Connect with us

News

China’s patchy vaccine campaign leaves elderly at risk

Published

on

China’s patchy vaccine campaign leaves elderly at risk

China’s patchy vaccination marketing campaign has left half of its aged inhabitants uncovered to the next threat of extreme Covid-19, simply because the nation tackles surging outbreaks of the extremely infectious Omicron variant in Shanghai and different areas.

Shanghai started on Monday a two-phase lockdown of all 26mn of its residents to fight a wave of largely asymptomatic instances which were quickly multiplying locally.

Hong Kong misplaced management of the same surge in January, during which greater than 1mn of its 7.4mn residents have been contaminated. However whereas the territory has a closed border with the remainder of China, Shanghai doesn’t, that means it’s extra seemingly instances will unfold past the town, with probably devastating penalties for the aged.

Greater than 130mn Chinese language aged 60 and above are both unvaccinated or have acquired fewer than three doses, which, in accordance with a College of Hong Kong (HKU) research, places them in higher hazard of growing extreme Covid signs or dying in the event that they contract the virus.

China’s homegrown Sinovac jab was discovered to be much less efficient in stopping dying from Covid among the many aged than the internationally developed BioNTech/Pfizer inoculation, except they acquired three photographs. The overwhelming majority of the inhabitants has been jabbed with both Sinovac or Sinopharm vaccine, which researchers stated additionally required a triple dose.

Advertisement

You might be seeing a snapshot of an interactive graphic. That is more than likely because of being offline or JavaScript being disabled in your browser.

The HKU research, revealed final week, discovered that three doses of Sinovac have been 98 per cent efficient at stopping extreme sickness in folks older than 60 — the same charge to the BioNTech vaccine. However two jabs proved solely 72 per cent efficient at stopping extreme instances and 77 per cent efficient in opposition to dying, decrease than BioNTech.

Advertisement

That huge scale of China’s uncovered aged inhabitants — higher than your entire inhabitants of Japan — has prompted officers to implement localised lockdown measures in a push to stamp out outbreaks throughout a number of cities together with Jilin and Shenzhen.

You might be seeing a snapshot of an interactive graphic. That is more than likely because of being offline or JavaScript being disabled in your browser.

Advertisement

Ben Cowling, an epidemiologist at HKU and one of many research’s authors, stated three jabs of inactivated inoculation “provides a really excessive stage of safety”. This conclusion, although it highlights the efficacy of home vaccines in opposition to Omicron, will fear public well being officers in China, the place solely 20 per cent of these aged 80 and above have acquired three doses.

You might be seeing a snapshot of an interactive graphic. That is more than likely because of being offline or JavaScript being disabled in your browser.


Beijing elevated its efforts to manage a 3rd inoculation to the aged in direction of the tip of 2021, when Covid evaded its strict border controls. However consultants stated the nation’s success in containing the virus, coupled with the older inhabitants’s suspicion of western medication, had undermined the vaccination drive.

“The early success of the zero-Covid coverage created a false sense of safety among the many aged,” stated Yanzhong Huang, a public well being coverage professional on the Council on International Relations in New York.

Advertisement

“Many older folks thought ‘there isn’t a virus, why trouble getting vaccinated and threat affected by the side-effects?’,” he added. This view was echoed by a number of folks interviewed by the Monetary Instances whose aged relations had resisted the vaccine.

“My dad and mom and grandparents refuse to get vaccinated,” stated a tech worker in her twenties in Guangdong who didn’t need to be named. “They don’t take heed to authorities scientific recommendation. They don’t belief the vaccines and like conventional Chinese language medication cures,” she added.

You might be seeing a snapshot of an interactive graphic. That is more than likely because of being offline or JavaScript being disabled in your browser.

Advertisement

A workers member at a Beijing aged care facility stated most residents had both not been vaccinated or had not acquired the third jab. “Some households are unwilling to get their family vaccinated. They’re involved in regards to the potential side-effects,” he stated.

