Month: March 2022

Home / Month: March 2022

Results

Division 2 football league

Click Here:

  • Roscommon 1-18 Down 0-10

Division 3 football league

  • Limerick 1-13 Wicklow 1-9
  • Laois 1-8 Antrim 1-8

Division 4 football league

  • Tipperary 1-13 Sligo 1-9

Hogan Cup semi-finals

  • Naas CBS 3-14 St Jarlath’s Tuam 1-4
  • St Brendan’s Killarney 1-10 St Mary’s Magherafelt 1-8

***********

Advertisement

ROSCOMMON MAINTAINED THEIR push for promotion to the top tier as they picked up a third victory of their Division 2 league campaign today.

Enda Smith’s goalscoring run continued as he raised the game’s only green flag in a dominant display in Newry as they saw off hosts Down.

It finished 1-18 to 0-10 in favour of Roscommon at Páirc Esler as James McCartan’s team saw their relegation concerns intensify.

Roscommon drew with Clare last Sunday in Dr Hyde Park but impressively returned to winning ways with Conor Cox (0-5), Donie Smith (0-4) and Cian McKeon (0-2) all to the fore in the scoring stakes.

In Division 3, Limerick also have promotion ambitions as they defeated Wicklow 1-13 to 1-9 away from home, bouncing back from last Sunday’s loss to Louth. Josh Ryan hit 1-4 and Hugh Bourke scored 0-4 for Limerick, while Eoin Darcy registered Wicklow’s only goal of the game in Aughrim.

Limerick are now top of the division, while their promotion rivals Laois and Antrim couldn’t be separated as it finished 1-8 apiece in O’Moore Park. Laois looked to have won it with a late point from Matthew Byron, but Antrim levelled the game courtesy of Ryan Murray in injury-time. Evan O’Carroll (Laois) and Odhran Eastwood (Antrim) struck a goal for either side.

Tipperary won their first game of the league, a vital victory in Division 4 as they saw off Sligo in Semple Stadium by four points.

Sean O’Connor scored Tipperary’s goal in the 1-13 to 1-9 success, Luke Towey netting for Sligo.

SEE SPORT
DIFFERENTLY

Get closer to the stories that matter with exclusive analysis, insight and debate in The42 Membership.

Become a Member

Today’s Hogan Cup semi-finals resulted in wins for St Brendan’s Killarney and Naas CBS.

St Brendan’s defeated Derry’s St Mary’s Magherafelt by two points at the Connacht GAA Centre of Excellence with Cian McMahon (1-2) and William Shine (0-3) making important scoring contributions. Naas ran out convincing victors against St Jarlath’s Tuam. Niall Dolan scored 2-1 for the Kildare outfit, while Sean Broderick also found the net for the winners.

The Hogan Cup final will now see 2016 and 2017 champions St Brendan’s face 2019 finalists Naas CBS on St Patrick’s Day.

Buy The42’s new book, Behind The Lines, here:

Galway 3-22
Cork 2-17

GALWAY’S PROMOTION PROSPECTS received another major boost as Shane Walsh put on a scoring masterclass in their successful trip to Cork this evening.

Padraic Joyce’s side, who had last week’s game postponed against Offaly, claimed their third win on the bounce in Division 2 of the football league, with Walsh shooting 2-8 and attacking colleague Damien Comer also finding the net.

For Cork a struggling league campaign continues as they sustained their third loss in the second tier and are set for a relegation scrap.

Steven Sherlock excelled in attack for Keith Ricken’s team as he fired 0-10, while goals arrived in either half from youngsters Blake Murphy and Daniel O’Connell.

But after a competitive opening half which saw the teams tied at 1-12 apiece at the break, the complexion of the game changed in the second half as Galway dominated.

Steven Sherlock impressed for Cork.

Source: Laszlo Geczo/INPHO

Murphy’s early goal gave Cork an ideal start but Galway took a firm grip thereafter with Walsh netting from the penalty spot, while inside forwards Robert Finnerty and Dessie Conneely both found their range to push their side ahead 1-8 to 1-4.

Then Cork responded impressively with five points in a row, four from Sherlock and one by Murphy, to nudge ahead. An entertaining first half concluded with the teams swapping scores, John O’Rourke’s effort leaving them tied at the break.

The teams were initially well-matched in the second half but Cork only hit 1-5 after the break, struggling to supplement Sherlock’s scoring input. The class of Walsh showed as he dictated matters for Galway, bagging their third goal after Comer had found the net for the second, and it was 3-16 to 1-15 in their favour by the 54th minute.

Galway’s lead had grown to 12 points approaching full-time but Cork managed to chip away with O’Connell’s goal and a Rory Maguire point, cutting the eventual deficit.

That could be important in their fight to avoid the drop with Meath in Navan up next, promotion chasing Galway will be at home to Clare.

Scorers for Galway: Shane Walsh 2-7 (0-4f, 1-0 pen), Robert Finnerty 0-4, Damien Comer 1-1, Matthew Tierney 0-2, Dylan McHugh 0-2, Dessie Conneely 0-2, Kieran Molloy 0-1, Paul Conroy 0-1, Owen Gallagher 0-1, Tony Gill 0-1.

Scorers for Cork: Steven Sherlock 0-10 (0-6f), Blake Murphy 1-2, Daniel O’Connell 1-0, Kevin O’Donovan 0-1, Ian Maguire 0-1, Rory Maguire 0-1, John O’Rourke 0-1, Tadhg Corkery 0-1.

Advertisement

Galway

Conor Flaherty (Claregalway)

Sean Kelly (Moycullen), Kieran Molloy (Corofin), Liam Silke (Corofin)

Dylan McHugh (Corofin), John Daly (Mountbellew-Moylough), Johnny Heaney (Killanin)

PauL Conroy (St James), Matthew Tierney (Oughterard)

Paul Kelly (Moycullen), Shane Walsh (Kilkerrin-Clonberne), Owen Gallagher (Moycullen)

Robert Finnerty (Salthill-Knocknacarra), Damien Comer (Annaghadown), Dessie Conneely (Moycullen)

Subs

Cathal Sweeney (Salthill-Knocknacarra) for Gallagher (40)

Tony Gill (Corofin) for Paul Kelly (55)

Finian Ó Laoi (An Spidéal) for Heaney (60)

Darragh Silke (Corofin) for Walsh (64)

N Daly for Conroy (69)

Cork

Chris Kelly (Éire Óg)

Billy Hennessy (St Finbarr’s), Kevin Flahive (Douglas), Tadhg Corkery (Cill na Martra)

Kevin O’Donovan (Nemo Rangers), Sean Meehan (Kiskeam), Mattie Taylor (Mallow)

SEE SPORT
DIFFERENTLY

Get closer to the stories that matter with exclusive analysis, insight and debate in The42 Membership.

Become a Member

Ian Maguire (St Finbarr’s), Rory Maguire (Castlehaven)

Daniel Dineen (Cill na Martra), Fionn Herlihy (Dohenys), Colm O’Callaghan (Éire Óg)

Blake Murphy (St Vincent’s), Steven Sherlock (St Finbarr’s), John O’Rourke (Carbery Rangers)

Subs

Cian Kiely (Ballincollig) for Meehan (inj) (43)

Paudie Allen (Newmarket) for Corkery (58)

Eoghan McSweeney (Knocknagree) for Hennessy (62)

Daniel O’Connell (Kanturk) for O’Rourke (65)

Micheal Martin (Nemo Rangers) for Kelly (66)

Referee: Cormac Reilly (Meath) 

Buy The42’s new book, Behind The Lines, here:

Click Here:

Offaly 1-10
Meath 1-10

Kevin Egan reports from Tullamore

IT MAY BE a point that proves vital to the survival of one or both of these counties in their battle against relegation from Division Two of the Allianz Football League, or it may yet turn out that these two counties are destined to meet again in Division Three some time in the Spring of 2023.

Certainly in terms of quality, there was something lacking in today’s clash between Offaly and Meath in Tullamore, though it’s unlikely that any game this weekend across the country will surpass it for tension and drama.

A goalkeeping masterclass from Paddy Dunican looked as if it was going to be enough to secure the win for Offaly, as they fought like demons to defend the one-goal advantage they enjoyed thanks to Niall McNamee’s close range finish in the 63rd minute.

However there was nothing that Dunican could do except get his body in position to block Eoin Harkin’s punched effort in the fifth minute of stoppage time, and then watch on in horror as Joey Wallace palmed the ball into the net with the last play of the game.

As the Offaly backs screamed for a square ball decision, referee Fergal Kelly consulted his umpires and allowed the goal to stand, giving the Faithful County their first point of the season, but one that will feel like an inadequate return, given it looked like they had done enough to secure the win.

It was only after McNamee’s goal that Offaly looked like they might win, given that they failed to used the breeze well in the first half, taking just a lead by 0-6 to 0-5 into the dressing room.

All Meath’s scores came from frees but their support running and ball movement was decent, with Cillian O’Sullivan’s return to the starting team giving them a focal point at the centre of the attack, and that helped create goal chances for Tomas O’Reilly and Matthew Costello, which were blocked by Dunican and Colm Doyle.

It was only when Meath inched in front at 0-5 to 0-4, that Offaly finally seemed to show signs of life, restoring a narrow advantage through good points from Dylan Hyland and Mark Abbott.

A lifeline came Offaly’s way when an inexplicable trip from Jack O’Connor on an Offaly defender with the last play of the first half meant he was shown a black card, and Offaly took advantage to kick on and add the first two points of the second half through Niall McNamee and Dylan Hyland.

Offaly’s Niall McNamee.

Source: Lorraine O’Sullivan/INPHO

Hyland was in sensational form for the home side in the second half, taking his tally up to four points, while McNamee mixed the good with the bad, adding a host of wides and giveaway passes to his scores. However he was still the man that looked like he delivered the win when he finished the ball to the net in the 63rd minute, following excellent link up play with his Rhode colleagues Anton Sullivan and Rúairí McNamee to set up the close range chance.

With Meath’s wide count mounting, and Dunican seemingly impossible to beat as he repelled attempts from Jordan Morris and Matthew Costello, that looked like it would be enough – right up until Joey Wallace made his crucial contribution to break Offaly hearts and potentially change the course of this division’s relegation dogfight.

Scorers for Offaly: Niall McNamee 1-3 (0-1f), Dylan Hyland 0-4, Jack Bryant, Mark Abbott, Paddy Dunican (0-1 ’45) 0-1 each.

Scorers for Meath: Jordan Morris 0-4 (0-2f), Joey Wallace 1-0, Harry Hogan 0-2 (0-2f), Shane Walsh (0-1f), Donal Keogan, Eoin Harkin, Jason Scully 0-1 each.

Offaly

1. Paddy Dunican (Shamrocks)

4. Niall Darby (Rhode), 19. Kieran Dolan (Shamrocks), 2. Declan Hogan (Tullamore)

7. Colm Doyle (Clara), 3. James Lalor (Raheen), 5. Cian Donohoe (St. Brigid’s)

8. Bill Carroll (Cappincur), 9. Jordan Hayes (Edenderry)

12. Dylan Hyland (Raheen), 6. David Dempsey (Ballycommon), 21. Mark Abbott (Edenderry)

Advertisement

13. Jack Bryant (Shamrocks), 14. Niall McNamee (Rhode), 15. Rúairí McNamee (Rhode)

Subs

10. Cathal Donoghue (Kilcormac-Killoughey) for Donohoe (21)

11. Anton Sullivan (Rhode) for Donoghue (52)

20. Keith O’Neill (Clonbullogue) for Bryant (58)

26. Cathal Flynn (Ferbane) for Abbott (70)

24. Cormac Egan (Tullamore) for R McNamee (72)

Meath

1. Harry Hogan (Longwood)

2. Robin Clarke (Duleek/Bellewstown), 3. Eoin Harkin (Dunsaney), 4. Jordan Muldoon (Colmcille)

7. Donal Keogan (Rathkenny), 6. Shane McEntee (St Peter’s Dunboyne), 5. Cathal Hickey (Senechalstown)

9. Ronan Jones (St Peter’s Dunboyne), 8. Pádraic Harnan (Moynalvey)

13. Jason Scully (Oldcastle), 11.Thomas O’Reilly (Wolfe Tones), 12. Mathew Costello (Senechalstown)

15. Jordan Morris (Kingscourt Stars, Cavan), 14. Shane Walsh (Na Fianna), 18. Cillian O’Sullivan (Moynalvey)

Subs

22. Jack O’Connor (Curraha) for Hickey (17)

20. Ronan Ryan (Summerhill) for Clarke (31)

23. Eamon Wallace (Ratoath) for O’Reilly (52)

24. Joey Wallace (Ratoath) for O’Sullivan (53)

26. James McEntee (Curraha) for Costello (68)

Referee: Fergal Kelly (Longford)

Buy The42’s new book, Behind The Lines, here:

Click Here:

CORK STROLLED TO a facile triumph against Limerick in their Littlewoods Ireland Camogie League Division 1 Group 2 game, starting explosively before it finished 5-17 to 0-6 at Páirc Uí Chaoimh.

Ashling Thompson was a notable presence throughout and exerted her influence from the outset as Cork hit three points in just over the first two minutes via Saoirse McCarthy and the brilliant Cliona Healy’s pair (one from a free).

Five minutes had elapsed when Healy forced a turnover from a puckout, played in Amy O’Connor and the St Vincent’s speedster billowed the net.

Click Here:

Michelle Curtin got Limerick off the mark but within seconds, Sorcha McCartan was rattling a shot to the net after being put into splendid isolation by Izzy O’Regan. More goals from O’Connor, O’Regan and Healy, who finished with a goal and seven, made it 5-10 to 0-3 at half-time, Curtin providing all of the Shannonsiders’ scores.

Matthew Twomey was able to introduce Chloe Sigerson during the break and the Killeagh star weighed in with three lovely scores as the Rebels sauntered to the finishing line.

Cork’s Cliona Healy and Limerick’s Stephanie Wolfe.

Source: Ken Sutton/INPHO

Kilkenny are the most successful team in the League in the past decade but the champions survived a huge scare, needing a point right at the death from Kellyann Doyle to snatch a 1-8 to 0-10 victory over Clare at Cusack Park.

Advertisement

The Banner women have nothing tangible to show for their two ties but after leading Cork at half-time last weekend, and then following that up with this outstanding display, they have illustrated a level of form that suggests they are building on the progress made in recent years.

Denise Gaule had an early penalty brilliantly saved by Doireann Murphy and Caoimhe Carmody pointed at the other end to give Clare the lead. Katie Nolan and Eimear Kelly, and then Katie Power and Lorna McMahon swapped scores but a goal from Miriam Walsh in the 27th minute was to prove the critical score as it ensured the Cats never fell behind again. Gaule and Laura Norris followed up with points and though Aoife O’Loughlin replied, it was 1-4 to 0-4 at half-time.

Miriam Walsh was Kilkenny’s goalscorer today.

Source: Laszlo Geczo/INPHO

It was nip and tuck for much of the second half, during which Gaule drove over from a second penalty, not long after Murphy had made another brilliant save, this time from Katie Nolan. Carmody registered a brace of points to keep the hosts in touch and when McMahon and Kelly raised further white flags, it was a one-point game.

With just over a minute of normal time remaining, McMahon equalised from a free she had won herself but the mentality of champions was shown as there was still time for Doyle to venture forward and bag the winner, meaning that Kilkenny will now play Cork on 12 March for a place in the final as group winners.

In Group 1, All-Ireland champions Galway were put to the pin of their collar for a long while by Down before opening up in the second half to record a 4-17 to 0-8 triumph in Liatroim. The Mourne side welcomed Niamh Mallon back after her heroics with Portaferry and she was to the fore as the they went in at the change of ends trailing by just 1-5 to 0-5.

The Maroons opened up after the resumption, a return of 2-5 in the final few minutes giving the final score harsh look from the Down perspective. Rebecca Hennelly finished with a hat-trick of goals for the winners, with Aoife Donohue grabbing her second major of the competition. The result means that Galway will do battle with Tipperary in a fortnight to determine the group winner and Division 1 finalist.

Galway’s Aoife Donohue

Source: James Crombie/INPHO

Dublin built on a decent opener against Galway by outgunning a young Offaly team that must do without the St Rynagh’s contingent at present by 1-12 to 0-2. Adrian O’Sullivan and his backroom staff made a couple of key positional switches from last week’s outing, which along with a first start of the season for skipper Hannah Hegarty paid rich dividends in Moneygall.

SEE SPORT
DIFFERENTLY

Get closer to the stories that matter with exclusive analysis, insight and debate in The42 Membership.

Become a Member

Aisling Maher shot five points in the first half, which allied with a goal and a point from Aisling O’Neill established a 1-6 to 0-1 interval lead over Offaly, whose score was provided by Sarah Harding from a free.

Kerrie Finnegan came into the fray in place of Maher at the interval but it made little difference in terms of the Dubs’ marksmanship from placed balls, as O’Neill inherited the duties and split the posts twice. The Castleknock sharpshooter slotted a couple of more scores from play to bring her tally to 1-5 as the Blues inexorably pulled clear.

Jody Couch and Niamh Gannon also pointed but Offaly’s efforts were rewarded with the final say, as Harding converted another free before the final whistle.

* Meanwhile in the AIB All-Ireland Junior Club Championship, Eoghan Rua (Derry) beat Athleague (Roscommon) by 1-12 to 0-6 in the rescheduled semi-final to set up a final clash with Clanmaurice (Kerry) next weekend.

10 ways Biden should fix the EPA

March 25, 2022 | News | No Comments

President-elect Joe Biden has nominated Michael Regan, secretary of the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, to head the Environmental Protection Agency, according to the transition team. Regan has two decades of experience in environmental policy and positions at the Environmental Defense Fund as well as the EPA, and would be the first Black man to run the agency in its 50-year history if confirmed.

Regan and the Biden administration will need to not only restore our nation’s premier environmental regulator but also remake it, adapting it to tackle mounting environmental problems against which it has long faltered, from climate change to rampant environmental injustice to toxic pollutants old and new.

It might seem like an impossible task, given that climate-linked disasters keep multiplying, many curbs on greenhouse gas emissions have vanished, and environmental enforcement has plummeted. But our new leaders and all Americans can take inspiration from how we have done it before.

Fifty years ago, our rivers were on fire, smog choked our urban centers, and state and local governments struggled to respond. In the single month of December 1970, President Nixon opened the EPA, its new head William Ruckelshaus came out swinging against water polluters and industry-dominated state pollution boards, and Congress finalized the Clean Air Act, which Nixon then signed into law.

Since then, the EPA has brought substantial improvements in our air, water, and dealings with hazardous waste, benefiting not just our health but also our economy. Over the past four years, however, EPA political appointees tied to industries regulated by the agency have set about stripping this vital agency of its power to act. Tragically, they’ve done so even as environmental pollution still contributes substantially to premature mortality, cancer, and heart disease, as its effects still weigh most heavily on our society’s most vulnerable and exploited, and as climate disasters impose ever more unmistakable impacts on Americans’ health and well-being.

What can be done to reverse the EPA’s systematic weakening under Trump, while retooling it to meet today’s challenges? The wisdom of staffers as gathered from the Environmental Data and Governance Initiative’s EPA oral history project and interwoven with our own analysis suggests there’s much that a Biden administration and the EPA itself can do.

Here are 10 things the new leadership should do to fix the EPA.

1) Take quick climate action

As the world’s largest historical emitter of greenhouse gases and still the second-largest annual contributor, the US has for too long shirked its global duty in helping alleviate the climate crisis.

The first step to rectifying this will be rejoining the Paris climate agreement and then translating our Paris commitments into policies that speed emissions reductions, a job that the Clean Air Act and the courts have placed largely in EPA’s hands. To make up for four years of EPA inaction under Trump, the Biden EPA must reverse the Trump administration’s rollback of Obama-era policies for curbing greenhouse gases and strengthen them in durable ways including possible legislation, and improve emissions reporting so that everyone can easily follow policies’ impacts.

2) Restore the budget and staff

The EPA’s staff has declined 22 percent since 1999, and its inflation-adjusted budget is now less than in 1979. Its budget has shrunk despite added responsibilities, limiting its ability to carry out longstanding work such as enforcing the Clean Air and Water acts and ensuring clean drinking water nationwide, while impeding its response to newer challenges, from tracking and lowering greenhouse gas emissions to preparing for and responding to the heat waves, wildfires, superstorms, and other threats posed by climate change.

To start fixing that, President-elect Biden should propose — and Congress should approve — a 10 percent or more increase to the agency’s funding. This would allow the EPA to hire adequate staff to meet its current responsibilities and decisively tackle climate change.

3) Keep industry out

In the Trump EPA, political appointees — as well as scientific advisers — have had extensive ties to industries regulated by the agency (such as the fossil fuel and chemical industries). But the agency’s decisions must be based on science and the public’s health, rather than an industry’s bottom line. The federal government needs to create better ways to prevent these sorts of conflicts of interest that undermine sound science and public confidence.

4) Make environmental justice a priority

The EPA has long struggled with how much more people of color are exposed to pollution. To better rectify this, the Biden administration should prioritize environmental justice not just through agency-wide administrative actions (which can be backpedaled later), but by advocating for greater legislative authority in this arena.

Among the promising recent legislative proposals, a proposed Public Health Air Quality Act mandating more fenceline monitoring would greatly aid the agency’s ability to recognize and respond to these communities’ dilemmas. An environmental justice bill passed in New Jersey as well as a similar federal bill introduced by Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) would also give the agency stronger legal tools to limit pollution in overburdened communities.

5) Tackle toxic chemicals

The EPA has had limited success ensuring the safety of chemicals used in everyday products, guarding against lead contamination of drinking water, and banning chemicals like asbestos that cause deadly diseases.

To tackle these toxics, the agency should improve implementation of the 2016 Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act. It should also strengthen air quality and other standards to prioritize protection of pregnant women, infants, and children from hazardous chemicals. And it should do more to protect children from lead — one way to do this is to dedicate funding to rapidly replace the millions of lead service lines that still carry drinking water in many parts of the country.

6) Reinvigorate science

The EPA’s ability to protect human health and enforce environmental laws hinges on science and scientists. But during the Trump administration, scientists were sidelined from top-level decision-making, and hundreds left the agency, weakening its expertise. To make the EPA a place where top scientists want to work means improving the hiring system, providing them with sufficient resources for their work, and heeding their knowledge and recommendations. The EPA must reinvigorate its scientific workforce, advisory system, and research to ensure that environmental decision-making is grounded in science.

7) Enforce the law

The EPA’s power and willingness to enforce environmental laws has undergone long-term erosion but dropped off precipitously under Trump — even as noncompliance remains frequent. To increase pressure on polluters on behalf of the public, the EPA needs to step up enforcement, especially when and where the states do not. To do so, its enforcement capacity needs rebuilding (environmental and compliance staff fell 23 percent under Trump), and from the outset, the new administrator and his team need to announce and pursue a serious commitment to taking on violators.

8) Upgrade data

Much of the federal government’s existing environmental data infrastructure remains fragmented, partial, and outmoded. The EPA should update technology for measuring and monitoring pollution and better integrate its data systems across programs. This promises to improve the agency’s work by, for one, enabling more prompt targeting of violators. It should also strive to help people and advocacy groups better understand what is going on.

Even the EPA’s best current digital interfaces pose challenges for ordinary citizens seeking to learn about nearby facilities, from unfamiliar acronyms to unexplained numbers. EPA data on polluters as well as the agency’s own actions or inaction need to be made more transparent, accessible, and interpretable to the public, so as to better inform communities about the environmental risks surrounding them. Making it easier to analyze environmental justice impacts at the community level should be an agency priority.

9) Be a better steward of information

The EPA should be a national force for educating the public about the science that grounds our environmental laws. Under Trump, this agency slid in the opposite direction, removing not just references to climate change but much other scientific information from its websites, abandoning many environmental education efforts, and even turning its press office into a megaphone for conservative op-eds by its political appointees. The incoming leadership should ensure not just that the agency provides factual, technically accurate, and user-friendly information, but that it actively promotes environmental science literacy.

10) Partner with the American public

To accomplish many of these goals, the agency needs support from advocacy groups, educators, and other environmentally concerned citizens. These partnerships will provide new avenues for communicating accurate information about environmental problems, including more “citizen science” to enhance the agency’s work. They will also fortify efforts to push for local, state, and federal actions to improve environmental health and address climate change, and to further strengthen the EPA’s abilities.

For 50 years, the EPA has played a critical role in making our air cleaner, providing safe drinking water, and ensuring that rivers no longer spontaneously catch fire. Let’s rebuild and strengthen the agency so that it is equipped to prevent the fires, both literal and figurative, of our present and future.

Marianne Sullivan is a professor of public health at the William Paterson University of New Jersey and a member of the Environmental Data and Governance Initiative (EDGI).

Christopher Sellers is a professor of history at Stony Brook University, a research fellow at the Institute for Historical Studies at the University of Texas at Austin, and on the coordinating committee of EDGI. He is the author of Crabgrass Crucible: Suburban Nature and the Rise of Environmentalism in 20th-Century America, and forthcoming books on the history of environmental politics in Atlanta, Texas, and Mexico.

Click Here:

In the United States, there have been 17 million reported cases of Covid-19 — about 5 percent of the population. Millions more have been infected and either did not get tested or didn’t have symptoms to begin with.

Vaccines are slowly rolling out — first to front-line health care and high-risk people, and next, likely to other essential workers, followed by people ages 65 and older and those with preexisting conditions.

But it’s reasonable to ask, given that there are well over 100 million people in these groups and not nearly enough vaccine supply for them right away: Should people who’ve already had Covid-19 be vaccinated too?

After all, the body mounts an immune response to the virus during an infection. In lab studies, scientists find that most people who contract the virus develop neutralizing antibodies to it. These antibodies are the immune system proteins that bind to viruses and render them harmless.

Click Here:

So a person who has had the virus likely has developed some level of immunity. Still, immunologists and vaccine experts say these people can — and perhaps should — get vaccinated anyway, should a vaccine become available to them.

“If I, personally, had Covid, I would still like to be vaccinated,” Alexander Sette, an immunologist at the La Jolla Institute for Immunology, says.

He and other immunology and vaccine experts can explain why.

Why people who have had Covid-19 should still be vaccinated

The biggest reason everyone — whether or not they had Covid-19 in the past — should be vaccinated is because different immune systems have responded very differently to the virus.

In general, Sette says, a body will mount a durable immune response. “In fact, we’ve seen it persist up to eight months,” he says. But this is only the case for 90 percent of people. “For 10 percent of people, they don’t seem to have a good immune response eight months out.”

There have been some documented cases of reinfection, which suggests that in some people, the immunity that comes from a first infection is either weak or wanes over time (scientists still don’t know how common reinfection is). Generally, scientists have told us, the worse the first infection, the stronger the immune response will be.

The thing is, “we have no way to tell,” he says, at least easily and feasibly, if a formerly infected person is in the 90 percent or in the 10 percent. Not taking precautions like masking and social distancing, or avoiding a vaccine after an infection, he says, is like “driving a car where you’re 90 percent sure the car has brakes.”

This has been the story of the whole pandemic: The human body’s response to the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes Covid-19 has been extremely variable. Some people don’t get symptoms at all. Some people end up dying of the infection. “Some develop very high levels of neutralizing antibodies and are likely in no need of vaccines, while others develop undetectable levels of neutralizing antibodies,” Yale immunobiology researcher Akiko Iwasaki explains in an email.

So, quite simply: A vaccine helps level out that variability. People whose immune systems didn’t produce a robust response can catch up to those who did. According to Sette, there’s less variability in people’s immune responses to the Covid-19 vaccines than there is to natural infection.

And, again, individuals who have had Covid-19 can’t really gauge their own levels of immunity. Yes, a person could potentially get an antibody test, to see if there are any in their bloodstream.

But the immune system has many, many other components, from memory B cells that can be activated to produce antibodies in the future, to T cells, which kill and destroy infected cells. These are not commonly tested for. And even if an individual could be tested for all the components of an immune response to SARS-CoV-2, it’s still hard to know what it all means for a second infection. Scientists still don’t understand the “correlate of protection” for Covid-19. That is: What is the precise right mix of immune system cells for a particular person that would prevent them from getting infected again?

Sette says it’s a “reasonable argument” to suggest that maybe people who have had Covid-19 shouldn’t be prioritized to get the vaccine, should the stock of it remain limited over the long term. But in practice, that argument could become problematic.

For one: “It’s too difficult to operationalize pre-vaccination testing,” Peter Hotez, vaccine expert and the dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College, says in an email. It would be tedious work to determine who might be immune to SARS-CoV-2 before vaccination. It could be tedious work to determine who has been infected prior to vaccination as well.

Plus, again, the information resulting from such tests may not be all that useful in determining a person’s lasting immunity.

The vaccines are safe — regardless of whether you have been infected

To sum up: “To be safe, I recommend getting the vaccine, even after you recover from COVID, when the vaccines become sufficiently available,” Iwasaki says.

It’s still a little unclear what the vaccine would add on top of a person’s natural immune response to the infection. Would a person who made a weak immune response to a natural infection make a stronger immune response to a vaccine? It’s possible.

“During a natural exposure to SARS-CoV-2, there are multiple factors that interfere with a robust immune response,” Iwasaki says. “The exposure dose may be too little. The virus interferes with our immune system (both innate and adaptive) to block proper antibody induction.”

On the other hand, she says, “vaccines are formulated to provide just the right dose” of the viral protein, and there’s no live virus to interfere with out immune systems. “There appears to be a much more uniform and higher level of antibodies generated with a vaccine,” she says.

For now, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention isn’t making an official recommendation on whether people who have had Covid-19 should be vaccinated; it’s waiting on the input of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, a group of medical and public health advisers who make recommendations on how to vaccinate the public. Though we know from clinical trial data, and the Food and Drug Administration’s review of it, that the Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna vaccines appear to be very safe for the general public.

But have they been proven safe, in particular, for people who have already been infected? There may not yet be enough data to say that definitively. “I think the answer is probably yes, but we won’t know for sure until the numbers are larger,” University of Washington immunologist and physician Helen Y. Chu writes in an email. “For most of the phase 3 trials, there was no screening for pre-existing antibody.”

Keep in mind that lack of safety data for this particular group doesn’t mean it’s unsafe. As Chu explained, there just needs to be more data.

Both the Moderna and Pfizer/BioNTech trials did include a small number of people who had already been infected, though. On Thursday, Moderna vaccine scientist Jacqueline Miller told an FDA advisory committee that the company is “anticipating data in the coming weeks” on how and whether the company’s vaccine boosts the immune systems of people who had been previously infected.

Also unclear from the current data: whether the vaccine truly does give people who mounted a weak immune response to a natural infection — that is, people who either did not produce a lot of immune system cells to fight the virus or whose immune system cells to fight the virus have declined over time — an immunological boost.

“This is not answered yet, but I would say that it probably does not hurt,” Chu says. “Antibody wanes over time, and it is likely that the vaccine will boost your pre-existing antibody titers.”

That said, per the current trial data, both vaccines are around 95 percent effective at preventing Covid-19. Sette says that high a level of efficacy is probably indicative that the vaccine can produce a robust immune response in a broad majority of people.

The language of vaccine science is really tricky. To say a vaccine protects against disease is not the same as saying the vaccine makes a person completely immune (or unable to spread the virus). Perhaps some people still get infected but clear the infection before symptoms show up. Scientists will need more data on this fine distinction. That said, “it would be hard to fathom that the vaccine gives you a 95 percent protection without inducing an immune response,” Sette says.

There’s a lot about decision-making during the pandemic that’s been very difficult. Deciding whether, and how, to visit friends and loved ones leads to a tedious risk-benefit analysis. Luckily, with the vaccines, this decision matrix is a lot simpler: Even if you have had Covid-19 in the past, a vaccine may help prevent future infections. Yes, more data is needed to be absolutely definitive on this. But for now, this is all pretty encouraging.

TYRONE’S FIRST WIN of the Division 1 campaign arrived against Kildare on Sunday despite the absence of a number of established players. 

There were minus the services of the four (Peter Harte, Kieran McGeary, Padraig Hampsey and Michael McKernan) that shipped red cards in round 2 against Armagh plus injured pair Ronan McNamee and Mattie Donnelly.

The nature of their second-half fightback against the Lilywhites was even more impressive given the five players that departed the Red Hand panel during the off-season.

Mark Bradley, Tiernan McCann, Ronan O’Neill, Hugh Pat McGeary and Michael Cassidy all walked away after winning their All-Ireland medals last season. Their exits left question marks over Tyrone’s bench strength as they face into the defence of their Ulster and All-Ireland crowns in 2022. 

The Red Hand infused the panel with talent from the vibrant club championship over the winter. 

“We had a lot of changes, a lot of changes in general this year with men returning and things like that,” said joint manager Feargal Logan after the game. 

“That’s what a panel is for. That’s the value from today, the take-home message, those boys there.”

Nathan Donnelly was a new call-up after his consistent performances for Killyclogher in recent club campaigns and he’s started all three league games so far.

Padraig McNulty, who made his debut under Mickey Harte in 2015, rejoined the panel, having last featured in 2018. He was recalled after showing strong form for Dungannon Clarkes, who he skippered to the Tyrone SFC title in 2020. 

McNulty became the 25th player to see game-time for Tyrone in the Allianz Football League.

Perhaps it’s unsurprising given they are the reigning All-Ireland champions with a panel of players mainly in their mid-to-late 20s, but Tyrone have not been one of the counties who’ve cast the net wide in search of talent in Division 1 so far. 

Only two sides have experimented less than the Red Hand: Monaghan and Kerry.

As a county with a small playing pool, the Farney have regularly been the team who’ve used the least amount of players over league campaigns in recent years.

Advertisement

Seamus McEnaney has tended to put out his strongest available team since returning to the job, and he required just 23 players in their first three outings. Veteran marksman Conor McManus arrived off the bench in the opening two rounds before he started against Armagh last weekend, in a game where Kieran Hughes made his seasonal bow. 

Jack O’Connor lifted the Division 1 crown on three occasions in the 2000s as Kingdom boss and consistency of selection, with 24 players fielded so far, indicates he’s looking to challenge for spring honours again in 2022. 

Dan O’Donoghue has been a welcome addition to Kerry in defence.

Source: Ben Brady/INPHO

Dan O’Donoghue, Greg Horan and Dylan Casey were Kerry’s three debutants so far in the league, while injured players such as David Moran, Stefan Okunbor and new captain Joe O’Connor will come into the mix down the line. 

With survival in the top flight all but assured, O’Connor did promise greater experimentation across the remaining fixtures. Jack Savage and Tony Brosnan, for instance, should be afforded a couple of starts after making substitute appearances in all three games. 

For some teams, the short gap between league and championship has increased the necessity to get key men up to speed in the spring but for others, such as Dublin, there remains a need to explore their panel for potential championship starters.

Dublin have handed game-time to 29 players inside the first three weekends of action, more than any other team in the division bar Mayo. 

In Dessie Farrell’s first league campaign in 2020, Dublin used 38 players and heavy experimentation remains a feature two years later.

The Sky Blues, who introduced 14 new squad members this year, are rooted to the bottom of the table after shipping three straight defeats but the manager has insisted their focus remains on the championship. 

Lee Gannon, Cameron McCormack, Ross McGarry, Lorcan O’Dell, Darragh Conlon, Killian McGinnis, CJ Smith, Alex Wright and Harry Ladd all made their league debuts over the past few weeks – by far the most of any county.

Emmet O Conghaile and Cian Murphy, who’ve been on the fringes of squads in the past, have logged minutes and 29-year-old Ryan Basquel started two games and came off the bench in a third. 

Considering James McCarthy, Con O’Callaghan, Robbie McDaid, Paddy Small have yet to come into contention, Dublin’s figure by the end of the league could well extend to the high 30s once again. 

Mayo are level with Dublin on 29 players used as they examine their options ahead of the summer.

Seven members of James Horan’s squad made their first appearances of the season against Dublin on Saturday night. 34-year-old Kevin McLoughlin was eased back into action after his extended club campaign with Knockmore, as established stars Oisin Mullin, Matthew Ruane and Enda Hession also returned. 

SEE SPORT
DIFFERENTLY

Get closer to the stories that matter with exclusive analysis, insight and debate in The42 Membership.

Become a Member

Aidan Orme grabbed a goal on his second appearance in Division 1.

Source: James Crombie/INPHO

Donnacha McHugh,  Jack Carney and Sam Callinan, the latest athletic wing-back to emerge from the county, were their only league debutants to date as Aidan Orme made his Division 1 bow, having appeared in the second tier last year.

Other familiar names such as James Carr and Cillian O’Connor will return from injury in the coming weeks.

Shane O’Donnell was Donegal’s most impressive rookie blooded under Declan Bonner, scoring two points as they struggled for long spells away to Kerry. Donegal are third in the table on 28 players tested, with Charles McGuinness, Mark Curran and Rory O’Donnell their other notable newcomers.

Donegal have been badly hampered by injury to date. Caolan McGonigle, Michael Murphy and Michael Langan all appeared in the first round but were forced to miss recent games.

However, Oisin Gallen and Daire Ó Baoill made their seasonal debuts in Killarney after recovering from problems and will add depth to Bonner’s panel. Jamie Brennan hasn’t seen a minute yet as he recovers from injury.

In fourth place on the players fielded table is Division 1 newcomers Kildare, who’ve mixed battling for points with getting a look at 27 players.

11 of those have started their encounters with Kerry, Donegal and Tyrone. In the third game, Glenn Ryan welcomed back Alex Beirne, Fergal Conway and Darragh Kirwan from injury off the bench. That trio are likely to come into contention for starting places in the weeks ahead, adding to Kildare’s depth.

Despite their strong start to the year, Armagh have spread minutes around the panel. Kieran McGeeney has used 26 players across their three games, leaving them ahead of Tyrone, Kerry and Monaghan.

Conor Turbitt and Oisin O’Neill became the latest two to make league appearances after their arrived off the bench against Monaghan. 

But McGeeney’s first XV has been remarkably consistent, with 13 players starting all three ties against Dublin, Tyrone and Monaghan.

Players used in Division 1 after 3 games

  • Dublin – 29
  • Mayo – 29
  • Donegal – 28
  • Kildare – 27
  • Armagh – 26
  • Tyrone – 25
  • Kerry – 24
  • Monaghan – 23

The42 is on Instagram! Tap the button below on your phone to follow us!

Click Here:

The Food and Drug Administration on Friday issued an emergency use authorization for Moderna’s Covid-19 vaccine, clearing the way for it to be the second vaccine distributed in the United States. The decision follows a vote on Thursday by an advisory committee to the FDA which found that the benefits of the vaccine outweigh its harms for people ages 18 years old and older.

“With the availability of two vaccines now for the prevention of COVID-19, the FDA has taken another crucial step in the fight against this global pandemic that is causing vast numbers of hospitalizations and deaths in the United States each day,” said FDA Commissioner Stephen Hahn, in a statement.

Between the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine that received a green light last week and the Moderna vaccine, US officials were expecting to have enough doses to vaccinate 20 million Americans by the end of the month. However, some states reported Thursday that they had received fewer doses than they were promised of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine.

Both of these vaccines use an mRNA platform to get human cells to make a component of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes Covid-19. That component, the spike protein of the virus, is then used by the immune system to build up protection against the pathogen. It’s an approach that is seeing widespread use in humans for the first time. Both vaccines are also administered as two doses; the doses of the Moderna vaccine are spaced 28 days apart, while the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine doses are spread 21 days apart.

Click Here:

Moderna’s vaccine can be stored long-term at minus 20 degrees Celsius (minus 4 degrees Fahrenheit) and is stable for 30 days between 2° and 8°C (36° to 46°F). In contrast, the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine needs temperatures of minus 70°C (minus 94°F). The less stringent storage requirements of Moderna’s product may ease some of the logistical challenges of distributing a vaccine.

The task of getting delicate vaccines from manufacturers to hospitals and into the hands of patients is complicated, something that will have to be scaled up to immunize millions of people across the United States.

Already, the distribution of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine has hit some bumps. State officials are reporting that their allocations of the vaccine have been suddenly downscaled, while Pfizer said that there are millions of doses of its vaccine that have gone unclaimed.

Though having a second vaccine on the market increases the number of people who can get immunized, it could also complicate the distribution process further, with more doses to track, transport, and administer.

Health officials are also warning recipients about potential side effects of these vaccines. At least four people who received the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine under an EUA experienced severe allergic reactions. While effects this severe are very rare, some doctors are pointing out that reactions to these vaccines can be more intense than responses to other inoculations, as Vox’s Julia Belluz explained:

What’s now clear: An injection with either vaccine, both of which use mRNA technology, can feel more intense than other routine vaccinations (such as the flu shot) — with side effects for some recipients such as pain, headache, and fatigue. And this may be especially true for Moderna’s vaccine: About 16 percent of people who got the shot in clinical trials experienced a “severe” systemic adverse reaction, a classification the FDA uses to refer to side effects, like fever or fatigue, that require medical attention and prevent people from going about their daily activities.

Per guidelines set by an advisory group for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the first people slated to receive the Moderna vaccine will be the same as those for the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine — health workers and residents and staff at long-term care facilities. The US government has purchased 100 million doses of each of these vaccines to be delivered through the end of March.

An EUA, however, is still short of a full approval, and there are still some outstanding concerns that need to be addressed. Moderna noted in its briefing document that the company is still trying to find out how long the vaccine’s protection lasts, how well it prevents transmission, and its long-term impacts. The company says it will monitor its trial pool for two years and will conduct additional studies among the people who receive the vaccine under an EUA to get answers to these questions.

Click:China Group Tours

Americans have spent much of the Covid-19 pandemic blaming one another for the coronavirus’s spread.

Don’t go to that beach or park. Don’t go to that bar or restaurant. Don’t do anything for Thanksgiving or Christmas. Wear a mask! You don’t want to kill Grandma, do you?

Public officials have joined in. Increasingly, they are blaming private gatherings, not the restaurants and bars they insist on keeping open, for the spread of the disease. In some places, such as the Dakotas, framing Covid-19 prevention as an individual responsibility became the core of the strategy to fight Covid-19. As cases and deaths climbed to among the highest rates in the world, South Dakota’s leaders preached “personal responsibility” and refused to require masks, much less stricter measures. Ian Fury, a spokesperson for Gov. Kristi Noem (R), told me his boss gave citizens “up-to-date science, facts, and data, and then trusted them to make the best decisions for themselves and their loved ones.”

It’s true that individuals have an important role in fighting Covid-19. Everyone should wear a mask, and, unfortunately, everyone should reconsider big family gatherings this holiday season. But relying on individual action to fight a deadly virus — an approach that the US has leveraged for problems ranging from the opioid crisis to global warming — simply hasn’t worked.

Today, America is among the worst performers at fighting Covid-19. Despite recent surges in Europe and Israel, the US remains within the top 20 percent for most coronavirus deaths per person among developed nations, with more than twice the death rate as the median developed country. If the US managed the same Covid-19 death rate as Canada, more than 190,000 Americans would likely be alive today.

There are many reasons for that, not least President Donald Trump’s awful leadership. But part of it, experts say, is America’s inability to address structural problems, instead relying on demanding more from individuals. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, highlighted this problem when he remarked that the “independent spirit in the United States of people not wanting to comply with public health measures has certainly hurt us a bit.”

That was clear in much of the public’s response to lockdowns starting in the spring. With “Don’t Tread on Me” flags hoisted in the background, protesters often took to statehouses to demand the end of government-mandated closures. At the demonstrations, attendees claimed they could take care of themselves and didn’t need the government to tell them what to do.

It’s also been apparent in the government responses. The emphasis on individualism helps explain why Trump and his conservative allies, like Noem, have resisted more government mandates on masks and stay-at-home orders in lieu of letting people deal with the virus for themselves.

But it’s not just Trump and friends. Every state in the country, Democratic or Republican, has at some point reopened restaurants or bars, allowing people to congregate in indoor areas that experts widely agree are breeding grounds for Covid-19. While resisting shutting down such places, local and state officials have argued that it’s on people to wear masks, cancel private gatherings for the holidays, and avoid nonessential activities — while leaving room for people to not follow at least some of those guidelines. Every state in the country has also, subsequently, seen surges in the coronavirus this fall.

New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo exemplified the failure of this approach. In the lead-up to Thanksgiving, he said, “My personal advice is you don’t have family gatherings — even for Thanksgiving.” Days later, it came out that Cuomo was planning to host a family gathering with his 89-year-old mother and two of his three adult daughters. He only canceled after a public backlash. Even Cuomo wasn’t planning on following his own advice. (Cuomo’s office argued his comments were misinterpreted.)

Meanwhile, much less attention has gone to addressing Covid-19 from a truly structural perspective. The coronavirus has revealed America’s pathetic public health infrastructure — there’s still no national testing-and-tracing program, and no state has an adequate contact tracing program, if they have such a program at all. Businesses and workers have been left to fend for themselves, as Congress failed to pass an economic relief bill before the last one started to expire. For all the talk about outdoor activities being safer during the coronavirus pandemic, there’s been next to no action in most of the country on getting people outside — at times, governments have even eliminated outdoor venues by closing parks or beaches.

“It’s a structural issue,” Jen Kates, director of global health and HIV policy at the Kaiser Family Foundation, told me. “Systemic challenges in the United States — that predate the pandemic but have gotten worse [during the pandemic] — lead to the situation we’re in.”

It’s easy to yell at people over their Covid-19 failures — simply log on to Twitter and blast away. It’s costless for a governor to tell people that it’s on them to stop the spread of the coronavirus by voluntarily giving up things they love, especially if the same governor doesn’t even plan on following his own advice.

So rather than do anything about it, Americans are stuck blaming each other for Covid-19. But until we truly realize this is a collective failure, not an individual one, the problems will linger.

Structural problems are really to blame here

Since the start of America’s epidemic, experts have warned that indoor dining and bars are among the worst places for the spread of Covid-19: People are in poorly ventilated indoor areas where the virus spreads more easily sit close for possibly hours, can’t wear masks as they eat or drink, and spew germs at each other as they shout, sing, and laugh.

So many experts have called on governments to close bars and restaurants. Acknowledging the economic toll of this, economists and public health experts have also asked for a bailout of the industry to make employers and their workers whole until the pandemic resides.

None of that happened. Instead, America started to reopen before Covid-19 cases were under control — at the US’s best point in the spring and summer, it still had more than 60 times the daily new cases of Australia, New Zealand, and South Korea — with bars and restaurants reopening in every state by the fall. Public officials acknowledged the risks but merely moved to limit capacity and called on everyone to be responsible by physical distancing, wearing a mask, and limiting contact with people from other households.

This has not gone well. Coronavirus cases have shot up across much of the country, with the US in the middle of its third and biggest surge of Covid-19 yet. At the same time, we’ve gotten more data showing how dangerous bars and restaurants can be for the spread of Covid-19: A study published in the Journal of Korean Medical Science found that a person in South Korea may have been infected with Covid-19 in a restaurant in as little as five minutes. Another study in Nature found, “Reopening full-service restaurants was associated with a particularly high risk.”

Despite that, officials across the country have by and large resisted shutting down again. Many of them, instead, have cited another culprit for Covid-19 spread: private gatherings. New York, for example, put out a PSA to stop “living room spread,” and the state published data suggesting households and private gatherings are driving 74 percent of coronavirus spread.

It’s true private gatherings and households are driving some transmission. Most experts agree Thanksgiving dinners likely led to a surge on top of a surge, and similar Christmas and New Year’s events likely will too.

But that’s why at least some experts believe there’s a need for more focus on systemic action, not the individualistic approach. “People, in general, are horrendous risk assessors — we’re awful at assessing risk,” Daniel Goldberg, a medical historian and public health ethicist at the University of Colorado, told me. “I hate to say people can’t be trusted, but.”

There are other problems with this framing. For one, the New York data doesn’t separate within-household transmissions from social gatherings — so the 74 percent figure includes someone spreading Covid-19 to the husband he lives with (not as avoidable) and someone spreading the virus to someone he invited over for drinks one night (very avoidable). This also only includes the cases that New York could actually contact trace, and it’s much easier to trace transmission between family and friends in a household than strangers in a bar.

The big problem, though, is that there’s nothing unusual about Covid-19 spreading among people who live together. It’s typical for the bulk, even the majority, of the transmission of any disease to happen within households. If you’re infected, the people you live with or come into close contact with at home are simply likely to get it too. That’s how pathogens work. What matters most, though, is where that virus originated from in the first place.

To put it another way: People couldn’t infect others in their homes if they hadn’t picked up the coronavirus in bars, restaurants, or other public spaces. So if these places weren’t open, individual choices to gather — including over Thanksgiving and Christmas — would be of far less concern. There would simply be much less virus out there jumping from person to person.

So it largely comes down to the lack of systemic action, not solely the individual choice.

It’s not just bars and restaurants. If officials want people to wear masks, they can mandate masks and actually enforce those mandates. If they want more adults to stay home, they can replace any income individuals might lose by not going into work, or take steps to make work-from-home life more bearable, like deeming schools “essential” or subsidizing day care. If they want people to stay outdoors and not indoors, they can do things that can encourage people to go outside instead of congregating inside — like offering free outdoor activities like ice skating or art installations, or even just places to eat (with some heating during the winter) — rather than shutting down parks. If they want to address racial disparities for Covid-19, they need to address systemic racial disparities across society and health care.

Otherwise, we’re going to be stuck with relying on people to make decisions — almost always against their own social, cultural, and economic interests — to do the right thing. So far, that just isn’t working.

It’s easier to blame individuals than fix big problems

Public leaders and government officials face their own structural forces too.

Brown University School of Public Health dean Ashish Jha told me of a recent conversation with a governor. Jha argued that risky indoor spaces like bars and restaurants should be closed, or hospitals will soon overflow. The governor responded that such closures would require money to support affected businesses and their employees, and the state simply doesn’t have that money. The governor added, “Maybe I should spend a little bit of money and try to campaign for people to be more careful” — a pivot to an individualistic approach.

“I came to appreciate that, ultimately, the problem wasn’t this governor,” Jha said. He later added, “The right answer is not we need better governors — the right answer is we need a different structure and a better federal government.”

Structural issues are, almost by definition, much harder to fix than simply asking people to do the right thing. It’s easy and cheap to yell at people for getting together for Christmas — especially when they really shouldn’t be doing it. Closing down bars and supporting them economically, in turn, requires both political and financial capital.

In some cases, governments legitimately can’t do what they would prefer. Local and state officials, unlike the federal government, can’t print money and usually have to balance their budgets. Given that reality, a governor might decide that she has to keep bars open simply because she can’t bail them out — the economic cost is so high, and, who knows, maybe the state might get lucky and avoid an outbreak anyway. States, counties, and cities face a structural barrier in the federal government’s inaction.

There’s a cultural component, too. Americans pride themselves on their individualistic and libertarian qualities — what Fauci described as an “independent spirit in the United States.” That creates an innate resistance, among the public and its leaders, to look at problems in a collective over an individual manner. So with Covid-19, we yell at people for not distancing or wearing masks in bars, but not as much at public officials for allowing that bar to open in the first place.

The truth, as Covid-19 has shown us, is this individualistic approach doesn’t work well for public health (even if it does serve us well in other areas). The alternative to not taking collective action is more death. The countries that have done the best against Covid-19 — including Australia, New Zealand, South Korea, and, to a now lesser degree, Germany — all approached the issue collectively, leveraging government aid and public health systems to let people stay home without losing as much income or health insurance, to test and trace infections, and, when necessary, to close down to stop the spread.

In fact, America’s best — and perhaps only — success against Covid-19 so far came about with the power of collective action. The vaccines that are now being shot into the arms of health care workers and people in nursing homes came about with the strong support of various governments, which funded research or, at the very least, paid for tens of millions of doses before the vaccines were even proven to work. Crucially, this came about by acknowledging the structural risks involved in developing a vaccine, particularly that drug companies might be reluctant to gamble on the medications if they may not pan out, and mitigated those risks.

The problem runs deeper than what America did and can do about Covid-19 alone. One advantage that other countries had as the pandemic began is stronger social safety nets, which guaranteed people would retain some income and health care even if a lockdown was needed. The US has no such guarantees — the programs that do exist are notoriously underfunded (hence Congress needing to boost unemployment insurance in its economic relief bills), and far from universal. So while British and German workers could rely on some significant government support even if they lost their jobs, Americans could claim no such certainty.

We see that today. Even as Congress nears a deal on economic relief, the truth is it’s already too late for many Americans. With much of the previous stimulus measure expiring, people who lost their jobs have languished for months with little to no support. And even if the new deal passes Congress (which is still uncertain), there will likely be a lag in actually rolling out those benefits to the people who need them, leading to more prolonged suffering. It could have been avoided if these kinds of benefits were permanent, or kicked in automatically if the economy begins to weaken, as government programs in other developed countries do.

Click Here:

That’s just one example. From building up the social safety net to actually funding public health infrastructure to reforming government so it’s more responsive, there’s a lot of work America could do to make sure it’s better equipped to handle crises as they come up. That won’t completely end the need for leadership in troubled times — European countries with large social safety nets have still passed additional economic relief measures — but it would put the US in a much better place.

It won’t be easy. It means committing to a more hands-on governing structure, costing us more in dollars and cents and forcing many Americans to rethink how they view the role of government.

But if Covid-19 has taught us anything, those changes are worth the cost. It begins with taking a structural, rather than individualistic, view of the problems facing the US today.

Jupiter and Saturn are due to converge in their orbits on Monday, appearing as a double planet in the night sky — the first such occurrence in almost 800 years.

The two planets have been near one another throughout the year, according to Rice University astronomer Patrick Hartigan. They will reach their closest approach, passing within 0.1 degrees of each other during the winter solstice on December 21, the longest night of the year.

The two celestial bodies pass one another about every 20 years, according to the Mount Wilson Observatory, in Los Angeles County, in what is referred to as a “great conjunction,” because they are the two largest planets.

But a passage as close as the one expected Monday has happened only a handful of times in the last two millennia. And two of those occurrences, one in 769 and one in 1623, happened too close to the sun to be seen with the unaided eye.

The last time a person could clearly see this event was on March 4, 1226.

Although the night of the solstice will be the planets’ closest convergence, the conjunction is ongoing. Their close approach will continue through Christmas, with the double planet appearing low in the western sky for about an hour after sunset, depending on conditions.

Because of the timing of the event, some early scientists — including noted astronomer Johannes Kepler — attempted to link the convergence to the so-called “Christmas star” or “star of Bethlehem,” which, according to the New Testament, guided the Magi to the birth of Jesus. But modern astronomers have established that, timing-wise, it seems unlikely that a similar great conjunction was at play around the time linked to the historical Jesus’s birth.

How to see Jupiter and Saturn’s great convergence

Although the path of these planets will be far enough from the sun to be observable this year, the planets may be so close that it will be difficult to separate them unaided by a telescope, Hartigan writes.

Visibility is best by the equator, and becomes increasingly fleeting the farther north a person is. This will make viewing conditions less than ideal for residents of the United States, Canada, and Europe, for example.

Depending on weather conditions, however, those in the Northern Hemisphere should be able to glimpse the planets at twilight, for about an hour after sunset, by looking to the southwest.

Binoculars or a small telescope will make it easier to witness the event, and to separate the two planets. Jupiter will be the clearer planet of the two, since it is far closer to Earth, with Saturn just next to it.

For those in less ideal locales, who don’t have access to binoculars, or just don’t want to miss the action, several planetariums have set up options to see the event up close.

Three California institutions — the Mount Wilson Observatory, Carnegie Observatories, and Glendale Community College — will host a virtual viewing party on Monday, beginning at 8 pm ET. Viewers can sign up on Zoom or watch on YouTube to see the event through a Mount Wilson Observatory telescope.

Click Here: