing when it happens to an atomic reactor and whole continents are irradiated, with children first to suffer, a death toll in the millions and eco-economic impacts beyond calculation.
Slain cartoonists at Charlie Hebdo were allies of anti-nuclear movement. Here's a cover from the September-October 2012 issue of Charlie Hebdo.
For decades our global security apparatus and its attendant media mavens have pretended that the radioactive elephant in the room of global terror does not exist. But after Fukushima, Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, 9/11, Charlie Hebdo and so much more, a terrible reality has become all too clear.
We have seen four American-designed reactors explode and three melt at a single Japanese site. A severely escalated thyroid cancer rate has followed, with more health disasters yet to come. Some two dozen sibling GE reactors currently operate in the U.S.
We have seen an entire continent—and more—irradiated by Chernobyl, with at least one major study calculating well over a million downwind deaths. Chernobyl-style reactors still operate in Europe.
We have seen a U.S. reactor rocked by a 1979 hydrogen explosion and melt-down (repeatedly denied by its owners) that poured still-unknown quantities of radiation into the Pennsylvania countryside.
Today, the Ohio Public Utilities Commission is poised to force ratepayers to subsidize the fault-riddled Davis-Besse nuke—a Three Mile Island clone—with millions of gouged dollars to keep it running despite profound vulnerability to its own advanced deterioration and the absolute impossibility of protecting it from a possible terror attack.
It has long been established that the accused 9/11 attackers contemplated hitting the reactors at Indian Point, 35 miles up the Hudson from Manhattan.
Neither U.S. military nor local police forces could have stopped such an attack, which could have poisoned millions of people in the American northeast and gutted the entire U.S. ecology and economy.
Worldwide there are more than 430 commercial reactors still operating. There are more than 50 in France, just under 100 in the U.S.
Not one of them can be effectively guarded against a concerted terror attack. Each could spew massive radiation releases and do untold damage to the human race, the planetary ecology, the global economy.
Every serious student of terrorism knows that such an attack is merely a matter of time. Every serious expert on atomic reactors knows the potential human costs simply cannot be calculated.
It’s impossible for a sane world to comprehend why someone would want to attack one of these reactors.
But it’s impossible to deny that there are probably those right now contemplating how to do just that.
Perfectly protecting these reactors is impossible. But their owners are almost entirely shielded from liability from the consequences of such an attack.
And the fallout would utterly dwarf any other catastrophe the world has yet seen.
We now have the ability to replace all these reactors with renewable sources and added efficiencies that are cheaper, cleaner, more reliable and—above all—safer than atomic reactors.
No city will be irradiated by an attack on a wind farm. No downwind children will die from a terrorist machine-gunning at a solar facility.
All across the world, from Illinois and Ohio to France and Japan, corrupt corporate reactor owners demand public subsidies to keep these obsolete, non-competitive, supremely dangerous machines in operation.
But in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo massacre, and of so much else we now know about today’s world, there’s no excuse for running these reactors—anywhere.
Why must we wait for the inevitable disaster to occur, and for the talking heads to then tell us that such insanity “could not have been predicted?" And that there is “nothing to worry about?"
Charlie Hebdo was an anti-nuclear publication. Its cartoons repeatedly lampooned the horrible dangers of this insane technology.
Its warnings now bear an added dimension, far deeper than the atomic industry—or the world’s leaders—seem willing to face.
As millions march in fear and mourning, will we now ignore Charlie twice? Are you willing to pay the next radioactive price?
Or will you act, and shut them all down?
Harvey Wasserman wrote SOLARTOPIA! OUR GREEN-POWERED EARTH and has reported on security risks at nuclear reactors since the 1970s.
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
Nukes Fade As Wind and Solar Soar
Contribute
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
In the tropics, farmers often slash and burn forests to clear fertile land for crops, but a new method avoids that technique. Inga Foundation video
Rainforests are an important defense against climate change because they absorb carbon. But many are being destroyed on a massive scale.
<iframe style="border: none" src="//html5-player.libsyn.com/embed/episode/id/14740994/height/45/theme/standard/thumbnail/yes/direction/backward/" height="45" width="100%" scrolling="no" allowfullscreen webkitallowfullscreen mozallowfullscreen oallowfullscreen msallowfullscreen></iframe>
<p>In the tropics, farmers often slash and burn forests to clear fertile land for crops. The practice involves cutting down vegetation and burning it. But the soil's fertility does not last long, so the farmers must clear a new patch of forest every few years.</p><p>"People believe it's the only possible way of growing crops," says ecologist Michael Hands.</p><p>But he says there's an alternative. Hands directs the Inga Foundation, which teaches farmers in Honduras and Costa Rica a method called <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ingafoundation.org/alley-cropping/">inga alley cropping</a>.</p><p>The inga is a fast-growing tree with roots that fix nitrogen, so it replenishes the soil.</p>
<p>In alley cropping, farmers plant inga trees in rows. Their shade kills weeds and creates space for planting maize or beans. Then the trees are pruned back so sunlight can reach the crops until harvest.</p><p>"And you can repeat the process the following year," Hands says.</p><p>The ingas' roots keep the soil rich, so the farmer does not need to slash and burn more land. That means less carbon pollution and less labor.</p><p>"It's definitely transforming people's lives," Hands says.</p>
<p><em>Reposted with permission from <a href="https://www.yaleclimateconnections.org/2020/07/farmers-learn-alternative-to-slashing-and-burning-rainforests/" target="_blank">Yale Climate Connections</a>.</em></p>From Your Site Articles
- Brazil's Amazon Rainforest Is the Wild West for Illegal Gold Miners ... ›
- Trump Moves to Open 16.7 Million Acre Alaskan Rainforest to ... ›
- Amazon Rainforest Reaches Point of No Return - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
A truck spreads lime on a meadow to increase the soil's fertility in Yorkshire Dales, UK. Farm Images / Universal Images Group via Getty Images
As we look for advanced technology to replace our dependence on fossil fuels and to rid the oceans of plastic, one solution to the climate crisis might simply be found in rocks. New research found that dispersing rock dust over farmland could suck billions of tons of carbon dioxide from the air every year, according to the first detailed large scale analysis of the technique, as The Guardian reported.
<p>The <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2448-9" target="_blank">study</a>, published Wednesday in the journal <em>Nature,</em> found the technique could pull enough carbon dioxide from the atmosphere to remove about half of the amount of that greenhouse gas currently produced by Europe. To put it another way, that would mean pulling more CO2 from the atmosphere than the current total emissions from global aviation and shipping combined, according to a <a href="https://www.newswise.com/articles/applying-rock-dust-to-croplands-could-absorb-up-to-2-billion-tonnes-of-co2-from-the-atmosphere-research-shows" target="_blank">press release</a> from the University of Sheffield where the study was conducted.</p><p>"Spreading rock dust on agricultural land is a straightforward, practical CO2 drawdown approach with the potential to boost soil health and food production, said David Beerling, director of the Leverhulme Center for Climate Change Mitigation at the University of Sheffield and lead author of the study. "Our analyses reveal the big emitting nations – China, the US, India – have the greatest potential to do this, emphasizing their need to step up to the challenge."</p>
<p>The research showed that if the world's three largest emitters of CO2 — China, the U.S. and India — adopted the practice on a large scale, they could collectively clear about 1 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide from the air, as <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-solutions/2020/07/08/spreading-rock-dust-ground-could-pull-carbon-air-researchers-say/" target="_blank">The Washington Post</a> reported.</p><p>The technique of spreading rock on the ground is known as enhanced rock weathering. The researchers took a realistic approach to perform a global analysis of the technique. The researchers say their modeling of enhanced rock weathering is the most realistic yet because it factors in how much rock is available and the energy countries would be willing to use for grinding it up, as <a href="https://www.newscientist.com/article/2248222-a-sprinkle-of-rock-dust-could-help-avoid-catastrophic-climate-change/" target="_blank">The New Scientist</a> reported.</p>
<p>Looking at each country's climate, farmland and energy infrastructure, they found that rock dust could remove between 0.5 and 2 gigatons of CO2 annually by 2050. Right now, global dependence on fossil fuels emits around 35 gigatons of CO2 each year, according to The New Scientist.</p><p>Enhanced rock weathering is a system where crushed rock is layered into the soil. As The Washington Post explained, when silicate or carbonate minerals in the dust dissolve in rain, carbon dioxide is drawn from the atmosphere into the solution to form bicarbonate ions. The bicarbonate ions then run off into the ocean, where they form carbonate minerals and store their carbon indefinitely.</p><p>The Guardian noted that while researchers are clear that the most important step to fighting the climate crisis is drastically reducing emissions, a reduction in emissions won't be enough to keep the world from breaking the targets of the Paris agreement keeping global temperature rise below 2 degrees Celsius. In order to achieve lasting success, the excess carbon in the atmosphere also needs to be removed.</p>
<p>"We have passed the safe level of greenhouse gases. Cutting fossil fuel emissions is crucial, but we must also extract atmospheric CO2 with safe, secure and scalable carbon dioxide removal strategies to bend the global CO2 curve and limit future climate change," said James Hansen, a partner in the study and director of the Climate Science, Awareness and Solutions Program at Columbia University's Earth Institute, in a press release. "The advantage of CO2 removal with crushed silicate rocks is that it could restore deteriorating top-soils, which underpin food security for billions of people, thereby incentivizing deployment."</p><p>The researchers say that enhanced rock weathering has several advantages, according to The Guardian. First, many farmers already add limestone dust to <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/soil">soils</a> to reduce acidification, and adding other rock dust improves fertility and crop yields, meaning the application could be both routine and desirable.</p><p>"CO2 drawdown strategies that can scale up and are compatible with existing land uses are urgently required to combat climate change, alongside deep emissions cuts," said Beerling. "Enhanced rock weathering is a straightforward, practical approach."</p>
From Your Site Articles
- California Startup Opus 12 Recycles Carbon Dioxide - EcoWatch ›
- UK Biomass Plant Starts Groundbreaking Carbon Capture Project ... ›
- 8 Ways to Sequester Carbon to Avoid Climate Catastrophe - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Global heating imposes a harsh cost at the most critical time of all: the moment of spawning. Pxfuel
By Tim Radford
German scientists now know why so many fish are so vulnerable to ever-warming oceans. Global heating imposes a harsh cost at the most critical time of all: the moment of spawning.
<p>"Our findings show that, both as embryos in eggs and as adults ready to mate, fish are far more sensitive to heat than in their larval stage or as sexually mature adults outside the mating season," said <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Flemming_Dahlke" target="_blank">Flemming Dahlke, a marine biologist</a> with the <a href="https://www.awi.de/" target="_blank">Alfred Wegener Institute at Bremerhaven</a>.</p><p>"On the global average, for example, adults outside the mating season can survive in water that's up to 10°C warmer than adults ready to mate, or fish eggs, can."</p><p>The finding – if it is confirmed by other research – should clear up some of the puzzles associated with fish numbers. There is clear evidence, established repeatedly over the decades, that <a href="https://climatenewsnetwork.net/ocean-heatwaves-drive-more-fish-north/" target="_blank">fish are responding to climate change</a>.</p><p>But almost three fourths of the planet is blue ocean, and <a href="https://climatenewsnetwork.net/hunger-threat-as-tropical-fish-seek-cooler-waters/" target="_blank">at depth is responding far more slowly</a> than the land surface to global heating fueled by fossil fuel exploitation that releases greenhouse gases.</p>
Nearing the Brink
<p>Since <a href="https://climatenewsnetwork.net/abundant-fish-need-cool-seas-and-protection/" target="_blank">fish in the temperate zones already experience a wide variation</a> in seasonal water temperatures, it hasn't been obvious why species such as <a href="https://climatenewsnetwork.net/sardines-swim-into-northern-waters-to-keep-cool/" target="_blank">cod have shifted nearer the Arctic, and sardines have migrated to the North Sea</a>.</p><p>But <a href="https://climatenewsnetwork.net/ocean-warming-spurs-marine-life-to-rapid-migration/" target="_blank">marine creatures are on the move</a>, and although there are other factors at work, including overfishing and <a href="https://climatenewsnetwork.net/fish-cant-smell-well-in-more-acidic-seas/" target="_blank">the increasingly alarming changes in ocean chemistry</a>, thanks to ever-higher levels of dissolved carbon dioxide, temperature change is part of the problem.</p><p>The latest answer, Dr Dahlke and his colleagues report in the journal <a href="https://science.sciencemag.org/cgi/doi/10.1126/science.aaz3658" target="_blank">Science</a>, is that many fish may already be living near the limits of their thermal tolerance.</p><p>The temperature safety margins during the moments of spawning and embryo might be very precise, and over hundreds of thousands of years of evolution, marine and freshwater species have worked out just what is best for the next generation. Rapid global warming upsets this equilibrium.</p><p>The Bremerhaven scientists looked at experiments, observations and recorded data for the life cycles of 694 marine and freshwater species, to decide that oxygen supply is the key decider of reproductive success. Warmer waters carry less dissolved oxygen. Embryo fish have no gills: they cannot simply take in deeper breaths.</p><p>Fish about to mate are busy producing extra mass in the form of sperm and egg cells: this additional body mass also needs oxygen. Even at lower temperatures, piscine cardiovascular systems are under stress.</p><p>So the reasoning follows that, if global heating continues, climate change and rising water temperatures are likely to affect the reproduction of perhaps 60% of all fish species.</p><p>"Some species might successfully manage this change," Dr Dahlke said. "But if you consider the fact that fish have adapted their mating patterns to specific habitats over extremely long timeframes, and have tailored their mating cycles of specific ocean currents and food sources, it has to be assumed that being forced to abandon their normal spawning areas will mean major problems for them."</p>
<p class=""><em>Reposted with permission from <a href="https://climatenewsnetwork.net/warming-oceans-deter-more-fish-from-spawning/" target="_blank">Climate News Network</a>.</em></p>
Read More
Show Less
Guillain-Barre syndrome occurs when the body's own immune system attacks and injures the nerves outside of the spinal cord or brain – the peripheral nervous system. Niq Steele / Getty Images
By Sherry H-Y. Chou, Aarti Sarwal and Neha S. Dangayach
The patient in the case report (let's call him Tom) was 54 and in good health. For two days in May, he felt unwell and was too weak to get out of bed. When his family finally brought him to the hospital, doctors found that he had a fever and signs of a severe infection, or sepsis. He tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19 infection. In addition to symptoms of COVID-19, he was also too weak to move his legs.
When a neurologist examined him, Tom was diagnosed with Guillain-Barre Syndrome, an autoimmune disease that causes abnormal sensation and weakness due to delays in sending signals through the nerves. Usually reversible, in severe cases it can cause prolonged paralysis involving breathing muscles, require ventilator support and sometimes leave permanent neurological deficits. Early recognition by expert neurologists is key to proper treatment.
We are neurologists specializing in intensive care and leading studies related to neurological complications from COVID-19. Given the occurrence of Guillain-Barre Syndrome in prior pandemics with other corona viruses like SARS and MERS, we are investigating a possible link between Guillain-Barre Syndrome and COVID-19 and tracking published reports to see if there is any link between Guillain-Barre Syndrome and COVID-19.
Some patients may not seek timely medical care for neurological symptoms like prolonged headache, vision loss and new muscle weakness due to fear of getting exposed to virus in the emergency setting. People need to know that medical facilities have taken full precautions to protect patients. Seeking timely medical evaluation for neurological symptoms can help treat many of these diseases.
What Is Guillain-Barre Syndrome?
Guillain-Barre syndrome occurs when the body's own immune system attacks and injures the nerves outside of the spinal cord or brain – the peripheral nervous system. Most commonly, the injury involves the protective sheath, or myelin, that wraps nerves and is essential to nerve function.
Without the myelin sheath, signals that go through a nerve are slowed or lost, which causes the nerve to malfunction.
To diagnose Guillain-Barre Syndrome, neurologists perform a detailed neurological exam. Due to the nerve injury, patients often may have loss of reflexes on examination. Doctors often need to perform a lumbar puncture, otherwise known as spinal tap, to sample spinal fluid and look for signs of inflammation and abnormal antibodies.
Studies have shown that giving patients an infusion of antibodies derived from donated blood or plasma exchange – a process that cleans patients' blood of harmful antibodies - can speed up recovery. A very small subset of patients may need these therapies long-term.
The majority of Guillain-Barre Syndrome patients improve within a few weeks and eventually can make a full recovery. However, some patients with Guillain-Barre Syndrome have lingering symptoms including weakness and abnormal sensations in arms and/or legs; rarely patients may be bedridden or disabled long-term.
Guillain-Barre Syndrome and Pandemics
As the COVID-19 pandemic sweeps across the globe, many neurologic specialists have been on the lookout for potentially serious nervous system complications such as Guillain-Barre Syndrome.
Though Guillain-Barre Syndrome is rare, it is well known to emerge following bacterial infections, such as Campylobacter jejuni, a common cause of food poisoning, and a multitude of viral infections including the flu virus, Zika virus and other coronaviruses.
Studies showed an increase in Guillain-Barre Syndrome cases following the 2009 H1N1 flu pandemic, suggesting a possible connection. The presumed cause for this link is that the body's own immune response to fight the infection turns on itself and attacks the peripheral nerves. This is called an "autoimmune" condition. When a pandemic affects as many people as our current COVID-19 crisis, even a rare complication can become a significant public health problem. That is especially true for one that causes neurological dysfunction where the recovery takes a long time and may be incomplete.
The first reports of Guillain-Barre Syndrome in COVID-19 pandemic originated from Italy, Spain and China, where the pandemic surged before the U.S. crisis.
Though there is clear clinical suspicion that COVID-19 can lead to Guillain-Barre Syndrome, many important questions remain. What are the chances that someone gets Guillain-Barre Syndrome during or following a COVID-19 infection? Does Guillain-Barre Syndrome happen more often in those who have been infected with COVID-19 compared to other types of infections, such as the flu?
The only way to get answers is through a prospective study where doctors perform systematic surveillance and collect data on a large group of patients. There are ongoing large research consortia hard at work to figure out answers to these questions.
Understanding the Association Between COVID-19 and Guillain-Barre Syndrome
While large research studies are underway, overall it appears that Guillain-Barre Syndrome is a rare but serious phenomenon possibly linked to COVID-19. Given that more than 10.7 million cases have been reported for COVID-19, there have been 10 reported cases of COVID-19 patients with Guillain-Barre Syndrome so far – only two reported cases in the U.S., five in Italy, two cases in Iran and one from Wuhan, China.
It is certainly possible that there are other cases that have not been reported. The Global Consortium Study of Neurological Dysfunctions in COVID-19 is actively underway to find out how often neurological problems like Guillain-Barre Syndrome is seen in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Also, just because Guillain-Barre Syndrome occurs in a patient diagnosed with COVID-19, that does not imply that it was caused by the virus; this still may be a coincident occurrence. More research is needed to understand how the two events are related.
Due to the pandemic and infection-containment considerations, diagnostic tests, such as a nerve conduction study that used to be routine for patients with suspected Guillain-Barre Syndrome, are more difficult to do. In both U.S. cases, the initial diagnosis and treatment were all based on clinical examination by a neurological experts rather than any tests. Both patients survived but with significant residual weakness at the time these case reports came out, but that is not uncommon for Guillain-Barre Syndrome patients. The road to recovery may sometimes be long, but many patients can make a full recovery with time.
Though the reported cases of Guillain-Barre Syndrome so far all have severe symptoms, this is not uncommon in a pandemic situation where the less sick patients may stay home and not present for medical care for fear of being exposed to the virus. This, plus the limited COVID-19 testing capability across the U.S., may skew our current detection of Guillain-Barre Syndrome cases toward the sicker patients who have to go to a hospital. In general, the majority of Guillain-Barre Syndrome patients do recover, given enough time. We do not yet know whether this is true for COVID-19-related cases at this stage of the pandemic. We and colleagues around the world are working around the clock to find answers to these critical questions.
Sherry H-Y. Chou is an Associate Professor of Critical Care Medicine, Neurology, and Neurosurgery, University of Pittsburgh.
Aarti Sarwal is an Associate Professor, Neurology, Wake Forest University.
Neha S. Dangayach is an Assistant Professor of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai.
Disclosure statement: Sherry H-Y. Chou receives funding from The University of Pittsburgh Clinical Translational Science Institute (CTSI), the National Institute of Health, and the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine Dean's Faculty Advancement Award. Sherry H-Y. Chou is a member of Board of Directors for the Neurocritical Care Society. Neha S. Dangayach receives funding from the Bee Foundation, the Friedman Brain Institute, the Neurocritical Care Society, InCHIP-UConn Center for mHealth and Social Media Seed Grant. She is faculty for emcrit.org and for AiSinai. Aarti Sarwal does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Reposted with permission from The Conversation.
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Nurses wear PPE prior to caring for a COVID-19 patient in the ICU at Sharp Grossmont Hospital on May 5, 2020 in La Mesa, California. Mario Tama / Getty Images
One of the initial reasons social distancing guidelines were put in place was to allow the healthcare system to adapt to a surge in patients since there was a critical shortage of beds, ventilators and personal protective equipment. In fact, masks that were designed for single-use were reused for an entire week in some hospitals.
<p>Now, five months into the pandemic, health care workers are raising the same concern. They are facing a shortage of masks, gowns, face shields and gloves, as <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/07/08/ppe-shortage-masks-gloves-gowns/" target="_blank">The Washington Post</a> reported.</p><p>"We're five months into this and there are still shortages of gowns, hair covers, shoe covers, masks, N95 masks," said Deborah Burger, president of National Nurses United, who cited results from a survey of the union's members, as <a href="https://time.com/5863776/personal-protective-gear-shortage-us/" target="_blank">The Associated Press</a> reported. "They're being doled out, and we're still being told to reuse them."</p><p>In a survey of 23,000 registered nurses, National Nurses United found 85 percent were asked to reuse masks designed for single use, according to The Washington Post.</p>
<p>The new shortage is not just affecting urban hospitals like it did in March. The rising demand for protective gear is now plaguing a broad range of health care facilities across the country, from urgent cares to doctors' offices to nursing homes. Several major medical associations said this was a preventable problem that would have required swift and aggressive action from the federal government in the early days of the pandemic, according to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/08/health/coronavirus-masks-ppe-doc.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage" target="_blank">The New York Times</a>. If the government had aggressively procured and distributed critical supplies, this shortage could have been avoided.</p><p>"A lot people thought once the alarm was sounded back in March surely the federal government would fix this, but that hasn't happened," said Burger to The Washington Post</p><p>She, like many health-care workers, blamed the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/trump-watch/" target="_self">Trump</a> administration for the lack of equipment. She pointed out that the administration has insisted the responsibility falls to state and local officials, with the federal government playing only a supporting role.</p><p>In a letter to Congress last week, the health department in DuPage County, Illinois, near Chicago, said all its hospitals are reusing protective gear "in ways that were not originally intended and are probably less safe than the optimal use of PPE," as The Associated Press reported.</p>
<p>Neurologists, cardiologists and cancer specialists around the country have been unable to reopen their offices in recent weeks, leaving many patients without care, according to a <a href="https://searchlf.ama-assn.org/undefined/documentDownload?uri=%2Funstructured%2Fbinary%2Fletter%2FLETTERS%2F2020-6-30-Letter-to-Gaynor-re-PPE.pdf" target="_blank">letter</a> from American Medical Association to the the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Vice President Mike Pence and members of Congress.</p><p>"We have kids living with grapefruit-sized abscesses for over three months who can't eat or drink and there's nothing we can do for them because we can't get P.P.E.," said Kay Kennel, the chief officer of Lubbock Kids Dental, to The New York Times. Her clinic serves low-income families in Texas and has a list of 50 children awaiting emergency surgery. "It's been just horrible, and given the growing number of infections here, I'm afraid things are going to get worse."</p>
<p>Rear Adm. John Polowczyk, who is in charge of coronavirus-related supplies for the White House, told Congress last week that more than one-fourth of the states have less than a 30-day supply.</p><p>"It would seem like in less than 30 days, we're going to have a real crisis," said Rep. Bill Foster, an Illinois Democrat, as The Associated Press reported.</p><p>That prompted the American Medical Association to write a <a href="https://searchlf.ama-assn.org/undefined/documentDownload?uri=%2Funstructured%2Fbinary%2Fletter%2FLETTERS%2F2020-6-30-Letter-to-Pence-re-PPE.pdf" target="_blank">letter</a> to the White House, asking it to invoke the Defense Protection Act to require American manufacturers to increase supplies of N95 masks and gowns, as The Washington Post reported.</p><p>Former Vice President Joe Biden said yesterday that he <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/6982369-Biden-Supply-Chain-Fact-Sheet-07-07-20.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosvitals&stream=top" target="_blank" title="">would use that law</a> to boost domestic protection of medical gear if elected.</p>
<p>As the New York Times noted, the nation's supply of PPE is trapped in an unsustainable supply chain model. The U.S. remains dependent on overseas manufacturers and various middlemen who raised prices sevenfold amid soaring global demand. There are only a handful of U.S.-based companies still making PPEs and they say they are already at maximum capacity.</p><p>So far, more than 900 health care workers have died of COVID-19, according to a tally by National Nurses United. Burger said many of the deaths have been linked to inadequate protective gear.</p><p>"There are tools at President Trump's disposal and he has failed us," she said to The New York Times. "These deaths are entirely preventable."</p>
From Your Site Articles
- Silent Threat of the Coronavirus: America's Dependence on Chinese ... ›
- Rich Countries Are Buying up Medical Supplies, Leaving Poor ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Democratic presidential hopefuls Joe Biden and Senator Bernie Sanders greet each other with a safe elbow bump before the start of the Democratic Party 2020 presidential debate in a CNN Washington Bureau studio in Washington, DC on March 15, 2020. Mandel Ngan / AFP / Getty Images
By Jake Johnson
Unity Task Forces formed by presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden and Sen. Bernie Sanders unveiled sweeping party platform recommendations Wednesday that—while falling short of progressive ambitions in a number of areas, from climate to healthcare—were applauded as important steps toward a bold and just policy agenda that matches the severity of the moment.
"We've moved the needle a lot, especially on environmental justice and upping Biden's ambition," said Sunrise Movement co-founder and executive director Varshini Prakash, a member of the Biden-Sanders Climate Task Force. "But there's still more work to do to push Democrats to act at the scale of the climate crisis."
The climate panel—co-chaired by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and former Secretary of State John Kerry—recommended that the Democratic Party commit to "eliminating carbon pollution from power plants by 2035," massively expanding investments in clean energy sources, and "achieving net-zero greenhouse gas emissions for all new buildings by 2030."
In a series of tweets Wednesday night, Ocasio-Cortez—the lead sponsor of the House Green New Deal resolution—noted that the Climate Task Force "shaved 15 years off Biden's previous target for 100% clean energy."
"Of course, like in any collaborative effort, there are areas of negotiation and compromise," said the New York Democrat. "But I do believe that the Climate Task Force effort meaningfully and substantively improved Biden's positions."
Today the 6 Biden-Sanders Unity Task Forces are unveiling final language. The Climate Task Force accomplished a gr… https://t.co/gz3broq2qe— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez)1594240617.0
The 110 pages of policy recommendations from the six eight-person Unity Task Forces on education, the economy, criminal justice, immigration, climate change, and healthcare are aimed at shaping negotiations over the 2020 Democratic platform at the party's convention next month.
Sanders said that while the "end result isn't what I or my supporters would've written alone, the task forces have created a good policy blueprint that will move this country in a much-needed progressive direction and substantially improve the lives of working families throughout our country."
"I look forward to working with Vice President Biden to help him win this campaign," the Vermont senator added, "and to move this country forward toward economic, racial, social, and environmental justice."
Biden, for his part, applauded the task forces "for helping build a bold, transformative platform for our party and for our country."
"I am deeply grateful to Bernie Sanders for working with us to unite our party and deliver real, lasting change for generations to come," said the former vice president.
On the life-or-death matter of reforming America's dysfunctional private health insurance system—a subject on which Sanders and Biden clashed repeatedly throughout the Democratic primary process—the Unity Task Force affirmed healthcare as "a right" but did not embrace Medicare for All, the signature policy plank of the Vermont senator's presidential bid.
Instead, the panel recommended building on the Affordable Care Act by establishing a public option, investing in community health centers, and lowering prescription drug costs by allowing the federal government to negotiate prices. The task force also endorsed making all Covid-19 testing, treatments, and potential vaccines free and expanding Medicaid for the duration of the pandemic.
"It has always been a crisis that tens of millions of Americans have no or inadequate health insurance—but in a pandemic, it's potentially catastrophic for public health," the task force wrote.
Dr. Abdul El-Sayed, a former Michigan gubernatorial candidate and Sanders-appointed member of the Healthcare Task Force, said that despite major disagreements, the panel "came to recommendations that will yield one of the most progressive Democratic campaign platforms in history—though we have further yet to go."
We rein in #pharma's greed by: 1) Allowing Medicare to FINALLY negotiate Rx drugs FOR ALL AMERICANS 2) Using Rx d… https://t.co/6k9iUCLMp7— Abdul El-Sayed (@Abdul El-Sayed)1594238411.0
Observers and advocacy groups also applauded the Unity Task Forces for recommending the creation of a postal banking system, endorsing a ban on for-profit charter schools, ending the use of private prisons, and imposing a 100-day moratorium on deportations "while conducting a full-scale study on current practices to develop recommendations for transforming enforcement policies and practices at ICE and CBP."
Marisa Franco, director of immigrant rights group Mijente, said in a statement that "going into these task force negotiations, we knew we were going to have to push Biden past his comfort zone, both to reconcile with past offenses and to carve a new path forward."
"That is exactly what we did, unapologetically," said Franco, a member of the Immigration Task Force. "For years, Mijente, along with the broader immigrant rights movement, has fought to reshape the narrative around immigration towards racial justice and to focus these very demands. We expect Biden and the Democratic Party to implement them in their entirety."
"There is no going back," Franco added. "Not an inch, not a step. We must only move forward from here."
Reposted with permission from Common Dreams.
From Your Site Articles
- Poll: 96% of Democratic Voters Want 2020 Nominee to Prioritize ... ›
- House Democrats Hold First Climate Change Hearings in More ... ›
- Latino Voters Worried About Climate Change Could Swing 2020 ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Trending
Yellowstone Grizzlies Win Reprieve From Trophy Hunt as Court Restores Endangered Species Protections
3h
Animals
A grizzly bear sow with cub in Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming. Danita Delimont / Gallo Images / Getty Images Plus
Grizzly bears in Wyoming and Idaho won't be subject to a trophy hunt thanks to a federal court decision Wednesday upholding endangered species protections for these iconic animals.
<p>The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/grizzly-bears-yellowstone-endangered-species-2607784220.html" target="_self">2018 decision</a> from the Montana District Court reinstating protections for Yellowstone area grizzly bears after the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/trump-administration" target="_self">Trump administration</a><a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/grizzly-bears-yellowstone-2446382005.html" target="_self"> stripped them of protections</a> in 2017. Wyoming and Idaho then announced plans to hunt the animals for the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/grizzly-bear-hunt-wyoming-2571671329.html" target="_self">first time in more than 40 years</a>.</p><p>"This is a tremendous victory for all who cherish Yellowstone's grizzly bears and for those who've worked to ensure they're protected under the Endangered Species Act," <a href="https://biologicaldiversity.org/" target="_blank">Center for Biological Diversity</a> (CBD) attorney Andrea Zaccardi <a href="https://biologicaldiversity.org/w/news/press-releases/appeals-court-victory-maintains-protections-yellowstone-grizzlies-2020-07-08/" target="_blank">said in a press release</a>. "Grizzlies still have a long way to go before recovery. Hunting these beautiful animals around America's most treasured <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/national-parks" target="_self">national park</a> should never again be an option."</p>
<div id="a1a10" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="dd14d33bb684f0237ea63e050dd997da"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1280956331550261258" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">The 9th Circuit just upheld a 2018 federal ruling that the Trump administration violated the Endangered Species Act… https://t.co/0AzXqRTLrO</div> — Center for Bio Div (@Center for Bio Div)<a href="https://twitter.com/CenterForBioDiv/statuses/1280956331550261258">1594238763.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>CBD joined the Northern Cheyenne Tribe, the <a href="https://www.sierraclub.org/" target="_blank">Sierra Club</a> and the <a href="https://www.npca.org/" target="_blank">National Parks Conservation Association</a> in suing to reinstate protections for the bears. The plaintiffs were represented by <a href="https://earthjustice.org/" target="_blank">Earthjustice</a>, according to a <a href="https://earthjustice.org/news/press/2020/9th-circuit-upholds-endangered-species-protections-for-yellowstone-grizzlies" target="_blank">press release</a>.</p><p>The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services delisted Yellowstone area grizzlies in 2017, in a decision that impacted around 700 bears in Wyoming, Idaho and Montana, according to <a href="https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/506446-court-upholds-protections-for-yellowstone-grizzly-bears" target="_blank">The Hill</a>. Those who supported the move said that the bears' population as well as successful <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/conservation" target="_self">conservation</a> efforts and state policies justified the move. Then Idaho and Wyoming said they would allow up to 23 bears to be hunted and killed outside of Yellowstone National Park, according to CBD.</p><p>But the Montana court ruled that the FWS did not consider the impact of delisting on a remnant population and did not use the best available <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/science/" target="_self">science</a> when making its decision, according to <a href="https://www.courthousenews.com/grizzlies-saved-ninth-circuit-stops-yellowstone-trophy-hunt/amp/" target="_blank">Courthouse News Service</a>, and the Ninth Circuit agreed.</p>
<p>Specifically, the court found that FWS did not take into account how delisting and trophy hunting would impact the genetic diversity of Yellowstone grizzlies.</p><p>"Because the 2017 rule's conclusion that genetic health no longer poses a threat to the Yellowstone grizzly is without scientific basis, this conclusion is arbitrary and capricious," U.S. Circuit Judge Mary Schroeder wrote.</p><p>The court ordered the FWS to reconsider its decision with a view towards how delisting would impact a remnant population and genetic diversity.</p><p>"The importance of this court ruling for the grizzly bears found in our most iconic national parks cannot be overstated," Northern Rockies Associate Director for the National Parks Conservation Association Stephanie Adams said in the Earthjustice press release. "This decision sets the stage for practical, science-based and on-the-ground collaboration to ensure a healthy future for grizzlies in Grand Teton, Yellowstone and beyond. And now, communities can continue their work to create opportunities to safely connect the grizzly bears of Yellowstone and Glacier."</p>
<div id="a6f0e" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="f7e4ff4c6e38a577c6285e8596d17696"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1280967734965264386" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">VICTORY: Today, a circuit court upheld the district court's opinion reinstating Endangered Species Act protections… https://t.co/wtdOhUcOiF</div> — National Parks Conservation Association (@National Parks Conservation Association)<a href="https://twitter.com/NPCA/statuses/1280967734965264386">1594241481.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>Not everyone was happy with the decision, however.</p><p>"Wyoming — not an activist court — should determine how the bear is managed. The state has a strong, science-based management plan and it should be given a chance to succeed.," Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) said in a statement reported by The Hill.</p><p>FWS did not return requests for comment from either The Hill or Courthouse News Service.</p><p>Grizzly bears once roamed across North America and the Western U.S., but now mostly live in Alaska. Of around 55,000 total U.S. bears, 1,500 live in the lower 48 states, most of them in the Yellowstone area, according to Courthouse News Service.</p>
From Your Site Articles
- Wyoming Votes to Allow First Grizzly Bear Hunt in 40 Years ... ›
- British Columbia Bans Grizzly Bear Trophy Hunting - EcoWatch ›
- Good News for Yellowstone Grizzlies? U.S. to Review 'Flawed ... ›
- Judge Blocks First Yellowstone-Area Grizzly Hunt in 40 Years ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less