Huang stated vaccine hesitancy was significantly prevalent in rural areas, that are weak within the occasion of an uncontrolled outbreak given the shortage of hospitals and docs within the countryside.

Mainland China’s protection is best than that of Hong Kong, the place 69 per cent of residents aged 80 and above have been unvaccinated in early February. Omicron has since torn by the aged unvaccinated inhabitants, leaving the territory with the best variety of deaths in contrast with inhabitants dimension on the earth.

China recorded greater than 65,900 instances over the previous fortnight, forcing a number of cities to implement localised lockdowns as officers tried to keep away from the identical destiny that befell Hong Kong. These measures seem to have protected essentially the most weak. The nation has had solely two Covid fatalities this month, in accordance with official statistics.

However consultants stated the big under-vaccinated aged inhabitants meant officers would impose ever-tougher restrictions. “Till the prices exceed the advantages, the federal government has no selection to surrender zero-Covid,” stated Huang.

Advertisement

Further reporting by Maiqi Ding in Beijing, Chan Ho-him in Hong Kong and Tom Mitchell in Singapore

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

News

As California Burns, ‘Octavia Tried to Tell Us’ Has New Meaning

Published

on

As California Burns, ‘Octavia Tried to Tell Us’ Has New Meaning

This article is also a weekly newsletter. Sign up for Race/Related here.

In the wake of the devastating fires in Los Angeles, many people are referencing the work of the science fiction writer Octavia Butler. Butler, who grew up in Pasadena, was the daughter of a housekeeper and a father who was a shoeshiner. She went on to become the first science fiction writer to win a MacArthur “genius” award. Her book “Parable of the Sower,” published in 1993, paints a picture of a California ravished by the effects of climate change, income inequality, political divisiveness and centers on a young woman struggling to find faith and the community to build a new future.

The phrase “Octavia tried to tell us,” which began to gain momentum in 2020 during the pandemic, has once again resurfaced, in part because Butler studied science and history so deeply. The accuracy with which she read the shifts in America can, at times, seem eerily prophetic. One entry in “Parable of the Sower,” which is structured as a journal, dated on “February 1, 2025” begins, “We had a fire today.” It goes on to describe how the fear of fires plague Robledo, a fictional town that feels much like Altadena, a haven for the Black middle class for more than 50 years, where Butler lived in the late ’90s.

In 2000, Butler wrote a piece for Essence magazine titled, “A Few Rules for Predicting the Future.” She wrote: “Of course, writing novels about the future doesn’t give me any special ability to foretell the future. But it does encourage me to use our past and present behaviors as guides to the kind of world we seem to be creating. The past, for example, is filled with repeating cycles of strength and weakness, wisdom and stupidity, empire and ashes.”

In one of the last interviews before she died in 2006, Butler spoke to Democracy Now!, an independent news organization, about how she’d been worried about how climate could devastate California . “I wrote the two ‘Parable’ books back in the ’90s,” she said, referring to “Parable of the Sower” and her 1998 follow-up, “Parable of the Talents.” These books, she explained, were about what happens when “we don’t trouble to correct some of the problems we are brewing for ourselves right now. Global warming is one of those problems. And I was aware of it back in the ’80s.” She continued: “A lot of people were seeing it as politics, as something very iffy, as something they could ignore because nothing was going to come of it tomorrow.

Advertisement

Lynell George, a writer who lives in Los Angeles and the author of a book on Butler and her creative journey, has spent many years studying Butler’s archives at the Huntington Library in Pasadena. In 2022, we asked George to write about how Butler predicted the world we live in. As so many people are turning to her work during this time of tremendous loss, we wanted to share that story with our readers again.

In her piece, “The Visions of Octavia Butler,” George wrote: “In ‘Parable of the Sower,’ Earth is tipping toward climate disaster: A catastrophic drought has led to social upheaval and violent class wars. Butler, a fervent environmentalist, researched the novel by clipping articles, taking notes and monitoring rain and growth in her Southern California neighborhood. She couldn’t help but wonder, she later wrote, what ‘environmental and economic stupidities’ might lead to. She often called herself a pessimist, but threaded into the bleak landscape of her ‘Parable’ novels are strands of glimmering hope — ribbons of blue at the edges of the fictional fiery skies.”

Invite your friends.
Invite someone to subscribe to the Race/Related newsletter. Or email your thoughts and suggestions to racerelated@nytimes.com.

Continue Reading

News

Donald Trump’s inauguration to be moved indoors because of ‘bitterly cold’ weather

Published

on

Donald Trump’s inauguration to be moved indoors because of ‘bitterly cold’ weather

Unlock the White House Watch newsletter for free

Parts of Donald Trump’s inauguration will be moved inside the US Capitol because of freezing weather that is forecast for Washington on Monday.

It will be the first time since 1985 — when a severe cold snap hit Ronald Reagan’s second inauguration — that a swearing-in ceremony has been moved indoors.

The president-elect announced the revised plans in a Truth Social post on Friday, saying he had ordered the inauguration address, as well as prayers and speeches, to be delivered inside the Capitol Rotunda as Reagan had done four decades ago.

Advertisement

“There is an Arctic blast sweeping the Country. I don’t want to see people hurt, or injured, in any way,” Trump wrote.

“It is dangerous conditions for the tens of thousands of Law Enforcement, First Responders, Police K9s and even horses, and hundreds of thousands of supporters that will be outside for many hours on the 20th.”

The National Weather Service said an “enhanced winter storm threat” was in place for Sunday afternoon and evening, and predicted about 2-4 inches of snow would fall, with a “reasonable worst case” scenario of 4-8 inches.

“Bitterly cold wind chills” were expected Monday to Wednesday, the NWS said on Friday, as it forecast temperatures to be “well below freezing” during this period.

The agency is forecasting a high of about -5C at 11am local time on Monday, when the swearing-in ceremony is due to begin, with a wind-chill of -13C that it warned could result in hypothermia or frostbite without appropriate attire.

Advertisement

Trump said the Capital One Arena — with a capacity of 20,000 — will be opened on Monday for a live viewing of the ceremony, and that he would visit the venue, located about 2km from the Capitol, following his swearing-in.

Other events, including a victory rally at the arena are scheduled for Sunday and inaugural balls set for Monday night, will continue as scheduled, the president-elect said.

Trump encouraged supporters who choose to come to “dress warmly!”

Continue Reading

News

CNN liable for defamation over story on Afghanistan 'black market' rescues

Published

on

CNN liable for defamation over story on Afghanistan 'black market' rescues

Security contractor Zachary Young alleges CNN defamed him in a November 2021 report, shown above, about Afghans’ fears of exorbitant charges from people offering to get them out of the country after the Taliban took control of Afghanistan. CNN says it will defend the report in a trial set to start in a Florida court Monday.

CNN via Internet Archive/Screenshot by NPR


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

CNN via Internet Archive/Screenshot by NPR

A Florida jury has found that CNN defamed a security consultant in presenting a story that suggested he was charging “exorbitant prices” to evacuate people desperate to get out of Afghanistan after the U.S. withdrawal in August 2021.

Jurors found the network should pay $5 million to U.S. Navy veteran Zachary Young for lost finances and suffering, and said he was eligible for more in punitive damages. The proceedings turned immediately to expert testimony as both sides presented cases over what punitive damages would be appropriate.

Young sat impassively as the jury’s verdict was read aloud in court.

Advertisement

The November 2021 story focused on concerns from Afghans that they faced extraordinary costs in a “black market” to secure safe passage for relatives and friends, especially those who had worked with U.S. agencies and organizations and therefore were fearful of the takeover by the Taliban.

Young was the only security contractor named in the piece, however, and a caption warned he offered “no guarantee of safety or success.”

He was not directly accused of operating in a black market in the television or written versions of the story, but the words did appear in the caption in the TV version of the story.

On the witness stand during the trial, CNN editors defended use of the term “black market,” saying it meant operating in unregulated circumstances, such as the chaos of Kabul at that time; Young’s lawyers noted that dictionaries consistently ascribe illegality to the term.

The jury found CNN liable for defamation per se, meaning it had harmed Young by the very words it chose, and for defamation by implication, that is, it had harmed his reputation by the implications that a reasonable reader or viewer might take from the story.

Advertisement

Young’s lead attorney, Devin Freedman, had argued that CNN willfully damaged Young, costing him millions of dollars and causing irreparable personal harm, and that the network should be punished for it. Toward the very end of his closing arguments, Freedman told the jury they had the rare opportunity to hold the press accountable.

“Media executives around the country are sitting by the phones to see what you do,” Freedman told jurors. “CNN’s executives are waiting in their boardrooms in Georgia to see what you decide. Make the phones ring in Georgia. Send a message.”

After the initial verdict, Judge William S. Henry instructed jurors that they could only find punitive damages against CNN for its actions in the case at hand, not over any other story or issue.

Even so, over the course of the lawsuit, lawyers for Zachary Young acquired internal correspondence showing several editors within CNN held reservations about the solidity of the reporting behind the story.

For example, Fuzz Hogan, a senior director of standards for CNN, acknowledged in testimony under oath that he had approved a “three-quarters true” story. Another editor, Tom Lumley, had said in an internal message that the piece was “80 percent emotion.” On the stand, Lumley said that it still wasn’t his favorite story, but on the grounds of the craft of story-telling involved.

Advertisement

During the trial, CNN’s lawyers had contended the story’s reporting holds up as fair and true under scrutiny. CNN correspondent Alexander Marquardt had presented viewers with a LinkedIn message from Young saying it would cost $75,000 to evacuate a vehicle with five or six passengers from Kabul to Pakistan. Young said he worked with corporate sponsors, including Bloomberg and Audible, rather than individuals.

On the stand, Young acknowledged that he took a 65% profit margin from the fees he charged, and took inquiries from individuals. He also curtly and coarsely brushed off people inquiring about help who could not afford his fees.

Other groups involving U.S. veterans and non-governmental organizations sought to get Afghans out without such profits, as a former major general testifying on Young’s behalf acknowledged. The retired major general, James V. Young Jr. (not related to Zach Young), said he charged donors for the cost.

CNN’s legal team, led by David Axelrod (the lawyer is not related to the Obama White House official and CNN analyst of the same name) had told jurors they should rely on their own “common sense.”

Axelrod had been able to press Young to concede that some of his claims to potential clients were not borne out by facts; Young had not in fact evacuated people from Afghanistan by air. Nor was he in constant contact with journalists, as claimed.

Advertisement

In his closing argument, Freedman presented Young as a swashbuckling former CIA operative to explain his curtness in messages to desperate people trying to help people.

On the witness stand, however, Young emerged as emotionally vulnerable himself, weeping during testimony. He recounted that, after the story ran, he became despondent, depressed, alienated from intimacy with his wife, cut off from friends and family members. HIs attorney cited “deep and lasting wounds” from the piece.

The piece was presented initially on CNN’s The Lead With Jake Tapper, and a fuller written version subsequently posted on CNN’s website. A few months later, shortly after Young’s legal team threatened legal actions, a substitute anchor apologized to Young on the air for use of the term “black market” in the story, and said it did not apply to him.

Freedman, Young’s attorney, called the apology insufficient.

“This is what makes this case historic: punitive damages,” Freedman told jurors. “A media company has to face an American jury with the power to punish. That is not a frequent event. Do you believe that CNN should be punished? Do you believe they should send a message to other media companies to avoid this misconduct?”

Advertisement

This story will be updated after the jury decides on what, if any, punitive damages to award Young.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending