npr--2020-06-26--LGBTQ Activist Cleve Jones: 'I'm Well Aware How Fragile Life Is'

LGBTQ Activist Cleve Jones : ' I 'm Well Aware How Fragile Life Is' Jones lost countless friends to the AIDS epidemic .
He became an activist after Harvey Milk 's assassination : `` Meeting Harvey , seeing his death , it fixed my course . ''
Originally broadcast Nov. 29 , 2016 .
This is FRESH AIR .
I 'm David Bianculli , editor of the website TV Worth Watching , sitting in for Terry Gross .
Today , as Pride Month comes to a close , our first guest is longtime LGBTQ activist Cleve Jones .
He thinks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ generation of homosexuals who grew up not knowing if there was anyone else on the entire planet who felt the way he did .
He moved to San Francisco in his early 20s and became active in the gay rights movement .
One of his mentors was Harvey Milk , the first openly gay elected official in California , who was assassinated in 1978 .
When the AIDS epidemic started , Jones was working with the state assembly speaker on gay rights issues and health issues .
He went on to co-found the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ AIDS Memorial Quilt .
He 's had HIV for many years , and few of his old friends survived the epidemic .
In 2016 , Cleve Jones wrote a memoir called `` When We Rise : My Life In The Movement . ''
He called it his attempt to describe not only his life , but what his generation fought for , what they lost and what they won .
He spoke with Terry Gross when his memoir was first published .
TERRY GROSS : Cleve Jones , welcome to FRESH AIR .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ for having a consensual sexual relationship with somebody of the same gender when you were a teenager , knowing that you were gay .
And we 're talking about the 1960s .
CLEVE JONES : The penalties for homosexual conduct were - would vary from state to state , but they were - it was a felony in most states , punishable with prison terms of varying lengths .
GROSS : So when you realized - when you knew that you were gay , were you afraid that someday you would be arrested @ @ @ @ @ @ @ began to understand what the words meant that were being tossed my way , I went to my father 's library - he was a psychologist - and looked it up .
And , you know , it was pretty horrifying for a 13- , 14-year-old kid to learn suddenly that his feelings are not only deemed criminal but , you know , psychologically , an illness .
So that was the reality for my generation , growing up in a world that - in which we were criminalized and considered to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lot of people imprisoned for gay relationships back then ?
JONES : You know , even in my town , even in San Francisco , thousands of gay men were arrested , usually using entrapment techniques , every single year for sexual behavior between consenting adults .
That continued well into the 1970s , until it was finally decriminalized in 1976 , I believe .
GROSS : So you were afraid to tell your parents that you were gay in part because your father is a psychologist ; you were afraid that he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for aversion therapy or electroshock therapy .
How seriously did you worry about that ?
JONES : Well , I was very concerned about it .
And I delayed telling my parents until I was 18 so that they would no longer have the legal right to have me committed and be subjected to these procedures that are , really , pretty barbaric .
And , you know , I think those fears were well-founded because , for the first couple of years after I came out , there was very little contact @ @ @ @ @ @ @ me to be cured , and I kept saying there 's nothing to cure .
Later , we were able to reconcile somewhat .
But my fears were certainly grounded in reality .
GROSS : And you write that you were hoarding pills .
You - it sounds like you had a suicide plan just in case .
What was the just-in-case ?
JONES : Yeah .
I felt that my life was over before it even really began because it just seemed then that there was no way to have a decent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I was terrified that I was going to be caught .
And I 'd already experienced quite a bit of bullying .
And , you know , I just thought that only misery lay ahead and that if I - when I got caught , that that would be the solution .
And I wish I could say that was a thing of the past , but you know it 's not .
And even today , every year , we lose an awful lot of young people , teenagers , who take @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or transgender .
GROSS : So you found out that there was , like , a gay movement through being a Quaker .
You and your mother went to Quaker meetings .
She went to Quaker meetings because she wanted to be a Quaker so you 'd have a reason to avoid the draft .
This was during the Vietnam War .
But - so how did going to Quaker meetings lead to your discovery of the gay rights movement ?
JONES : The Quakers were very welcoming .
And even back then @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ceremonies for same-sex couples .
But , really , the big news for me came not at Quaker meeting but through Life magazine , and it was the Year in Review issue of 1971 .
They had a big spread called homosexuals in revolt , and I think it was eight or nine pages of text and photographs .
And it was just the most astonishing thing for me .
Stonewall , the rebellion in New York 's Greenwich Village , had happened just two years prior , but if you were a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you did n't know about that .
So this magazine , in a matter of minutes , revealed to me that there were other people like me .
There were a lot of us , that we were organizing , that there was a community .
And there were places where we could live safely and that one of those places was called San Francisco .
GROSS : So you met Harvey Milk .
He became a mentor to you .
GROSS : How would you describe his importance in the gay rights @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's often described as the first openly gay person to be elected to public office .
That 's inaccurate .
And in my book , I make sure to credit the half-dozen or so individuals who came before him in various places in the country .
But I think that Harvey 's significance really was that he became our first shared martyr .
The word of his assassination spread far and wide .
And even though gay people had lost many people to violence , to suicide , to drugs and alcohol , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ struck a chord with people .
For those of us in San Francisco , it was fascinating to see this guy who was really just kind of , you know , like one of your local neighborhood characters assume this worldwide significance .
GROSS : So in 1977 , Anita Bryant led a campaign to overturn a gay rights ordinance in Dade County , Fla. And after winning , she vowed to take that campaign nationwide .
So after her group kind of won in 1977 , there was a big protest in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Harvey Milk helped - you say he helped channel the anger into a march .
So describe him in action during that protest .
JONES : Harvey was very smart and really good at working with crowds of people .
And he did not want violence .
So when people were angry , when people were frightened , he would bring us all together so we could have that sense of power that comes from being together in the street and taking over the street , and then he would march us @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that went for miles and miles up and down some of the steepest hills in San Francisco , and the main reason we did this was , first , of course , to show our anger and our determination , but also to make sure that , by the end of it , everybody would be too tired to break windows or fight the police ( laughter ) .
GROSS : Really ?
That was part of the strategy ?
JONES : It was march them till they drop .
That was the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so many times when we would go roaring through town at , you know , 11 o'clock at night , tens of thousands of people screaming bloody murder , but without breaking a single window or injuring a single person .
GROSS : Yeah , you say that Harvey Monk 's attitude was do n't burn down your neighborhood .
GROSS : So in 1978 , California State Senator John Briggs proposed a bill , which became known as the Briggs Initiative or Proposition 6 , that would ban gay people from working @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
What was your role in opposing that ?
JONES : At that time .
there were only a few local jurisdictions in the entire country that had passed any kind of legal protections for the people we now call LGBT , and the movement to repeal them was gaining speed .
We had the loss in Dade County , also defeats in Wichita and St. Paul and Eugene .
So , initially , we looked at Proposition 6 , the Briggs Initiative , as an inevitable defeat and a really grave threat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ban anyone who was LGBT or anyone who supported them from working in any capacity in any public school in the entire state .
So it was a real attack against gay people , against workers , against teachers .
And Harvey thought it was very important that the young people who were joining gay liberation in droves be organized in an effective way .
So my first responsibility in that campaign was to head out and visit all of the campuses and pull together the usually very small gay student organizations that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coalition .
So that was how it began .
GROSS : And what was the outcome ?
JONES : Well , contrary to all the predictions , we won that election .
And , you know , it would be decades before we won another statewide election like that .
And the history has largely been forgotten .
And back then , even that early on in the movement , we were able to win .
And I think that we did it by coming out , and that was Harvey 's main @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we had to come out ; we had to take the risks .
And yes , there were risks .
There were potential repercussions that could be very serious .
He never diminished that .
But he said that everyone had a responsibility to themselves , to their families , to their community and to the movement to come out of the closet .
So in that campaign against the Briggs Initiative , you saw literally tens of thousands of ordinary people knocking on doors and saying , please , I 'm your @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
I 'm gay .
If this passes , it will hurt me .
It will harm my family .
I think that 's how we won .
GROSS : You did that kind of work , too , did n't you ?
Knock on doors ?
BIANCULLI : Activist Cleve Jones speaking to Terry Gross in 2016 .
More after a break .
This is FRESH AIR .
BIANCULLI : This is FRESH AIR .
Let 's get back to Terry 's interview with activist Cleve Jones .
They spoke in 2016 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rise : My Life In The Movement '' was first published .
GROSS : You were working for Harvey Milk when he was assassinated by Dan White , and you knew - you saw police .
You knew something was wrong when you came to the office .
You had a kind of personal way of getting in there so that the police were n't blocking your way .
And you came upon Harvey Milk 's dead body and saw a police officer picking up the body .
And you saw an explicitly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that have on you ?
You ca n't unsee something like that .
You ca n't erase it from your mind .
JONES : Well , you know , it changed my life forever .
And , you know , when I came around the corner and saw him , I saw his feet sticking out in the hallway .
Dan White had invited him into his office and shot him there .
And his feet were sticking out in the hall , and I recognized his wingtip shoes .
He had secondhand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thrift store .
And then we could n't leave .
We were stuck there because the police were doing their thing .
And we played the tape that he 'd left for us to play because he predicted his assassination .
And I used to tease him for it ( laughter ) and tell him he was n't important enough to get shot .
So that was pretty eerie and very horrible to be sitting in his office , listening to his voice predicting his death while his body 's there in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the day that that was the single most important moment of my life , and it was the single most important thing that had happened to me .
Meeting Harvey , seeing his death - it fixed my course .
GROSS : You got a job after Harvey Milk 's assassination with the state assembly 's speaker , the state assembly of California , to work on gay rights and to monitor the assembly 's health committee and serve as the liaison between the committee 's Democratic members and the speaker , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's how you first found out about AIDS , before that word was known .
You had to , as part of your job , read the CDC 's weekly Morbidity and Mortality Report .
And back in 1981 , you read about something called pneumocystis pneumonia .
Did you realize right away that this was something that was going to decimate a lot of the gay community ?
Like , what was the first article about it that you read ?
What were the clues ?
JONES : It was the first @ @ @ @ @ @ @ read in the CDC 's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report about these cases of pneumocystis pneumonia and Kaposi 's sarcoma among young , previously healthy homosexual men .
And I remember being very puzzled by it and alarmed .
I cut it out and put it on the bulletin board at my office .
About a month later , The New York Times did their first story about it , and I cut that out , too .
And about the same time , I got a call from Dr. Marcus Conant , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of California , San Francisco , and he wanted to talk with me because he knew that I worked for the Democratic leadership .
And he was already , you know , predicting that we were going to need to raise and spend significant sums of money for research and treatment .
So he took me to dinner at a place called the Zuni Cafe - it 's still there on Market Street - and told me that he thought it was a new virus , sexually transmitted , may be dormant for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attacked the immune system in some way that he could n't understand and was fatal .
And there was something about the way he delivered this information that just went right to my heart .
And I knew that night , and I - you know , I looked up , and I said , well , then we 're all dead .
And he said , you know , maybe .
He then took me to meet a young man who was dying at the UCSF hospital .
His name was Simon @ @ @ @ @ @ @ know , he was in an isolation ward , and it was pretty horrifying to see close up what the disease did to him .
That was June of 1981 .
By the fall of 1985 , almost everyone I knew was dead or dying or caring for someone who was dying .
GROSS : When were you diagnosed ?
JONES : I tested positive for HIV the week the test came out , which I 'm thinking was 1985 .
That time is a bit of a blur , but yeah , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been in a study I had volunteered for , so I knew that they had samples of my blood going back all the way to 1977 .
So I learned that not only did I have HIV , but I learned that I 'd had it since the winter of '78 , '79 .
So I never expected to survive .
GROSS : And you almost did n't .
JONES : I did n't get seriously ill until 1993 , and then I got very sick .
My immune system collapsed , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the drugs used to treat the opportunistic infections , particularly pneumocystis pneumonia .
So I moved out into the woods .
I got a little cabin out in the redwood forest north of San Francisco and thought that would be as good a place as any to finish up .
And .
Dr. Cohen had got me in one of these first studies for what we now call the cocktail .
And it was a combination of three drugs .
And I responded almost immediately .
So that was November of '94 that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ came just in time to save my life .
GROSS : You say the movement saved your life because you think it was in part because of ACT UP that the trials of these drugs are sped up .
JONES : Well , I mean , that 's really what this book is about .
The movement saved my life twice .
I was planning to kill myself when I was 15 because I thought I was the only queer in the world , and I did n't want to live that way @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be ashamed and beaten up .
And then I read about gay liberation in Life Magazine , and I decided not to kill myself .
And I flushed - you know , I flushed the pills down the toilet .
And then when I was dying of AIDS and could barely walk , of course it was ACT UP that saved my life .
It was all of the activism and all the people who participated in that struggle to change the way the drugs were tested , to change the double-blind placebo @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that were dying .
And it absolutely saved my life .
None of that would have happened if it had n't been for ACT UP and people like Larry Kramer driving people nuts with their anger and rage .
But nonetheless , you know , it was very well-focused , and it had extraordinary results .
And anybody who was part of that struggle during that time would say yes , absolutely , Cleve , you 're alive because of activism .
JONES : It 's good ( laughter ) .
And , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when the meds started to work , I ran into a friend at the grocery store .
It was one of my first trips out by myself able to walk , go shopping , you know , live a semi-normal life .
And we 're in the produce section , and I see my friend .
And he 's been in the same study , and he 's responding well to the meds .
And he said , well , I guess we 're not going to die .
And I said , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ going to die .
And then one of us or the other said , but we 'll never be happy again .
And I thought , no , that 's true .
We 'll never be happy again .
And , you know , I 'm 62 .
I 'm healthy .
I 'm happy and very grateful to be alive today .
GROSS : Was it hard to learn how to be happy when you 'd lost so many of your friends to the epidemic ?
JONES : I 'm still learning @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that kind of experience with that kind of - the enormity of the loss , you know , it 's similar , I think , to being in a war .
And I think of my friends every day .
There are some days when it is so painful I really can barely function .
But I have to , and I do .
And I find that I get my strength from my community and my friends .
And I am surrounded by people who went through that time with me .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ we love each other and are grateful for every bit of laughter and joy that comes our way .
GROSS : Cleve Jones , thank you so much for talking with us .
And I wish you all best and good health .
JONES : Thank you very much , Terry .
BIANCULLI : Cleve Jones speaking to Terry Gross in 2016 .
His memoir is titled `` When We Rise : My Life In The Movement . ''
He is now an organizer with UNITE HERE , a labor union for hospitality @ @ @ @ @ @ @ quilt will soon be on display through a partnership with Vivent Health .
I 'm David Bianculli , and this is FRESH AIR .

LGBTQ Activist Cleve Jones: 'I'm Well Aware How Fragile Life Is'
Jones lost countless friends to the AIDS epidemic. He became an activist after Harvey Milk's assassination: "Meeting Harvey, seeing his death, it fixed my course." Originally broadcast Nov. 29, 2016.
DAVID BIANCULLI, HOST:
This is FRESH AIR. I'm David Bianculli, editor of the website TV Worth Watching, sitting in for Terry Gross.
Today, as Pride Month comes to a close, our first guest is longtime LGBTQ activist Cleve Jones. He thinks of himself as part of the last generation of homosexuals who grew up not knowing if there was anyone else on the entire planet who felt the way he did. He moved to San Francisco in his early 20s and became active in the gay rights movement. One of his mentors was Harvey Milk, the first openly gay elected official in California, who was assassinated in 1978.
When the AIDS epidemic started, Jones was working with the state assembly speaker on gay rights issues and health issues. He went on to co-found the San Francisco AIDS Foundation and conceived the AIDS Memorial Quilt. He's had HIV for many years, and few of his old friends survived the epidemic. In 2016, Cleve Jones wrote a memoir called "When We Rise: My Life In The Movement." He called it his attempt to describe not only his life, but what his generation fought for, what they lost and what they won.
He spoke with Terry Gross when his memoir was first published.
(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED NPR BROADCAST)
TERRY GROSS: Cleve Jones, welcome to FRESH AIR. Remind us of what the penalties were for having a consensual sexual relationship with somebody of the same gender when you were a teenager, knowing that you were gay. And we're talking about the 1960s.
CLEVE JONES: The penalties for homosexual conduct were - would vary from state to state, but they were - it was a felony in most states, punishable with prison terms of varying lengths.
GROSS: So when you realized - when you knew that you were gay, were you afraid that someday you would be arrested?
JONES: Yes. When I began to understand what the words meant that were being tossed my way, I went to my father's library - he was a psychologist - and looked it up. And, you know, it was pretty horrifying for a 13-, 14-year-old kid to learn suddenly that his feelings are not only deemed criminal but, you know, psychologically, an illness. So that was the reality for my generation, growing up in a world that - in which we were criminalized and considered to be ill.
GROSS: And were a lot of people imprisoned for gay relationships back then?
JONES: You know, even in my town, even in San Francisco, thousands of gay men were arrested, usually using entrapment techniques, every single year for sexual behavior between consenting adults. That continued well into the 1970s, until it was finally decriminalized in 1976, I believe.
GROSS: So you were afraid to tell your parents that you were gay in part because your father is a psychologist; you were afraid that he'd sign you up against your will for aversion therapy or electroshock therapy. How seriously did you worry about that?
JONES: Well, I was very concerned about it. And I delayed telling my parents until I was 18 so that they would no longer have the legal right to have me committed and be subjected to these procedures that are, really, pretty barbaric. And, you know, I think those fears were well-founded because, for the first couple of years after I came out, there was very little contact with him. And he really wanted me to be cured, and I kept saying there's nothing to cure. Later, we were able to reconcile somewhat. But my fears were certainly grounded in reality.
GROSS: And you write that you were hoarding pills. You - it sounds like you had a suicide plan just in case. What was the just-in-case?
JONES: Yeah. I felt that my life was over before it even really began because it just seemed then that there was no way to have a decent life and to be gay. So I was terrified that I was going to be caught. And I'd already experienced quite a bit of bullying. And, you know, I just thought that only misery lay ahead and that if I - when I got caught, that that would be the solution. And I wish I could say that was a thing of the past, but you know it's not. And even today, every year, we lose an awful lot of young people, teenagers, who take their own lives because they are gay or transgender.
GROSS: So you found out that there was, like, a gay movement through being a Quaker. You and your mother went to Quaker meetings. She went to Quaker meetings because she wanted to be a Quaker so you'd have a reason to avoid the draft. This was during the Vietnam War. But - so how did going to Quaker meetings lead to your discovery of the gay rights movement?
JONES: The Quakers were very welcoming. And even back then, I think they were performing commitment ceremonies for same-sex couples. But, really, the big news for me came not at Quaker meeting but through Life magazine, and it was the Year in Review issue of 1971. They had a big spread called homosexuals in revolt, and I think it was eight or nine pages of text and photographs. And it was just the most astonishing thing for me.
Stonewall, the rebellion in New York's Greenwich Village, had happened just two years prior, but if you were a teenage kid in Phoenix, Ariz., you didn't know about that. So this magazine, in a matter of minutes, revealed to me that there were other people like me. There were a lot of us, that we were organizing, that there was a community. And there were places where we could live safely and that one of those places was called San Francisco.
GROSS: So you met Harvey Milk. He became a mentor to you.
JONES: Yeah.
GROSS: How would you describe his importance in the gay rights movement?
JONES: Well, he's often described as the first openly gay person to be elected to public office. That's inaccurate. And in my book, I make sure to credit the half-dozen or so individuals who came before him in various places in the country. But I think that Harvey's significance really was that he became our first shared martyr. The word of his assassination spread far and wide. And even though gay people had lost many people to violence, to suicide, to drugs and alcohol, here was this symbolic figure that just struck a chord with people. For those of us in San Francisco, it was fascinating to see this guy who was really just kind of, you know, like one of your local neighborhood characters assume this worldwide significance.
GROSS: So in 1977, Anita Bryant led a campaign to overturn a gay rights ordinance in Dade County, Fla. And after winning, she vowed to take that campaign nationwide. So after her group kind of won in 1977, there was a big protest in San Francisco. And, you know, Harvey Milk helped - you say he helped channel the anger into a march. So describe him in action during that protest.
JONES: Harvey was very smart and really good at working with crowds of people. And he did not want violence. So when people were angry, when people were frightened, he would bring us all together so we could have that sense of power that comes from being together in the street and taking over the street, and then he would march us. And we created this march route that went for miles and miles up and down some of the steepest hills in San Francisco, and the main reason we did this was, first, of course, to show our anger and our determination, but also to make sure that, by the end of it, everybody would be too tired to break windows or fight the police (laughter).
GROSS: Really? That was part of the strategy?
JONES: It was march them till they drop. That was the strategy.
GROSS: (Laughter).
JONES: And there were so many times when we would go roaring through town at, you know, 11 o'clock at night, tens of thousands of people screaming bloody murder, but without breaking a single window or injuring a single person.
GROSS: Yeah, you say that Harvey Monk's attitude was don't burn down your neighborhood.
JONES: Yeah (laughter).
GROSS: So in 1978, California State Senator John Briggs proposed a bill, which became known as the Briggs Initiative or Proposition 6, that would ban gay people from working in any capacity in California public schools. What was your role in opposing that?
JONES: At that time. there were only a few local jurisdictions in the entire country that had passed any kind of legal protections for the people we now call LGBT, and the movement to repeal them was gaining speed. We had the loss in Dade County, also defeats in Wichita and St. Paul and Eugene. So, initially, we looked at Proposition 6, the Briggs Initiative, as an inevitable defeat and a really grave threat because this was a bill that would ban anyone who was LGBT or anyone who supported them from working in any capacity in any public school in the entire state. So it was a real attack against gay people, against workers, against teachers.
And Harvey thought it was very important that the young people who were joining gay liberation in droves be organized in an effective way. So my first responsibility in that campaign was to head out and visit all of the campuses and pull together the usually very small gay student organizations that existed at that time and build a coalition. So that was how it began.
GROSS: And what was the outcome?
JONES: Well, contrary to all the predictions, we won that election. And, you know, it would be decades before we won another statewide election like that. And the history has largely been forgotten. And back then, even that early on in the movement, we were able to win. And I think that we did it by coming out, and that was Harvey's main message to the community, was that we had to come out; we had to take the risks.
And yes, there were risks. There were potential repercussions that could be very serious. He never diminished that. But he said that everyone had a responsibility to themselves, to their families, to their community and to the movement to come out of the closet. So in that campaign against the Briggs Initiative, you saw literally tens of thousands of ordinary people knocking on doors and saying, please, I'm your neighbor. I live down the street. I'm gay. If this passes, it will hurt me. It will harm my family. I think that's how we won.
GROSS: You did that kind of work, too, didn't you? Knock on doors?
JONES: Yes, I did.
BIANCULLI: Activist Cleve Jones speaking to Terry Gross in 2016. More after a break. This is FRESH AIR.
(SOUNDBITE OF MUSIC)
BIANCULLI: This is FRESH AIR. Let's get back to Terry's interview with activist Cleve Jones. They spoke in 2016, when his memoir "When We Rise: My Life In The Movement" was first published.
(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED NPR BROADCAST)
GROSS: You were working for Harvey Milk when he was assassinated by Dan White, and you knew - you saw police. You knew something was wrong when you came to the office. You had a kind of personal way of getting in there so that the police weren't blocking your way. And you came upon Harvey Milk's dead body and saw a police officer picking up the body. And you saw an explicitly horrible death. What lasting impact did that have on you? You can't unsee something like that. You can't erase it from your mind.
JONES: Well, you know, it changed my life forever. And, you know, when I came around the corner and saw him, I saw his feet sticking out in the hallway. Dan White had invited him into his office and shot him there. And his feet were sticking out in the hall, and I recognized his wingtip shoes. He had secondhand shoes that he'd bought at a thrift store. And then we couldn't leave. We were stuck there because the police were doing their thing.
And we played the tape that he'd left for us to play because he predicted his assassination. And I used to tease him for it (laughter) and tell him he wasn't important enough to get shot. So that was pretty eerie and very horrible to be sitting in his office, listening to his voice predicting his death while his body's there in the hallway. I knew by the end of the day that that was the single most important moment of my life, and it was the single most important thing that had happened to me. Meeting Harvey, seeing his death - it fixed my course.
GROSS: You got a job after Harvey Milk's assassination with the state assembly's speaker, the state assembly of California, to work on gay rights and to monitor the assembly's health committee and serve as the liaison between the committee's Democratic members and the speaker, who was Leo McCarthy. And that's how you first found out about AIDS, before that word was known. You had to, as part of your job, read the CDC's weekly Morbidity and Mortality Report. And back in 1981, you read about something called pneumocystis pneumonia. Did you realize right away that this was something that was going to decimate a lot of the gay community? Like, what was the first article about it that you read? What were the clues?
JONES: It was the first week of June 1981, and I read in the CDC's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report about these cases of pneumocystis pneumonia and Kaposi's sarcoma among young, previously healthy homosexual men. And I remember being very puzzled by it and alarmed. I cut it out and put it on the bulletin board at my office. About a month later, The New York Times did their first story about it, and I cut that out, too.
And about the same time, I got a call from Dr. Marcus Conant, who was a dermatologist at the University of California, San Francisco, and he wanted to talk with me because he knew that I worked for the Democratic leadership. And he was already, you know, predicting that we were going to need to raise and spend significant sums of money for research and treatment. So he took me to dinner at a place called the Zuni Cafe - it's still there on Market Street - and told me that he thought it was a new virus, sexually transmitted, may be dormant for many, many years, that it attacked the immune system in some way that he couldn't understand and was fatal. And there was something about the way he delivered this information that just went right to my heart. And I knew that night, and I - you know, I looked up, and I said, well, then we're all dead. And he said, you know, maybe.
He then took me to meet a young man who was dying at the UCSF hospital. His name was Simon (ph). And, you know, he was in an isolation ward, and it was pretty horrifying to see close up what the disease did to him. That was June of 1981. By the fall of 1985, almost everyone I knew was dead or dying or caring for someone who was dying.
GROSS: When were you diagnosed?
JONES: I tested positive for HIV the week the test came out, which I'm thinking was 1985. That time is a bit of a blur, but yeah, I tested positive. And I had been in a study I had volunteered for, so I knew that they had samples of my blood going back all the way to 1977. So I learned that not only did I have HIV, but I learned that I'd had it since the winter of '78, '79. So I never expected to survive.
GROSS: And you almost didn't.
JONES: I didn't get seriously ill until 1993, and then I got very sick. My immune system collapsed, and I was also allergic to many of the drugs used to treat the opportunistic infections, particularly pneumocystis pneumonia. So I moved out into the woods. I got a little cabin out in the redwood forest north of San Francisco and thought that would be as good a place as any to finish up. And. Dr. Cohen had got me in one of these first studies for what we now call the cocktail. And it was a combination of three drugs. And I responded almost immediately. So that was November of '94 that I started on treatment. And it came just in time to save my life.
GROSS: You say the movement saved your life because you think it was in part because of ACT UP that the trials of these drugs are sped up.
JONES: Well, I mean, that's really what this book is about. The movement saved my life twice. I was planning to kill myself when I was 15 because I thought I was the only queer in the world, and I didn't want to live that way, and I didn't want to be ashamed and beaten up. And then I read about gay liberation in Life Magazine, and I decided not to kill myself. And I flushed - you know, I flushed the pills down the toilet.
And then when I was dying of AIDS and could barely walk, of course it was ACT UP that saved my life. It was all of the activism and all the people who participated in that struggle to change the way the drugs were tested, to change the double-blind placebo policies, to make access for people that were dying. And it absolutely saved my life. None of that would have happened if it hadn't been for ACT UP and people like Larry Kramer driving people nuts with their anger and rage. But nonetheless, you know, it was very well-focused, and it had extraordinary results. And anybody who was part of that struggle during that time would say yes, absolutely, Cleve, you're alive because of activism.
GROSS: How's your health now?
JONES: It's good (laughter). And, you know, when - that fall when the meds started to work, I ran into a friend at the grocery store. It was one of my first trips out by myself able to walk, go shopping, you know, live a semi-normal life. And we're in the produce section, and I see my friend. And he's been in the same study, and he's responding well to the meds. And he said, well, I guess we're not going to die. And I said, no, I guess we're not going to die. And then one of us or the other said, but we'll never be happy again. And I thought, no, that's true. We'll never be happy again. And, you know, I'm 62. I'm healthy. I'm happy and very grateful to be alive today.
GROSS: Was it hard to learn how to be happy when you'd lost so many of your friends to the epidemic?
JONES: I'm still learning. I think anyone who goes through that kind of experience with that kind of - the enormity of the loss, you know, it's similar, I think, to being in a war. And I think of my friends every day. There are some days when it is so painful I really can barely function. But I have to, and I do. And I find that I get my strength from my community and my friends. And I am surrounded by people who went through that time with me. And we support each other, and we love each other and are grateful for every bit of laughter and joy that comes our way.
GROSS: Cleve Jones, thank you so much for talking with us. And I wish you all best and good health.
JONES: Thank you very much, Terry.
BIANCULLI: Cleve Jones speaking to Terry Gross in 2016. His memoir is titled "When We Rise: My Life In The Movement." He is now an organizer with UNITE HERE, a labor union for hospitality workers. Panels of the AIDS memorial quilt will soon be on display through a partnership with Vivent Health. I'm David Bianculli, and this is FRESH AIR.
(SOUNDBITE OF KEVIN EUBANKS AND STANLEY JORDAN'S "MORNING SUN")
Copyright © 2020 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.
NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.


npr--2020-06-26--Why Were Some Nursing Homes Spared The Devastation of COVID-19? Depends Who You Ask

Why Were Some Nursing Homes Spared The Devastation of COVID-19 ?
Depends Who You Ask Residents and staff of long-term care facilities account for at least 40 % of U.S. deaths from the coronavirus .
In reaction , nursing homes have banned family visitors , scrambled for scarce personal safety equipment , and attracted scrutiny from state and federal lawmakers .
What 's received less attention is that many nursing homes have remained virtually COVID-19-free .
If researchers could figure out what made the difference , that could help protect nursing home residents now and in the future .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wildly different conclusions .
The federal government has weighed in on the controversy .
The overall quality of nursing homes is rated on a scale of 1 to 5 stars .
And according to the agency that regulates them , the lowest rated nursing homes have been hardest hit by COVID-19 .
There are some independent researchers getting the same results .
`` The nursing homes that before the pandemic had the most quality problems were , not surprisingly , are the ones that were more likely to get the virus when the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , '' says Charlene Harrington , professor emerita at the University of California , San Francisco .
Harrington looked at more than 1,000 nursing homes in California .
Her study will be published later this summer in the journal Policy , Politics , & Nursing Practice .
But David Grabowski , a professor of health policy at Harvard Medical School , found no evidence that quality ratings matter when it comes to COVID-19 .
He looked at nursing homes across 30 states .
`` In terms of your five-star status , in terms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whether you 'd had a prior infection control violation , we could n't find any kind of measure of facility quality that was correlated with having a COVID case , '' says Grabowski .
Tamara Konetzka , a health economist and professor at the University of Chicago , has also looked at the quality of nursing homes and coronavirus .
Like Grabowski , she found no correlation between quality ratings and COVID-19 cases .
`` Even the highest quality nursing homes were caught completely off guard , '' says Konetzka .
Both say @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is location .
`` If you happen to be a five-star facility in a community with lots of cases , it 's likely to come into your building , '' says Grabowski .
`` If you 're a one-star facility located in an area with very few cases , you 're probably not going to have COVID enter your building . ''
UCSF 's Charlene Harrington is not an outlier , however .
Another study , focusing on Connecticut nursing homes , reached the same conclusions as Harrington 's .
`` We found @ @ @ @ @ @ @ quality ratings were associated with less COVID-19 cases and deaths , '' says Yue Li , a professor of health services research at the University of Rochester Medical Center in the Department of Public Health Sciences .
He even was able to quantify the effect of staffing levels .
`` We found that every 20-minutes [ per patient per day ] increase in the RN staffing level was associated with a 22 percent reduction in COVID-19 cases , '' he says .
There is one thing on which these researchers do agree .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ has taken on Black and Latinx residents in large nursing homes .
Facilities with larger populations of people of color are twice as likely to have COVID-19 outbreaks as facilities where most of the residents are white .
But that 's where agreement ends .
So policy makers looking for ways to make nursing homes better wo n't get clear guidance from these studies .
That 's because the researchers do n't agree on solutions any more than they agree on the causes of nursing the home outbreaks .
Charlene Harrington 's work @ @ @ @ @ @ @ focus on low quality nursing homes and inadequate nurse staffing , which is something that nursing homes wo n't fix on their own .
`` And that 's because 70 % of them are for profit , '' says Harrington .
`` And the main way to make money is keep the labor costs low .
And that means that they 're leaving their residents unprotected . ''
She 's especially concerned with low levels of registered nurse staffing .
`` They are very important for infection control and the overall quality of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Professor Yue Li , of the University of Rochester , thinks that low-rated facilities should be prioritized for government scrutiny and assistance .
`` I think that we should target these facilities , '' he says But the University of Chicago 's Tamara Konetzka thinks pressuring low rated nursing homes with fines and inspections could be a mistake .
`` Ramping up fines and inspections is not going to give them what they need to fight this pandemic , '' she says .
What this pandemic has shown is that all nursing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Grabowski , with sufficient personal protective equipment , with more testing , and with better infection control .
With no consensus among researchers , it 'll be up to policy makers to decide to what extent quality or location or staffing are responsible for the devastation of some nursing homes .
Meanwhile , the lives of residents and the workers who care for them hang in the balance .

Why Were Some Nursing Homes Spared The Devastation of COVID-19? Depends Who You Ask
Enlarge this image toggle caption Chris Ehrmann/AP Chris Ehrmann/AP
Residents and staff of long-term care facilities account for at least 40% of U.S. deaths from the coronavirus. In reaction, nursing homes have banned family visitors, scrambled for scarce personal safety equipment, and attracted scrutiny from state and federal lawmakers.
What's received less attention is that many nursing homes have remained virtually COVID-19-free. If researchers could figure out what made the difference, that could help protect nursing home residents now and in the future.
But so far, their studies have drawn wildly different conclusions.
The federal government has weighed in on the controversy. The overall quality of nursing homes is rated on a scale of 1 to 5 stars. And according to the agency that regulates them, the lowest rated nursing homes have been hardest hit by COVID-19.
There are some independent researchers getting the same results.
"The nursing homes that before the pandemic had the most quality problems were, not surprisingly, are the ones that were more likely to get the virus when the pandemic hit because they were so vulnerable," says Charlene Harrington, professor emerita at the University of California, San Francisco.
Harrington looked at more than 1,000 nursing homes in California. Her study will be published later this summer in the journal Policy, Politics, & Nursing Practice.
But David Grabowski, a professor of health policy at Harvard Medical School, found no evidence that quality ratings matter when it comes to COVID-19. He looked at nursing homes across 30 states.
"In terms of your five-star status, in terms of your staffing, in terms of whether you'd had a prior infection control violation, we couldn't find any kind of measure of facility quality that was correlated with having a COVID case," says Grabowski.
Tamara Konetzka , a health economist and professor at the University of Chicago, has also looked at the quality of nursing homes and coronavirus. Like Grabowski, she found no correlation between quality ratings and COVID-19 cases.
"Even the highest quality nursing homes were caught completely off guard," says Konetzka.
Both say that one of the most important variables is location.
"If you happen to be a five-star facility in a community with lots of cases, it's likely to come into your building," says Grabowski. "If you're a one-star facility located in an area with very few cases, you're probably not going to have COVID enter your building."
UCSF's Charlene Harrington is not an outlier, however. Another study, focusing on Connecticut nursing homes, reached the same conclusions as Harrington's.
"We found that higher nurse staffing levels and higher quality ratings were associated with less COVID-19 cases and deaths," says Yue Li, a professor of health services research at the University of Rochester Medical Center in the Department of Public Health Sciences. He even was able to quantify the effect of staffing levels.
"We found that every 20-minutes [per patient per day] increase in the RN staffing level was associated with a 22 percent reduction in COVID-19 cases," he says.
There is one thing on which these researchers do agree. And that is the toll the virus has taken on Black and Latinx residents in large nursing homes. Facilities with larger populations of people of color are twice as likely to have COVID-19 outbreaks as facilities where most of the residents are white.
But that's where agreement ends. So policy makers looking for ways to make nursing homes better won't get clear guidance from these studies. That's because the researchers don't agree on solutions any more than they agree on the causes of nursing the home outbreaks.
Charlene Harrington's work leads her to conclude that lawmakers should focus on low quality nursing homes and inadequate nurse staffing, which is something that nursing homes won't fix on their own.
"And that's because 70% of them are for profit," says Harrington. "And the main way to make money is keep the labor costs low. And that means that they're leaving their residents unprotected."
She's especially concerned with low levels of registered nurse staffing. "They are very important for infection control and the overall quality of the nursing home," Harrington says.
Professor Yue Li, of the University of Rochester, thinks that low-rated facilities should be prioritized for government scrutiny and assistance. "I think that we should target these facilities," he says
But the University of Chicago's Tamara Konetzka thinks pressuring low rated nursing homes with fines and inspections could be a mistake.
"Ramping up fines and inspections is not going to give them what they need to fight this pandemic," she says.
What this pandemic has shown is that all nursing homes need help, says Harvard's Grabowski, with sufficient personal protective equipment, with more testing, and with better infection control.
With no consensus among researchers, it'll be up to policy makers to decide to what extent quality or location or staffing are responsible for the devastation of some nursing homes. Meanwhile, the lives of residents and the workers who care for them hang in the balance.


npr--2020-06-26--Swedish Disease Expert Calls WHO's COVID-19 Warning 'A Total Mistake'

Swedish state epidemiologist Anders Tegnell says the World Health Organization made `` a total mistake '' when it included Sweden in a list of countries seeing a resurgence of the coronavirus .
The WHO misinterpreted the Swedish data , Tegnell said .
`` It is a total mistake , '' Tegnell said , according to Swedish public broadcaster Sveriges Radio .
Sweden has been closely watched because of its controversial approach to the COVID-19 pandemic .
While the country has urged people to practice physical distancing and follow other safety precautions , it has not ordered a strict shutdown .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ three months of austere conditions , Sweden allowed most of its bars , restaurants , schools and retail stores to remain open .
Tegnell 's remarks were a retort to a warning from Dr. Hans Henri P. Kluge , the WHO 's regional director for Europe , who said on Thursday that in Sweden and 10 other countries , `` accelerated transmission has led to very significant resurgence that if left unchecked will push health systems to the brink once again in Europe . ''
Along with Sweden , the warning included countries @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Ukraine .
Days before the WHO issued its warning , Sweden reported 1,699 new coronavirus cases — its biggest spike yet , according to data from the Swedish Ministry of Health and Social Affairs .
So far this month , Sweden has set a new record for daily case numbers every week .
But Tegnell objected to Kluge 's warning , saying that WHO officials were misinterpreting Sweden 's epidemiological data .
In Tegnell 's view , the rise in new cases is due to a recent bump in testing .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ low number of admissions to intensive care units , along with a decline in COVID-19 deaths .
Swedish officials had said earlier this year that the city of Stockholm was on course to reach `` herd immunity '' .
A target date was set for the end of May , though last month officials acknowledged that the goal would not be met .
`` Herd immunity occurs when enough people of a population are immune to an infectious disease , either because they 've been infected and recovered or they 've been vaccinated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ H.J .
Mai has reported .
`` Some researchers have put the threshold for coronavirus herd immunity at 60 % . ''
Overall , Sweden has reported more than 65,000 coronavirus cases , including more than 5,200 deaths , according to data compiled by Johns Hopkins University .

Swedish Disease Expert Calls WHO's COVID-19 Warning 'A Total Mistake'
Enlarge this image toggle caption Johan Nilsson/TT News Agency/AFP via Getty Images Johan Nilsson/TT News Agency/AFP via Getty Images
Updated at 3 p.m. ET
Swedish state epidemiologist Anders Tegnell says the World Health Organization made "a total mistake" when it included Sweden in a list of countries seeing a resurgence of the coronavirus. The WHO misinterpreted the Swedish data, Tegnell said.
"It is a total mistake," Tegnell said, according to Swedish public broadcaster Sveriges Radio.
Sweden has been closely watched because of its controversial approach to the COVID-19 pandemic. While the country has urged people to practice physical distancing and follow other safety precautions, it has not ordered a strict shutdown. While many of its European neighbors endured three months of austere conditions, Sweden allowed most of its bars, restaurants, schools and retail stores to remain open.
Tegnell's remarks were a retort to a warning from Dr. Hans Henri P. Kluge, the WHO's regional director for Europe, who said on Thursday that in Sweden and 10 other countries, "accelerated transmission has led to very significant resurgence that if left unchecked will push health systems to the brink once again in Europe."
Along with Sweden, the warning included countries such as Armenia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Ukraine.
Days before the WHO issued its warning, Sweden reported 1,699 new coronavirus cases — its biggest spike yet, according to data from the Swedish Ministry of Health and Social Affairs. So far this month, Sweden has set a new record for daily case numbers every week.
But Tegnell objected to Kluge's warning, saying that WHO officials were misinterpreting Sweden's epidemiological data. In Tegnell's view, the rise in new cases is due to a recent bump in testing. He added that Sweden is seeing a relatively low number of admissions to intensive care units, along with a decline in COVID-19 deaths.
Swedish officials had said earlier this year that the city of Stockholm was on course to reach "herd immunity". A target date was set for the end of May, though last month officials acknowledged that the goal would not be met.
"Herd immunity occurs when enough people of a population are immune to an infectious disease, either because they've been infected and recovered or they've been vaccinated against it," as NPR's H.J. Mai has reported. "Some researchers have put the threshold for coronavirus herd immunity at 60%."
Overall, Sweden has reported more than 65,000 coronavirus cases, including more than 5,200 deaths, according to data compiled by Johns Hopkins University.


npr--2020-06-27--Coronavirus World Map: Tracking The Spread Of The Outbreak

Coronavirus World Map : Tracking The Spread Of The Outbreak Since the new coronavirus was first reported in Wuhan , China , in December , the infectious respiratory disease COVID-19 has spread rapidly within China and to neighboring countries and beyond .
The first confirmed coronavirus cases outside China occurred on Jan. 20 , in Japan , Thailand and South Korea .
On Jan. 21 , the first case in the U.S. was identified in Washington state .
On Jan. 24 , the first two European cases were confirmed in France .
By Feb. 1 , eight European nations had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ month later that count had risen to 24 countries with at least 2,200 cases , most of them in Italy .
On March 11 , Italy eclipsed 10,000 cases and the World Health Organization declared the outbreak a pandemic — the first since H1N1 in 2009 .
That 's also when China , the original epicenter , began seeing drops in daily counts of new cases .
March also saw exponential spread of the virus throughout the U.S. , with all 50 states reporting cases by March 17 .
This particular virus , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the third strain of coronavirus known to frequently cause severe symptoms in humans .
The other two strains cause Middle East respiratory syndrome and severe acute respiratory syndrome .
Click here to see the state-by-state breakdown of cases in the United States .
This story was originally published on March 30 , 2020 .

Coronavirus world map: We've now passed the 600 million mark for infections
Editor's note: This page is no longer being updated. The last update was Sept. 5, 2022. For current data about COVID-19 cases and deaths around the world, Johns Hopkins University and Our World in Data are useful resources.
In late January 2020 only a few dozen COVID-19 infections had been identified outside of China. A year later, the world tallied its first 100 million cases. It took the globe just 7 more months to pass the 200 million mark— then another 5 months to hit 300 million, according to researchers at Johns Hopkins University. Now the virus has spread to every corner of the globe and has been blamed for more than 6 million deaths.
The United States, India and Brazil in that order have had the most COVID cases and the three nations collectively account for almost half of all recorded infections so far in the pandemic.
Explore the chart below to find a country-by-country breakdown of new and total cases since January 2020.
Loading...
Loading...
Explore how the number of coronavirus cases have shifted in different parts of the world over time. The first chart compares each continent to each other, while the next charts highlight the number of cases in select countries by region.
Loading...
Loading...
This story was originally published on March 30, 2020.


npr--2020-06-27--Tracking The Pandemic: Are Coronavirus Cases Rising Or Falling In Your State?

Tracking The Pandemic : Are Coronavirus Cases Rising Or Falling In Your State ?
More than 2 million people in the U.S. have tested positive for the coronavirus and more than 120,000 have died .
Though growth in new cases slowed in late spring , by mid-June new cases began to trend upward nationally .
In the graphics below , explore the trend in new cases in your state to see whether cases are rising , falling or staying level .
You can view the data via a heat map ( immediately below ) , a curve chart and a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cases over the last three weeks .
Or to see states ' total cases and deaths on a map , click here .
The following chart displays states ' trends in new daily case counts , total cases , and per capita totals .
To compare state outbreaks , the trend lines for average new daily cases are graphed against each state 's total case count to date .
This highlights a state 's daily growth relative to the overall size of its outbreak .
When both new and total case counts grow @ @ @ @ @ @ @ As cases slow , the curve levels or bends down .
In New York , site of the country 's largest outbreak , the state 's curve rose sharply before reaching over 170,000 total cases in April .
Since then , new cases have fallen from about 10,000 per day in mid-April to fewer than 700 per day in late June .
Some states , such as Hawaii , have declined to just a dozen new cases per day , while others are growing .
Arizona , which had leveled off at around @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a sudden sharp spike in new cases in June .
The coronavirus has hit some states much harder than others .
For much of the pandemic , a large share of U.S. cases have been centered around New York City .
As of early June , New York state , Connecticut and New Jersey accounted for about 30 % of total cases in the nation and 42 % of deaths , although new cases have been dropping in these three states .
Across the country , other large , populous states such as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ totals as well .
Some smaller states have had a heavy burden of disease relative to their population size , such as Nebraska and Iowa , which have high case counts per capita , and Louisiana and Michigan which have a high death count per capita .
Explore the map below to see totals and per capita figures around the country .
Click here to see a global map of confirmed cases and deaths .
For more detail on your state , the table below shows the change in average new cases per @ @ @ @ @ @ @ week .
States marked in shades of red are showing growth , those in shades of green , are showing declines .
The data used here are compiled by the Center for Systems Science and Engineering at Johns Hopkins University from several sources , including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ; the World Health Organization ; national , state and local government health departments ; 1point3acres ; and local media reports .
The JHU team automates its data uploads and regularly checks them for anomalies .
State-by-state recovery data are unavailable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ discrepancies between what you see here and what you see on your local health department 's website .
Figures shown do not include cases on cruise ships .
In early June , Michigan health authorities started including probable cases in its totals .
This resulted in a brief spike in the state 's daily numbers until the JHU team was able to reconcile the historical data .
This story was originally published on March 16 , 2020 .
Elena Renken was a co-author on that version .
Sean McMinn contributed to and Carmel @ @ @ @ @

Tracking the coronavirus around the U.S.: See how your state is doing
Loading...
Note: This page was last updated on Feb. 1, 2023. It will no longer be updated. For current data on COVID cases and deaths, demographics, and hospitalizations, consult the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
As of Feb. 1, there have been more than 101 million confirmed coronavirus infections in the U.S. and more than 1 million people have died of COVID-19. In the graphics below, explore the trends in your state.
Loading...
The above charts show average new cases per 100,000 people for each state over the last 12 months.
Note: Actual cases may be substantially higher, since many who test positive with at-home tests don't report their cases.
For additional data about COVID-19 in the U.S, including cases and deaths, demographics, and hospitalizations, consult the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website.
To show trends, the table below shows the change in average new cases per day in each state, week over week for the last 28 days. States marked in shades of red have growing outbreaks; those in shades of green, are declining.
Loading...
Methodology
The graphics on this page pull from data compiled by the Center for Systems Science and Engineering at Johns Hopkins University from several sources, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; the World Health Organization; national, state and local government health departments; 1point3acres; and local media reports.
The JHU team automates its data uploads and regularly checks them for anomalies. This may result in occasional data discrepancies on this page as the JHU team resolves anomalies and updates its feeds. There may be discrepancies between what you see here and what you see on your local health department's website. Figures shown do not include cases on cruise ships.
Fluctuations in the numbers may happen as health authorities review old cases, process testing backlogs or update their methodologies. The JHU team maintains a list of such changes.
This story was originally published on March 16, 2020. Elena Renken was a co-author on that version. Sean McMinn and Audrey Carlsen contributed to this story. Carmel Wroth edited this story.


npr--2020-06-27--Opinion: Remembering Michael Hawley, Remarkable Polymath And Exceptional Friend

Michael Hawley told me he had cancer a few months ago but did n't have a bucket list of things to do .
`` Just friends I want to see , '' he said .
I was blessed — a word Michael used generously , even as a scientist — to be among them .
Michael Hawley died this week at the age of 58 , after a life packed with feats and friendships .
He led a scientific expedition on Mount Everest .
He won the Van Cliburn Piano Competition and played at a wedding alongside Yo-Yo Ma .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and digitized The Complete Works of Shakespeare .
He wrote electronic music in Paris .
He accompanied the great soprano , Charity-Tillemann Dick and aided her though her own terminal illness .
He helped Steve Jobs launch NeXT Computers , and taught at the MIT Media Lab , where his Things That Think and Toys of Tomorrow projects prophesied so much of the ways in which our world would become digitally connected — which , Michael would sometimes remind those who sounded rhapsodic over the prospect , had alarming implications , too .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ called EG , for Entertainment Gathering , which welcomed musicians , comedians , astronauts , programmers , doctors , actors and magicians — because he felt scientists , artists , engineers and entertainers ought to appreciate one another .
Michael Hawley collected friends .
He did n't compile names , or network as a verb .
He met people , learned from them and tried to nourish them all with new ideas and friendships .
I 'd see an email from Michael , time-stamped after midnight , and wonder if he was up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on a mountain in Kyrgyzstan .
`` I just learned something , '' he 'd start out .
`` Let me introduce you to ... '' When Michael got his cancer diagnosis , he told me he wanted to write a short , urgent book , dedicated to his wife , Nina , and their infant son , Tycho .
He shared some thoughts .
As I read , I realized that Michael did n't want to write a memoir about famed names and stellar accomplishments , but raise a clear call from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about what he 'd learned was truly vital .
`` Great gifts and great sacrifices go hand in hand , '' Michael Hawley wrote .
`` So I try to regard my cancer as a gift .
It is n't easy .
( But ) It has brought me empathy that no amount of imagination or secondhand experience can impart .
It forces me to focus on the people I love and the moments that matter most in the brief time we are blessed to have . ''

Opinion: Remembering Michael Hawley, Remarkable Polymath And Exceptional Friend
Michael Hawley told me he had cancer a few months ago but didn't have a bucket list of things to do. "Just friends I want to see," he said.
I was blessed — a word Michael used generously, even as a scientist — to be among them.
Michael Hawley died this week at the age of 58, after a life packed with feats and friendships.
He led a scientific expedition on Mount Everest. He tied for first place in the Cliburn International Amateur Piano Competition and played at a wedding alongside Yo-Yo Ma. He designed video games for George Lucas and digitized The Complete Works of Shakespeare. He wrote electronic music in Paris. He accompanied the great soprano, Charity Tillemann-Dick and aided her though her own terminal illness. He helped Steve Jobs launch NeXT Computers, and taught at the MIT Media Lab, where his Things That Think and Toys of Tomorrow projects prophesied so much of the ways in which our world would become digitally connected — which, Michael would sometimes remind those who sounded rhapsodic over the prospect, had alarming implications, too.
He organized an annual conference of ideas called EG, for Entertainment Gathering, which welcomed musicians, comedians, astronauts, programmers, doctors, actors and magicians — because he felt scientists, artists, engineers and entertainers ought to appreciate one another.
Michael Hawley collected friends. He didn't compile names, or network as a verb. He met people, learned from them and tried to nourish them all with new ideas and friendships. I'd see an email from Michael, time-stamped after midnight, and wonder if he was up late at home in Cambridge, or on a mountain in Kyrgyzstan. "I just learned something," he'd start out. "Let me introduce you to..."
When Michael got his cancer diagnosis, he told me he wanted to write a short, urgent book, dedicated to his wife, Nina, and their infant son, Tycho. He shared some thoughts. As I read, I realized that Michael didn't want to write a memoir about famed names and stellar accomplishments, but raise a clear call from the heart of a husband and father about what he'd learned was truly vital.
"Great gifts and great sacrifices go hand in hand," Michael Hawley wrote. "So I try to regard my cancer as a gift. It isn't easy. (But) It has brought me empathy that no amount of imagination or secondhand experience can impart. It forces me to focus on the people I love and the moments that matter most in the brief time we are blessed to have."


npr--2020-06-27--Some Longtime D.C. Residents Still Vote In Other States. Is That ... Legal?

Some Longtime D.C .
Residents Still Vote In Other States .
Is That ... Legal ?
Some residents of Washington D.C. have lived there for years but still cast their votes from elsewhere in the United States .
D.C. is home to over 700,000 people , a population greater than Wyoming and Vermont — but unlike citizens in those states , D.C. residents do n't have anyone voting for their interests in Congress .
That situation is unlikely to change anytime soon , even with a historic vote in the House on Friday to grant D.C. statehood , because of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the White House .
All this means some District residents go through complicated lengths in an effort to have their vote count at the federal level .
Katherine Abughazaleh is one of those voters .
She says her decision to stay registered in Texas came down to wanting to feel like her vote matters .
`` Especially in Dallas , you have a lot more voting power .
In 2018 , our representative changed from red to blue and I wanted to be a part of that , '' Abughazaleh says .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , I would n't have someone to call and say 'vote this way . '
Right now , I can call my congressman and say , ' I want you to support this or I do n't want you to support that . '
'' Kate , a Republican who works in D.C. as a political consultant , also votes in her home state of Tennessee .
She asked NPR only to use her first name , out of concerns she might be skirting voting laws .
For Kate , the choice centers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ politics of her hometown than on big national factors .
`` [ The District ] is blue enough that no matter how I vote , it 's not going to change it .
Where I 'm from in Tennessee , it 's red enough that no matter how I vote , it 's not going to change it , '' Kate chuckles .
`` Voting for small , local town stuff — I feel like my opinion is more valid in those politics than in these . ''
These types of reasoning frustrate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as one of D.C. 's at-large Council members .
`` I 'm always disappointed when folks live in D.C. but do n't vote here , because if you call D.C. home , then you have to join our struggle , '' he says .
`` If folks want voting representation , then the work they have to do is not maintain voting elsewhere but to work with us to get the representation that we deserve . ''
Rebecca — who also asked NPR only to use her first name out of potential legal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seven years ago and says she feels guilty about continuing to vote in Georgia .
`` I feel a little like I 'm rigging the system , '' she says .
`` But when I remember that Congress is rigging the system by not allowing D.C. congressional representation and voting power and statehood , it kind of justifies what I 'm doing . ''
Beneath what she called indignation about D.C. 's status is confusion , too — as to whether or not she 's breaking the law .
`` I do feel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Georgia .
I pay rent in D.C. , but I 'm just here temporarily , '' Rebecca says .
`` If someone were to question me legally , I do n't know what the actual legal definition of living somewhere is . ''
The answer to that lies in the gray areas of state residency laws .
`` Most states have a law that says something about either you reside there or you intend to return , '' says David Becker , the executive director of the Center for Election Innovation and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the Electronic Registration Information Center , or ERIC , which helps states correct out of date voter records , as well as register new eligible voters .
`` If a person lives in the District of Columbia and can claim residency legally in another state ... and only votes there , there is nothing illegal or improper about that , '' he says .
That the voter only votes in their former state is key , as many states do have laws that explicitly ban double voting .
'Intent to return ' @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in one place but consider their permanent home to be elsewhere , including military families who relocate often , college students and snow birds .
Becker cautioned against inflating the effects of the small percentage of people in D.C. who engage in this practice .
`` The number of people who are voting somewhere other than their legal residency is infinitesimally small , '' he says .
`` The number of people who may be voting somewhere other than where they 're currently putting their head at night might be somewhat larger than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a broad perspective about what it means for someone to intend to return someday .
`` The states have decided how they 're going to define residency and most have defined residency as an attempt to return ...
They can always change that , '' Becker said .
`` But most states have n't .
And probably because this is something that members of both parties are doing . ''
The gray area also makes potential legal challenges difficult , because a state would have to prove that a voter never intended to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in U.S. elections is very rare .
Becker says the issues with U.S. elections do n't have anything to do with a small group of D.C. voters who want to have a say in who is elected to Congress — it 's that much of the rest of the country chooses not to be engaged at all .
`` The biggest problem in the United States is not that we have people too willing to register and go out of their way to register in a particular way and go out of their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ elections ; that is not the problem , '' Becker says .
`` If that were the problem , we 'd have a far different country .
We would n't have 60 % maximum turnout in a presidential election . ''

Some Longtime D.C. Residents Still Vote In Other States. Is That ... Legal?
Enlarge this image toggle caption Owen Byrne/Flickr Owen Byrne/Flickr
Some residents of Washington, D.C., have lived there for years but still cast their votes from elsewhere in the United States.
D.C. is home to over 700,000 people, a population greater than Wyoming and Vermont — but unlike citizens in those states, D.C. residents don't have anyone voting for their interests in Congress.
That situation is unlikely to change anytime soon, even with a historic vote in the House on Friday to grant D.C. statehood, because of opposition to the legislation by the Senate and the White House.
All this means some District residents go through complicated lengths in an effort to have their vote count at the federal level.
Katherine Abughazaleh is one of those voters. She says her decision to stay registered in Texas came down to wanting to feel like her vote matters.
"Especially in Dallas, you have a lot more voting power. In 2018, our representative changed from red to blue and I wanted to be a part of that," Abughazaleh says. "If I were a D.C. voter, I wouldn't have someone to call and say 'vote this way.' Right now, I can call my congressman and say, 'I want you to support this' or 'I don't want you to support that.' "
Kate, a Republican who works in D.C. as a political consultant, also votes in her home state of Tennessee. She asked NPR only to use her first name, out of concerns she might be skirting voting laws.
For Kate, the choice centers more on her interest in the local politics of her hometown than on big national factors.
"[The District] is blue enough that no matter how I vote, it's not going to change it. Where I'm from in Tennessee, it's red enough that no matter how I vote, it's not going to change it," Kate chuckles. "Voting for small, local town stuff — I feel like my opinion is more valid in those politics than in these."
These types of reasoning frustrate Robert C. White Jr., who serves as one of D.C.'s at-large council members.
"I'm always disappointed when folks live in D.C. but don't vote here, because if you call D.C. home, then you have to join our struggle," he says. "If folks want voting representation, then the work they have to do is not maintain voting elsewhere but to work with us to get the representation that we deserve."
Rebecca — who also asked NPR only to use her first name out of potential legal concerns — came to D.C. for college seven years ago and says she feels guilty about continuing to vote in Georgia.
"I feel a little like I'm rigging the system," she says. "But when I remember that Congress is rigging the system by not allowing D.C. congressional representation and voting power and statehood, it kind of justifies what I'm doing."
Beneath what she called indignation about D.C.'s status is confusion, too — as to whether or not she's breaking the law.
"I do feel like my home is my family home in Georgia. I pay rent in D.C., but I'm just here temporarily," Rebecca says. "If someone were to question me legally, I don't know what the actual legal definition of living somewhere is."
Intention is everything
The answer to that lies in the gray areas of state residency laws.
"Most states have a law that says something about either you reside there or you intend to return," says David Becker, the executive director of the Center for Election Innovation and Research.
Becker also led the development of the Electronic Registration Information Center, or ERIC, which helps states correct out-of-date voter records, as well as register new eligible voters.
"If a person lives in the District of Columbia and can claim residency legally in another state ... and only votes there, there is nothing illegal or improper about that," he says.
That the voter only votes in their former state is key, as many states do have laws that explicitly ban double voting.
'Intent to return' covers various groups of people who live in one place but consider their permanent home to be elsewhere, including military families who relocate often, college students and snow birds.
Becker cautioned against inflating the effects of the small percentage of people in D.C. who engage in this practice.
"The number of people who are voting somewhere other than their legal residency is infinitesimally small," he says. "The number of people who may be voting somewhere other than where they're currently putting their head at night might be somewhat larger than that."
Many state laws take a broad perspective about what it means for someone to intend to return someday.
"The states have decided how they're going to define residency and most have defined residency as an attempt to return. ... They can always change that," Becker said. "But most states haven't. And probably because this is something that members of both parties are doing."
The gray area also makes potential legal challenges difficult, because a state would have to prove that a voter never intended to one day return.
Actual voter fraud in U.S. elections is very rare.
Becker says the issues with U.S. elections don't have anything to do with a small group of D.C. voters who want to have a say in who is elected to Congress — it's that much of the rest of the country chooses not to be engaged at all.
"The biggest problem in the United States is not that we have people too willing to register and go out of their way to register in a particular way and go out of their way to vote in more and more elections; that is not the problem," Becker says. "If that were the problem, we'd have a far different country. We wouldn't have 60% maximum turnout in a presidential election."


npr--2020-06-27--Masks And The Outdoor Exerciser: Advice For Runners, Bikers, Walkers, Hikers

Masks And The Outdoor Exerciser : Advice For Runners , Bikers , Walkers , Hikers I like to run .
And bike .
And go for walks .
Especially during the pandemic .
It 's a time I can almost forget about the novel coronavirus .
But some people are trying to make me feel guilty about outdoor exercise .
My own nephew said , `` Uncle Marc , if you 're infected and do n't know it , you could be huffing and puffing out virus . ''
Does he have a point ?
I talked to half-a-dozen experts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exercise for the exerciser and for others — and whether masks are helpful .
And let me clarify : I mean solo exercise .
Going out shoulder-to-shoulder with a bunch of pals is not a good idea during a pandemic .
First of all , my sources told me , studies all show that the biggest risk of catching coronavirus is indoors , with face-to-face contact with others for a few minutes or more .
Being outdoors for a solo activity is much lower risk .
It appears that viral particles may not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as they do inside , although it 's not certain whether wind , sun or other environmental factors are responsible .
Here are some tips to keep your risk – and the risk to others — as minimal as possible .
First , there 's the matter of the mask .
The experts I spoke to all said wearing a mask is a good thing .
Now you probably do n't think you have coronavirus if you feel good enough to exercise .
But some people are asymptomatic – they never show symptoms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ yet feeling it .
A mask will protect others by blocking respiratory droplets you breathe out that can carry viral particles .
A mask with a tight weave ( i.e .
you ca n't see the sunlight through the fabric ) and multiple layers may give you a measure of protection as well by preventing you from inhaling viral particles expelled by someone who 's infectious .
The exception for mask-wearing might be if you 're 100 % certain you wo n't come within 12 feet of any human , my sources did @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I 'm told there 's no definitive study on cotton vs. synthetic materials .
I 've tried ... a bandana ( too much tying and retying and in retrospect the fabric was too thin ) , a folded up cloth towel with scrunchies ( they pinched my ears as did the ear loops on store bought cloth masks ) and an undershirt I converted into a mask ( it slipped off my nose a lot and looked kind raggedy . )
My current mask of choice is a neck gaiter made of synthetic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over the mouth and nose and can be used to hold a filter , offering additional layers of protection .
It 's also called a buff and is basically a long tube of fabric that slips over the head .
And it 's got a nice elastic rim that clings to my face just above my nostrils and hardly ever slips .
Second , there 's timing and location .
Pick a time and place where you wo n't likely be in close contact with people .
So aim to get out when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ around .
And look for routes that are n't hyper-crowded .
If you do come near someone and want to pass , make sure you allow for six feet of distance as you run , bike or walk by them .
Think of it the way you 'd pass a car – start moving away early on , execute the pass , then gradually return to the path .
And you do n't want to be directly behind one person for an extended period of time .
If that individual is infected , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spitting out infectious droplets .
Third , keep your hands to yourself .
Do n't touch `` high-touch '' areas where a lot of people might have put a hand down , like a bench or a stair railing , says Jill Weatherhead , assistant professor of adult and pediatric infectious diseases at Baylor College of Medicine .
It 's possible that someone who 's infected might have touched it and left behind droplets that can survive a little while on surfaces .
Now let 's talk about what happens with your mask @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tell you from firsthand experience : It 's hard to exercise with a mask on .
One of my sources said trying to breathe while exercising with a mask is a bit like trying to work out at high altitude .
`` You do have a barrier to getting in air , '' says Dr. Michael Fredericson of Stanford University 's Department of Orthodopaedic Surgery , whose specialties include sports medicine .
`` As you start to perspire and mask gets wet , it 's makes it even more difficult — almost like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ '' And look around .
If there 's no one near you and no one you can see up ahead , pull the mask down .
Continue on until you see someone .
And then pull it back up .
Now I want to stress that it 's important not to touch your mask in , say , a grocery store , where your fingers might have come into contact with virus in droplets left on objects by other shoppers .
But if you 've not been touching anything or having a close @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , it 's okay to pull the mask down , says Dr. Abraar Karan , who 's an internal medicine physician at Harvard Medical School .
( He told me he had his mask pulled down when he was walking home and being interviewed on the phone by me 'cause no one was around ) .
But they experts suggest pulling the mask down without touching the front of it , just so you do n't get in the habit of fiddling with the front of your mask over your nose and mouth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ infected ) .
And of course , whatever you do , do n't stick your finger up your nose or into your eye or mouth – that 's how viral particles enter the body .
When you finish your activity , if it 's hot and humid , the mask is going to be wet .
With sweat .
And with nasal excretions .
So when you get home , wash it out thoroughly with soap and water .
And wash your hands , too .
Because ... it ca n't hurt !
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , biking or hiking , there are other outdoor activities you can consider .
Not shooting hoops with some pals .
Too much prolonged close contact .
But Dr. Paul Sax , clinical director of the Infectious Disease Clinic at Brigham and Women 's Hospital , told me he 's very much looking forward to a socially distant game of tennis — but no high-fiving !
Thanks to my additional sources for this story : Bryanne Bellovary , a Ph.D. candidate at the University of New Mexico who ran a study on exercising @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , professor of civil and environmental engineering at the Global Change Center at Virginia Tech ; Lauren Sauer , assistant professor of emergency medicine at Johns Hopkins Medical ;

Masks And The Outdoor Exerciser: Advice For Runners, Bikers, Walkers, Hikers
Maxwell Posner/NPR YouTube
I like to run. And bike. And go for walks.
Especially during the pandemic. It's a time I can almost forget about the novel coronavirus.
But some people are trying to make me feel guilty about outdoor exercise.
My own nephew said, "Uncle Marc, if you're infected and don't know it, you could be huffing and puffing out virus."
Does he have a point? I talked to a half-dozen experts to see about the risks of outdoor exercise for the exerciser and for others — and whether masks are helpful.
And let me clarify: I mean solo exercise. Going out shoulder to shoulder with a bunch of pals is not a good idea during a pandemic.
First of all, my sources told me, studies all show that the biggest risk of catching the coronavirus is indoors, with face-to-face contact with others for a few minutes or more. Being outdoors for a solo activity is much lower risk. It appears that viral particles may not survive as long in the outdoor air as they do inside, although it's not certain whether wind, sun or other environmental factors are responsible.
Here are some tips to keep your risk – and the risk to others — as minimal as possible.
First, there's the matter of the mask.
The experts I spoke to all said wearing a mask is a good thing. Now you probably don't think you have the coronavirus if you feel good enough to exercise. But some people are asymptomatic – they never show symptoms – or presymptomatic – sick but not yet feeling it. A mask will protect others by blocking respiratory droplets you breathe out that can carry viral particles. A mask with a tight weave (i.e., you can't see the sunlight through the fabric) and multiple layers may give you a measure of protection as well by preventing you from inhaling viral particles expelled by someone who's infectious.
The exception for mask-wearing might be if you're 100% certain you won't come within 12 feet of any human, my sources did note.
As for mask material, I'm told there's no definitive study on cotton vs. synthetic materials.
I've tried ... a bandanna (too much tying and retying and in retrospect the fabric was too thin), a folded-up cloth towel with scrunchies (they pinched my ears as did the ear loops on store-bought cloth masks) and an undershirt I converted into a mask. (It slipped off my nose a lot and looked kind of raggedy.)
Enlarge this image toggle caption Maxwell Posner/NPR Maxwell Posner/NPR
My current mask of choice is a neck gaiter made of synthetic fiber with an inside flap that sits over the mouth and nose and can be used to hold a filter, offering additional layers of protection. It's also called a buff and is basically a long tube of fabric that slips over the head. And it's got a nice elastic rim that clings to my face just above my nostrils and hardly ever slips.
Second, there's timing and location.
Pick a time and place where you won't likely be in close contact with people. So aim to get out when there aren't a lot of folks around. And look for routes that aren't hyper-crowded.
If you do come near someone and want to pass, make sure you allow for 6 feet of distance as you run, bike or walk by them. Think of it the way you'd pass a car – start moving away early on, execute the pass, then gradually return to the path.
And you don't want to be directly behind one person for an extended period of time. If that individual is infected, they could be exhaling or coughing or spitting out infectious droplets.
Third, keep your hands to yourself. Don't touch "high-touch" areas where a lot of people might have put a hand down, such as a bench or a stair railing, says Jill Weatherhead, assistant professor of adult and pediatric infectious diseases at Baylor College of Medicine. It's possible that someone who's infected might have touched it and left behind droplets that can survive a little while on surfaces.
Now let's talk about what happens with your mask when you're exercising.
I can tell you from firsthand experience: It's hard to exercise with a mask on.
One of my sources said trying to breathe while exercising with a mask is a bit like trying to work out at high altitude. "You do have a barrier to getting in air," says Dr. Michael Fredericson of Stanford University's Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, whose specialties include sports medicine. "As you start to perspire and [the] mask gets wet, it makes it even more difficult — almost like you're exercising in a sauna."
So ... stop.
And look around.
If there's no one near you and no one you can see up ahead, pull the mask down. Continue on until you see someone. And then pull it back up.
Now I want to stress that it's important not to touch your mask in, say, a grocery store, where your fingers might have come into contact with virus in droplets left on objects by other shoppers.
But if you've not been touching anything or having a close chat with anyone during your outdoor exercise, it's OK to pull the mask down, says Abraar Karan, an internal medicine physician at Harvard Medical School. (He told me he had his mask pulled down when he was walking home and being interviewed on the phone by me 'cause no one was around.)
But the experts suggest pulling the mask down without touching the front of it, just so you don't get in the habit of fiddling with the front of your mask over your nose and mouth (which is how you'd get infected). And of course, whatever you do, don't stick your finger up your nose or into your eye or mouth – that's how viral particles enter the body.
When you finish your activity, if it's hot and humid, the mask is going to be wet. With sweat. And with nasal excretions.
So when you get home, wash it out thoroughly with soap and water. And wash your hands, too. Because ... it can't hurt!
And if you're not into running, biking or hiking, there are other outdoor activities you can consider. Not shooting hoops with some pals. Too much prolonged close contact. But Dr. Paul Sax, clinical director of the Infectious Disease Clinic at Brigham and Women's Hospital, told me he's very much looking forward to a socially distant game of tennis — but no high-fiving!
Thanks to my additional sources for this story: Bryanne Bellovary, a Ph.D. candidate at the University of New Mexico who ran a study on exercising with and without masks; Linsey Marr, professor of civil and environmental engineering at the Global Change Center at Virginia Tech; and Lauren Sauer, assistant professor of emergency medicine at Johns Hopkins Medicine.