Health & Fitness

There’s been a lot of talk lately about whether or not the fast-tracked COVID-19 vaccine will in fact be safe and effective. While vaccine makers insist that any vaccine reaching the market will have undergone rigorous testing, the way trial protocols are designed suggests these vaccines may leave a lot to be desired.

As reported¹ by Forbes contributor William Haseltine, a former professor at Harvard Medical School and Harvard School of Public Health, while Moderna, Pfizer, AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson have all published their vaccine trial protocols in a rare display of transparency, “close inspection of the protocols raises surprising concerns.”

In a nutshell, the trial designs are such that the vaccines will get a passing grade even if their efficacy is minimal. Of course, we must also consider vaccine side effects and I’ve also written several articles about mounting safety concerns.

COVID-19 Vaccine Trials Rigged to Pass Efficacy Test

As noted by Haseltine, prevention of infection would typically be a critical endpoint of any vaccine trial. In other words, you want to ensure that when you take the vaccine, your risk of infection is significantly reduced.

However, when it comes to the COVID-19 vaccine, shockingly, preventing infection is not a criterion for success in any of these trials. The only criterion for a successful COVID-19 vaccine is a reduction of COVID-19 symptoms, and even then, the reduction required is minimal.

“We all expect an effective vaccine to prevent serious illness if infected. Three of the vaccine protocols — Moderna, Pfizer, and AstraZeneca — do not require that their vaccine prevent serious disease only that they prevent moderate symptoms which may be as mild as cough, or headache,” Haseltine writes,² adding:

“The pharmaceutical companies intend to do trials ranging from 30,000 to 60,000 participants. This scale of study would be sufficient for testing vaccine efficacy.

The first surprise found upon a closer reading of the protocols reveals that each study intends to complete interim and primary analyses that at most include 164 participants. These companies likely intend to apply for an emergency use authorization (EUA) from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) with just their limited preliminary results.”

To get a “passing” grade in the limited interim analysis, a vaccine must show a 70% efficacy. However, again, this does not mean it will prevent infection in 7 of 10 people. As explained by Haseltine:³

“For Moderna, the initial interim analysis will be based on the results of infection of only 53 people. The judgment reached in interim analysis is dependent upon the difference in the number of people with symptoms … in the vaccinated group versus the unvaccinated group. Moderna’s success margin is for 13 or less of those 53 to develop symptoms compared to 40 or more in their control group.”

The other vaccine makers are basing results on a similar protocol, where only a limited number of vaccinated participants are exposed to the virus to evaluate the extent of their symptoms.

Johnson & Johnson’s interim analysis will include results from 77 vaccine recipients who have been infected with SARS-CoV-2, and if fewer than 18 of them develop symptoms of COVID-19, compared to 59 in the control group, the vaccine will be considered successful.

In AstraZeneca’s case, the interim analysis includes 50 vaccine recipients. The vaccine will be a success if 12 or fewer develop symptoms after exposure to SARS-CoV-2, compared to 19 in the 25-person control group.

Pfizer’s interim analysis is the smallest of the bunch, with just 32 vaccine recipients. Their success margin is seven or fewer vaccine recipients developing symptoms, compared to 25 in the control group. In the primary analysis, efficacy is set to about 60%, and at most, 164 volunteers will be included in that analysis.

Especially concerning are that those receiving the vaccine in these trials are young and healthy individuals who are not really at high risk of dying from COVID-19. This makes the results of these trials highly questionable in the far more vulnerable population of the elderly.

Trials Are Merely Testing Reduction of Common Cold Symptoms

As if that’s not eyebrow-raising enough, the minimum qualification for a “case of COVID-19” amounts to just one positive PCR test and one or two mild symptoms, such as headache, fever, cough or mild nausea. As noted by Haseltine, “This is far from adequate.”

All they’re doing is testing to see if this COVID-19 vaccine will minimize common cold symptoms. They are not actually ensuring the vaccine will prevent serious COVID-19 complications. Johnson & Johnson’s trial is the only one that requires at least five severe COVID-19 cases to be included in the interim analysis.

“One of the more immediate questions a trial needs to answer is whether a vaccine prevents infection. If someone takes this vaccine, are they far less likely to become infected with the virus?

These trials all clearly focus on eliminating symptoms of COVID-19, and not infections themselves. Asymptomatic infection is listed as a secondary objective in these trials when they should be of critical importance.

It appears that all the pharmaceutical companies assume that the vaccine will never prevent infection. Their criteria for approval is the difference in symptoms between an infected control group and an infected vaccine group. They do not measure the difference between infection and noninfection as a primary motivation,” Haseltine writes.⁴

Severe illness and death are also secondary objectives in these trials, and none of them include failure to prevent hospitalization or death as an important barrier to success. The increasingly disappearing common sense tells us that if the vaccine cannot reduce infection, hospitalization or death, then it cannot end the pandemic, which means everyone who takes the vaccine will be doing so in vain.

Some COVID-19 Vaccine Trials Are Not Using Inert Placebos

In addition to all of that, some COVID-19 vaccine trials are using other vaccines as “placebo” rather than truly biologically inert substances such as saline, which effectively makes if far easier to hide any vaccine side effects. While Moderna is using a saline solution placebo,⁵ AstraZeneca is using injected meningococcal vaccine rather than a true placebo.⁶

Another way AstraZeneca is masking potential side effects is by administering the vaccine along with certain drugs. In one of its study arms, subjects are given acetaminophen every six hours for the first 24 hours after inoculation. The pain and fever reducer could potentially mask and downplay side effects such as pain, fever, headache or general malaise.

In addition to masking side effects, it is widely recognized among literate natural medicine physicians that using acetaminophen during acute viral infections is not a wise strategy as it impairs the immune response to fight the infection.

As reported by Wired:⁷

“The press release for … results from the Oxford vaccine trials described an increased frequency of ‘minor side effects’ among participants. A look at the actual paper, though, reveals this to be a marketing spin …

Yes, mild reactions were far more common than worse ones. But moderate or severe harms — defined as being bad enough to interfere with daily life or needing medical care — were common too.

Around one-third of people vaccinated with the COVID-19 vaccine without acetaminophen experienced moderate or severe chills, fatigue, headache, malaise, and/or feverishness.

Close to 10 percent had a fever of at least 100.4 degrees, and just over one-fourth developed moderate or severe muscle aches. That’s a lot, in a young and healthy group of people — and the acetaminophen didn’t help much for most of those problems.”

Two Trials Paused Due to Safety Concerns

September 6, 2020, AstraZeneca paused its Phase 3 vaccine trial due to a “suspected serious and unexpected adverse reaction” in a British participant.^8,9 The company did not initially divulge the nature of the adverse reaction, but it has since been revealed the volunteer developed severe inflammation of the spinal cord, known as transverse myelitis.^10,11

September 12, 2020, the British Medicines Health Regulatory Authority gave AstraZeneca the go-ahead to resume its Phase 3 trial in the U.K., after an independent review found it “safe to do so.”^12,13 According to an AstraZeneca spokesperson, the incident was a case of undiagnosed multiple sclerosis.¹⁴

Days later, September 19, 2020, The New York Times reported¹⁵ a second case of transverse myelitis had occurred in the AstraZeneca trial. According to one expert consulted by the NYT, the occurrence represented a “dangerous pattern,” and that a third incidence might shut down the vaccine trial indefinitely.

AstraZeneca, however, claims the two cases are “unlikely to be associated with the vaccine,” and that there’s “insufficient evidence to say for certain that the illnesses were or were not related to the vaccine.”¹⁶ October 21, 2020, it was reported¹⁷ that one of the volunteers in AstraZeneca’s Brazilian trial had died from COVID-19 complications, but that the trial would continue anyway.

October 12, 2020, Johnson & Johnson halted its trial due to “unexplained illness” in one of its participants.^18,19 Like AstraZeneca, Johnson & Johnson has kept mum about the details of the illness, saying “it’s important to have all the facts before we share additional information.”

Side Effects Are Commonplace

The fact that more trials have not been halted is surprising considering the rate of side effects²⁰ occurring in perfectly healthy volunteers. As reported in “Gates Tries to Justify Side Effects of Fast-Tracked Vaccine,” after the first of two doses of the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine, 80% of Phase 1 participants receiving the 100 microgram (mcg) dose developed systemic side effects.²¹

After the second dose, 100% reported side effects ranging from fatigue (80%), chills (80%), headache (60%) and myalgia or muscle pain (53%).

Despite that, the 100-mcg dose was ultimately chosen to move on to Phase 3 trials.²² In the highest dosage group, which received 250 mcg, 100% of participants suffered side effects after both the first and second doses.²³ Three of the 14 participants (21%) in the 250-mcg group suffered “one or more severe events.”

An October 1, 2020, report²⁴ by CNBC reviews the experiences of five participants in Moderna’s and Pfizer’s SARS-CoV-2 vaccine trials. One of the participants in Pfizer’s vaccine trial “woke up with chills, shaking so hard he cracked a tooth after taking the second dose.”

A Moderna trial participant told CNBC he had a low-grade fever and felt “under the weather” for several days after his first shot. Eight hours after his second shot he was “bed-bound with a fever of over 101, shakes, chills, a pounding headache and shortness of breath. He said the pain in his arm, where he received the shot, felt like a ‘goose egg on my shoulder.’ He hardly slept that night, recording that his temperature was higher than 100 degrees for five hours.”²⁵

Two others reported similar side effects, and a third warned you would need to take a day off after the second shot. CNBC also noted that “as companies progressed through clinical trials, several vaccine makers abandoned their highest doses following reports of more severe reactions.”

Might Certain COVID-19 Vaccines Raise Risk of AIDS?

Disturbingly, a group of researchers are now expressing concern that some COVID-19 vaccine candidates might put certain people at a higher risk of acquiring HIV, the virus that causes AIDS.^26,27,28

Using the failed attempt to create an HIV vaccine as an example, researchers explain²⁹ that the genetically engineered adenovirus, Ad5, used in the HIV vaccine trials, is the same one being used now in four COVID-19 candidates being studied in the U.S., Russia and Pakistan.

At the time of the failed HIV vaccine, scientists were unable to identify the exact reason why Ad5 seemed to increase the risk of HIV; it just inexplicably did. Interestingly, Dr. Anthony Fauci was the lead author on the HIV study,³⁰ in which he questioned “whether the problem extends to some or all of the other recombinant vectors currently in development or to other vector-based vaccines.”

Reflecting on that question, the researchers say they decided to go public with this information now, because Ad5 vaccines for COVID-19 might soon be tested in populations with high HIV prevalence, and they believe that informed consent about the HIV/AIDS risk should be part of the COVID-19 clinical studies.

Will COVID-19 Vaccine Be Mandatory?

According to one September 2020 poll,³¹ only 51% of Americans said they “definitely or probably” would get the COVID-19 vaccine when it comes out. Another survey³² found only 44% would take the first-generation vaccine even if they were paid $100. Mounting vaccine hesitancy was bemoaned in an October 1, 2020, article³³ in the New England Journal of Medicine, and the answer, the article suggests, is to make it mandatory for all.

And, to entice compliance, the authors recommend implementing severe penalties for noncompliance, such as the suspension of employment and/or house arrest.

An October 19, 2020, article ³⁴ by Wisconsin Public Radio also warns that if precedents hold, employers may have the right to force workers to get vaccinated. Potential exceptions might include certain medical issues, bona fide religious objections, and certain union contracts that bar vaccine requirements.

Operation Warp Speed recently selected Walgreens and CVS as nationwide partners in the coming vaccine distribution effort.³⁵ Nursing homes and long-term care facilities around the U.S. can opt in by signing up to have either of these companies come and administer the vaccine to its residents and staff, once available.

So-called “health passports” are also becoming reality. Ireland, for example, has already begun its national trial. The Health Passport Ireland initiative uses an app to track and display results of COVID-19 testing. Vaccination status will be added once a vaccine becomes available.

Untold amounts of money are also being spent on programs to tag, track and trace the human population in the name of public health and safety. According to an article³⁶ in the journal JAMA, the estimated cumulative costs of the COVID-19 pandemic related to lost output and health reduction amounts to more than $16 trillion in the U.S. alone, or about 90% of our annual gross domestic product.

“For this reason, policies that can materially reduce the spread of SARS-CoV-2 have enormous social value,” the article claims. However, testing, tracing and isolation rules, all of which are promoted in this article, also have a price, and it’s one that any sensible person would reject, namely the loss of privacy and liberty.

As reported³⁷ by The Last American Vagabond, governments are selling our freedom in the name of public health. Do we really want to live in a “biosecurity state”? These freedom-robbing strategies are being sold to us as the path back to normalcy, but the reality will be anything but normal.

As detailed in “The Global Takeover Is Underway,” the pandemic and the global response to it is far from accidental. Overwhelmingly, the evidence points to it being part of a much larger scheme to implement the last stages of a technocratic takeover. 

I’ve also covered various aspects of this globalists agenda in “COVID Symptoms of Power: Tech Billionaires Harvest Humanity,” “Tech Billionaires Aiming at a Global Currency,” “Harvard Professor Exposes Surveillance Capitalism,” “How Medical Technocracy Made the Plandemic Possible” and “US Surveillance Bill 6666: The Devil in the Details.”

The COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically widened the economic gap between average people and the wealthy elite,^38,39 and continuing down the path we’re currently on will only make this disparity worse, not better.

The globalist plan isn’t about creating a better world for the average person, it’s about enslaving us so that we cannot reject or even resist what’s ultimately coming. Forced vaccinations are but one aspect of the plan that must be resisted at all cost.

from Articles https://ift.tt/3dXooOu
via IFTTT

In a case-control investigation of people with COVID-19 who visited 11 U.S. health care facilities, a U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report revealed factors associated with getting the disease.¹

People who spent time around others with COVID-19 had an increased risk, as did those who dined in restaurants. Those who reported going to restaurants or bars were twice as likely to have a positive test for SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, as those who did not.

This was the main focus of the report, with the researchers stating, "Exposures and activities where mask use and social distancing are difficult to maintain, including going to places that offer on-site eating or drinking, might be important risk factors for acquiring COVID-19."²

But buried in a table at the end of the report were numbers related to the reported use of cloth face coverings or masks in the 14 days before becoming ill. The majority of them — 70.6% — reported that they "always" wore a mask, but they still got sick.

More People Wearing a Mask Got COVID Than Those Who Didn't

Among the interview respondents who became ill, 108, or 70.6%, said they always wore a mask, compared to six, or 3.9%, who said they "never" did, and six more, or 3.9%, who said they "rarely" did. Taken together, this shows that, of the symptomatic adults with COVID-19, 70.6% always wore a mask and still got sick, compared to 7.8% for those who rarely or never did.³

The findings call into question the effectiveness of masks for preventing COVID-19, a controversial practice that's been mandated in many parts of the world.

You may remember that in the early days of the pandemic, health officials spoke out against the use of masks and discouraged Americans from wearing them, then did an about-face and said they're essential for lowering your risk. As noted by the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS):⁴

"COVID-19 is as politically-charged as it is infectious. Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, the WHO, the CDC and NIH's Dr. Anthony Fauci discouraged wearing masks as not useful for non-health care workers.

Now they recommend wearing cloth face coverings in public settings where other social distancing measures are hard to do (e.g., grocery stores and pharmacies). The recommendation was published without a single scientific paper or other information provided to support that cloth masks actually provide any respiratory protection."

Cloth Masks Are Useless Against Aerosolized Particulates

As AAPS pointed out, the theory behind cloth mask wearing is that the mask may trap droplets that come out of your mouth if you cough or sneeze. However, large respiratory droplets, which are greater than 5 micrometers/microns (μm), only remain in the air for a short time and can only travel for short distances, falling to the ground instead. This is why the CDC recommends maintaining social distancing of 6 feet from others.⁵

"Public health authorities define a significant exposure to COVID-19 as face-to-face contact within 6 feet with a patient with symptomatic COVID-19 that is sustained for at least a few minutes (and some say more than 10 minutes or even 30 minutes)," AAPS explains, adding, "The chance of catching COVID-19 from a passing interaction in a public space is therefore minimal."⁶

Further, there's evidence that aerosol transmission is involved in the spread of SARS-CoV-2,⁷ which are 0.125 μm in size. Friday September 18, 2020, the CDC posted updated COVID-19 guidance on its "How COVID-19 Spreads" page that, for the first time, mentioned aerosol transmission of SARS-CoV-2, saying "this is thought to be the main way the virus spreads."⁸

The CDC then deleted the mention of aerosols and the possibility of spread beyond 6 feet the following Monday, September 21, saying a draft version of proposed changes had been posted "in error."⁹

It's a noteworthy difference, if SARS-CoV-2 is spread via aerosolized droplets, which research suggests,¹⁰ as such droplets remain in the air for at least three hours and can travel over long distances of up to 27 feet.¹¹ Further, it adds to the likelihood that cloth masks do little to stop you from getting COVID-19. AAPS explained:¹²

"The preponderance of scientific evidence supports that aerosols play a critical role in the transmission of SARS-CoV-2. Years of dose response studies indicate that if anything gets through, you will become infected. Thus, any respiratory protection respirator or mask must provide a high level of filtration and fit to be highly effective in preventing the transmission of SARS-CoV-2."

Surgeon's Analysis Shows Masks Are Ineffective and Harmful

Dr. Jim Meehan, an ophthalmologist and preventive medicine specialist who has performed more than 10,000 surgical procedures and who is also a former editor of the medical journal Ocular Immunology and Inflammation, has peer-reviewed thousands of medical research studies.

He used this expertise to conduct an evidence-based scientific analysis on masks, which shows that not only should healthy people not be wearing masks but they could be harmed as a result.¹³

"Decades of the highest-level scientific evidence (meta-analyses of multiple randomized controlled trials) overwhelmingly conclude that medical masks are ineffective at preventing the transmission of respiratory viruses, including SAR-CoV-2," he writes. "Those arguing for masks are relying on low-level evidence (observational retrospective trials and mechanistic theories), none of which are powered to counter the evidence, arguments, and risks of mask mandates."¹⁴

He first points out that the notion of mask-wearing defies common sense and reason, considering that most of the population is at very low or almost no risk of becoming severely ill from COVID-19. Children, especially, are at extremely low risk from this illness, making mask mandates in schools highly questionable.

"Based on CDC published data, 99.99815% of children that contract CoVID-19 survive," Meehan states. "Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 among children in schools and daycares is very rare."¹⁵ He compiled multiple studies that show masks are ineffective:

Cloth Masks Pose Risks, May Increase Transmission

In addition to being ineffective, Meehan is among many experts suggesting that wearing a mask may actually increase the risk of disease transmission.

A study published in 2015, which compared the use of cloth masks with medical masks in health care workers, found that health care workers wearing cloth masks had the highest rates of influenza-like illness and laboratory-confirmed respiratory virus infections, when compared to those wearing medical masks or controls.²²

Compared to controls and the medical mask group, those wearing cloth masks had a 72% higher rate of lab-confirmed viral infections. And according to the authors, such masks may also increase infection risk:

"Penetration of cloth masks by particles was almost 97% and medical masks 44%. This study is the first RCT of cloth masks, and the results caution against the use of cloth masks. This is an important finding to inform occupational health and safety.

Moisture retention, reuse of cloth masks and poor filtration may result in increased risk of infection. Further research is needed to inform the widespread use of cloth masks globally. However, as a precautionary measure, cloth masks should not be recommended for HCWs [health care workers], particularly in high-risk situations …"

What's more, for the general public, wearing cloth masks may not be a matter of "something is better than nothing," as wearing them may be harmful. Children forced to wear masks for long periods could experience mental and psychological repercussions, in addition to potential physical risks. Meehan further compiled 17 ways that masks can cause harm:²³

Medical masks adversely affect respiratory physiology and function	Medical masks lower oxygen levels in the blood
Medical masks raise carbon dioxide levels in the blood	SAR-CoV-2 has a "furin cleavage" site that makes it more pathogenic, and the virus enters cells more easily when arterial oxygen levels decline, which means wearing a mask could increase COVID-19 severity
Medical masks trap exhaled virus in the mouth/mask, increasing viral/infectious load and increasing disease severity	SARS-CoV-2 becomes more dangerous when blood oxygen levels decline
The furin cleavage site of SARS-CoV-2 increases cellular invasion, especially during low blood oxygen levels	Cloth masks may increase the risk of contracting COVID-19 and other respiratory infections
Wearing a face mask may give a false sense of security	Masks compromise communications and reduce social distancing
Untrained and inappropriate management of face masks is common	Masks worn imperfectly are dangerous
Masks collect and colonize viruses, bacteria and mold	Wearing a face mask makes the exhaled air go into the eyes
Contact tracing studies show that asymptomatic carrier transmission is very rare	Face masks and stay at home orders prevent the development of herd immunity
Face masks are dangerous and contraindicated for a large number of people with pre-existing medical conditions and disabilities

Why Are Mask Mandates Persisting?

With the lack of solid evidence to support mask use among the general population, it appears as though mask mandates are being used as political and psychological tools rather than one aimed at protecting public health.

Meehan concluded, "… the great weight of scientific evidence shows unmistakably that wearing face masks for extended periods is harmful to people's health, safety and emotional well-being, especially to young children."²⁴

Around the world, calls for peaceful civil disobedience against mandatory masking are growing. The U.S. nonprofit Stand for Health Freedom is also calling for civil disobedience, and has a widget you can use to contact your government representatives to let them know wearing a mask must be a personal choice.

Keep in mind, too, that in many areas with mask mandates, the rules state that you must wear a mask "unless you can maintain a 6-foot distance." You will need to check the local guidelines in your area, but in many cases if you are 6 feet away from others, you can forgo wearing a mask and still be in compliance with the mandate.

from Articles https://ift.tt/3e0IsPT
via IFTTT

Sugary drinks and artificially sweetened beverages are associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular disease, which suggests artificially sweetened beverages may not be the healthy alternative they are often claimed to be, according to a research letter.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2HDpQtj

Foods linked obesity, heart disease and diabetes don't sound particularly appetising... Dietitian Melissa Meier explains everything you need to know about ultra-processed foods, and why you should avoid them next time you're doing the grocery shop. 

from Nutrition | body+soul https://ift.tt/3jwmju1

Model, activist and actor, Emily Ratajkowski revealed her pregnancy in a self-shot short film,'Who Will You Be?' alongside powerful essay entailing why she will not be revealing the gender of her child - smashing the norms of societal gender constructions.

from Health | body+soul https://ift.tt/2TuoOCC

Although the link may not be obvious, healthcare and climate change -- two issues that pose major challenges around the world -- are in fact more connected than society may realize. So say researchers, who are increasingly proving this to be true.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3jwbA2O

Access to more localized data on childhood vaccination coverage, such as at the school or neighborhood levels, could help better predict and prevent measles outbreaks in the United States, according to a new study.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/35EC1Oz

Upsetting the brain's timekeeping can cause cognitive impairments, like when jetlag makes you feel foggy and forgetful. These impairments may stem from disrupting a protein that aligns the brain's time-keeping mechanism to the correct time of day, according to new research in fruit flies.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2HGUHoU

Author and founder of COYA restaurant, Ashraf Saleh, shares their flavoursome and vegan recipe for Middle Eastern inspired fried cauliflower with white tahini. Your next meat-free meal - sorted!

from Nutrition | body+soul https://ift.tt/3owuASg

Researchers have identified a direct molecular link between meat and dairy diets and the development of antibodies in the blood that increase the chances of developing cancer. This connection may explain the high incidence of cancer among those who consume large amounts of dairy products and red meat, similar to the link between high cholesterol and an increased risk of heart disease.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/37KzzZU

DNA variation in a gene called ROBO1 is associated with early anatomical differences in a brain region that plays a key role in quantity representation, potentially explaining how genetic variability might shape mathematical performance in children, according to a new study.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2Tp6af5

New findings could lead to new therapies for IBD and people who've had portions of their bowels removed due to conditions like colon cancer and ulcerative colitis.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2HD4Brg

Researchers have identified a direct molecular link between meat and dairy diets and the development of antibodies in the blood that increase the chances of developing cancer. This connection may explain the high incidence of cancer among those who consume large amounts of dairy products and red meat, similar to the link between high cholesterol and an increased risk of heart disease.

from Diet and Weight Loss News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/37KzzZU

Researchers find that strong state firearm laws are associated with fewer firearm homicides -- both within the state where the laws are enacted and across state lines. Conversely, weak firearm laws in one state are linked to higher rates of homicides in neighboring states.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3orLGkg

T-cells taken from the blood of people who recovered from a COVID-19 infection can be successfully multiplied in the lab and maintain the ability to effectively target proteins that are key to the virus's function, according to a new study.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/35ylo7f

A new study demonstrates how changes in human genes can reduce SARS-CoV-2 infection and describes a wide array of genes that have not previously been considered as therapeutic targets for SARS-CoV-2.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2J4RDDv

The Contagion Airborne Transmission inequality model illustrates correlation between physical distancing and protection, the efficacy of face masks and the impact of physical activity on transmission.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/31JAhmc

Researchers tracked the mutation rate in SARS-CoV-2 virus's proteome -- the collection of proteins encoded by genetic material -- through time, starting with the first SARS-CoV-2 genome published in January and ending more than 15,300 genomes later in May. The team found some regions still actively spinning off new mutations, indicating continuing adaptation to the host environment. But the mutation rate in other regions showed signs of slowing, coalescing around single versions of key proteins.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2TqJvz9

Love is not the primary reason humans developed music. A new evolutionary theory of the origins of music argues more evidence supports music coming from the need for groups to impress allies and foes, and for parents to signal their attention to infants. They also argue against the theory that making music arose out of a need for social bonding, or that it is 'auditory cheesecake' a fancy evolutionary byproduct with no purpose.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2TqDTVx

Researchers have found that the production of hydrogen sulfide gas is necessary to breathe normally. Inhibition of hydrogen sulfide production in rats prevented brain neurons that control breathing from functioning normally. These findings have identified new mediators of breathing that can now be explored in the context of human health and disease.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2IXH70L

Maths - it's the subject some kids love to hate, yet despite its lack of popularity, mathematics is critical for a STEM-capable workforce and vital for current and future productivity. New research finds that boosting student confidence in maths, is pivotal to greater engagement with the subject.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3kxeOEi

Even in normal times, parents wrestle with decisions about how best to support their children’s development. Now, however, parents are faced with nearly-unprecedented choices, and problems with no clear solutions: What if in-person schooling is better for emotional health, but remote schooling is better for physical health? How can children foster social skills without typical social interactions? How can parents select among learning environments when all the options have clear downsides?

These concerns and choices are even more difficult for parents of children with disabilities, who are among the most vulnerable students and who are at increased risk of regression during school disruptions.

Special education: One size does not fit all

Of course, students who receive special education are not a uniform group. They range in age from 3 to 22, attending preschool through post-secondary placements. They include students with a wide variety of mild to severe cognitive, physical, social, emotional, and behavioral disabilities.

But students with disabilities share a need for special services, accommodations, or both, in order to fully access the school curriculum, and to make meaningful progress appropriate to their ability. At a time when schools are scrambling to deliver regular education in a novel and frightening new context, parents and educators must also work together to select and design appropriate programs for students with special needs.

Remote learning

Remote learning has two obvious benefits. First, it is the safest choice from a physical health perspective; it may indeed be the only choice for students who are medically fragile. Second, remote learning is less likely to be disrupted or changed over the course of the school year. Students who struggle with transitions or anxiety may benefit from the relatively predictable course of remote learning.

But remote learning also carries risks, some of which are particularly acute for students with disabilities. When children are at home, educators may not be able to deliver some services or accommodations. It may be more difficult, or even impossible, to work toward some goals, especially those that require proximity to or interaction with others, such as independently toileting, or purchasing lunch in the school cafeteria without adult support.

Remote learning also requires flexibility in parents’ schedules, and intensive parental participation. Even with parental involvement, students vary in how effectively they can engage with remote learning. And students who struggle with attention, intellectual functioning, language, self-regulation, or a combination of these challenges may have great difficulty learning efficiently from a remote platform. The lack of peer models may lead some children to regress behaviorally or academically.

In-person learning

In-person or hybrid (a combination of remote and in-person learning) models offer most of the benefits that remote options lack. These include a social environment with peers, and access to services and accommodations in as normal an environment as possible. Students who require intensive support, hands-on services, or who are working on skills specific to the school or vocational environment may require in-person learning opportunities in order to fully access the curriculum.

However, in-person models carry one major and obvious risk: the potential of increased exposure to COVID-19. All parents must be wary of this dangerous disease, and parents of medically complex children may deem such a risk unacceptable, despite potential academic or social benefits.

In-person models are also likely to evolve as the pandemic progresses. As a result, students will require greater flexibility in order to be successful at a physical school.

What should parents do?

Parents and educators will need to approach this challenge with creativity, flexibility, and collaboration. Parents should request to meet with their child’s educational team as soon as possible, and should plan to meet regularly thereafter to monitor their child’s progress, and to update the educational program as needed. When parents meet with their team, they should consider each goal and service with an open mind, discussing multiple options for how a goal could be met, and how a service or accommodation could be delivered.

Some adaptations are easy: for example, large print, screen-reading software, and speech-to-text are all immediately available in a remote context. Other adaptations pose challenges, but not necessarily insurmountable ones. A behavior analyst could offer coaching through a video call, for example. Or a teacher certified in intensive special education could deliver discrete trials instruction remotely by positioning two tablets in the child’s home, one for the child to use, and one as a screen to watch the child’s responses. An aide or behavioral support could join a child’s virtual classroom, and chat with or break out with the child as needed to offer support.

Now is the time for innovation, and many schools and families are discovering great new ways to deliver special education instruction safely and effectively.

Put schooling in perspective

While it can seem like there are no great options for school, parents should try to take comfort in accepting that this year, “good enough” is truly enough.

We should also strive to prioritize the things that children require even more than schooling: physical and emotional safety, a responsive adult, and unconditional love and acceptance. Children who feel safe and loved will emerge from this pandemic resilient, and ready to overcome other challenges in their future — and they may even have learned a thing or two along the way.

Resources

Autism Speaks COVID Resources

Child Trends (includes multiple excellent articles about supporting children through COVID-19)

Harvard’s Center for the Developing Child Guide to COVID-19 and Early Child Development

Helping Traumatized Children Learn, a collaborative work of MA Advocates for Children and Harvard Law School

Learning Policy Institute Resources and Examples

PTA Resources

US Department of Education resources for schools, students, and families

The post Making special education work for your child during COVID-19 appeared first on Harvard Health Blog.

from Harvard Health Blog https://ift.tt/3kHVc0c

Adults with severe obesity (BMI >35) and a prior heart attack who undergo weight-reduction surgery may lower their risk of a second heart attack, major cardiovascular event, heart failure and death. The effect weight-reduction surgery had on the patients' weight, blood pressure, cholesterol and A1C (a Type 2 diabetes marker) seems to play a role in decreasing the risk of heart attack and death.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3mppe9K

Nearly 30% of U.S. adults younger than 45 don't know all five of the most common stroke symptoms, according to a recent survey. Hispanic adults, people not born in the U.S. and less educated young adults were among the most likely to be unaware of stroke symptoms. Stroke incidence and hospitalizations are rising among young adults in the U.S.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/35xFApP

Adults with severe obesity (BMI >35) and a prior heart attack who undergo weight-reduction surgery may lower their risk of a second heart attack, major cardiovascular event, heart failure and death. The effect weight-reduction surgery had on the patients' weight, blood pressure, cholesterol and A1C (a Type 2 diabetes marker) seems to play a role in decreasing the risk of heart attack and death.

from Diet and Weight Loss News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3mppe9K

GREAT news for you, Melbournians! The Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews has announced that lockdown will finally be over from tomorrow midnight! But there's just one catch...

from Health | body+soul https://ift.tt/2HykqA0